What motivates the leaders of the United Kingdom Independence Party?
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
What drives Booth, Farage and Titford
This is a comparative table of parliamentarian salaries across Europe from
25th March 2003
This determines the amount MEPs are paid.
Remuneration of members of national parliaments in the European Union (Amounts - per month - updated in September 2002)
Austria - 14 months - 7,500 euro
Belgium - 12 months - 5,544 euro
Denmark - 12 months - 5,570 euro
Finland - 12 months - 4,541 euro
France - 12 months - 5,169 euro
Germany - 12 months - 6,878 euro
Greece - 14 months - 4,800 euro
Ireland - 12 months - 5,984 euro
Italy - 12 months -11,779 euro
Luxembourg- 12 months - 4,637 euro
Netherlands - 12 months - 6,467 euro
Portugal - 14 months - 3,448 euro
Spain - 14 months - 2,540 euro
Sweden - 12 months - 4,800 euro
United Kingdom - 12 months - 7,216 euro
On 4th June it was similarly reported in the
that MEPs had voted to abandon the link with their National Parliaments and instead receive a salary of 8,500 euro per month an increase of 17.8 per cent for the British MEPs.
Commission: equal pay for MEPs strain on EU budget
Part of the offset to these huge pay rises was to be a reform of the 'gravy train' perks, whereby MEP's virtually write their own expense cheques even for items not actually incurred. We hear that one effect of this might be an increase of as much as 20% in the travel expense budget, (over and above enlargement costs!) Some economising!
The ruthless determination of UKIP MEPs to get themselves reselected as lead candidates and their particular friends into lead candidate position in other regions, can thus clearly be explained. It is of course nothing whatever to do with removing Britain from Europe; in fact the effect is quite the reverse.
posted by Martin |
Monday, September 29, 2003
The above UKIP activist, who retains his party posts, in spite of having been found guilty of various shameful shenanigans, has once again mounted an attack on this blog and its author, while disputing all the facts as proven against himself.
Many in the North of England well knew of Trevor Agnew and his past. As can be seen from this report from the North East with a picture of
Agnew on the March
(obtained by scrolling three-quarters of the way down the page), it would have been impossible for any UKIP activists in the region
to have known of Agnew's BNP associations. Head Office, in their defence, claimed they had a properly completed application form from Agnew with his correct address!! He received a membership card out of the blue!! His membership was found to be paid by Peter Troy. Click this to read the full
(Now also in Landmark Links and under Treasurer).
Rodney Atkinson had already expelled Agnew from UKIP as a result of the above photograph having been brought to his attention. The subsequent Regional Chairman had also been alerted to another attempt by Agnew to rejoin UKIP and warned Head Office of his affiliations. It beggars all belief that Troy did not know of Agnew's past. Troy was solely concerned to crookedly bag votes for himself, in what he had perceived as an otherwise unequal competition. When uncovered the play-acting, then entered into by Troy and the two Party Secretaries, Clark and Harvey, all of which is detailed herein, was a farce.
Troy asks what motivates this blog and its author. I am convinced Britain needs to leave the EU and that is the sole motivation. On joining the party I found a tightly knit group at the top using UKIP as a cover for advancing their own ambitions and comforts; as a result of which the anti-EU cause in the country as a whole has been effectively neutralised. Peter Troy acts as a fixer or gofer to this group, which is presumably why he is tolerated. His dismissal might be an early indication that things are changing, but we suspect the following will first have to be removed:-
Roger Knapman, David Lott, Nigel Farage, Mike Nattrass, Derek Clark, Michael Harvey, and Graham Booth
Many in UKIP give their time and energies and often times money to the cause of restoring Britain's sovereignty. As a general rule of thumb those who give rather than take are the ones who might be best able to lead the party out of this quagmire. All those such as Regional Organisers receiving funds from the EU should be treated with the utmost distrust.
I am not prepared to debate Peter Troy, a proven liar, nor enter into personal disputations.
posted by Martin |
Sunday, September 28, 2003
Racism and Corrupt Practises
We received the following in response to our posting of yesterday
'How Far Right?'
which highlights both the potential problems of racist undertones having become associated with the UKIP name but also provides further evidence of the total corruption of the
procedures under Derek Clark (see side panel links).
"UKIP's website has a public message board on which there were postings which I found offensive and felt were damaging to the anti-EU movement. They included comments on the employment of Jews, public marches by extremist groups, the rights of homosexuals, the killing of political opponents, and the death of Gordon Brown's baby.
I brought a disciplinary complaint against three UKIP members - Paul Birch, author of the messages and a former UKIP candidate and secretary of David Lott's IOW branch; UKIP webmaster John de Roeck, who had left the messages in place for several weeks and ignored another contributor's request that Paul Birch be banned; and Nigel Farage, who was aware of problems with the message board but failed to take action.
The postings were eventually removed, but in spite of UKIP having been brought into disrepute through its website being used as a platform for views that many would regard as extremist, the discipline committee took no action against those responsible. Paul Birch continued to make postings - in support of Jean-Marie Le Pen; claiming the EU is making 'us' hate foreigners; and calling anyone who is not xenophobic "either abysmally ignorant or an utter fool".
Within days of my complaint having been received, NEC members Nigel Farage, Tony Stone and Derek Clark were colluding in putting together a retaliatory complaint against me, the conduct and outcome of which were very different from the one I had made. In chairing the discipline committee, Derek Clark acted against me by breaking a disciplinary procedure rule, denying having done so, and himself supplying 'evidence' for the complainant to use. I was suspended for eighteen months and my appeal to the NEC turned down. "
Time and again this blog has pointed out the multiple abuses of the Disciplinary Procedures by the panel's Chairman, Party Secretary, Derek Clark but no action is taken. Instead he heads the list of MEP candidates in the East Midlands. A matter of shame for all party members. The proof is here in these pages for all to read!
posted by Martin |
More Murky Money Matters
we made a post regarding the recruitment of Dick Morris which concluded as follows:-
Neither sheer incompetence (one of our earliest theories) nor complete naivety could explain the recruitment of Dick Morris. The claim of a reduced fee also beggars belief, this man does not run on small change. Do not forget it was only a few weeks ago the Party Chairman advised that following the disastrous mismanagement of the Welsh regional assembly campaign, where the budget was reported as having been overspent by 300 per cent, there were insufficient funds to print leaflets arguing the case against VdGE's Constitution. Now we have apparently been able to hire the world's most expensive and degraded pollster.
We returned to the subject the next day with a long post
Estimating the cost of Dick Morris
which queries were apparently answered in a post on
subsequently disputed by a statement from the UKIP Press Spokesman quoting Chairman David Lott on
which stated the following:-
If you receive any queries from members about this matter you can reassure them that the figures mentioned are pure fiction. Furthermore, funding for Dick Morris's monthly expenses is coming direct from generous donors, not from members' subscriptions nor from the EDD/European Parliament.
Now no doubt we'll have the usual suspects casting doubt on the veracity of that statement above.
UKIP Uncovered has now learnt that the fee for the first visit of Dick Morris was $5000 equivalent to about three thousand pounds. A member of the NEC Mike Nattrass paid for this but apparently made a clear statement that it was not a donation and that he expected to be re-imbursed from Party Funds, thus making David Lott a liar in his statement through the press officer.
Why does UKIP think it sensible to continue with a Chairman who is so publicly prepared to dice with the truth.
posted by Martin |
Saturday, September 27, 2003
How Far Right?
An article we came upon this week described
"a minor British MEP, an unknown called Nigel Farage, who represents the right-wing UK Independence Party....Mr Farage's party is of the Far-right."
Many ordinary UKIP members will vehemently dispute that tag, as I myself frequently had to do during my brief time within the Party. The reason for this is of course that while the tag may be untrue or indeed unfair, the perception is nevertheless widely held.
Members of UKIP who boast of the clear party policy statement of
must also appreciate the damage unremarked press statements and comment such as that linked in the posting below to a
article cause to the validity of that claim.
The leadership of the party has had links with other groups to the right of the political spectrum that many voters would consider unacceptable. Roger Knapman has associations with the Monday Club, always to the right of the Tories and within such a group has no qualms at being associated at the last Conservative Party conference with a Right-wing action meeting within that right wing body. Mike Nattrass had associations with the New Britain Party and stubbornly refuses to disassociate himself from Peter Troy guilty of knowingly recruiting a BNP member and activist into UKIP. The longstanding and never to be silenced rumours regarding Nigel Farage and other members of that racist party are well known and fully discussed within this blog.
According to recent Opinion Polls more than one third of the people in Britain wish to withdraw from the European Union. In the latest Eurobarometer Poll undertaken by that organisation only 30 per cent of Britons think our membership is a good thing. There is theoretically therefore a huge majority who would not object to withdrawal. If something is perceived as not being good the obvious action is to withdraw, so think 70 per cent of our countrymen and women.
Yet none of the three major political parties offer a policy for withdrawal. The only political party so to do is seen as being a creature of the right and therefore an unacceptable electoral choice for the vast majority. On top of that, as readers of this blog now well know, UKIP is rotten at the top, mismanaged and financially unsound.
Last weekend Tony Blair flew off to Berlin and according to the French and German Press gave away our independence on matters of defence. According to
as I quoted on the blogspot
, he conceded those points bitterly resisted and fought against at Nice. This was not a part of an International Treaty meeting but a closed door session with France and Germany in Berlin, continuing the process Blair began at St Malo with Chirac several years ago. There has as far as I can determine been silence from the Leader of the Opposition on this matter, so it appears another sell out to Europe has been agreed between the two major parties as so many times before during the past half-century. (Only 26 per cent of Britons think a Common European Defence is a good thing according to the same Eurobarometer Poll, WHAT POSSIBLE JUSTIFICATION DOES THAT PROVIDE BLAIR?)
UKIP as presently led and constituted cannot lead the way against either the Referendum, or the still encroaching EU. The Tories are to be fully supported while they fully join the fight for a referendum on the EU Constitution, but a further rallying point for the majority of Britons from across the political spectrum who want out of the EU is now ever more desperately required.
posted by Martin |
Friday, September 26, 2003
Comments on Mark Lester's Statement
There were two comments of note on the statement made by Mark Lester on last Saturday's Branch Chairmen meeting. The first was posted on the internet group Eurofaq by Christina Speight:
Note that Mark Lester quotes "Farage's belief that the Party is paralysed" and that "the Party was ungovernable" [= Farage is no longer getting all his own way] and his own view of "lack of accountability, irregular financial practices, gross overspend" and "individuals can get away with totally unacceptable practices. The veil of confidentiality on all things NEC- related pexcept for Farage's leaks to GLW] compounds this problem.".
In the light of this indictment by an insider how can they have the nerve to stand and ask for the public to vote for them . For this is what the meeting decided - "sweep it under the carpet, boyos, till the votes are in". Maybe we can continue then with some more EU money
B**ger Britain! Vote for a party with "unacceptable practices", a paralysed ungovernable party - one with "lack of accountability, irregular financial practices, gross overspend"
It could only be the fantasists of UKIP who would sail under such a flag!!!
The second was from Andy Edwards and posted on new-ind-uk:-
Hi,for all of those who've called my warnings about the situation in UKIP, rubbish & garbage, I've been vindicated. By, Nigel Farage, of all people!!!!
In the statement put out by Mark Lester [copied below], co-Organiser of last Saturdays meeting in London, he quotes, "Farage's belief that the Party is paralysed", and that "the Party was ungovernable"! OK, his comments may have been made in pique, but show that there are real problems, none the less!
Yet, in spite of this,the meeting still decided - "sweep it under the carpet, boyos, till the votes are in".*as Christina Speight said) Maybe we can continue then with some more EU money! Damn Britain! Vote for a party with "unacceptable practices", a paralysed ungovernable party - one with "lack of accountability, irregular financial practices, gross overspend". Be honest gentlemen, is this a blueprint for disaster. How can anyone believe that a Party with an utterly divided Leadership will be able to create an effective campaign!
We have received questions as to whether this was the same Mark Lester who came to some prominence in UKIP early in 2001 and confirm that it was. A press comment to refresh memories on that matter is linked below.
UKIP hit by new row over Holocaust denial
Another question posed for Mark and Tim Parker is where did they obtain the mailing list for the letter to Branch Chairmen and Chairwomen. If they wish to keep sources confidential, an e-mail to the blog will be kept that way.
posted by Martin |
An interesting aspect of the crisis facing UKIP is the fact that at no stage has it been centred around the policies, speeches or actions of the Party Leader. To refresh memories, the supposed man at the head of the party is Roger Knapman. All know the true force within is Nigel Farage and the ludicrous manner in which Knapman was appointed rather than elected was the first clear signal of his poodle role.
Other parties transiting periods of change would tend to have events polarised around the leader and one perceived contender. Not UKIP. As for everything within the party all centres around the somewhat diminutive figure and clearly flawed personality of its MEP for South East England.
Signs that all is not completely calm at the top, however, emerged during the Brent East campaign trail where Knapman is reported to have made an appearance. Not only was he to be seen. Accounts reaching us indicate that evidence of thought and even emotion were on display in that the leader was reportedly incandescent with rage about recent goings on.
Strangely enough, the targets for his fury was not the aforesaid Nigel Farage and his close associations with Greg Lance-Watkins, which was my first guess, nor indeed Nigel Farage for manipulating the telesales campaign, breaking the constitution and party rules over candidate selection, maintaining the disgraced Peter Troy and Committee suspensions, or any of the other activities in which Farage regularly indulges. Nor was it David Lott, the Party Chairman, fresh from confessing his huge unauthorised overspend in Wales and Scotland for the price of a Lord Mayor's book signing. Nor was it the idiot who hired Dick Morris or the ridiculous Press Officer with his ludicrous and conflicting statements. No, it was none of those many, many matters listed and detailed in this blog, all of which serve to make the party appear both rotten, ridiculous and unelectable.
His anger was predictably enough directed instead against those on the NEC who have recently taken to voting against the wishes of the ruling cabal thus preventing them from continuing to have their misguided way. Or as Nigel Farage is quoted as saying at last Saturday's meeting in the Statement posted below:
Paralysing the Party
posted by Martin |
Thursday, September 25, 2003
Statement from Mark Lester
START OF STATEMENT
Statement to 'UKIP uncovered' from an Organiser of the Branch Chairmen's Meeting
Several comments have appeared on 'UKIP uncovered' regarding the substance, attendance and outcome of the branch chairmen's meeting on Saturday 20th, 2003. As one of its organisers, I feel I should make some clarifications, although this account is my own personal point of view.
The meeting was designed to consider, in a professional and dispassionate way, the shortcomings in the governance of UKIP, financial and non-financial. Everything members
complain about - poor decisions, lack of accountability, irregular financial practices, gross overspend, etc.- are symptomatic of a poor system of governance & controls.
UKIP has not designed its structure and rules in a thoughtful way, they have just evolved in a rather haphazard and incomplete manner. The absence of clear rules and systems means that individuals can get away with totally unacceptable practices. The veil of confidentiality on all things NEC- related compounds this problem.
Branch chairmen, who came from across the UK (including Wales, Scotland, the South West, Midlands and London), agreed that the governance was flawed. Nigel Farage was also kind enough to confirm that the Party was ungovernable. I thank all for their contributions.
The meeting decided, against some who wanted stronger action, to pass motions calling for the Party to have recommendations for a new system of governance ready by the end of the
European elections. Work must, therefore, begin now if it is to be completed properly by then - people must be consulted and suitable systems researched. However, such an effort would benefit from the documented and formal backing of the NEC and Leader.
Given Nigel Farage's belief that the Party is paralysed, and the supportive comments from other NEC members that attended the meeting, I trust they will be among those on the NEC supportive of such action. We shall, obviously, keep branch chairmen posted on the response to their requests.
END OF STATEMENT
UKIP Uncovered thanks Mark for his contribution.
posted by Martin |
When money is tight, look out for a fight!
And it is fighting that now seems to be getting underway. The announcement by the just sacked Treasurer that UKIP’s Party Finances were in a parlous state was re-inforced by a letter circulated throughout the party by one Branch Chairman quoting the unambiguous facts and concluded
“the party is in imminent danger of not being able to pay its bills.“
Among financial disputes discussed during the last NEC meeting, (other than the attempt to dispose of the Treasurer), were reportedly queries over the final destination of credit card receipts and their collection method in respect of subscriptions collected through the loss-making telesales programme.
Ahead of the meeting numerous rumours were spreading throughout the party as to a supposed attempt being mounted by Nigel Farage to channel the receipts of the telesales towards the South East regional office, while hopefully leaving the costs of the operation to be met elsewhere. Whether or not such a plan, if indeed it ever existed, was successfully thwarted was one of the items lost to view in the furore resulting from the Treasurer’s dismissal.
Reports arriving today indicate that a wealthy individual from the 'Garden of England’ is set to mount his white charger to the rescue of UKIP and with a flash of his chequebook make a contribution of up to fifty thousand pounds to see the central party through its difficulties. It would be helpful if anyone knowing such a gentleman could point him towards this blog where he might decide there are better means of countering the EU and all its works at this critical time.
Extraordinarily enough we also hear that payment is being delayed, as a UKIP MEP has apparently suggested such funds might also be better used in the South East region!
posted by Martin |
We have received the following clarification from Edward Spalton on individual UKIP membership liabilities in the event of a complete financial collapse of the party:-
When I last took advice on this some years ago, it was said that recourse for liabilities was normally only made to responsible officers and those who knew or should have known about any insolvency. Ordinary members without special knowledge of the running of such an association or party were not, in general, held to have personal unlimited liability. Each case depends on the circumstances. So I may have unduly alarmed UKIP members and apologise for it.
Our comment regarding the worries for Branch Chairmen who heard the re-instated Treasurer speak last Saturday still seems to hold true however.
The only financially secure way to be a UKIP member these days would thus seem to be to maintain a state of total ignorance regarding the Party and its activities, which come to think of it must be the sole reason why any still stay as even the quickest look beneath the surface will reveal at least part of the awful reality.
We join Mr Spalton in apologising for any undue alarm caused by our earlier report.
posted by Martin |
Danger! to Personal Wealth
The following contribution to new-ind-uk was made by Edward Spalton yesterday:-
Given the unsatisfactory state of UKIP's accounts, anyone taking office on the NEC might face personal indebtedness for liabilities incurred by the party. In theory this could be true for every member too. No doubt money will be produced from somewhere as long as UKIP remains a vehicle for careers. But if the EU funds for those careers end and the careerists depart, others will be left to face the music.
Interestingly enough the Regional Assemblies have been organising themselves as private limited companies to avoid the possibility of members becoming personally liable for any debts or liabilities incurred by each Assembly.
A recent calculation of the party's then lower salary bill some two or three years ago showed outgoings above a quarter of a million pounds a year. Questions as to the origin of these funds to the Press Officer and others elicited no clarification. With present debts apparently of huge and growing proportions, some disputed and uncovered and a telesales operation now running at a loss, the wisest member of this year's NEC looks like being Lesley Brown who resigned in the Spring.
How will the redundancies and other wind up costs of the party be met following the now practical certainty of electoral slaughter next June? What if the EDD goes simultaneously?
Will the battle to avoid being the first to resign from the NEC thus handing the voting majority to one's opponents suddenly become a bolt for the door as the full personal financial implications of recent mismanagement sinks in.
Ordinary members might also look to their own positions on noticing Mr Spalton's suggestion:-
"In theory this could be true for every member too."
I bet there are a few Branch Chairmen who were at Saturday's meeting unaware of that potential liability when they blithely voted to continue things as they are until after next June.
posted by Martin |
Wednesday, September 24, 2003
PS on Last Saturday
Signatures are now being collected for an Emergency General Meeting in November as a total of only twenty UKIP Branch Chairman's signatures are required for such a gathering.
Farage apparently reported at Saturday's meeting that new branches were now being formed at the rate of two per day so such a low target should be potentially achievable in a very short time. If some of the newer Branch Chairmen begin to appear as gutless as their more senior colleagues who attended last Saturday's meeting, perhaps they should be shown the latest outpourings from UKIP's senior outside advisor Greg Lance-Watkins (see post below) with a cutting of his recent front page 'Sunday Telegraph' piece!
Meantime suggestions are being made for the standing down of UKIP's MEPs from party positions to allow more time for active campaigning while AT LONG LAST!!! DEMANDS (other than from this blog) for the resignation of Chairman David Lott are finally being heard.
posted by Martin |
Further Threats from GLW
A long rambling diatribe, typical of many sent down the years by Greg Lance-Watkins, has now come our way having first been circulated earlier this week. Here are some of the slightly relevant threats from this supposed non-member of UKIP:-
UKIP MUST if it is ever to be considered credible, reinstate ALL of the disciplinary complaints, which it has tried to sweep under the table in grubby little deals to con the membership into thinking all is well, reinstate each and every complaint against all those we know were due for disciplinary hearings dont let Lott drop his 60 complaints against Hockney or the Party Secretarys undertaking to represent the complaints against Longman etc. etc.
Yes, unlike Speight, Hockney, Cole et al, I know where the rest of the skeletons are buried and I WILL expose them ALL and ensure UKIP is finished for good if you do not give Hockney, Longman etc. the right to clear their names openly, transparently and before a hearing of the full disciplinary committee with full minutes open to scrutiny.
If the Party Secretary lacks the decency to carry out his duties then it is time for him to resign. If the Party Leader lacks the integrity to lead then what is he for? If the Chairman is too weak to acquit his DUTIES what is he for? If the Treasurer has to shelter behind the rules to stay amongst a majority who do not want him!! Surely he is best advised to resign whilst holding the moral high ground! If the Party Secretary feels he can act against his own NEC without authority and try to rally constituency chairmen he is obviously not OF the NEC! If Tony Schofield can seek to damage the credibility of UKIP with letters to the Tory Party!!! If Derek Clark is too weak to prosecute his duty!! If Tony Stone abstains from voting on substantial issues and tries to avoid finding out what is going on!!
This is the NEC of UKIP who pretend to their members, who pay their bills, that they are competent to and will win seats at Westminster and upto 15 MEPs in the EUropean Soviets Parliamentary elections know any other good jokes??
The threat is clear and directed against many of UKIP's NEC, other than Farage. The threat is disclosure of some dark secrets those named would presumably prefer to be kept that way. Nice goings-on in public!
Another reader and individual attacked, Christina Speight has prepared her own precis of the outburst which we quote below mainly for sheer entertainment value, but apologies to any mentioned with thinner skin than ours:-
Then he castigates just about everyone inside UKIP for dereliction of one
kind or another ( Remember he is not a member of UKIP.)
Let ne list them:
1. Damian Hockney .. this week's prime villain ... oily, pathetic, issuing half-truths, untrue, [make up his mind!] paranoia, fantasy, misrepresentation, inaccurate, charmless , ludicrous obsessions, dishonesty .... much much more !! But NO attempt to disprove anything!
2-6 Andy Edwards, Judith Longman, Catherine Jeffs, Martin Cole, Michael Cassidy and the rest of the poisonous tendency and their ilke [sic]
7. The Chairman (Lott) - inefficiency
8. The Party Secretary (Clark) too weak
9. The Treasurer (J de Roeck) unwanted
10. Tony Schofield - letters to the Tory Party
11. Secretary (Harvey) - no decency -
12. Tony Stone - he abstains
13. Tony Bennett - lies about GLW
At this point one must pause and ask who's left in the party that he DOES like? Why the heart of the 'cabal' - Farage whom he is paid to like - Nattrass, Booth and (perhaps) Titford.
Of course Christina herself is not spared but says she is at least a 'Happy Harridan"!
posted by Martin |
Frantic activities have been underway to salvage the reputation of Nigel Farage MEP; witness the brouhaha surrounding the non-existent apology from the
to Greg Lance-Watkins.
Such an exercise is necessary, as all with even the slightest knowledge of how the party has been run, know that these two individuals operate in the closest of tandem. What community of interest brought them together can only be guessed at, but the clear fact that it continues and apparently cannot be easily severed must now be clear to all.
A similar bond seems to exist with the political trickster, Peter Troy. Even during the recent scandals he reportedly informed a Northern journalist that he would be UKIP's candidate against Tony Blair in Sedgefield at the next General Election. Similar queries arise regarding his recent trip to Estonia; what could such a person possibly achieve in that country and who paid for the trip and
. He was known by then across the party as a charlatan.
It could of course well be that both these stories are products of Troy's imagination. We have learnt to place zero reliance on anything Troy says, but some facts are clear. He still maintains his party position, he was put forward as a candidate MEP for Scotland even when the facts of his misdemeanours in the North East had been fully exposed and he was touted as a speaker at the Greg Lance-Watkin's weekend at 'The Huntsman' in Chepstow in October, as was Richard North, another one time member of the tight little group of conspirators that for years has clustered around Farage.
The leaking of the full report by the Party Treasurer which clearly showed Troy's guilt, in spite of his repeated protestations of innocence across various internet fora for weeks before thus finally forcing its publication, was revealed only three days before the abortive attempt to fire the Treasurer. The report itself was dated 30th May 2003. Was it purely co-incidence the ridiculous cabal tried to backdate the Treasurer's dismissal to 24th May, 2003. Could they have been so stupid as to believe that earlier dismissal of their Treasurer would invalidate his findings. It is hard to believe such stupidity could be at work, but it would be a piece with certain other recent relevations, not least the expensive fantasy of a UKIP sweep in Wales.
In any event enough is known about both Peter Troy and Greg Lance-Watkins that any close associate to two such men should have had no part in any leadership role of any supposedly respectable political party. Not just now, that is why the emphasis on the 'Sunday Telegraph' article is so wide of the mark, but year after year throughout Farage's years as an MEP. The evidence against the probity of these three men, Farage, Lance-Watkins and Troy is extensive, detailed and longstanding. Farage must go, the evidence is overpowering the other dross must follow.
(Note. We regret the archive files are again not fully operable. we are working upon the problem.)
posted by Martin |
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
The following has been posted by Christina Speight to a very wide circulation:-
It beggars belief that after months of one scandal after another these weak-kneed officers at their unofficial meeting decided to DO NOTHING!!! This in the face of:
1. Intrigue, backbiting, and disciplinary proceedings bursting out all over!! In Yorkshire and the North East the Party headquarters did not like the robustly independent stance of the local committees, so on jumped-up pretexts the entire committees were suspended and their officers forbidden from communicating with party members. The North East Committee protested at the ?stuffing¹ of local membership lists with involuntary members - including one from the BNP! - apparently to bolster the chances in candidate selection for the coming European Elections of the Party HQ¹s favourite. The culprit was found - by the Party - to have falsified the lists but having stood aside in the N. East was approved to stand in Scotland, where this recent history has apparently been concealed . Those who disclosed this malpractice were disqualified from candidature or suspended from office for eighteen months. Similar disciplinary procedures were invoked against the Yorkshire committee.
(NOTE The Yorkshire discipline had to be withdrawn eventually; the North East is unresolved)
2. the loss of the party's chief Researcher who resigned and joined the Tories saying that in respect of UKIP" there does not seem to be any reason for it to exist."
3. The accounts for the party filed with the Electoral Commission were notable primarily for what they did NOT show or say!! They hid membership sibscriptions in branch accounts which they did not publish; they did not comply with the rule that gifts in kind should be declared (eg Nigel Farage's regional offices)
4. The treasurer (John de Roeck) was illegally sacked but after the receipt of a solicitor's letter was hastily reinstated.
5. It was disclosed that at the end of August the party had £10,000 in the bank, a legal claim against it for £24,000 and was losing £5,600 a month on a telesales drive to boost membership in the S.East region (where Nigel Farage is the lead Euro-candidate). Furthermore the 3 and 5 year subscriptions had not been ring-fenced for the next 2-4 years but had been spent
6. And to cap it all an NEC member disclosed that Nigel Farage made it a regular practice to telephone his version of the outcome of all confidential NEC meetings to a non-UKIP member so that the Farage 'line' could be spread round the internet. This recipient was also paid by Farage for his services . The man in question acting as Farage's mouthpiece then broke the law by inciting "patriots in Britain" "to deal with traitors " as the Swedish "patriot' had done. This was front-page headline news but the man was backed by senior UKIP officers.
After all this, the branch chairmen decided that the unity of such a disgraceful rabble was more important than clearing out the dishonest elements in the party - the 'cabal'. THEY DECIDED TO DO NOTHING TILL AFTER THE EURO-ELECTIONS. The honour of our country counts for less than the continuance of EU money for the pockets of a few.
posted by Martin |
GLW - Apology?
GLW is insisting he has received an apology, which has again been misrepresented on an internet forum. Here follows yet another explanation:-
GLW has claimed that he was misquoted by Daniel Foggo in the article 'Eurosceptic hails Lindh murder', and that the Sunday Telegraph has apologised for this.
The facts are:
The article quoted accurately from two emails, 'A Patriot In Sweden' on 10 September, and 'patriots in Britain too - well done the Patriot in Sweden!' on 13 September. GLW is now claiming that he was quoted "out of context" and "so grossly mis quoted".
What he means is that when his first message (and also the first on the 'well done' thread) appeared, Ms Lindh was in a critical condition in hospital, but still alive. It was expressing approval of her assailant having attacked and stabbed her, not as it then was of having murdered her. On the day the article appeared, 14 September, he admitted: "My words in the S. Telegraph were NOT miss quoted".
Re the 'apology' there were several emails protesting at GLW's views as quoted in the article, and he copied his response to one of these to Daniel Foggo. DF replied in a private email, but posted from the Telegraph Group office, explaining that the article as originally written was longer, and quoted also from a third GLW email (in addition to the two already mentioned) including a statement possibly intended to suggest that he does not advocate violence. The piece was cut for space reasons and this last quote omitted, which DF regretted because he felt it helped balance the piece. He therefore offered his personal apologies for that.
GLW is now claiming that this constitutes an apology from The Sunday Telegraph itself, which clearly is not the case.
posted by Martin |
As the Cabal had no doubt hoped the re-instatement of the Party Treasurer served to remove a lot of the point and certainly most of the heat from Saturday's meeting of the UKIP Branch Chairmen. An estimated sixty people attended. (Including Farage's direct employee, Stephen Harris, South East RO, and other paid officials!) Certainly some who had earlier planned to attend from branches far flung from the capital eventually decided not to attend, making the assembly less than truly representative. The re-instated Treasurer gave a well received presentation while Nigel Farage gave a low key talk which was 'politely' received, but he left before any questions could be put.
There was apparently some recognition that problems did exist within the party, but that it were best nothing be done to investigate or rectify these until after the European Parliamentary elections next June. A suggestion that a proposal for an EGM be put to the vote was apparently 'howled down'.
Thus the party that likes to consider itself the main anti-EU voice in the country, facing what an NEC member described to us last week as
a huge financial crisis
, and a complete leadership deficit, has a group of Branch Chairmen totally unprepared to act to rectify matters, but prefer to sit things out. This too with the timetable for the IGC on the constitution announced this morning, at a time when the European Union is poised to finally purloin the remaining sovereignty of our nation.
Now UKIP can now be viewed in all its true colours. Not just run by a small group of duplicitous, spendthrift, and devious individuals pursuing their own ends for their own personal gains. Even its secondary tier of volunteer management are prepared to put the party image before the good of their country or the benefit of the cause to which they claim to belong.
posted by Martin |
Monday, September 22, 2003
We continue to research the detail of the weekend meeting for as full as possible a blog report . After one account our impression of events is that the sole existing raison d'etre for the party has now become to merely guarantee Nigel Farage MEP's salary and perks for the next session of the European Parliament.
Amazingly enough there are a many UKIP Branch Chairmen, at least in the areas closest to London, that are apparently prepared to turn a blind eye to numerous malpractises and horrendous goings on to share his objective.
The truth will out however and it will be they who then have to live with the knowledge of their treachery towards the anti-EU cause.
posted by Martin |
UKIP Cabal and GLW
The letter below from UKIP Vice Chairman and NEC member Damian Hockney is being circulated on various internet discussion groups. It provides yet further evidence of the continuing and close relationship between those in the UKIP Cabal and the disgraced Greg Lance-Watkins. It is quoted in full:-
I too am very disappointed that the illegal sacking of the Party Treasurer was aired in public, but this of course was done by a telephone call from an NEC member at 6.30pm immediately after the September NEC to Greg Lance Watkins' home telephone number, who then put out an e-mail to a list of 300 people in the party with the wearying familiar arguments attacking the Party Treasurer to which we had just been subjected (which of course invited further comment and thought from members and precipitated the Branch Chairmen meeting and the wide discussion of our illegal and unconstitutional actions): GLW then also called a number of NEC members, in at least one instance leaving a somewhat hysterical message on their answerphone.
Similarly, I am unhappy that GLW knew a week before I did that it was planned to revive discipline proceedings against me, apparently out of spite because of my involvement in defending the Party Treasurer and the Constitution, and the use of my lawyers to assist in restoring the party to order. I made clear the content of GLW's e-mail on this matter to the Party Secretary 10 days ago...and received notice of these proceedings from him a few days back, just after the resolution of the illegal sacking. GLW claims in an e-mail to Richard North that a group of people, meeting on the day the illegal sacking was reversed, decided to "get Hockney". At least he wasn't suggesting (yet) that it would be the 'act of a patriot' to murder me as he did with a Swedish Yes campaigner.
A couple of weeks ago, I correctly advised that the sacking of the Party Treasurer was unconstitutional and would lead to unintended consequences.
Now I am giving some more helpful advice, that the manner in which this planned kangaroo court is being arranged is also unconstitutional. Additionally it is of doubtful legality, due to the defamatory nature of the allegations which are being placed in the public arena without any proof other than one person's opinion, together with the proof we now have of pre-planning (thank you GLW), and I put on notice the almost suicidal lack of wisdom of proceeding with another divisive action which this time has the added bonus of possibly breaking criminal law. I will in any event not be 'judged' by a collection of party employees who have been told in advance, according again to the GLW e-mail, that my sentence is to be 18 months disbarment from office. Very convenient if you consider the NEC election cycle, and my own re-election year. Is this what we mean by 'slimming down the NEC'? I will respond appropriately again to restore order to the party if this continuing public attack is not stopped.
All those who are party to these illegal attacks, or who support them, are liable. The Constitution cannot indemnify those on the Discipline Panel who knowingly act in the manner decribed above, and the indemnity outlined in the Constitution is not applicable in such a case. If I do not hear that this case has been dropped, I will be initially obliged, in order to restore order to the party again, to instruct my lawyers to write to the Discipline Panel to ask them to take legal advice in the knowledge that the party secretary has failed to provide them with the proper indemnity, is inciting them to break the law and does not actually know what he is doing in this case - they will have to make their decisions on whether they wish to be accomplices in breaking the law accordingly. Similarly, the discipline action revives the legal actions I myself kindly and good-heartedly in a spirit of co-operation placed on hold once I thought there was a commitment to drop all of these divisive and silly discipline proceedings and to work together sensibly. Do I now seriously have to be forced to issue writs against those who defamed me simply because I have acted correctly to help restore order to the party and they feel that their egos have been bruised?
Remember, I am only responding to attacks: do not blame anyone - party treasurer, party secretary, regional committees, individual NEC members, whoever - who return fire with fire in order to protect their reputations and standings, which are under fire by a careful campaign of smears and lies.
Again, I am only reporting what GLW has apparently been told and the results of my own advice, taken following receipt of the GLW e-mail outlining the plans to find me guilty of a disciplinary offence which lawyers have made clear to me is not actually a disciplinary matter anyway
- GLW seems to learn earlier than the rest of us what is happening, and he does claim to our members in Wales that he is on 'the inner circle' of our leadership, and his predictions have been right about this matter and many others so far. In that sense, I suspect that his e-mails are becoming quite useful, and I have lifted my three-year bar on receiving his missives as they enable me to know what is happening and what is being planned.
posted by Martin |
Party Sabotaged in Wales
On 29th March of this year Martin Cole circulated a series of questions to certain NEC members which he knows from later responses received further circulation. Questions 1 - 5 concerned BNP infiltration of the Party and are not immediately relevant here. Questions 6 - 10 are quoted below:-
6. David Lott in his recent e-mail of 28th March to me stated:-
'I have masses to do as we are in the critical few days before all the procedures and paperwork for hundreds of local election candidates and all those in the Scottish and Welsh campaigns have to completed. You will find out what that means next year and you will gain some sympathy for the incredible pressure under which some of us are working."
Why is the Party Chairman so concerned with such local matters, when the party supposedly dedicated to extricating us from the EU is on the point of a major split?
7. Why do we have a party leader ex-communicato by e-mail and unwilling to discuss by telephone?
8. Why was an appointed UKIP MEP, Graham Booth, allowed to make a maiden speech in the European Parliament, as reported in the last Independent New, that can only serve to make the party a laughing stock?
9. Why is Mike Nattrass planning to further support Peter Troy by attending a Sedgefield meeting organised by the latter for next week?
10. How was the policy to put up local councillors and assembly members arrived at and if improperly, is it now too late to withdraw their nominations?
About one week later the NEC met and were informed that costs were then estimated at GBP 53,500 not including costs for offices, local leaflets, printing costs and newsletter, ballot papers, direct letters to members and some carefully targeted newspaper advertising.
This was after having approved by vote at the March NEC meeting a budget of fifty thousand pounds.
The whole NEC thus appears culpable in the expensive waste of funds on a totally pointless and doomed exercise, (they can hardly say they were not warned after my e-mail above). Party members should demand to know details of the discussions that took place within the NEC and how the individual members voted. David Lott should be immediately suspended while a full and thorough investigation of exactly how the money was spent is carried out, preferably by the now re-instated Party Treasurer
posted by Martin |
Sunday, September 21, 2003
Chairman Spend a Lott!
Further highly pertinent questions are being raised following Chairman Lott's innocent plea regarding the vast overspend over the already absurdly high budgeted figures for the May Regional Assembly and local council elections. Some highlights raised on an internet discussion group this afternoon:-
I see there were disputed claims of over £12,000 in the Scottish campaign, as well as a similar amount in Wales. Was that another printing error?
And if Scotland was a paper exercise where costs were kept to a minimum, how did UKIP manage to spend £8,000 more on leaflets than the Green Party?
Also in Wales, given that UKIP wasn't awash with money, wouldn't a spend of over £2,000 more on leaflets than Plaid Cymru, and £25,597 on advertising (more than four times as much as the Conservatives) seem a little excessive?
And why, if £15,000 was spent on party political broadcasts, did UKIP tell the Electoral Commission they cost only £6,161.63?
posted by Martin |
Apology hard to Find
As we suspected a search of the
reveals no apology from either the paper or Mr Foggo to Greg Lance-Watkins. A full search of the entire paper might reveal something of course although we cannot imagine what the paper could find to apologise for. Entering 'Greg lance-Watkins Apology' into the paper's search engine similarly yields nothing.
posted by Martin |
Branch Chairman's Meeting
Preliminary reports arriving from the Branch Chairman's meeting indicate that, as we feared, little was achieved. The consensus was to do nothing and wait until after the Euros. The Branch Chairman have missed what should have been a great opportunity for reform. UKIP remains like a silent movie heroine, tied to the railway tracks by the villainous cabal, as the Eurostar TGV hurtles ever closer. A fuller report of this lost opportunity will be
posted in due course.
Among party members on the ground, however there are few such remaining illusions regarding the gravity of UKIP's true situation. Witness the evidence provided by this extract from a posting on one internet list yesterday evening:_
Nigel Farage M.E.P.'s domination of the United Kingdom Independece Party has led us to...UKIP achieving 140 votes in the Brert East by-election. Just four years ago, I spent two full days leafletting like mad in Wigan, hardly promising UKIP territory. UKIP got 800 votes there, over 5% of the vote, saving our deposit. Now we are down to 0.6%. That meant that 1 in 140 of those who voted in Brent East voted for UKIP. If you count those *eligible* to vote, it's about 1 in 400.
posted by Martin |
Saturday, September 20, 2003
Chairman Lott's Election Expenses
A quite extraordinary document now circulating the world wide web has come our way which purports to be an explanation from UKIP Party Chairman and Scottish, Welsh and Local Elections Campaign Organiser May 2003 (as he grandly styles himself) seeking to justify election expense overruns of at least one hundred per cent from fifty thousand to one hundred and seven thousand five hundred pounds on even the most charitable view of the figures given.
The results for all this expenditure in Wales and Scotland were of course absolutely zero for UKIP but Party Chairman Lott seeks to justify it all with this astounding statement:-
The results in Wales were very good particularly if compared with by- election results. The success in Swansea led directly to the Party Leader and myself being invited to meet the Lord Mayor of Swansea and to sign the visitors book with an official photographer on hand. What was memorable was his coded message to us saying that he as Leader of the Labour controlled council would prefer to see UKIP become the official opposition replacing the Lib Dems. He cited us as a growing Party.
Chairman Lott was obviously anxious to get his side of the story out before today's Branch Chairman's meeting. If it carries a message looking ahead to any EGM it must surely be that Lott has be the among the first to go!
One hundred grand plus to sign a Swansea City vistor's book! Even with 'an official photographer' on hand who can say this is anything other than Totally Outrageous!
posted by Martin |
Kangaroo Court Returns
After the circulation of the legal letter reproduced below, that successfully resulted in the re-instatement of Party Treasurer John de Roeck, the Cabal sought for ways to strike back at their tormentors and re-activated the totally disgraced Disciplinary Panel, according to this edited report just received.
Following the meeting at which they were forced to climb down over JdeR; Farage, Lott & Clark then made the decision - all on their own - to resurrect long dead disciplinary charges against Damian Hockney! Clearly as a knee jerk result to his providing the legal support to JdeR! Pathetic or what???
And guess what, yes, GLW knew of this possibility days ago! Which of the 3 told him???
Yesterday, Damian received official notice of a disciplinary complaint from Derek Clark!
In many ways the issue isn't whether Damian did or didn't beak some obscure rule. The issue is that with the Party nye on bankrupt, with a emergency Chairman's meeting called for today, what do the Cabal do, why, they embark on yet another divisive destructive journey!
Damian has on more than one occasion protected the party from the gross stupidity of these people. So they attack him - not surprising though given their track record - not to protect the Party but to protect their own backsides! Pathetic!
Honestly you couldn't make it up!
posted by Martin |
Treasurer's Letter to the NEC
The text of a draft of the legal letter that was sent by UKIP's Treasurer to members of the NEC last week has been circulated on various internet fora and we thus now feel able to place the text on the blog:-
Draft Letter to Roger Knapman and others
We act for John de Roeck, National Party Treasurer of the UK Independence Party (UKIP).
Our client commenced his employment on the 24th May 2000 when his appointment was ratified by the UKIP National Executive Committee (NEC) on that day. His position was confirmed by an exchange of correspondence between ****, Party Secretary, and our client on the 25th and 28th May 2000.
Our client's period of employment is defined by the UKIP's Constitution at paragraph 9 which provides that the Treasurer's term of office shall be "annual". Accordingly our client's contract has and continues to roll over year on year unless terminated on the 24th May of any one year.
On the 3rd September the Finance Committee which is chaired by the Party Treasurer published a report to the NEC, authored by Craig Mackinlay, on the subject of "The experience to date of the Telesales operations in London & Ashford (Seast). Recommendations for improvements and an investigation into the interaction with the financial affairs of the Party and its longer term financial stability." On the 5th September 2003 our client raised an issue with Derek Clark, Party Secretary, concerning compliance with both good financial governance and Party rules. This letter was not well received.
On Monday 9th September the NEC met. The following resolution was put to the vote: The NEC agrees to renew the Party Treasurer's tenure for a further year from May 2003. Prior to voting our client was subjected to hostile criticism but prevented from answering questions put to him. Our client pointed out that his contract could only be renewed or terminated in May of each year. When the resolution came to be voted upon our client was asked to leave the room, but he (rightly) refused. The voting was 7:7 with the Chairman's casting vote against the motion. Our client was informed that he was no longer National Treasurer. Our client asked that the minutes recorded that he considered the motion to be invalid only to be told by David Lott, Party Chairman, that the minutes should not record this view.
The NEC cannot terminate our client's contract in September without, at the very least, very good reason that would justify a summary dismissal.
There is no basis upon which our client could be summarily dismissed. No notice has been given of his dismissal. Your actions are unlawful, unconstitutional, and an infringement of our client's human rights.
It follows that our client remains the National Party Treasurer and it is his intention to fulfil his contractual obligations. Should the UKIP seek to prevent him from doing so our client will take legal proceedings against you, the other persons to whom this letter is being copied and the UKIP to prevent the continuation of your unlawful and unconstitutional acts.
Our client has considered the interests of the UK Independence Party and believes that it will be best served by a quick and amicable resolution to this matter.
In the circumstances we must insist upon your reply within 7 days.
posted by Martin |
Any still interested in the wierd sayings of Greg Lance-Watkins might wish to follow the exchange from an internet group that we quote below. In the context of UKIP and the meeting that takes place today there is a lesson to be taken away. The effect of GLW's activities on the Eurorealist cause has been disastrous. Nevertheless, time spent on determining what he intended or whether he was controlled by external forces to act as he did is time wasted. All that now immediately matters is the disastrous effects his presence has had on the anti-EU cause. There will be ample time for full post mortems when the end-game with the EU (which we are now entering as Blair leaves for Berlin to most probably bargain away yet more of our nation's sovereign rights) is over. All in the ant-EU cause can now have no further truck with this man as they too will be tainted with extremism.
Similarly with UKIP. Time spent discussing how the party got to this point, who was chiefly responsible and their possible motives will today be time wasted. Where does the the party go from here? How can it best help the eurorealist cause? These should be the sole considerations in the minds of those attending. Somebody will no doubt record the history and point the finger of blame further down the line.
We wish the attendees good luck and good judgement.
Herewith the overnight exchange. We have removed the name of the democracy movement spokesman, who we do not know.
From: "Greg Lance Watkins"
you will have observed that the glee with which you and others made fools of yourselves over my appearance on the front page of The Sunday Telegraph was totally blown out of the water by the apology I received from the paper and the journalist who wrote the story. GLW
The following was the reply to this from a Democracy Movement e-mail address
Er, hardly. Greg's whole case, in standard politician style, is that he was quoted 'out of context'. Yet what possible explanatory context could "well done the patriot in Sweden" have been put into to explain it? None. His congratulation of the murderer as a patriot is as clear as day. In fact, Lance-Watkins went on to say "Yes, I do support the execution of elected politicians when they seek to betray the electorate and their country". He repeated that quote in an e-mail to me, so it wasn't the product of a Sunday Telegraph conspiracy to misrepresent him.
Even if prefaced by something along the lines of not supporting violence, that would just be evidently contradictory to the clear meaning of these other quotes. Like saying "I support joining the euro, but I support keeping the pound." He was clearly too stupid to realise this, or he didn't care. The Sunday Telegraph had to choose which half of his contradictory gibberish he actually meant, and went with the pro-murder theme because that was the obvious subject of and reason for his e-mails. He can't complain about that, and he certainly can't pretend his meaning was perverted. He should be man enough to take responsibility for this and apologise for the damage he has done the cause as a result.
Because thanks to Lance-Watkins, millions of people will now
have noted with distaste that eurosceptics welcomed the murder of Anna Lindh, when not even our most overt enemies dared to suggest a eurosceptic was responsible or link our cause to that act. He has yet to explain why he thought such a statement would attract support to euroscepticism from any right-thinking person, and has childishly stopped answering my e-mails which ask this simple question, having finally run out of arrogant bluff and bluster.
Lance-Watkins is not a eurorealist. He talks the talk, and some people fall for that. But his activities continually betray three aims - to disrupt, divide and discredit eurorealism. Whether we are talking about his Sweden atrocity; his efforts to get eurorealists to talk about other eurorealists or groups as seemingly part of a friendly conversation but then send those comments to the subject; his vitriolic attacks on virtually all campaigning groups to try to put activists off getting involved with them and prevent them campaigning with others in an effective, organised way; or his staple continual spamming of as many e-addresses as he can get hold of with rambling, nutty e-mails in the name of euroscepticism....it all adds up.
Whether he is doing this for his own perverse amusement, or for money, or for some other reason, no-one can be sure. But thankfully his comments about Anna Lindh have at last driven this home to the few who still gave him the benefit of the doubt.
To which Christina Speight added the following comments:-
"Did GLW send you a copy of the supposed 'apology'? (Or are you supposed just to take his word? !!! ) I cannot for the life of me see what they could possibly apologise FOR? He either said it or he didn't. After that comment is free! In any case he has, as you say, repeated it elsewhere. Incitement to murder can hardly be taken out of context. It is a criminalact.
The man's cornered and will probably turn nasty. Look out for phone calls in the middle of the night!! (He's DONE that!)"
posted by Martin |
Friday, September 19, 2003
Another Butchers at Brent
Who beat the UKIP candidate:-
1. Sarah Teather (Lib Dem) 8,158
2. Robert Evans (Labour) 7,040
3. Uma Fernandes (Conservative) 3,368
4. Noel Lynch (Green)638
5. Brian Butterworth(Socialist Alliance)361
6. Fawzi Ibrahim (Public Services Not War) 219
7. Winston McKenzie (Black Voice for Great Britain) 197
8. Kelly McBride (The Justice for Peter McBride Campaign) 189
9. Harold Immanuel (Independent) 188
Brian Hall (UK Independence)140
and finally the heroic few that did even worse than Hall and UKIP actually beat:-
11. Iris Cremer (Socialist Labour) 111
12. Neil Walsh (Independent) 101
13. Aaron Barschak (Independent) 37
14. Jiten Bardwaj (Yogi and Meditation) 35
15. Alan ‘Howling Laud’ Hope (Monster Raving Loony) 59
16. Rainbow George Weiss (www.xat.org) 11
For a party that its Chairman, admittedly not noted for his analytical ability, is fond of trumpeting as the fourth largest in the country, could this be a wake-up call.
Good Luck tomorrow to the UKIP Branch Chairmen and Women faced with such horrendous problems! If only there were some at the top capable of heeding good advice (see post below).
posted by Martin |
As the UKIP Branch Chairs head off to London tomorrow morning to consider the future of the party, we felt it might be helpful to post the proposal we made last May in response from a request that we understood came from Nigel Farage and and David Lott (via Tony Stone but later denied) to remove this Blog from the internet.
This was our reply sent out on 4th May, 2003. The names of certain parties not now directly involved have been removed, otherwise it is 'as sent' :-
I am writing further to last Friday evening's telephone conversation. I am copying this e-mail to Nigel Farage and David Lott whom you mentioned as having an interest in this matter. I am also copying Judith Longman and Michael Rollings who are closely involved in the matters covered below.
All recipients should feel free to give this e-mail whatever circulation they wish as far as I'm concerned. In the event of no reply I shall arrange to have it posted on the Blog after a few days.
I have given much careful thought to what you said regarding the good of the party. At the present moment the Blog UKIP uncovered is only known to UKIP Party Members and it would seem unlikely that its contents would become available to a wider audience outside the party, let alone to the media, unless a particular party member deliberately chose to disclose the web
You may recall that I stated that the objective of the Blog was to aid in the withdrawal of Britain from the EU by forcing a thorough clean-up of the rot that has been allowed to develop at the centre of the party, followed by a root and branch reform of the party procedures that have enabled this situation to develop.
I have therefore prepared a Heads of Agreement covering the main areas that I believe need urgent attention and laid out my ideas as to how they might be tackled. With the following put into effect the concerns raised within the Blog will have been largely corrected and it could therefore be removed.
HEADS OF AGREEMENT
UKIP REFORMS TO RESTORE ELECTABILITY TO MEP CANDIDATES BY JUNE 2004
The undersigned UKIP Party Officials and Members hereby agree as follows:-
1. That the Yorkshire & Humberside and North East Regional Committees be re-instated with immediate effect.
2. ****, **** and **** be removed from the MEP approved candidate list.
3. That the postal ballot be cancelled where the Regional Committees are unhappy with either the procedures used or the Candidates they will be expected to support. The European Election Committee be disbanded and its procedures to have no further force.
4. That the Yorkshire and North East Regional Committees be allowed to draw up a short-list of candidates, as have all the other regions, who will be ranked and selected in accordance with whatever democratic procedures these committees so decide. The North East and Yorkshire Regional Committees' decision regarding the short-lists shall be final.
5. That the Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Committees be fully reimbursed for the costs incurred in fighting their suspension.
6. That the two UKIP MEPs who sat throughout the last Parliament agree to be positioned no higher than second place in the regional party lists for the forthcoming June 2004 European Parliamentary elections (see Conference Proposal [e] below).
7. Because of wide-spread dissatisfaction with the Regional Organisers in certain regions and in order to return the Party finances to a reasonable level to be able to adequately fight the forthcoming European elections, following the recent costly and pointless campaign in Wales and recognising the reduced anticipated annual income due to the 3 year membership programme, the Regional Organisers and **** be asked to tender their resignations
with immediate effect. Those regions feeling able to meet the costs of re-employing their Regional Organisers should of course be free to do so. Regional Organisers refusing to tender their resignations should have their appointments terminated as soon as legally possible unless their regional committee otherwise decides to continue their employment at their own expense.
8. That all reporting of persons to the Disciplinary Committee and disciplinary hearings cease while inquiries under this agreement are underway.
9. That an investigatory panel be established to consist of one member nominated by the National Executive Committee, excluding any paid official or other member involved in the recent disputes namely: Farage, Lott, Nattrass, Harvey, and Clark, and one member each (not necessarily a member of the National Executive) nominated by the Chairwoman/Chairman of the Yorkshire and Humberside and the North East Regions.
The investigating panel may determine removal of Party Officials from their functions and expulsion from Party membership as they deem appropriate, and may reach such decisions by majority vote. (Members of the panel to have their expenses met from Party Funds and to appoint investigators or use whatever other means they deem necessary to establish the facts. Costs of the enquiry will be met from Party Funds).
The panel to fully investigate all matters related to and arising from recent events resulting in the suspension of the two Regional Committees and disqualification of a North East MEP candidate, including but not limited to the following:-
i. to examine all the circumstances surrounding the membership irregularities in the North East and the establishment and financing and use of funds for the Hartlepool Office. That David Lott, Michael Harvey, Derek Clark, Peter Troy, ***** and **** be suspended pending the outcome of this inquiry.
ii. to consider the actions of Nigel Farage in previous matters drawing press attention as well as in recent events including the suspension of the two regional committees and to determine whether he should continue as an approved candidate for the forthcoming European Parliamentary elections.
To establish the extent of the risks to the UKIP MEP campaign as a result of the theft of Nigel Farage's computers from his Sussex offices in May 2002.
iii. to require Nigel Farage to produce the letter he showed to Jeffrey Titford, which the latter described as Mosaic Film's authorisation for the sale of copied Video Tapes. In the absence of such letter being produced, this factor to be carefully considered in deciding any recommendation pursuant to subsection ii above.
iv. to establish the reasons for the refusal by the Party Leader Roger Knapman to initiate a full enquiry on 12th March 2003, when first warned of the likely extent of the crisis now engulfing the party.
v. to fully explore the extent of Roger Knapman's links to and membership of the now disaffiliated Conservative Monday Club and any other extreme right-wing or racist organisations. (Particularly in connection with his attendance and speech at the Connaught Hotel, Bournemouth 9th October, 2002).
Roger Knapman to offer a letter of resignation as Leader pending the outcome of these inquiries. Any new or re-appointed Party Leader to first agree to withdraw as MEP candidate. Following these inquiries the panel will decide whether Mr Knapman should be invited to continue as Leader or approved MEP candidate or neither.
vi. to investigate the actions of M. Harvey, D. Clark and M. Nattrass in recent events and particularly during the Middlesborough Hustings on 17th March 2003 and decide which of these three, if any, should continue in their present party positions.
vii. to investigate the recent actions and communications and therefore the suitability of David Lott continuing as Party Chairman.
viii. to put aside the result of any appeal that might have upheld the disqualification of MEP Candidate Martin Cole and re-assess the disqualification.
Following the above enquiry, a Working Group be established to consider amendments to the Party Constitution deemed necessary as a result of the panel's findings. Recommendations as to constitutional changes should be submitted for consideration and vote at the next party conference.
The following motions are additionally to go forward as Motions for the next annual conference.
1. The Party Secretary implements the measures necessary to amend the constitution
to include the following paragraphs:
a. The Party shall seek to establish a Regional Committee in every UK EU Region.
b. Such Regional Committees will affiliate to the national Party by resolution at their first corporate meeting.
c. The Regional Committee has the responsibility for administering its own financial and other affairs, including the election of Regional Organisers and the selection of candidates for the EU elections. These functions will be conducted in accordance with the procedures set down in the Party's Rule Book.
d. The Regional Committee shall have the power of veto over the appointment of Regional Organisers and regarding proposed rule changes by the NEC, or any subcommittee of the NEC, affecting the running of Regions, associations and branches, subject to the power of the Annual General Meeting or a Special General Meeting to approve rule changes.
e. The Party Constitution be amended to restrict sitting MEPs to no higher position than SECOND on the regional party list in the immediately following European Parliamentary election. Neither the Party Leader, Chairman, Party Secretary, General Party Secretary nor any paid party employees such as Regional Organisers shall be permitted to stand as MEP Candidates.
Following the agreement on these points Martin Cole undertakes to arrange the removal of the Blog UKIP Uncovered from the web.
The following undersigned Party Officials agree to make every effort to have any motions or proposals necessary to implement these procedures accepted within the National Executive by voting in their favour and to furthermore offer every assistance and documentation that the inquiry panel established herein may require.
Agreed to this ......... of ............... 2003
To be signed by:- Martin Cole, Roger Knapman, Nigel Farage, David Lott,
Mike Nattrass, Derek Clark, and Michael Harvey
posted by Martin |
One hundred and forty pathetic UKIP votes. Shame on UKIP but most of all shame on UKIP's NEC and MEPs who instead of using the springboard of gaining three MEPs in the last Euro elections they have for years squandered all the goodwill and selfishly gorged themselves on the Eurodosh so that when the people finally turned against the Governement, at a time of huge disillisionment with the EU, it was the even more pro-EU Lib-Dems who profited.
UKIP is a disaster and doubts about the Tories can only be strengthened following this dreadful result.
posted by Martin |
GLW and Simon Muir
Two further comments on the strange mindset of Simon Muir:-
From: Anthony Bennett Subject: Re: Greg Lance-Watkins in his own words...
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:47:29 +0000
re (Simon Muir of Bristol UKIP): "Greg Lance-Watkins is expressing a significantly more extreme view, but one that has resonance in the country..."
COMMENT: Approving of the killing of people you disagree with does not have much resonance in the United Kingdom, unless you count people like the Provisional IRA or Al Muhajiroun.
And from Damian Hockney:-
Quite so. It is interesting the people who have come out trying to say "Well, he didn't really say...he was only trying to...I think what he meant...".
The reality is that the man is not on our side, and thank God. If he was on-side I'd seriously wonder whether I was on-side with myself.
He is used by people to make points, he has been paid by people to make points, he has recently recently praised the murder of a politician as the act of a patriot.
He is not with us or of us, and your point is spot-on Tony.
posted by Martin |
Thursday, September 18, 2003
A Late Night Thought from Graham Booth MEP Number 2
If I had my way,
the entire system of MEP's
would be disbanded
(at £130,000 pa, tax free, every eight MEP's [sic] costs over £1million pa).........
posted by Martin |
Defending the Indefensible
This Post was edited 19th September 2003 2000GMT to remove the name of an individual who routed these quotes from another list.
Incredible as it may seem there are some within UKIP seeking to defend the words of Greg Lance-Watkins as reported in the National Press and on this blog.
This may be a last ditch attempt to lend some credibility to the now fully exposed activities of Nigel Farage in which case those now going public are displaying their own true qualities.
This example is from Simon Muir UKIP Branch Chairman for Bristol and another UKIP member Richard Buttrey. We listed the former as a possible supporter of G.L-W
on 14th September
and placed a request for further details on new-ind-uk on Tuesday. The jury was still out until this morning when he made this absolutely astounding statement:-
Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 8:46:49 PM Europe/London
Greg Lance-Watkins in his own words...
In article Richard Buttrey writes (Full quotation follows ed.)
Two points: firstly this is an opportunity for us. I do "not" advocate outright condemnation of GLW's comments - no need to volunteer comments, that is. If the matter is raised, then it's up to us to seize the moment - UKIP stands for democratic accountability. GLW is expressing a significantly more extreme view, but one that has resonance in the country. If the press and politicians refuse to take UKIP seriously, as with the issue of race relations and the BNP, there are worse things lurking in the shadows. They should take heed. Second point: Greg is burying his father tomorrow morning (a brave man - Spitfire pilot among other accomplishments - watch for an obit in the Telegraph). If there was a lack of finesse at the weekend, it's probably understandable.
The above was in response to this from Richard Buttrey:-
Greg is not a fool and AFAIAA has been pretty savvy in the past about the effect of words. Which makes his recent emails to Daniel Foggo even more surprising. Let's hope it was a one off lapse because he really should have know better.
Ultimately all that matters is how we are perceived. We might have the most cast iron case around, but if the great British public see it as the work of a lunatic fringe, all eurosceptics will be tainted.
Muir and Buttrey are either falling on their swords to try and bolster Farage, or both have lost all touch with what is and is not decent but also such simple parameters as the 'reasonable' or 'excusable'.
These items to the attention of the new-ind- uk forum copied from another list which attracted this excellent response from Edward Spalton, with which remarks we would wish to associate this blog:-
At 11:04 18/09/2003 +0100, you wrote:
Surely, Robert, no-one of any claim to political seriousness would have anything at all to do with Greg Lance Watkins. He is a serial perpetrator of "one-off lapses", most of which have been damaging to the EUsceptic movement. I am astonished that messrs Muir & Buttrey should circulate views to the contrary.
I would also query the morality behind the statement "Ultimately all that matters is how we are perceived" - That's the Blairite heresy! Surely reality and substance have to creep in at some point.
As for UKIP ""standing for democratic accountability -well, probably they are fit companions for GLW after all!
Andrew Edwards offered this additional piece of information:-
Hi, one has to remember that, Simon Muir, Chairman of UKIP Bristol,who's comments Robert has brought to our attention, is quite close to GLW. In fact Gregs' partner/wife is an ' associate' member of Muirs' Bristol Branch!
Muir and Buttrey, how many ordinary UKIP members now wish to remain in a party with their likes alongside?
posted by Martin |
On our post on the above
we stated that we had received indications that UKIP's candidate Brian Hall's politics
lie well to the right of the mainstream of the party!
We have this morning received a telephone report from a UKIP NEC member to the effect that as far as he knew this was not the case. As the by-election is underway, and in the interests of accuracy and balance we wish to say that we have no special knowledge as to where exactly Mr Hall's politics might lie, particularly as we have been unable to trace any of his election material on the web.
posted by Martin |
We are extremely happy to announce that our archives have now been restored to full working order.
Thanks a million Steve at Blogger!
We cannot say too much for these people!
To further make reader's access to the iniquitous goings on within UKIP in recent years and now more importantly over the past few weeks, we are rearranging our side-bar boxes to make even more facts quickly available on your subject of choice with one quick click. The first of these 'Chairmen Meet' has the various posts regarding Saturday's meeting called by Tim Parker. Others to follow will include the Treasurers Dismissal and Re-instatement, the Greg Lance-Watkin's situation, a Mike Nattrass and Mark Croucher Box and additions/amendments to all the older ones. Monthly archive files can again be accessed.
Regular updates of events as they unfold will also be provided as the news comes in. E-mails with suggestions or any further inside information are always welcomed.
Whatever the intentions
The effect of UKIP in the recent past has been to confuse and render less effective the anti-EU cause within Britain. As this is the direct opposite of the aims of its membership then regrettably as corrupted and broke as UKIP is it cannot now be allowed to survive.
Money or energies devoted to the drastic surgery and long term convalescence it would require will never restore it to become a fighting force. Such funds and efforts of the volunteers on which it depends would be far better spent elsewhere. One alternative was suggested
yesterday. Others of course do exist.
posted by Martin |
Wednesday, September 17, 2003
A Late Night Thought from Graham Booth MEP
I feel much more use could be made of natural power....can't someone design a windmill that could pass for a tree?
posted by Martin |
Ahead of Saturday's critical meeting it is important to maintain the pressure on those members of the NEC who have supported the four ringleaders, Farage, Knapman, Lott and Clarke.
In reading the post immediately below this, we explored the thought processes of Graham Booth during his presumably formative poitical years. A charitable view of these would be to ignore any present day activities of such a man, yet by default he is an MEP for the SW of England and even more astoundingly the lead candidate for next year's MEP elections in that region. He also backs the Cabal.
Now Mike Nattrass, who as will be seen from the following, has his own skeletons in his cupboard, this time in his more recent political past, very much concerning UKIP and highly relevant to a divided NEC.
We can now reproduce this e-mail from Christina Speight to Mike Nattrass:-
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 11:30:30 +0100
To: mike nattrass
Subject: Offlist - all of them! and Private
I have been mulling over the events of the last weeks since we all met in your offices in Birmingham. We all planned to do what we could to save UKIP from being taken over by the very people who had caused 6 months melt-down. We planned together to do all we could to get you, Rodney, Gordon, Chris, Derek Bennet, Hugh, and John Langham and others elected to the NEC and we succeeded up to the point of the above 6.
This produced a split NEC and immediately Farage moved in - in Hugh and John's absences - to eliminate Janet G. and to establish his control. At this point you effectively went back on all you had promised us in Birmingham and sided with the corrupt elements. Aided by their control they issued 600 more ballot papers for the leadership election than for the NEC one and ensured that wafer-thin 15 vote majority. You were previously swearing to haul at least 4 of your new pals on the NEC before the disciplinary committee .. now you accept UKIP's chairmanship at their hands. This seems to me me to be treacherous in the extreme especially to those who had backed you.
UKIP has fallen into evil hands by cynical manipulation of all sorts of processes and in particular ...
(a) the criminal - literally - misuse and purloining of our membership list and its use by non-members and by the extremist right;
(b) the infiltration of the party by new members from outside who were provided with lists of whom to barrack at the January meeting and who did even not know the branch from which they came; 6900 members in January but 7600 for the leader ... pull the other one!
(c) the failure to produce accounts;
(d) the invalid extension of NEC membership against the constitution;
(e) the purporting to be the NEC long after they were time-expired
(f) the use of a temporary majority on the NEC to challenge an elected member and then while that member was suspended to take over the whole communications 'portfolio' of the party without even notifying the party's Newsletter editor;
(g) the announcement of a candidate for Romsey who only joined the party from the Lib-Dems just in time to stand. (This candidate is still not as I understand- NEC approved and it seems doubtful if the local branch was consulted properly).
(h) the involvement of one the MEPs with a member of the BNP, aninvolvement recently repeated on TV and not challenged.
All of this - and your endorsement of it - seems to me to be out of character with the man I thought I knew. I cannot think when I last felt so betrayed. Hence the reason that some of us who act on moral principles have left. I cannot understand your position.
We earlier stated that without Greg Lance-Watkins having been given the data base to circulate journalist's letters to the broad party electorate, UKIP would not be what it is today.
It seems from the above that Mike Nattrass had the chance to similarly influence the party's future, and had indeed apparently been elected for that purpose, but then spectaculalry changed sides to assist in the steady degradation of the party and its democratic credentials.
The creeping rot that has been allowed to spread since those events must now be halted and Mike Nattrass, seemingly having clearly been part of the corrupting process must clearly be among those to go.
posted by Martin |
Graham Booth and Party Pressure
We are told by Andy Edwards
that the UKIP (paid) Organisers are doing all they can to dissuade members from attending Saturday's meeting in London. If correct, maybe they should ask themselves who they are there to serve. The members, or, a small Cabal, interested only in stifling debate about their unconstitutional/illegal attempt to remove the Party Treasurer!
Regional Organisers, you have to choose - Democracy or Oligarchy. Please support, those trying to clean up UKIP, and not those trying to use it for there own ends!
In our earlier post today regarding NEC attempts to block the meeting, we reported that Graham Booth and Tony Stone were the public front being used. Booth recent MEP replacement for Michael Holmes, has been treated lightly on this blog, other than some small leg-pulling over his European Parliamentary maiden speech.
Having heard of his present activities, we feel some further such light entertainment at his expense might now be called for and therefore bring our readers this 'manifesto' for a new party written in January 1996, which originally ran to eight pages but we now offer just a taste :-
(Creation Of the Silent Majority's Opportunity to Speak)
Some of the extracts read thus:
"The sole purpose of COSMOS is to dramatically improve Britain's future prospects."
"System of Government:
I believe that a system of Proportional Representation would be much more equitable and would probably result in a coalition government, thus using the best brains, regardless of party, to take the key roles, so that Britain's interests could at last be given full consideration................."
"I would question the need for 600 odd MPs, many of whom are of dubious quality - why not increase the present salary of £33,000 per year to say, £100,000 but at the same time reduce the number of MPs to approximately 100................."
Why not control the rate of inflation at an 'acceptable' level of, say, 3 to 4% with STRICT controls on WAGES AND PRICES.............."
To deter young offenders, when given custodial sentences, I would suggest that a stiff, daily work routine should be arranged for them, suopervised by ex-RSM's..............."
"Personally I can't see any problem with carrying an ID card, even including a genetic fingerprint - if it helped reduce crime the so-called "loss of civil liberties" would be a price worth paying......"
Would it not, therefore, be a good idea to use £5 per week from the employERs share of National Insurance..........for each employee and give it to BUPA (or similar). With some 20million new customers it should be possible to negotiate a pretty good deal!"
COSMOS would invite opinion through a referendum on the lines of:
1 'Do you wish to revert to the original idea of a simple free-trade group of European countries?'
[2 & 3 not shown for bevity]
"IF the first option won the majority vote I would have no problem with a single currency"
After A levels, a six month 'Outward Bounds' style course, perhaps on the lines of the Duke of Edinburgh's Award Scheme, should be compulsory for all boys (and girls) to instill a sense of responsibilty into our children as they approach adulthood."
I suggest an immediate ban on all unsolicited junk mail................"
"It does seem particularly ironical that the world's leading spokesman on contraception is the head of the all-male, all celibate Vatican! If only all couple could be persuaded that two children make an ideal family, the world's population would level out and soon actually decrease."
Maybe newspapers could include a couple of pages each day confined to reports on "Good News" items........"
This 'new political party' was conceived by, and the 'manifesto' from which the extracts above are culled, was written by one Graham Booth.
Presumably before he joined UKIP.
We are assured by our usually reliable source that he holds the hard copy and believe it or not was intended to be taken seriously when issued. In the event there is another politically motivated Graham Booth whose 'brainchild?' this might have been we will of course immediately remove this post and offer our sincere apologies to UKIP's third MEP and lead candidate for SW England.
posted by Martin |
Joint Party/Treasurer's Statement
Joint Statement from the UK Independence Party Leadership and Treasurer
16th May 2003
We would like to make it clear to all of you that at no stage in the recent dispute was there any question concerning the Party Treasurer, John de Roeck's probity and efficiency which has been exemplary.
We are delighted to inform you that John de Roeck's tenure as Party Treasurer has been extended to May 2004 when, in the natural order of events, it comes up for review under the Party's constitution.
The UKIP is growing fast which creates a concomitant expansion at Head Office requiring increased expenditure. We are very pleased to let you know, that the Party centrally has raised sufficient additional funds to significantly boost our cash flow.
There were matters of disagreement between the Party leadership and the Party Treasurer that gave rise to the recent dispute. In order to ensure the efficient working relationship between the leadership and Treasurer their roles have been redefined.
Roger Knapman Party Leader
David Lott - Party Chairman
Derek Clark - Party Secretary
Party Treasurers Statement
I am very pleased that that this dispute over my position is now behind us and that I will resume my duties as Party Treasurer with full confidence in the leadership team.
My first and urgent task will be to work hard to develop a more effective method of reaching financial decisions. I will also help to define the financial responsibilities of those involved in those decisions.
I regret that my determination to enforce Party financial policy contributed to the difficult situation that arose between us and I appreciate that some may have felt that I was being inflexible.
I look forward to being part of a dynamic team in the run up to the European election.
John de Roeck
End of statements
This statement will be posted out from Head Office today by first class mail by Michael Harvey to all the addressees to which his previous message was sent.
posted by Martin |
Archive and Slow Loading Problems
We are experiencing problems with downloading times and links access. We have notified our server, but this might be due to traffic volume factors...We request your patience. Even if we completely disappear we shall return!!!!!!!
posted by Martin |
Attempts to Block Saturday's Meeting
This is the latest internal e-mail to be circulated from SW stalwart Andy Edwards :-
Hi, everyone. If any of you had doubts about the meeting being organised by Tim Parker, forget them! This is clearly a very important event. How do I know? Simple! Supporters of the Cabal that ambushed the last NEC meeting, the one where J de R was sacked ( David Lott has been forced to down reinstate him - humiliating or what!), have been busily attempting to stop this meeting taking place. Notable amongst those attempting to stop this meeting have been, Graham Booth & Tony Stone. But why are they so willing to act as front men for the puppeteers [Farage, Knapman, Clark, and, Lott] skulking in the background as usual???
Pressure has been brought to bear on the Organisers, who have been castigated as 'wreckers' to cancel the meeting. I've recently learnt that Party Vice Chairman, Damian Hockney, has also been pressurised, to try and get him to help stop the meeting. I'm confident the pressure won't work though as he's far too principled, unlike certain others! I trust that any Branch Chairman reading this will likewise be principled enough to resist pressures on them not to attend. If you can't make it, at least make sure your voice is counted by contacting Tim Parker, [or appoint a proxy to pass on your wishes, especially in relation to any vote that might take place] before this coming Saturday!
Smears against those seeking to arrange this meeting, and against those who, support it/ won't help to stop it, have begun to circulate. Please treat such smears with the contempt they deserve.
After an example of such smear tactics, Andy ends:
Ladies and gentlemen it's our Party, its time to take it back!
posted by Martin |
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit
Copyright © 2006 Martin Cole.
04/01/2003 - 05/01/2003
05/01/2003 - 06/01/2003
06/01/2003 - 07/01/2003
07/01/2003 - 08/01/2003
08/01/2003 - 09/01/2003
09/01/2003 - 10/01/2003
10/01/2003 - 11/01/2003
11/01/2003 - 12/01/2003
12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
03/01/2004 - 04/01/2004
04/01/2004 - 05/01/2004
05/01/2004 - 06/01/2004
06/01/2004 - 07/01/2004
07/01/2004 - 08/01/2004
08/01/2004 - 09/01/2004
09/01/2004 - 10/01/2004
10/01/2004 - 11/01/2004
11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
05/01/2007 - 06/01/2007
06/01/2007 - 07/01/2007
07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
11/01/2007 - 12/01/2007
12/01/2007 - 01/01/2008
01/01/2008 - 02/01/2008
02/01/2008 - 03/01/2008
03/01/2008 - 04/01/2008
04/01/2008 - 05/01/2008
05/01/2008 - 06/01/2008
09/01/2008 - 10/01/2008
11/01/2008 - 12/01/2008
01/01/2009 - 02/01/2009
02/01/2009 - 03/01/2009
03/01/2009 - 04/01/2009
04/01/2009 - 05/01/2009
05/01/2009 - 06/01/2009
06/01/2009 - 07/01/2009
09/01/2009 - 10/01/2009
10/01/2009 - 11/01/2009
11/01/2009 - 12/01/2009
12/01/2009 - 01/01/2010
01/01/2010 - 02/01/2010
02/01/2010 - 03/01/2010
03/01/2010 - 04/01/2010
04/01/2010 - 05/01/2010
05/01/2010 - 06/01/2010
08/01/2010 - 09/01/2010
09/01/2010 - 10/01/2010
10/01/2010 - 11/01/2010
11/01/2010 - 12/01/2010
01/01/2011 - 02/01/2011
04/01/2011 - 05/01/2011
05/01/2011 - 06/01/2011
07/01/2011 - 08/01/2011
10/01/2011 - 11/01/2011
12/01/2011 - 01/01/2012
03/01/2012 - 04/01/2012
06/01/2012 - 07/01/2012
11/01/2012 - 12/01/2012
12/01/2012 - 01/01/2013
02/01/2013 - 03/01/2013
03/01/2013 - 04/01/2013
05/01/2013 - 06/01/2013
01/01/2017 - 02/01/2017
my other blogs
The Strasbourg Cesspit
In French 'L'UE L'A EU'
Ballot Box Blackmail
Dr North's Resignation
Farage Flouts NEC
NEC in Thrall of
Open letter CSpeight
With Deavin of BNP
Accepting Contradictory Truths
Ballot Box Blackmail
Appeal to the NEC
GLW drft to NF
Disciplined NE Committee
GLW Incites Murder
NE's UKIP Today"
Peter Troy Resigns
Preparing for Future
UKIP's Thug Image
Yorks&NE Disciplne Complaint
Report on Troy
Sets back Anti-EU
The Election Busting Letter E-mailed by GL-W to Farage in Brussels
glw & farage
NF NEC mole for GLW?
Complaint in Full
a neutered nec
Appeal for Action
Chairman David Lott
Clanger & Sabotage?
Story of Troy & Agnew
Contradictory Letter Head
Chuck out Rule Book
Suspended but Chair
No Press Release!
Lots more Lies?
Support from Muir
UKIP's Press Officer
Ignoring the Appeal
Walls have Ears
A Reasonable OR ELSE
Memo on JdeR
Role as Returning Officer
Righter than right
Guardian letter re BNP
Britain and the EU
UKIP London Assembly
New Ind UK
Notes from the Borderland
Truth about Europe
The Strasbourg Cesspit
Corriere della Sera
buy my book
Read About the Book
Order the Book for a Fiver.
Proceeds go to the fight against Regional Assemblies
Copyright © 2003/6 Martin Cole.