UKIP Uncovered

UKIP Uncovered
What motivates the leaders of the United Kingdom Independence Party?

Tuesday, January 27, 2004

Yet Another Plea for Decency to UKIP's Ruling Cabal!

We have received the following open e-mail to be addressed to the Leadership of UKIP by any continuing members concerned over recent events. We post it for the convenience of continuing members who may not yet have received an e-mail copy.

Dear UKIP,

The verdict against Damian Hockney is the clearest sign yet that the Disciplinary Committee system is bankrupt. An institution must earn respect if its decisions are to be recognised as legitimate. UKIP's Disciplinary Committee system, as constituted, has shown beyond doubt that it is unworkable. Therefore, members should call for it to be terminated as an institution immediately and its panel members disbanded.

The complaint against Damian Hockney, so far as one can tell, accused him of breaching NEC confidentiality and publicly opposing plans to move Head Office to London. In short, he is to be expelled for endorsing values of:

1. Openness
2. Transparency
3. Constructive Enquiry and Opposition

But these are values that are essential for the proper working of any organisation or team. By rejecting Damian, the plaintiffs and Disciplinary Committee of UKIP reject the values of openness, transparency and constructive enquiry & opposition.

Could you imagine how we would feel if Tony Blair's government was not required to disclose policies to Parliament for debate? Outrage. As a matter of fact, most government policies developed undergo a lengthy consultation process with relevant stakeholders during development, and then require public debate. Look at the current fight over tuition fees. Would Nick Brown be expelled for causing trouble and talking to the media about his opposition to
them? Hardly.

UKIP, in contrast, just decides what it wants, considers whether it needs to tell anyone later, and crushes opposition in any way it deems appropriate.

Damian's public opposition and exposure of the intended policies of the Leadership were necessary and right. Confidentiality and lack of debate are only required in the most extreme cases where confidential Party campaign strategy and legal matters are involved. The Head Office move does not fall under either; it is not a secret matter!

The absence of commonsense on the Disciplinary Committee and its Panel means it should be suspended until a new system and mechanism for its composition can be determined. To go on
with the current system is more dangerous than not having one at all for a few weeks. (Also, NEC confidentiality rules should be revised.)

People might object to this proposal because the Constitution requires a Disciplinary Committee. But the Constitution, while important, should not bar commonsense. The spirit behind the establishment of the Disciplinary Committee in the Constitution was as a means of protecting the integrity of the Party and ensuring sound governance procedures were safeguarded. This spirit has been ignored by the current Committee and Leadership; the Committee now has perversely
become the very risk to UKIP's integrity and governance.

If you agree with this statement, forward a copy of this text to Party members. Before sending, add your details to the bottom (full name and local branch), underneath the previous recipient.

CALL TO NEC:

"I Support the Call for the NEC to Suspend the Disciplinary Committee Until Such Time as New Rules Can be Devised to Produce Genuine Impartiality, Reasoned Decisions and Fair
Procedures".

Supported by:

Full Name; Local Branch

posted by Martin |1:39 PM