UKIP Uncovered

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

Monday, February 16, 2004

Chairman Lott's Labour for Losses

Just over one year ago I first met UKIP's Chairman David Lott. I had been asked to attend a North East Regional Committee meeting as a potential MEP candidate, and had asked if time could be made availabale for me to make a brief introductory speech as I was a stranger to the region. This had been agreed and as a courtesy I forwarded a copy of the speech to Lott ahead of the meeting. Imagine my amazement when early on in the evening and before I'd had the chance to utter a word, I heard portions of my speech plagiarised in the Party Chairman's rallying words for the campaign ahead. It was not so much the dishonesty of this act that struck me as odd at that time but more the stupidity it illustrated.

Perhaps it was similar stupidity that accounts for what subsequently happened in Wales? A visit to the UK Parliamentary analysis of last May's elections on Wales, linked from here, shows the extent of that fiasco. We quote from the report:-

The United Kingdom Independence Party fielded forty candidates, none of whom was elected in either the regional or constituency ballots. Overall, UKIP received 49,222 votes and the party's share of the vote was 2.9%. In the Gower constituency, UKIP obtained 10.3% of the vote while in Ynys Mon the party's share was just 1.9%. In the regional ballot, UKIP polled 4.4% in South Wales West but only 2.6% in North Wales.

The voting system for the 20 Regional Assembly Members is complex and it is difficult to draw conclusions as to the exact impact of the nearly 50,000 votes UKIP drew from the other parties, but somebody reading this blog might perhaps be able to offer an analysis.

Elsewhere UKIP's efforts in Cardiff North clearly affected the result, as there they gathered 1295 votes and Labour scraped in with a majority of only 540 over the Conservatives. Ahead of the election the UKIP affect must have appeared more worrying for Labour's opponents than it ultimately proved: that anyway is my conclusion from a brief review of the study.

The question remains as to how UKIP came to be so deeply involved, and what drove the Party Chairman to so exceed his authority and spending limits. It certainly caused him a great deal of work and worry as he e-mailed me on 3rd April last year as follows:-

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 be 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.

We posted his excuses on 20th September which can be re-read from here and some details of the overspend on 21st September here. From the first of those links we quote a portion showing the gratitude of one Labour Mayor for Lott's efforts:-

"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."

Now the quote above and the theft of my own words before my very eyes give proof enough that Lott is probably nothing much more than a buffoon or a pawn. The question for his fellow NEC members who have tolerated his presence at such a high level in the Party for so long, is this - WHO exactly is Lott's puppet-master? And given that the unauthorised overspend in last year's May elections nearly bankrupted the party, apparently forcing their move from London to Birmingham, and is now neutering the Euro election campaign in large parts of the country, to whose benefit or for whom is such a controller working?

posted by Martin |8:48 AM