UKIP Uncovered

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

Saturday, February 28, 2004

Strangers to the Truth

Hardly had Nicole Sinclaire been appointed Acting Party Secretary than her real virtue in the eyes of the cabal (for as pointed out earlier she clearly lacks any proper qualifications for the post) became strikingly clear. Her extremely chequered party history is one matter, but the lie described in the post below and her increasingly frantic attempts to defend it via internet disputation, is quite another. Now we have further evidence, as mentioned earlier, that she lies without thought or conscience and when discovered blithely sets out to attempt to alter the evidence as if such could retroactively change the truth.

Someone made a statement on a party internet discussion group that Nikki Sinclaire (in discussion with Party Leader Roger Knapman) wished to add a statement to one NEC candidate's election details which go out for voting that such candidate had legal actions pending. (Such a notation had been correctly placed against Ms Sinclaire's details in the 2003 NEC elections where she won only 765 votes or 5.02 per cent of the poll putting her in 11th place). Nicole Sinclaire in response to this sent the following message:-

"... your message is grossly inaccurate and libelous to me. Please withdraw. I have made no demands on the party re additions to the election addresses."

The NEC candidate whose details were to be the subject of Ms Sinclaire's suggested addition then entered the discussion with the following:-

"Nikki

Then I was clearly misinformed when told that you proposed a motion at the February NEC that an addition be made to my CV for the NEC election stating that I had threatened legal action against the Party. Please confirm that no such motion was proposed or voted on.

For the record, I have no legal action outstanding against the Party. The only people who have sued the Party in the last 5 years are Michael Holmes (although he dropped his case) and Nikki
Sinclaire."

The new Acting Party Secretary then, with no attempt to answer, shot back with this demand:-

"Who informed you of this matter?"

Which was met with this perfectly proper response:-

"Nikki

You fail to answer a very simple factual question. Either you did propose the motion at the February NEC meeting or you didn't.

If you did not, just say so and the matter is closed.

If you did, you are in trouble because you stated categorically on this list that "I have made no demands on the party re additions to the election addresses". Deliberately misleading Party members is a serious matter, especially for an Acting Party Secretary.

I look forward to your prompt clarification."

And this was how the Acting Party Secretary reacted to being thus caught out:

"This is a matter of NEC confidentiality. The current minutes relating to this are incorrect and will be amended. I repeat, I did not propose or second the addendum to your CV. I will not be drawn on hearsay. How are you aware what transpired at the NEC meeting?"

Reasonable people will no doubt conclude that while Nicole Sinclaire seems perfectly suited to fill the shoes of Derek Clark, she now seems totally unfit to be trusted in any position of authority where straightforwardness, transparency and integrity would generally be considered as assets.

posted by Martin |8:00 AM