UKIP Uncovered

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

Wednesday, December 01, 2004

Kilroy and Party Money

Yesterday's article in the Daily Telegraph, linked here, reported on Nigel Farage's assertion that Kilroy was a menace to UKIP's finances as follows:-

"Mr Farage also claimed that the "Kilroy factor" was discouraging party donors, causing a 70 per cent drop in income and threatening Ukip's hopes of staging a serious national general election campaign next year."

I have been copied part of an unattributed refutation of such an idea which makes a complete nonsense of the whole argument:-

"It was pointed out that UKIP now has 27,000 members and if on average each gave a tenner, that's £270,000, and it's better to rely on lots of small donations rather than be beholden to a few large donors. The answer came - "They're not renewing" - what a surprise!

Apparently the money for the European elections was about half from members, half from a few large donors - actually that ignores the fact that members also spent money on petrol etc during the campaign, and as always very little of their expenses would be reclaimed. That's legal as far as I know - the minor expenses of volunteers do not have to be included as election expenses.

Additionally, over the years the UKIP leadership has poured huge amounts of money down the drain in different ways, including on court actions and settlements, while the members have continued to put in their own money on incidental expenses, as well as their time of course.

If UKIP was stabilised and run properly, and if it then say doubled its present number of members, it would be above critical mass (say about 50,000) and it would not need to rely on the half of the money that comes from large donors, with strings attached, and it would be able to face up to the other main parties (especially the LibDems, about 80,000 members) during election campaigns......."

Most of the increase from say 10,000 to the present 27,000 (minus losses) is down to Kilroy-Silk, spread that over say six months for argument's sake and it comes to 18% per month compound......

But I've come to the conclusion that a lot of the longer-standing members do NOT in fact want new members - they prefer to be the big fish in a small pond. Hence some of the hostility to Kilroy-Silk."

Hence also the recently reported remark of Derek Clark MEP that new members are not worth the bother!

Following on from these clearly valid points, UKIP's leadership cabal ALSO continues to allege that the loss of Paul Sykes as a donor was due to the conference speech of Robert Kilroy-Silk .

This cannot possibly be justified when set against this report from BBC News of 10th September, linked here, which makes clear - Paul Sykes in early September, was heavily promoting the party leadership of Robert Kilroy-Silk, some quotes:-

Millionaire businessman Paul Sykes said UKIP's breakthrough in the European elections was down, in part, to Mr Kilroy-Silk's high profile.

And he said the party risked losing momentum unless it made him leader, in place of ex-Tory MP Roger Knapman.

Never were truer words spoken! Why was this advice of such an important backer not heeded and how can David Lott continue to make such false assertions as he has again in his recent ludicrous 'Unshackle Me' plea?

Something between the time of this news report and the conference made Paul Sykes vulnerable to an approach from the Conservative Party. Logic suggests that it was the cabal's total disregard for his stated leadership preference that was the primary cause. This tends to be borne out by the timing and means by which the news of his switch subsequently became public.

Money is clearly now a major problem for UKIP, just as UKIP is a serious threat to the entire Eurorealist cause as long as Knapman and Farage are left in charge no progress will ever be possible. The gravity of the difficulties may be guaged from this report by David Lott the proven incompetent veteran of so many earlier failed and useless campaigns:

I will have to make it clear that fundraising is very problematic whilst there are ongoing efforts to foment a 'revolution', as RKS calls it, within UKIP. The call centres have noticed much more difficulty in raising money and so will the branches. This will be a real blow to constituency associations that cannot be addressed satisfactorily until this exercise is over or called off and the sooner the better from a general election campaign viewpoint.

The Daily Telegraph, as linked from this blog on 13th September and again here, had similarly made clear the looming crisis, which Knapman Farage Lott and the other cabal members assumed could be ignored. Blame for the present situation lies with them. The article was as follows:

"UKIP BACKER THREATENS TO WITHDRAW SUPPORT

The UK Independence Party has been thrown into crisis after its main financial backer threatened to withdraw support unless Robert Kilroy-Silk becomes leader.

The threat by Paul Sykes has reopened the party's internal rift between supporters and opponents of the charismatic former chat show host.

In what amounts to an ultimatum, the Yorkshire businessman has told friends that he will not fund UKIP's general election campaign unless Roger Knapman, the current leader, is replaced.

The argument threatens to damage the anti-European Union party's attempt to capitalise on this summer's European elections when it quadrupled its European Parliament seats to 12 and dented the Tory vote.

Mr Sykes has reportedly given UKIP £1.4 million this year and helped mastermind the European election campaign."

Fomenting a revolution or other such drastic action is of course needed, because the necessary chance for the party membership to democratically decide who should lead Euro-scepticisms major party into the coming General Election is being denied!

posted by Martin |11:37 AM