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

Saturday, April 30, 2005 

A Conspiracy (continued).

If there is one seat in the West Country upon which UKIP should have concentrated, in my opinion, it is that of Oliver Letwin. I spent several weeks in his constituency during the run-up to the campaign so I know of what I speak!

Letwin could easily have been unseated with a concentratedl UKIP effort - especially given the 2001 understanding between the local Labour Party and the Lib Dems in Dorset *evidence of which appeared on the Lib Dem internet site) looking likely to be repeated this time around, .

And yet?

Look at this pathetic plea from the Dorset UKIP representative that may be found on their 'so-called' activists public internet forum:

"If anyone wants to give us a hand next Saturday, we will be in South Street Dorchester giving out balloons and literature between 11am & 1pm.

Our two UKIP candidates, Linda Guest and Richard Frampton Hobbs (West and North Dorset) will be at Bryanston School, Blandford, Dorset next Saturday morning (7 am) for the Today programme. I hope they get a chance to speak.

I know North Dorset need a hand as well. They have a good chance there of getting rid of that well known europhile Tory, Robert Walter. Leave a message in my message box if anyone wants to help, and I will put you in touch."

This from a party drawing millions in revenues from the EU which it supposedly exists to destroy..................the connection must by now surely becoming obvious!!!!!!

posted by Martin |8:39 PM

Former UKIP Party Secretary and present PPC arrested in election kerfuffle!

The report of the incident may be read from a report in The Scotsman, linked here.

Incredibly this item was brought to my attention by an inquiry on the UKIP Forum as to the identity of Ms Sinclaire. Amazing that dedicated UKIP activists can be so apparently unaware of this significant name in the party's colourful recent history!

Try typing the name in the Google Search Bar at the top of the blog!

posted by Martin |8:22 PM

Thursday, April 28, 2005 

UKIP Predicts its own MPs

The report may be read from this link to the BBC.

posted by Martin |2:09 PM

Friday, April 22, 2005 

Roger Knapman vs Ken Clarke on Radio Four

This evening's broadcast of 'Any Questions' did much to amply illustrate the tragedy for democracy and British sovereignty that the buffoon Knapman has wrought by his refusal to stand aside for Robert Kilroy-Silk.

UKIP and Howard - more effective in the cause of EU Federalism than Blair and Mandelson combined!

posted by Martin |9:31 PM

Wednesday, April 20, 2005 

UKIP Candidate stands in Eight Seats

Read the report from this link.

While Veritas proudly announces the candidature of 65 genuinely eurosceptic candidates - a mere 76 days after the party's launch - UKIP, whose tactics daily make it more obvious that they exist purely as a means of wasting the anti-EU groundswell within the country, with all the wealth their Euro funding now brings (courtesy of Robert Kilroy-Silk) resort to pathetic strategies such as these.

Visit my Veritas blog linked from the side bar for news of the real anti-EU campaign.

posted by Martin |6:59 PM

A Conspiracy?

The following is an extract from an article by Ferdinand Mount in this morning's Daily Telegraphlinked from here:

"..... so far foreign affairs have been kept off both parties' menus with Stalinist rigidity. It is as though their leaders had signed some secret concordat not to mention the war, or indeed the outside world in any shape or form

I heard Mr Howard start off yesterday morning with a thumping denunciation of Blair's lies: the lies about Tory spending plans, the lies about Labour's pensions policy, the lies about the patient's passport. Terrific stuff, but was there not one other little area of, shall we say, prime-ministerial prevarication that earnt some notoriety not all that long ago?

With few exceptions, the media seem happy enough with this weird vacuum. They will remorselessly quiz the politicians on almost anything else you can think of: where the Blair tan came from, what Rupert Murdoch thinks of immigration, the treatment of prostate cancer. But as for the world and Britain's place in it, for the moment these seem to be no-go areas.

Which is peculiar in the extreme. Because outside the political hothouse, as far as I can see, people talk of little else. Perhaps for the first time since 1945, it is two foreign issues - Iraq and the European Union - that are foremost in the minds of the most agitated voters at this election.

Every Leftish person I bump into is obsessed with Blair's lies in the run-up to war. Every Rightish person is exercised by the latest excesses of Brussels and in despair at our apparent impotence to undo them, let alone to find a stable and enduring relationship with the EU, in or out of it. Every tobacconist and taxi driver is liable to let rip on either front.

There are not one but two elephants in our sitting room. And the politicians are doing their best to pretend that neither of them is there. In the American elections, the candidates chewed over every aspect of the Iraq war. In France, each clause of the EU constitution is being hotly contested. In the British election campaign to date, zero public debate on either."

posted by Martin |8:29 AM

Monday, April 18, 2005 

Conservative Party Rejects British Constitution and Parliament

The following is taken directly from the website of the British Declaration of Independence which is linked from here.

15 April 2005

We talked to the Policy Unit at Conservative Central Office.

CCO said that:

  1. The Conservative Party rejects the British Declaration of Independence principally because of paragraph 2 - the right of the British Parliament to "initiate, pass and repeal laws applied to the British people". That is unacceptable to the Tory Party. (In other words the Party rejects a Parliament and Democracy itself not only for Britain but for the whole of the European Union as well. "The Tory Party is committed to the treaties signed since 1972 which contradict paragraph 2 of the BDI".
  2. The Tory Party would NOT withdraw "from areas where the EU Court has jurisdiction over the United Kingdom". It would request re-negotiation of specified areas –e.g. employment, immigration, international aid and fishing.
  3. The policy he was stating had been decided by Michael Howard and the Shadow Cabinet. We asked if candidates had been told NOT to sign the BDI. He replied the policy was that candidates should not sign statements which are inconsistent with Conservative policy. We stated that the BDI was entirely consistent with "in Europe but not ruled by Europe", a sovereign independent Britain in the European Union. They said they disagreed with the BDI because it meant "withdrawal from Europe". But the BDI does not concern itself with Europe it concerns itself entirely with British Democracy.
  4. Therefore the Conservative Party confirms that membership of the European Union has destroyed British Democracy and that the British Parliament was replaced in 1972 by a British Assembly. The British Conservative Party confirmed that this always was and remains their intention.
  5. The Conservative Party rejects the British Constitution. They also reject the European Constitution. Therefore they believe in NO Constitution – which means unfettered control by the politicians.

The Tory Party refutes the British constitution, rejects the terms of the Oath of Allegiance, denies Britain a Parliament, rejects the 1966 UN Convention of the Self determination of peoples (a treaty which the British Government signed) and thereby disqualifies Britain as a sovereign nation from membership of the UN.

This confirms Michael Howard's stance that, on being elected, he will request permission (of what he recognises as a superior power, the European Union) to govern in the United Kingdom and even then in only certain areas.

The Conservative Party has been forced to produce a new "form of words" designed to fool their candidates and the British people. The BDI, by demanding they sign up to their previous "form of words" (i.e. "In Europe but not ruled by Europe"), has forced them to refute those words.

The BDI is concerned solely with the sovereignty of the British people and the status of their Parliament as a forum in which their laws are made. Our concern is the British Constitution, not the European Union – or any other Union!

This has all come as a great shock to many Conservative candidates and voters. Those candidates who have signed the BDI regardless of party pressure deserve our unstinting support. We need to do everything we can to strengthen them in the party and encourage allies to join them.

Tell others about the BDI and the Petition. (You can sign up others if they have no computer and you have their post code and permission!)

The BDI is powerful - use it.

posted by Martin |1:52 PM

Portillo Gets It Spot On

Michael Portillo in yesterday's 'Sunday Times':

"The Conservatives have been saved by the numbskull U.K. Independence Party. Had it made Robert Kilroy-Silk (whose face is better known to daytime television viewers than Blair's) its leader, it might have stolen large numbers of Conservative votes.

One day a bust may stand in Tory Central Office to commemorate the party's saviour, Roger Knapman. He is, in case you do not know, the UKIP leader (and former Tory MP) who refused to step aside for Kilroy.

posted by Martin |8:29 AM

Sunday, April 17, 2005 

UKIP's Manifesto Launch

The most extensive and best coverage seems to have been in the Financial Times, linked here, from which this is a quote:-

"Try as hard as he did to sound like a British bulldog, Mr Knapman gave a characteristically lacklustre performance, while Petrina Holds-worth, party chairman, looked and sounded pure Women's Institute.

It was left to the more dynamic Nigel Farage, the UKIP's European parliamentary leader, to give some spark, tackling the more awkward issues confronting his party. Mr Farage, who claimed responsibility for recruiting Mr Kilroy-Silk in the first place, acknowledged yesterday that the former TV presenter had helped to raise the party's profile."

And, therefore, again we ask just who is running in Folkestone where Howard could so easily be unseated - none other than the 'pure Women's Institute, Petrina Holdsworth' - insanity or delberately contrived treachery to the party's claimed cause? If not that then WHY?

More on this conundrum may be read on this morning's first posting to Veritas Straight Talk, linked here.

posted by Martin |10:00 AM

Saturday, April 16, 2005 

FT article reflects Farage's success in defusing threat to the Tories

The following is the most pertinent quote from the item in today's paper, which may be read in full from this link.

"The Tories' more Eurosceptic signals, along with Mr Kilroy-Silk's departure, have helped to defuse the UKIP threat."

posted by Martin |6:01 PM


Further evidence of a UKIP plot to sabotage Veritas comes from their decision - announced on the UKIP website earlier this week, and confirmed this week by the 'Harlow Star' - to put up a certain Mr John Felgate against Tony Bennett, who is standing for Veritas in Harlow.

Bennett announced his candidacy several weeks ago and has received excellent local coverage.
Well-known after having lived in the town for 27 years and having worked for 10 years as its Principal Welfare Rights Officer, helping thousands to claim extra benefits, Bennett managed 1,223 votes (3.0%) at the last General Election - in UKIP's top 10% results in 2001 - and had realistic hopes of increasing that vote.

The decision of UKIP to run John Felgate in Harlow confirms other examples nationwide of UKIP deliberately placing their candidates in seats in Staffordshire and elsewhere, where it has become known that Veritas has already announced candidates.

The decision of UKIP to run steam train enthusiast Geoffrey Kingscott against Robert Kilroy-Silk is a classic example. Kingscott was famously quoted by the local press in the European election campaign as saying: "I hate leafleting".

The really curious, even sinister, point about Felgate running in Harlow is that he lives in the constituency of Hertfordshire North-East, in Hitchin. Neither UKIP nor Veritas is fielding a candidate there. One must therefore question the motives for attempting to split the eurosceptic vote in Harlow and denying the voters of North-East Hertfordhsire a chance to vote for a eurosceptic candidate.

There are several other Hertfordshire constituencies where no Veriats nor UKIP candidate will be standing.

Harlow is in Essex. So UKIP has failed to put up Felgate in any of those constituencies in Hertfordshire in order to try to undercut Bennett's vote in Harlow.

The true face of UKIP is revealed by the case of 'Felgategate'. UKIP, it may be remembered, is the Party that has frequently run on the slogan: 'It's time to put country before Party'.

Oh yes?

posted by Martin |5:21 PM

Friday, April 15, 2005 

Farage's Funking Folkestone Finally Proves UKIP's Treachery

Think about it. Why is Nigel Farage MEP, once again UKIP's most effective political weapon since Kilroy's defection, not running against Michael Howard in Folkestone where the Tory Leader's slim majority could so easily be overturned. Think again of the running away from Hodge Hill and Hartlepool even after last Junes fantastic success, think of all the other opportunities where Nigel Farage might have succeeded in winning a Westminster seat - all refused.

There is still time for Nigel Farage to get his nomination in at Folkestone to replace the unknown and electorally pathetic Petrina Holdsworth - if he does not UKIP members must surely finally accept that they are being betrayed by their own party!

posted by Martin |8:15 AM

Wednesday, April 13, 2005 

UKIP's Pro-EU Spoiling Tactics Continue

The latest in the UKIP leadership's strategy to undermine candidates genuinely believing in Britain's withdrawal from the non-democratic superstate is their fielding of an unknown candidate to stand against the well known Tony Bennett from Veritas who ran a strong campaign in Harlow at the last election, and had already made a strong start against the declared EU federalists from the three main parties - as may be read from here.

Is it not time for the craven Branch Chairmen of UKIP, who stood idly by as party democracy was destroyed before their eyes in the bitter Kilroy/Knapman leadership dispute of the past several months, to now step up and demand a halt to this ongoing stupidity.....Or do they, like the paid UKIP employees and their troughing MEPs, now really believe that the EU is a fine and profitable thing, and that life at the trough is pretty damn cosy - just like the three main British political parties?

Who can deny UKIP's present tactics can only work in the interests of the EU? And how can they be justified?

Where is the UKIP inside whistleblower who will step up and reveal the truth behind the continuing series of bizarre decisions that throughout UKIP's history always leave the party inadequately challenging for Westminster representation?

Time is short for there now to be any prospect for the renewal of our country's sovereignty.

Another victory for the EU-fanatical, authoritarian and anti-democratic New Labour party will almost certainly entrench EU control so deeply into the fabric of Britain that any return will become practically impossible! Only three weeks are now left!

posted by Martin |7:12 PM

Tuesday, April 12, 2005 

Not Much News on UKIP

Very little to report on UKIP today. Please visit my blog Veritas Straight Talk for a report on the coverage gained by Robert Kilroy-Silk for Veritas during the day. That is likely to be the more active of my blogs during the campaign so why not click here and add it to your favourites or bookmarks.

The URL is

The full Veritas Manifesto which will be launched in Westminster next Thursday is now available from the party's website and may be read from here.

Impressive I thought especially the opening quoted below with my own enlarged emphasis in red:-

Our Manifesto is based on our two core beliefs:

(1)We must be able to govern ourselves as an independent nation.

(2) We must maintain and protect our personal and constitutional freedoms, for which many have fought and died over the centuries.

Neither belief is compatible with continued membership of the European Union.

All our policies are therefore based on our intention to leave the EU immediately.

posted by Martin |6:26 PM

Monday, April 11, 2005 

UKIP vs Veritas AGAIN!

From my e-mail inbox it is pretty clear that many ordinary UKIP and Veritas party members see the insanity of the two parties competing in different constituencies up and down the country on 5th May.

Why is it proving so difficult for the likes of David Lott, Petrina Holdsworth, Robert Kilroy-Silk and Roger Knapman to face up to the likely lunatic consequences of their presently intended course?

Even Nigel Farage on yesterday's 'Frost on Sunday' had the grace to admit that Kilroy had done wonders for UKIP. The report in The Scotsman on that broadcast is linked from the posting below.

My earlier suggestions of a national pact, local understandings etc., having seemingly so far been ignored, let me, therefore, make yet another proposal to these parties' leaders:-

Kilroy's strength in the European elections and the thrust of the Veritas General Election campaign is likely to be in the East Midlands. Ukip should agree to stand aside in that particular area giving Veritas the opportunity to maximise their efforts and resources in those constituencies.

In return Veritas will ask its candidates outside the East Midlands to stand-down, contribute their set aside resources to the East Midlands campaign and maximise the anti-EU effort for the benefit of all.

I cannot imagine the thinking electorate seriously considering a vote for either of these parties on polling day if they have been seen to compete against one another during the campaign. I doubt either party will ever recover credibility with that electorate either in national or european contests for years to come.

posted by Martin |7:33 PM

Sunday, April 10, 2005 

UKIP offer to Eurosceptics

The following is quoted from a report in The Scotsman, linked here:
The eurosceptic UK Independence Party today offered to give a free run in the upcoming General Election to any Conservative or Labour candidate who declared that they want to take Britain out of the European Union.

Ukip MEP Nigel Farage said the party would not run against any candidates from the major parties who publicly stated their intention to seek Britain’s withdrawal from the EU’s political structures.

His offer will be seen as an appeal particularly to eurosceptic Conservative MPs who are fearful of seeing their support squeezed on May 5 if there is a repeat of Ukip’s strong showing in last June’s European Parliament elections, when it took 16% of the vote.

Mr Farage told BBC1’s Breakfast With Frost that Ukip hoped to gain a “toehold” at Westminster on May 5, and had “real chances” in around 20 seats.

Many of Ukip’s key target seats are in Devon and Cornwall, where it was the largest single party in last year’s Euro-election.

Mr Farage said that Ukip’s General Election ambition was “getting our first toehold in Westminster”.

He added: “What we’ve got to do here is look at the 21 constituencies in which we came first on June 10 last year and to try to secure – even if it’s just a handful – victories in those seats.

“Once the Ukip voice is heard in Westminster, I’m sure it will grow very rapidly indeed.

“We have got real chances in up to 20 seats.”

Ukip would be willing to step back and make way for any Conservative or Labour candidate who announced that they wanted an “amicable divorce” from the EU and a return to a free-trade relationship with the continent, said Mr Farage.

“In those circumstances, I can’t envisage that Ukip would run a candidate against anyone saying that,” he said. “But none of them are.

“What’s a eurosceptic? Just saying you are doubtful about it, that you don’t like elements of it, attacking the symptoms but not the cause, really isn’t good enough.”

posted by Martin |7:33 PM

Saturday, April 09, 2005 

UKIP's Candidate in Erewash - Naive, Nuts or Nasty?

Mr Geoffrey Kingscott is the UKIP candidate for Erewash according to the UKIP web site. Mr Kingscott's telephone number is listed on that party's website and may be reached by clicking here (you may need to enter Erewash in the search field).

Why not give Mr Kingscott a call and inquire why he feels that he might stand a better chance of winning the election in Erewash rather than Robert Kilroy-Silk MEP, who brought victory to 12 UKIP MEPS last June, went to the Strasbourg Parliament and demanded our country back(a slogan now emblazoned across the UKIP home page), was repeatedly rebuffed by UKIP when wishing to take the fight directly to the other parties in Hodge Hill, Hartlepool etc., and in final frustration was forced to form his own EU withdrawalist party.

If there is one constituency in the country where there is a real chance of a euro-sceptic party candidate victory, one firmly espousing the withdrawalist cause, it surely must lie with Robert Kilroy-Silk MEP in Erewash.

What then does this Geoffrey Kingscott and the UKIP leaders who are supporting his candidature think they are playing at? If you belong to UKIP - contact them and find out! NOW

Next week will be too late!

Why do UKIP constantly seem to wish to prevent any euro-sceptic MPs ever sitting in Westminster?

posted by Martin |4:45 PM

Friday, April 08, 2005 

Tony Bennett grabs Harlow Headlines for Veritas

The local newspaper Bishop's Stortford Citizen highlights Tony Bennet's standing for Veritas against the three main parties as may be read from this link.

A typical constituency where a challenge from UKIP would be plainly suicidal for the anti-EU cause as has been repeatedly argued both here and on our sister blog UkipUncovered where this posting is being repeated.

posted by Martin |11:25 AM

Thursday, April 07, 2005 

Two Parties out of Three Say NO to any Electoral Pact - Shame on Them!

Naturally I directed my request for an electoral pact (read below) to the senior leadership of all three parties concerned. I received a pretty immediate positive response from the leadership of the English Democrats, followed by a polite but curt and definite NO from the Deputy Leader of the UK Independence Party, Mr Mike Nattrass. This latter reply was remarkably similar in reasoning to the equally negative response that came from a senior member of my own party, Veritas.

It is therefore now up to the UKIP and Veritas membership in the individual constituencies across the country to prevent this madness. UKIP members denied their own chance to resolve the bitter and acrimonious leadership dispute by the constitutional means of an EGM should impress on their local candidates where clashes arise that they and their often ex-colleagues now in Veritas should jointly decide which is the best candidate to proceed with nomination while the other is prevailed upon to stand aside. How many prospective candidates could really relish fighting a campaign with no helpers on a platform identical to that of another candidate?

The 630 odd individual contests that make up this general election are just that - local and independent. Each depends on volunteers which in the anti-EU, pro-democratic cause will mainly be drawn from party members within the UKIP and Veritas. These ignored patriots, now have the power to halt this pointless and destructive competition in their own constituencies but only during the next few short days!

posted by Martin |9:51 AM

Wednesday, April 06, 2005 

Guardian Letter on the BDI

The following appeared in yesterday's newspaper, linked from here:

Election principles

Tuesday April 5, 2005
The Guardian

At this election the only thing that matters is whether the parliament to which we elect MPs has the power to govern in our interests (Election countdown, April 4). The British parliament no longer makes our laws. This happened without the knowledge or permission of the British people. The British Declaration of Independence makes sure that in future only our MPs make our laws and that we can sack our law-makers if we don't like those laws - in other words that we live in a democracy.
By signing the declaration, parliamentary candidates acknowledge the authority of the British people and commit to exercising British self-government when they get to parliament. People pressure them to do so by signing our petition ( We then tell the candidates how many votes they gain by signing. We urge the electorate to vote for a candidate who has signed the declaration. Without self-government there is no point in voting at all.

Rodney Atkinson
Frederick Forsyth
Leolin Price QC
Lynn Riley
Alfred Sherman
David Stoddart
The British Declaration of Independence

posted by Martin |1:28 PM

Tuesday, April 05, 2005 

Last Gasp for Democracy -
Time for a UKIP/Veritas/English Democrat Pact

If, as is widely expected and reported, a General Election is indeed announced today by Britain's lying, authoritarian and deeply distrusted Prime Minister, Tony Blair - then a huge responsoibility for the future of democracy in Britain will fall upon the shoulders of the UKIP leadership, Robert Kilroy-Silk and Robin Tilbrook of the English Democrat party. (Possibly also IMO, other nationalist or EU withdrawalist parties and/or independent candidates in Scotland and Wales).

An electoral pact, prohibiting EU withdrawalist candidates from these parties from standing against one another in the coming election is the very least that the British electorate should be expected to be offered from protest parties whose driving principle is supposedly the reversal of the anti-democratic forces now at work in our society.

As short-lived Chief of Staff to Robert Kilroy-Silk and within days of the formation of the Veritas Party, I attended a meeting of the committee of broadcasters responsible for allocating Party Political Braodcasts during the coming election campaign. I was informed by the BBC employee Chairing this group, that even were Veritas to field a candidate in every constituency for the Westminster Parliament the maximum broadcasts we would be allocated would be ONE!

The judge reporting on the Labour Party postal ballot election rigging in Birmingham stated yesterday -
the episode would "disgrace a banana republic" (read the full Daily Telegraph report from this link), this seems to me another case for a similar attack.


What might one of the international election monitoring organisations make of the BBC's proposed allocation of this most crucial electoral resource?

Will such grave concerns be aired and fully discussed in the election campaign? Certainly not if the smaller protest parties fight mainly themselves.

There is, however, a quirk in the strange mish mash of rules and precedent that the BBC relies upon to justify its PPB policy, one that would allow three independent parties forming an electoral pact to be granted one broadcast each. Thus a UKIP/Veritas/English Democrat electoral pact could result in three national Party Political Broadcasts. That alone, in this TV dominated time of democratic crisis, should be sufficient to get those party's leaders around a table today!

posted by Martin |6:06 AM
www Ukip Uncovered
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.
Copyright © 2006 Martin Cole.
contact us
my other blogs
nigel farage
landmark links
fired treasurer
glw incitement
glw & farage
a complaint
a neutered nec
graham booth
derek clark
mark croucher
michael harvey
roger knapman
mike nattrass
buy my book
Copyright © 2003/6 Martin Cole.