Today’s first letter should be read together with the article by Dr Tomasz Slivnik in today’s UKIP Daily, and the report on the legal challenge issued by one candidate to the NEC which we reported yesterday (see here):

Sir,

I am reliably informed that UKIP,  facing a tight election deadline, has recently received a legal challenge from a public-spirited leadership candidate.  I commend his vigilance in seeking to ensure we follow our own rules, as we jolly well should! However, the Party Rulebook is, IMO, so holey there’s more lacunae than fabric therein, and much of the time it’s hard to tell whether we’re following the rules or not.

If the challenge to AMW’s inclusion on the ballot is indeed on the basis of I.8 and O.5 of http://www.ukip.org/ukip_party_rule_book, I see no end of economical and efficient defences.  So does my fellow mathematician Dr Slivnik, a businessman and former NEC member, who is also unencumbered by legal qualifications, and whose deliberations on this have already been circulated far and wide.

Here’s one even Dr Slivnik missed:

O.5 Eligibility:

“In accordance with the NEC’s criteria, applicants must have been a member of the party, in good standing continuously for at least two years from June 23 2017.”

Unless time travel is feasible, that’s a nonsense to begin with!  If “from” means “to”, “yes” might mean “no”, etc.

Evidently, common sense is needed in interpreting our rules, and surely the NEC must be given due powers and leeway to so do, to interpret ambiguities.  End of.

IMO, no judge is going to seek to interfere and abrogate powers of interpretation reasonably exercised by or available to our directly-elected representatives (the NEC).

Still, it is only prudent to review what’s potentially arrayed against us if we do not comply and thus leave Anne-Marie on the ballot paper.

I have looked into the firm of solicitors and its sole practitioner, reportedly involved:

http://solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/office/591265/tna-solicitors

We see from this site that a language spoken at the practice is “Nigerian”, but (in the same way that “Indian” is not a language) there’s no such language. Also do read:

https://twitter.com/gbenleke/status/504509156351819776

https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-oluleke-ashogbon-3285a123

Taking into account everything mentioned here, even I can grasp why one or more of UKIP’s three competent barristers at the very helm of the Party (Adam Richardson, Paul Oakley, Piers Wauchope) and the solicitor who serves on the NEC might well be quaking in his/her boots at the prospect of this particular legal danger.

I wouldn’t even be surprised if the NEC have been advised to yield to the challenge, but this is speculation, as such counsel would never be leaked.

But for some inexplicable reason, I am not quaking.  Why might this be?  Probably, because all these lawyer types are so much smarter than me.  Also, as several have observed, I’m too stupid to be intimidated.

With the greatest respect to the able candidate, I encourage the NEC to resist this challenge.

Respectfully, Freddy Vachha, UKIP Regional Chairman London

The second letter today is from our correspondent Cllr Brian Silvester:

Sir,

Labour MP Sarah Champion wrote an article for the Sun. She wrote:

“Britain has a problem with British Pakistani men raping and exploiting white girls. There. I said it. Does that make me a racist? Or am I just prepared to call out this horrifying problem for what it is?”

A few days later she was forced to resign as Labour’s Equalities Spokesperson. She said:

“I apologise for the offence caused by the extremely poor choice of words in The Sun article.”

The truth of the matter is that she did not make an extremely poor choice of words. Everything she wrote was absolutely correct. It is an horrifying problem and no more so than for the poor, young, vulnerable white girls who are groomed and then raped and abused by mainly Muslim men.

It has been going on for over 30 years.

In August 2014 the Professor Alexis Jay Report concluded that at least 1,400 children in Rotherham, most of them white girls aged 11–15, had been sexually abused between 1997 and 2013 by predominantly British-Pakistani men. The reason it had not come to light much earlier is that far too many in authority were frightened of being called racist.You would have thought that Labour would have learned from this but they haven’t.Three years after the Jay Report a Labour MP is forced to resign and called racist for saying exactly what was said in 2014.

Shamefully the grooming of young girls by Muslim men is still going on in Rotherham and across this country. All the parties who have been in Government over the last 30 years need to hang their heads in shame.

Sadly.thousands of young,mainly working class, girls,have been groomed and abused and the Government, Police and Social Services have failed to stop it. Indeed it goes on to this day.

The only politician who has spoken out on this issue is Anne Marie Waters, the UKIP Leadership contender, who has called for the law to be unapologetically enforced so these girls can be protected.

It is a national disgrace that those in authority are allowing young girls, who we should be protecting, to be abused in this way and nobody seems capable of stopping it. We need new leaders who will protect the British people and, in particular, these young girls.

Respectfully, Cllr Brian Silvester

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email