Today’s first letter comes from our contributor Stout Yeoman who takes issue with Bolton and Farage and points out the serious flaw in their arguments:
Sir,
I see that both Nigel Farage and Henry Bolton are declaring the NEC not fit for purpose. Neither gives an explanation of why that is so exactly nor what alternative is so desirable it merits the civil war such public statements risk causing, and so should be resisted for the shabby manoeuvre it is. But there was something else in their destructive stance that concerns me. UKIP is to be a single issue party again for both say its purpose, and only purpose, is to pursue Brexit.
This is the problem that has underpinned UKIP’s existential uncertainty ever since the referendum. By and large, the electorate does not vote for single issue parties in a general election, at least not in a way likely to put it into government. But the party’s constitution at article 2.5 is not single issue. Leaving the EU was merely a necessary first step to fulfil its broader mission described in article 2.5 but the party never gave proper thought to this beyond the haphazard and lightweight effort of Suzanne Evans and a few equally intellectually challenged MEPs.
Farage and Bolton’s latest utterances betray that mission and in effect declare UKIP shall live until 29 March 2019 only. After that date all of us who want to see, and are willing to work for, a Britain that “strengthens and guarantees the essential, traditional freedoms and liberties of all people in the United Kingdom” can presumably go hang.
It is this hijacking of the party’s core purpose, this betrayal, that is the deeper reason why Farage and Bolton need to be consigned to oblivion. Their fascist tactic of casting the NEC in the role of juden, of whipping up anti-NEC fervour, is despicable enough. But the obliteration of UKIP’s deeper purpose, of taking away the one party that could represent people who want to get out from under the stifling grip of big government, political correctness, and to resist being mere vassals of an elite, is unforgivable.
I urge all members to vote against Nigel and Bolton. It is the only way to give UKIP at least the possibility of a worthwhile future.
Respectfully, Stout Yeoman
Next, a letter from Mike Hookem MEP:
Sir,
UKIP is now in a state of paralysis due to this man’s failure to resign; with branches closing down; members leaving in droves, and years of hard work in the party’s grassroots being undermined.
Bolton could not have done a better job of shutting down UKIP’s opposition to a Brexit betrayal if he was a fully paid-up member of the Lib Dems.
Bolton cannot be totally blind to the damage he is causing within the party due to his arrogant failure to resign. Therefore, in my opinion, he must be working towards goals that are utterly divergent from those of its membership.
This is the only explanation for Bolton’s continued refusal to resign since his failed attempt to divert the blame for his failures onto the National Executive Committee and those resigning from his cabinet.
The fact is, many of the members who are leaving at the moment are still committed to Brexit; still committed to working toward UKIP’s stated goals; but don’t want to be represented by a man who is a political and personal embarrassment. Frankly, I don’t give a hoot who Henry is or is not in a relationship with. The only thing that matters to me is working towards the wants and needs of the membership in achieving real change in the UK, free of EU interference.
Respectfully, Mike Hookem MEP
Next, a letter from our contributor Jack Russell who takes issue with yet another Bolton ‘statement’:
Sir,
It’s apparently not sufficient for Henry Bolton to denigrate the NEC in an attempt to make himself look good, he’s now doing it to the whole Party. In today’s “Express” I read how he declares UKIP will be bankrupt because the Party loses £20,000 to £30,000 every month and has difficulties balancing the books. At the same time he says that he’s not receiving any salary (he knew this before he stood for Leader!), and that he’s not reimbursed for his expenses – but then we read that he actually receives a stipend!
So the question is of course: what has he done to rectify or at least alleviate this drain of money during the four months of his leadership? Make that three months because the last month was spent either canoodling with Ms Marney or defending himself in the MSM. That car-crash interview of him on “Good Morning Britain” yesterday was the penultimate straw for me – this article is the last one. Why should I or indeed anyone vote for him to stay as leader when he’s bringing the Party into disrepute every time he opens his mouth?
Respectfully, Jack Russell
Finally, the latest issue of “Bromsgrovia” from Peter Mchugh:
A Unique Independence Party.
UKIP’s present difficulties are something that the party’s rank and file could well have done without, but they are resilient, and they will soldier on – they’ve done it before – their spirit is intact and their network wide!
UKIP’s success is built almost entirely on the ability and personality of one man, it’s joint founder Nigel Farage, who today still commands the respect and allegiance of thousands .
UKIP is a uniquely British, political phenomenon, whose stature has to be viewed in the light of it being the target of the most intense denigration campaign ever waged against a British political movement, by an Establishment directed, National Propaganda Service ie. a section of our press and broadcast media .
UKIP’s aims touched a chord in the early days, with a disenchanted electorate, which was coming to the realisation that the process by which we were encouraged to join : first the Common Market, and then the EU, had about it a very strong odour of government deceit and dishonesty.
It appealed to ordinary, modest, decent people, and everyone who joined, or just gave their support, can be proud, whilst those who tried to suppress it, cannot.
As a fledgling party, UKIP appealed immediately to those who were being ridiculed as little Englanders, but who eventually retaliated by voting OUT in the 1975 and 2016 referenda .
UKIP cannot claim victory, or even the achievement of its primary goal – but neither can its detractors claim its total defeat – and UKIP’s place in our political history is unique and secure.
Nigel’s place in European political history will one day rank with the likes of Martin Luther, as a David who took on a Goliath, and won.
UKIP’s membership today is a vast untapped reservoir of anger – anger generated by government failure to implement the Referendum decision, and against a Westminster which does not cherish the sovereignty we are attempting to regain.
UKIP can say to any who advocate REMAINING: Why would you be happy to leave our sovereignty in the hands of twelve unelected political nonentities, and pay so dearly for the privilege ?
The sour grapes of Remainerism are best rebuffed by quoting Henry V before Agincourt:
They shall think themselves accursed they were not here, with us – – and hold their manhood cheap, whilst any speak, who fought with us on Referendum Day
Bromsgrovia 23/1/18.
Viv,
Elizabeth is always very good on interviews and this too was a good one. Looks like she is supporting Gerard which is also good, but he does need to get out there and state his case. Why are we not seeing him being interviewed on Good Morning Britain and such like, just to get back at Bolton..
He needs to be attacked up front not from the sidelines, and the membership and NEC cannot be expected to do it all for him. Just saying.
By the way, I hate the way Bolton smirks when they discuss his love life, he seems to get some sort of kick from it, makes me feel sick quite honestly.
You might like to watch this interview of Liz Jones, by Luke Nash-Jones of MBGA:
A perception changing interview. Which underlines the need for communication. Elizabeth Jones presented herself very well. She was prepared and clear in her answers. Thank you for the link.
I remember she was a candidate for the leadership after Farage resigned in 2016. I seriously considered voting for her then.
I don’t know why there were many disparaging comments about her at the time. Could she be considered as a possibility now in our time of need?
Viv,
Elizabeth is always very good on interviews and this too was a good one. Looks like she is supporting Gerard which is also good, but he does need to get out there and state his case. Why are we not seeing him being interviewed on Good Morning Britain and such like, just to get back at Bolton..
He needs to be attacked up front not from the sidelines, and the membership and NEC cannot be expected to do it all for him. Just saying.
By the way, I hate the way Bolton smirks when they discuss his love life, he seems to get some sort of kick from it, makes me feel sick quite honestly.
Jack wrote: “Why should I… vote for him… when he’s bringing the Party into disrepute…?”
This is the guy who compared UKIP to national socialists. He was bringing the party into disrepute before he even won the election.
30% voted for him anyway.
With all the infighting, the blows, some mortal, the insults, the struggle of self-questioning, the coming to terms with betrayal, the anger, the disappointment and despair, there is carnage. Amongst the bloodied mass of weary wounded bodies, humbled, their preconceived ideas, bubbles and boxes smashed, their leaders slain, a dirtied hand is raised. ‘Long live UKIP’ and a tumultuous roar goes up!
I know I’m a silly sod, but I hope so.
I`m sure there`s a play or a film in this, maybe an epic
Kim,
I thought maybe this was from Shakespeare, but perhaps not, I confess to not being too familiar with his scribblings.
Can we make an asessment of Henrys actions over 4 months.
1. taken up with the obviously 30 dayssince Boxing Day. Half of which could be sympathetically and desperately be called publicity. And since no-one in the world likes Piers Morgan, he may have garnered the odd sympathy vote from prisons. Thatis 16 days.
2. As far as I can work out, It’s a very small database. Say max 100 K records plus various sorts and accessprogramms Starting from scratch I would think 2.5 peopl would be needed for say 3 months then 2 people at £60K inc taxes eac….HB, Setting up and advising is unlikely to be no more than 3 days plus 2x 0.5 days for 8 weeks..11 days.
3.Travelling and polishing image Say 10 full day meetings plus another 10 at 0.5 days plus say with benefit of doubt 5 days. =20days
4. Sorting out simple working routines, and rules. = 2 days.
5.Xmas 3 days
That is 52 days out of 120
As a man in an exciting and challenging new position I would have exoected getting on for 18 hours a day every day including weekends.
Since I can fingd no mention of what he’s done, and on the above figures, completed.And giving every shadow of benefit, I’m forced to the conclusion that he’s not for this job.
Stout Yeoman wrote:
“…the party never gave proper thought to this beyond the haphazard and lightweight effort of Suzanne Evans and a few equally intellectually challenged MEPs.”
Did you stand in 2015? I did, and the above average result in West Suffolk (nearly 22%) was because Suzanne Evans and Patrick O’Flynn sent us into battle with a well crafted and fully costed manifesto. Far from being the product of lightweights, that manifesto has stood the test of time — I’d happily run on it again.
Haphazard and lightweight? You must be thinking of the Labour effort.
JF
And how did you or the party get on in February and June last year with Evans’ well crafted work?
2015 was the peak of 3.88 million votes. What evidence do you have that anyone read the manifesto.
Nationally, in 2014 and before, UKIP campaigned on a platform described in our Party Constitution (small government, low tax) and in 2014 received 26.6% of the vote. In 2015, we campaigned on a manifesto which positioned us at the opposite end of the political spectrum (I think even its authors would agree with this assessment) and which was, shall we put it this way, somewhat ignorant of our Party Constitution. Quite what the purpose of that was was never clear, since the Party’s traditional platform was serving us really well and was what most of our members at the time sincerely believed in. In consequence, in 2015 UKIP received 12.6% of the vote. In 2017, we campaigned on the integration agenda and UKIP received 1.8% of the vote. The 2014 election (on the one hand) and the 2015 and 2017 elections (on the other hand) are different animals, of course, since one was a European election and the other two were Westminster ones. However, opinion polls from all the three eras reflected that UKIP’s support among the general population was consistent with the results achieved in the respective election at the time. I think a lot of this loss was not necessarily due to what our new position each time was, but because we so sharply shifted our position to one diametrically opposed to what it had previously always been for decades, what it was immediately before the seismic shift occurred, and which we previously always very sincerely, convincingly and confidently advocated.
It is more complicated than you are admitting.
UKIP is a victim of its own success.
Many ordinary voters see that since we are (however imperfectly) getting out of the EU, that the job of UKIP is finished. You or I might disagree, I am simply repeating here what I hear from colleagues and acquaintances.
The integration agenda was incompetently executed. It failed to spell out the root of the problem, which is the contents of the Koran. The burka is the symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself. When you have a fever the fever itself cannot be cured until the root cause – an infection – is recognised and effectively treated.
I’ve read most of the recent articles and the many comments, and my head is spinning so forgive me if I have missed the possible answer to the following question.
Am I correct in believing that the leader, the chairman and the treasurer of UKIP all sit on the NEC, a committee that they are supposed to report to and be answerable to. If so how can this possibly be in the interests of the party and it’s members? Or have I misunderstood?
It’s analogous to executive officers and non-execs on commercial company boards. The party is a limited company and complying with company law is in the interests of the party.
So is the chairman in a similar position to say Fred the Shred?
JF,
God, I hope not because that would be Steve Crowther.
I would not put Farage down, but would say his sense of character judgement is way off the mark.
As for financing the party, why not throw it open to crowd
investment funding, 17.4 million 50ps is cheap to purchase a slice of self respect, and the chance to say in the future, “I always knew they would make good I helped finance them”
Set up a fund with a trusted member to handle ie Gerald Batten,why not.
Ogga 1,,
Reasonable idea but not 17.4 million people are all UKIP supporters, and how would you monitor it all, don’t you think Gerard will have enough to do, poor man? He has got to take on the Farage, Banks machine.
Personally I think the price of fredom and self respect at 50p to be a bloody bargain and even those still voting for the odious lab/lib/con coalition would see it as such, covering their rear exits for the future as in “I helped finance UKIP yo know to win through”
Then get another trusted member, we have more than one have we not, unsavoury as it is , money talks.
Ogga1,
I just don’t think they will bother donating and anyway, would’nt it look like we are begging? We should have a capable finance department watching all incomings and outgoings, that’s there job.
But what we really need is our big donors back excluding Arron Banks because he just wants to rule the party, like when he tried to oust out the current party chairman and take his place, what a cheek.
But as they say ‘money talks’, but not 50p I’m afraid.
Dear Mike Hookem
“Bolton could not have done a better job of shutting down UKIP’s opposition to a Brexit betrayal if he was a fully paid-up member of the Lib Dems.”
How can we know for sure that he is not a fully paid-up member of the Lib Dems? I find it difficult to believe that he, as an ex Lib Dem, can wholeheartedly embrace Brexit when the Lib Dems are so violently opposed to the idea of the UK leaving their beloved EU.
Is all this talk about holding Mrs May’s feet to the fire on Brexit just as empty a slogan as Mrs May’s own slogan that Brexit means Brexit?
If so, then Bolton is definitely not the leader UKIP needs or deserves after all the hard work our foot soldiers have put into the cause of Brexit, and the quicker he disappears into the sunset the better.
Lidian,
I think he is just a greedy chancer and careerist, as well as a fantasist, the worst attributes to have as a politician, the Lib Dums must have rumbled it and sent him to us thinking we would not. I cannot believe this has happened, Farage owes us an abject and sincere apology and should pay all the money back that Bolton has obviously fiddled.
Donald Duck, and Ogga1
Sadly, I have to agree with you that Farage owes us an abject apology for this monumental cock-up. Unfortunately, Ogga1 is spot on when he says Nigel’s sense of character judgement is way off the mark. It is not the first time he has lumbered us with a cuckoo’s egg.
Such a pity because Nigel has other excellent attributes which have served UKIP and the country very well in the past.
If Henry is so skint and in service charge arrears that he nedds to sell his Folkestone flat, might he not have mentioned that he as at the mercy of his (soon-to-be-ex) wife when running for the leadership?
It seems I was right when I pointed out the new leader would need to be an MEP, MP or man of money, and the “anyone should be able to stand” brigade are proven wrong. ?
But did not Mr Bolton assure us at hustings he did not require a salary as he had his own source of income?
Jake,
I remember him asking for a salary at the hustings as did AMW’s, so there you go.
When Lisa Duffy ran, shecsaid she would need a salary, but would ensure she had raised sufficient funds first.
Rob,
That’s OK is’nt it, what has happened to her is she still active in UKIP?
No idea.
Alternatively, if his marriage was already in trouble, so a divorce and child maintenance payments were in prospect, then he would try and set up a smokescreen of poverty to limit any claims against him. We were not the audience but his wife’s lawyers (and other possible creditors) were.
SY,
God, this man is as crafty as a cartload of monkeys, but monkeys are better looking, oops, I must erase that last bit.
All of this is OK.
We need action. How difficult would it have been to tell our members To Buy some leaflets and give em out in town centres again. Any message at all would have done. Mike Hookem has the idea. Henry hasn’t a clue. A hundred things could and still should now be being done.
Instead he’s trying to save himself not the party.
As a soldier he’s a dead loss. As a womaniser he aint that good either.
For this reason Stupidity, inexperience,resistance, mulishnessness, whatever A lack of any result shows he’s no good .
He must go: together with constitution, rule book and the pathetic Ltd Co.
t g spokes,
Now you are talking sense.
Third childhood
t g spokes,
Okay pet!
Well that’s interesting, he claims to be paid a ‘monthly stipend’ not a salary….. or is he putting misinformation out there? A stipend would be a fixed monthly amount rather than reimbursing specific expenses. We have always been told that the leader’s position was unpaid. What is the full truth?
I’ve heard of Torquil Dick-Erikson, and I regularly read what he writes with interest. I am a law graduate who has studied the EU treaties for several years.
Phillip,
As you are studying law, can you get us out of this mess?
For your amusement…. note the typo….
The gift that keeps on giving….
https://twitter.com/Jo_Marney/status/956116088051453953
She’s standing by her man! Is there anything brainier than that? LOL
BTW – did enjoy the Mail’s expression – electric prong in the bidet. Anyone who can make it to Lakeside, Frimley on Saturday afternoon bring yours with you. You’ll know where to stick it
POP,
Why, what is happening there? will a red hot poker do?
Mr Bav,
Not too gifted in the grey matter is she,? ‘Drain the Bog’, how eloquent. But she must be good at something or our ‘enry would not have been so easily seduced by her,not with his extraordinary large brain, for a marauding Drake.
I think she’s been saying ‘flush the bog’. I wonder if her parents now consider that spending £16,000 per annum on a private education for her was a waste of money?
Regards
Brenda,
God, it gets worse, her parents must be horrified, are they younger than Henry?
Of course we could sort this all out with a boxing match between Mike and Henry. I’d back the commando over Walter Mitty every time.
Mr. Bav,
Would that be Mike Tyson and our ‘enry Cooper (since departed)?
Everyone by now is familiar with the blasted Bolton , while hands up those who have heard of Torquil Dick Erikson and his excellent clutch of articles on this website?
I can put my hand up. That man (Torquil Dick-Erikson) is brilliant and I always enjoy his articles.
Kind regards.
I can, and I can BOAST that he included one of my comments in a subsequent article he wrote, way back.
Apart from the implied approval from a man who clearly knew his subject, he really allowed me to put together a Referendum “narrative” and speak confidently to the “other” man in the street, the market place hustings and friends and family; the majority of them who had never heard of Corpus Juris, the Napoleonic Code and their difference from the freedoms exemplified by the right of Habeas Corpus, all derived from Magna Carta and it`s subsequent derivations.
I had always believed that fighting a Referendum was a selling operation, for me personally to be involved I had to have a “narrative”, I knew the UKIP tale was broadly that the EU was an undemocratic institution, illegal in its gestation, totalitarian in its objectives and operation, peopled by some characters who even acknowledged it was right to lie and a whole body malevolent to the interests of the British State and devoted to its final destruction by absorbing it into the “United States of Europe” or some other such “closer Union”
Effectively it was slavery.
So the “legs” to my story with which Torquil Dick-Erikson provided became the foundation of my “pitch” and often the opening gambit.
To be able to instance the European Arrest Warrant as inimical to British justice and to be able to explain that Habeas Corpus in its most important detail required an arrested person to be charged and brought before a magistrate within so many days or set free, whereas under Corpus Juris there was no such requirement and in fact defendants can linger in custody for months, in many cases unable to gather evidence for their case.(in my opinion it`s akin to kangaroo justice)
So yes thanks again Torquil, I try to “read, learn and inwardly digest” every reason you give me to expose the perfidity of the EU (and the Remainiacs who to their everlasting shame still support them)