The NEC of UKIP is the body that holds all the power. As company directors, they can prevent and/or authorise virtually everything. Despite this enormous power they are essentially an unqualified and largely unknown group of people elected on a system far more representative of a tombola dip than an election. This is quite deliberate and designed to keep the power in the hands of a few.
The last NEC election attracted 91 candidates who were put to a single ballot. No campaigning other than 150 words is allowed, so there is no opportunity for members to really know who these people are, how qualified they are, or what they believe in. Most members don’t bother, largely because of the general anonymity of the NEC and the fact that they do not realise the excessive power they have. Today, they may have killed the party.
The result, therefore is that people whose names are marginally better known get elected. The result of this deliberate process is to create a permanent conflict between those with the power but without, political nous, experience, knowledge or necessarily the best interests of the party at heart, and the leadership. Most members don’t even know who these people are. We don’t know what that do, what they talk about, who votes for what, and they have no formal connection with the party in the country and as a result are completely unaccountable.
Every candidate in the recent leadership election vowed to do something about this rotten core at the heart of UKIP. Only one can, and did start this process.
Nigel Farage had eventually had enough of the constant battles, and he is a formidable opponent. Diane James crumbled in the face of this confrontational organisation almost immediately and Paul Nuttall simply did nothing to reform the party in his entire tenure. What he meant by the ‘unity candidate’ was to accede to the status quo in the hope that personal electoral success would follow. That didn’t work very well, and we began haemorrhaging members.
However, the 2017 leadership election threw up an outsider in Henry Bolton. Many had favourites in existing senior people, a bubble surge even suggested that Anne Marie Waters would win, but Henry Bolton did. His win saved the party then, only for the NEC to try to finish it off now.
As the outsider Henry Bolton was keen to initiate sweeping reform, as only an outsider (to the UKIP clique) can do. This wasn’t popular with those in power who wished to keep things as they are and as a result, Henry Bolton began his tenure with a target on his back. It wasn’t long before the knives came out. However, if it wasn’t this, it would have been something else. In the cold light of day, though, this is a weak and premature attack, because it’s foundations are based upon guilt by association as opposed to any personal guilt or failings. Henry Bolton was doing a good job for the party and has done nothing wrong. This won’t look good.
The NEC today [Ed: Sunday 21st Jan] voted unanimously in favour of a no-confidence motion in the leader, the chairman only has a casting vote. In doing this they may have consigned the party to the dustbin of history, but the process is not over.
The final decision now goes to the membership under the auspices of an EGM and creates a wonderful opportunity for real change.
Many, I’m sure, will not know that should the EGM not confirm the vote of no confidence in the leader, taken today, then the entire NEC has to stand down and a completely new one elected. This is a wonderful opportunity to rid ourselves of all the present incumbents in one go and choose 12 people who truly have the interests of the party at heart. The wording of the constitution clearly suggests also that none of the existing NEC members may stand for re-election. As it happens, and with a tinge of irony, this vote of no confidence in Henry Bolton also applies to the NEC. It is the ultimate power battle. Henry Bolton goes, or the NEC goes. This is a watershed moment for the party.
My SAGE group for electoral reform (a Henry Bolton innovation) has met and we have drafted a much more sensible electoral process for both the NEC and leadership elections that I will be submitting and publishing over the next couple of days. It may not be in the interests of the current party power base but after that, perhaps? As it happens we’ve also drafted our manifesto commitments in this area. Policy is being created.
Make no mistake, that this is simply a power grab by an anonymous and incompetent NEC in the face of wide ranging party reforms being driven by Henry Bolton. His relationship issues, upsetting as they must be for everyone involved, has been the catalyst, but will be seen, certainly by the media, as an unjustifiable witch hunt.
Now, though, it is up to the party membership. We can get rid of this NEC once and for all, giving a clear opportunity to reform and reshape the party and its power base. I urge all of you who wish to see the continuation of UKIP and its resurgence as a relevant political force to make sure you attend the EGM and vote against the NEC decision. If you do, a new dawn awaits, with new opportunity.
A new NEC must commit to party reform and the wide-ranging changes needed. Never before have the membership had such a decisive vote. It’s a shame that our stupid rules and awful constitution denies so many members a say. Apparently only those mobile enough or otherwise able to get to the EGM will count, so that’s just one more thing that needs fixing.
If the no-confidence vote is upheld, Henry Bolton’s reforms will simply bite the dust. There will be no member engagement and no party re-structuring, no SAGE, and business (the business of sinking without trace) will simply continue. We’ll also have no leader and no prospective leader in sight. This would be the fourth election in just over a year, in six months or a year we’ll be having the fifth, if we still exist.
Three leadership elections have proved that there is nobody of sufficient stature who wants the job. Forcing another one over, essentially personal circumstances is absolute folly. If the NEC prevail, the boy’s jobs, for as long as they last will be safe, but the party will be over. MEPs will likely begin to drift away as they start the search for new jobs, as their EU tenure draws to a close. Goodbye UKIP, you tried, but the forces of self-interest prevailed. RIP. Unless?
I don’t agree in guilt by association, especially regards text messages he could know nothing about when they were sent. I think Bolton should be given longer to prove himself. It seems, by refusing to resign, he is willing to fight for the party and Brexit on behalf of UKIP members and voters. Our UKIP MEPs and spokespersons should be doing the same, not resigning, which achieves nothing. While it seems many members have written asking for his resignation, perhaps those who have remained silent feel differently. No one person speaks for the membership so Bolton did the right thing by putting this Leadership decision in the hands of the membership.
As a relative newbie may I be permitted to make a comment? I joined UKIP a little over a year ago and increasingly have questioned the wisdom of having done so. I can live with poor election results but I can not live with organizational incompetence and morally questionable “leadership”. The party appears to be going to the dogs, each new leader worse than the one replaced. Will I renew my membership? Probably not; many local members, to my certain knowledge, feel exactly the same way. What a pity, what a waste – Britain deserves better.
Stout,
We had no choice but to get behind Paul Nuttall in Stoke. It’s obvious why he failed to win, or get a very good 2nd place (maybe even beat my 39% vote share in Heywood & Middleton in 2014).
We spent very little on the GE because finances were tight after Stoke (at the time did anyone think Theresa the Appeaser would call a GE). Maybe the poor Stoke result triggered it with her thinking she’d pick up 3.8m votes?
David,
You stated: ‘Every candidate in the recent leadership election vowed to do something about this rotten core at the heart of UKIP. Only one can, and did start this process’.
WHAT AN APPALLING ACCUSATION. PLEASE PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR SUCH OR CRAWL BACK UNDER YOUR ROCK
Nigel Farage had eventually had enough of the constant battles, and he is a formidable opponent. Diane James crumbled in the face of this confrontational organisation almost immediately and Paul Nuttall simply did nothing to reform the party in his entire tenure. What he meant by the ‘unity candidate’ was to accede to the status quo in the hope that personal electoral success would follow. That didn’t work very well, and we began haemorrhaging members.
NIGEL ‘LOVED’ THE NEC WHEN IT ALLOWED HIM TO UNRESIGN IN MAY 2015 HOWEVER THREW HIS TOYS OUT OF THE PRAM WHEN THE NEC DIDN’T KICK CARSWELL & HAMILTON OUT OF THE PARTY (WHICH THEY COULDN’T). THE NEC BELIEVED HE WANTED TO ‘CHOOSE’ THE CANDIDATES WHO STOOD IN THE WELSH ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS, VIA NATHAN GILL HOWEVER WHEN THE NEC DECIDED TO LET THE WELSH MEMBERS DECIDE WHO STOOD HE PUBLICLY AGREED THAT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.
DIANE NEVER BOTHERED EITHER ENGAGING WITH THE PARTY OFFICERS OR NEC OR EVEN MEETING THEM.
WHY DON’T YOU STAND FOR THE NEC DAVID – PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND STOP LOBBING HAND GRENADES FROM THE SIDELINES.
John,
Tut Tut, shouting doesn’t improve your arguments, it just makes you appear desperate. As for my comments I was at many leadership hustings so am very aware of the feeling against the NEC. If you aren’t aware of that then I guess that’s part of the problem.
Oh, and I have stood for the NEC on the last two occasions, that’s public knowledge.
David,
Please set out, with evidence, why UKIP is rotten at the core. If you can’t maybe you’d like to apologise to those people (our hard working staff) you have impugned with your pathetic cheap shot.
Just as an aside I often find people who have done very little to further a cause or have ingratiated themselves with the boss in return for some scraps (maybe like a spokeman’s role) are rather pompous, sneering and vacuous. And rather ignorant of the business they’re in. Lord Dartmouth recently put one such also ran in his place.
John, whatever became of the NEC’s Constitutional Reform committee under Michael Greaves? This was tantalisingly mentioned in one ‘meeting record’ but seemed to disappear without trace?
Whilst, of course, I acknowledge you natural superiority over all beings you are still wrong and very focussed upon your own rectal cavity. The rotten bit of UKIP is it’s structure which gives the leader zero authority and the NEC (elected by lottery) all the power with no responsibility. Sometimes, individuals get on it who also have personal agendas and delusions of grandeur. You’ll know who I mean.
Steve resigned after Nigel stepped down, having served him for six years I believe.
David,
As usual you make many unwarranted, evidence lite claims.
Let me repeat: the treasurer & the rest of the NEC have yet to see any semblance of a business plan from the Leader, almost four months into his leadership. The NEC have been very keen to see his plan so we can critique it and when finally approved help him implement it.
Far from reforming/professionalising the party (easy soundbites/promises to throw out at a leadership hustings to please the crowd), we’ve no idea what he wants to do & how it’s going to be paid for. What’s the saying: all talk and no walk!
The NEC and wider party desperately wanted Bolton to succeed (for my part I was organising finances to support the ‘office of the leader’ to ensure he could do his job).
If you’re incapable of understanding that as leader it was his lack of political nous, judgement and self awareness that has caused this fiasco then I give up.
Really John?
I thought it was all about your moral superiority, after all you said:
“Having been in Mrs B’s shoes I have all my sympathy with her and the children, I cannot work for a leader who has so publicly humiliated his wife.”
Apparently, it’s now about his incompetence as leader. Some comsistency?
I think you’re attributing the wrong quote to me dear boy. I never said anything about ‘having been in Mrs B shoes……………’ I’m a bloke btw not a women.
I thought the contributors/readers on here might like to know that we haven’t seen any plans from HB, almost four months into his leadership. If he’s shared some with his minions maybe you’d be so kind as to pass them on to the party’s ruling body?
Mr Bickley
The quote mentioned by D Allen, above, is most definitely not one that can be accredited to you.
I remember reading this quote, either in a newspaper article or on twitter. Unfortunately, I cannot find the quote now to verify the name of the person who did make it, hence why I can’t say the name here.
I can confirm that the quote was made by a woman.
Regards
John,
Correct, It wasn’t your quote but Ms Anderton’s. Still an odd sentiment but on this occasion not from you , I apologise.
John,
Is David now having gender identity issues as well as everything else, perhaps you need to change your name to Joan or is there something you need to tell us?
John Bickley, at times it must feel like you are banging your head against a brick wall. However I have appreciated your comments on here as it has given a different and informed dimension to the debate.
I’m sorry, Mr Allen, but your blind loyalty to Bolton is taking you down the same delusional path. Press the ejector button before you too crash and burn.
Fortunately, I am an independent thinker, not dependent upon anybody, not easily intimidated and hard to knock off track simply by following a mob mentality. I don’t make a good sheep. You confuse loyalty with pragmatism.
David,
You are certainly ‘bloody minded’ and intransient in your views, somehow you remind me the Japanese pilots who committed ‘hari Kari’ during the war.
To blame all the problems that have faced and are facing UKIP on the NEC is to ignore not one but several elephants in the room.
When Henry was elected he announced, “Brexit is my core task”, ‘core is a word that HB uses quite a lot; I suppose the smaller ones vocabulary the more one is obliged to fall back on certain words and expressions, of necessity.
The most urgent issue facing UKIP when HB took over was the fact that we were and are haemorrhaging members at a thousand a month; many people are simply not renewing and our branch is no different. The internal systems of UKIP were rubbish in 2014 and 2015 UKIP made significant electoral impact under them; what the membership were seeking was not party reform but leadership, particularly on the issue of Brexit and they simply didn’t get it, indeed as far as Brexit is concerned, it is not at all clear that HB has mastered his brief.
There is no doubt that we are in dire straits and it behoves the NEC to facilitate the installation of leader such as Gerald Batten, our Brexit spokesman, to steady the ship.
I note that David Allen stood unsuccessfully for election to the NEC in 2016 and for election as party leader in 2017, subsequently endorsing HB.
I agree with David that our Constitution, Rulebook and paper systems are unwieldy, expensive and require urgent modernisation for which reason I think it would be highly undesirable to hold a further formal leadership election under the existing rules. As a local activist I became totally exasperated by the quantity and quality of a much of those who put themselves forward for these recent elections and the paucity of real information concerning their prior life experience; I myself would not have expected to obtain professional employment on the basis of unsubstantiated claims of experience and competence. Of the top four candidates in the last leadership election, three had external affiliations which would have meant the party becoming transmuted into something else. Another candidate had a track record dicomented on the Companies House website which would have been spotted immediately by the MSM etc.
And I was also unsuccessful in 2015, though received many more votes. So, I have tried to help. I stood in the leadership election to get a voice, in that endeavour I was successful. Members have been routinely ignored by the party, now there is a formal process (or was) to engage members in policy creation (SAGE), inspired by Henry Bolton. I fear that will end, I fear that the professionalisation program, new website, new membership system, new procurement processes, candidate training, eleciton support for branches will all end if Henry goes. Nobody else hsa been remotely interested in doing this and so it would be again if he goes. My support is for party reform, not an individual, but as that individual has been instrumental in the changes so far, clearly I think the party would be better off if he stayed.
David,
From what you say and all the work you have done I can see why you do not wish it to be undone, but would that necessarily happen if HB were to go, there must be others that can help especially those of us on this site, why do you trust him more than us?
All this SAGE and other reforms sound very good to me, have you bounced them off anyone else for instance John Bickley who also comments on this site? I don’t understand why you need to rely on one man even if he is the leader, especially someone like HB, don’t be so defeatist and keep looking to the future, Henry is now past history I’m afraid.
Where does Steve Crowther fit in all this mess?
The last I saw or heard of him was at the Conference, where I thought his address was inspirational. As interim leader he communicated with articulate flair, and a number of people to whom I spoke at Conference wished that he had been on the leadership ballot.
Steve has been criticized for presenting the new logo as a done deal, but I thought his reasoning (explained in a newsletter AND at Conference) was sound. He is a branding expert, and personally I think the result is a good one.
Not trying to move the goalposts for this thread, but simply wondering what has happened to someone who guided the party through the inter-regnum and from whom we have not heard since. It seems relevant to mention this, since we will once more have an inter-regnum from about 16:01 this afternoon.
Grummy,
I suspect Steve is having a good lie down, you are right he did give a good speech at the conference and did a good job as interim leader, but I think he has had enough of being in the front line, he is no ‘spring chicken’ after all.
I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong but did’nt he resign at the same time as Nigel and Paul Nuttall when they all ran off into the sunlit uplands, following the referendum result.
Steve resigned after Nigel stepped down, having served him for six years I believe.
John,
Yes, that is correct, I guess he did not wish to stay any longer or work under a new leader, anyway, he did come back to help out when we were leaderless. And we must always remember that Diane James wanted to be leader but Paul Nuttall did not, he felt compelled to do it after Diane gave up.
I still do not understand why she left the party though, because now she has no voice, although I did see her saying something recently.
The Lenny the Lion logo has not been registered with the EC, the reason it will not fit on a ballot paper! Bit of an error by a ‘branding expert’. Looks like we are stuck with the £ logo that everyone recognises and has served us so well, good.
Alec,
God, what a joke you would have thought someone would have checked that, but at least as you say people will recognise that but will we have any candidates to vote for?
David Allen, don’t you think you are straining at a gnat, trying to defend Bolton OBE? While I gather you were his stalking horse, Bolton OBE has revealed himself not only as a serial philanderer, a mountebank, a cad = “slimeball” in current americanese, but also no clue on leadership, poor judgement,revealed I would say by his ridiculous legal challenge withdrawn within 24 hours and his smearing of a large number of Kippers. He has gone back on his word on DK,therefore untrustworthy, no campaigning enthusiasm or skills, no ability to reconnect UKIP to the people, no ability to lead a team – what have we heard from the so-called cabinet whose spokesmen are now resigning in droves?
Bolton OBE’s position is as untenable as your curious attempt to save him. Wake up man!
I really have no right to comment, having resigned on Jan 11th, but your piece is so absurd, I cannot help myself.
Why is it curious to save the party from yet another round of leadership elections? I am, as it happens, wide awake, and still supporting the party, which you, of course, are not.
And there are many of us still in and supporting the party which is why we want Bolton to go.
We did not want another round of elections. We just feel it is the lesser of two evils.
No, you are supporting your man, who is doing damage to the party which may already be irredeemable.
Tony,
Firstly I would second what you are saying.
Secondly, a short while back, Vivian Evans, the Editor in Chief, made it clear on another thread that UkipDaily is not a closed shop and all voices could be heard.
Kind regards.
Sorry David but Bolton has been a terrible leader.
Let’s just rewind a little.
Within 24 hours of being elected himself and Farage managed to alienate 2000 plus members who had voted for AMW. Not good.
His first interview on walking out of the conference hall he was all over the place on immigration yet he had been campaigning for months. Did he actually have any ideas on the subject? As AMW said in her recent video all Bolton had was a couple of soundbites ‘We must hold Teresa May’s feet to the fire…’ and the like. No policies, no vision.
Reneged on his promise to David Kurten. First question mark on his trustworthiness.
Then within 48 hours we had a hint from a Tweet that Bolton had not paid service charges on a flat he had bought in a pensioner’s block since he’d moved in. Having worked in property I warned Kippers that should be looked into ASAP and that you could know the character of the man by getting to the bottom of that allegation. Even Marie a backer of Bolton said it should be investigated ASAP. Well as it turns out from the FT article that Graham linked to it seems he is now having to sell that flat to pay his arrears. Not paying his debts. Second question mark on his trustworthiness.
All this was before the Jo Marney/wife business.
Sorry but Bolton was given the benefit of the doubt far too often.
He’s a chancer pure and simple.
Bolton was the wrong choice as he had, to coin a Farage term, the charisma of a damp rag. What UKIP needed was a leader with personality and politically conviction. I’m struggling to offer any names for a replacement that fits the bill so RIP UKIP.
I agree with Tomaž and Stout, having served on the NEC with at least one of them.
Nigel threw his toys out the pram when he didn’t get his own way. Henry looks to be doing the same.
Many of the NEC, e.g. Alan Bown, are hardworking successful businessmen, who marke large donations to coffers, and to compare them to a tombola stall is a disgrace. Nigel tried similar insults, too, because they got too independent.
As for Diane, maybe if she had bothered to meet us, at least once, we could have come to some mutual form of respect.
Lastly, there is NOTHING in the constitution that prevents the NEC members standing for election again post-EGM – although whether they would want to is an entirely different matter.
The election process is the core of the analogy, not the people. Criticise my view by all means but do try to get it right. 91 candidates, 150 words. It says it all.
For all your defence the membership want the NEC gone more than Henry Bolton. It has presided over four leaders and a collapse in membership, not to mention a completely dysfunctional organisation. That’s hard to defend. I’m not necessarily denigrating the people themselves, after all I have no idea what you do, what you discuss, how you vote or if any of you are any good. That’s part of the problem. The real issue is that power is exercised without responsibility or accountability. A structural change is necessary as is a revised constitution. The only reason that doesn’t happen is the opposition of the NEC. You can see why members don’t like it. I hope the NEC will approve the revised electoral process drawn up by the electoral reform SAGE group. That will go some way to improving members electoral choices. There is nothing in the constitution to say that they can stand again either, however the implied tone and the rules for normal NEC elections would suggest, quite strongly, not.
Rob,
I just want to say two words in support of what some people say about the NEC, and I have no wish to be spiteful in saying them:’Marion Mason’ who stood for the leadership contest, I think she was the only one from the NEC and a lovely lady she was too, but hardly leadership qualities.
Now, as nice and well meaning as she was this either says something about the NEC or the poor vetting procedure for prospective candidates, some might say that Aiden Poundsland fell into this category as well but he did entertain us.
I would suggest that Henry should not have been there either if he had been properly scrutinised, but some one pulled some strings there to get him through all the hoops, or it was just pure negligence. Are the NEC responsible for that? if so they have chosen some one who wants to get rid of them, the plot just thickens hour by hour.
Thank you, Tomaz Slivnik, for your contribution and other comments, some very detailed, that I have read in the past. Having voted for you when you stood as an NEC candidate, I am very glad that you are still involved in UKIP and passionate about what happens to the party.
As a Wales UKIP (Cardiff branch) member I remember well the situation of ‘the young lady’ you refer to. The NEC is not perfect and I am sure that reforms within the party structure are needed, but I have no doubt the NEC has made the right decision about Henry Bolton, and that it was unanimous is more than I dared hope for. Henry Bolton spoke very convincingly at the
Newport hustings and had an admirable CV, and although I did not vote for him I gave him the benefit of the doubt about the David Kurten deputy leadership issue and believed he would be a good leader. It has become apparent that he has behaved like a fool or a knave or a deranged person. Perhaps he is all three.
This debacle is a very disillusioning and unsettling experience for all UKIP members but our prospects are still good for making a difference to the UK, and we must stick to our original aims for Brexit and hold our heads high.
“If the no-confidence vote is upheld, Henry Bolton’s reforms will simply bite the dust. There will be no member engagement and no party re-structuring, no SAGE, and business (the business of sinking without trace) will simply continue.” [David Allen]
These two sentences are part of a strong assertion that
Reform is in the hand of one individual and it lives or dies with that one individual.
Any reforms which are clearly published with the wider membership and openly debated surely can go through a calmer process.
I simply do not buy into the concept that good reform can only come about at the hands of one champion.
I also do not accept the premise that all members of the NEC are wrong minded, must go and that one higher individual is better than all the NEC.
Finally I do not accept the view that if Mr Bolton is deselected, rusticated or simply abdicates that UKIP as a political party will collapse.
I have faith in the UKIP membership and I believe that with inspirational leadership many voters, who at present feel slightly ill at ease with the other two-three parties will again vote UKIP. (should the ballot form have a sensible, identifiable logo)
The idea that there is only one person, Mr Bolton who can save UKIP from itself is flawed.
I was greatly cheered at the prospect of Gerard Batten taking over and I am positive that Gerard Batten himself is best placed to explain whether he want leadership or not.
If Gerard Batten takes over as leader the party-Home Office needs to ensure his security.
As it happens, the party has gone into neutral as far as the professionalization program is concerned, and into reverse if Henry goes.. I accept that members have not been well enough informed as to the work that is being done. I for one abhor opaqueness and I embrace member involvement in policy creation. Getting this out there was hugely important and a mistake not to do so. Our unsuitable constitution and rule book, party internal organisation, IT infrastructure all need bringing up to date as the party is simply too expensive to run as it is. This has never been done, so I do not agree that one person makes no difference, one person can start the ball rolling and an outsider like Henry Bolton is best suited to do that. Usually those in the seat aren’t keen on getting up so that it can be re-covered.
David, thanks for the response.
I agree that the parts you mentioned would benefit from improvement, “Our unsuitable constitution and rule book, party internal organisation, IT infrastructure all need bringing up to date” and of course as Henry Bolton was supportive of those changes that was helpful for these reforms.
Am sure you would still find wider support to continue the work you have engaged in which has been affected by these troubles.
Yes, more communication with members might have helped but stuff happens and things get overlooked.
I would not take issue with someone like yourself for trying to improve things.
All I am saying is that I’m sure you would find people receptive to some of the improvements you would like to see.
David, I find your article to be the proverbial curate’s egg, good in parts, especially the first one-and-a-half paragraphs and the ‘tombola dip’ analogy which I will steal. As you seem to be privy to some information about the reforms that Henry was proposing, could you actually explain what they are, because I don’t believe he ever explained them to members. What little leaked out suggested he was basically doing a Julius Caesar and curtailing the powers of the senate (NEC) so that he could become ‘dictator in perpetuity’. Of course I am being facetious, but what precisely was being planned? I do believe it deserves a hearing.
Graham,
If you look at UKIP daily you will see that I’ve published quite a bit about my strategy for electoral reform and the SAGE process. SAGE is a mechanism to involve members with appropriate experience to research and develop good policy. It’s working in part though I’m the only spokesperson to have begun using it. I’m not sure anyone else is as keen on member involvement as I am. SAGE is a Henry Bolton innovation. Our IT is in a mess, the email system is unreliable and massively expensive, courtesy of idiots commissioning it. Our membership system is still manual to a large degree, the website is awful, we have no campaigning structure or even campaigning materials, or training and everybody knows his and constantly moans about it. All of this is down to the existing, and before Henry Bolton, regime. all the changes, that have now stalled, were driven by Henry Bolton. It’s a simple fact that visible results will take time, but we are an impatient lot. Had we been riding high as a party then much or Henry’s personal issue would have been overlooked. Bolton is the reformer and the most inclusive (member wise) leader we’ve ever had. People don’t know that. By the time we get to the EGM they will.
Apologies, wrote my comment asking what Sage was seconds before you explained it.
David,
I will say it until I am blue in the face, what exactly has he done?
David, thanks, I know about the IT systems issues, but what was he planning for the internal governance, e.g. role of NEC, how they get elected, how policy is approved, etc. From what I read he was about to make a proposal to the NEC on this front. Thank you.
I don’t know about that bit. After all, I’m not a confidant of Henry’s, just an appointee, trying to do a good job. I hope to get the people who are involved, including Henry Bolton to get this out there as soon as possible.
But you said you are a member of this SAGE team that has made a proposal that you hope the NEC adopts? What is this proposal? I would have thought that such a proposal would deserve some member input before being put forward?
David,
Arhh, now we are getting to the ‘nitty gritty’ of your argument, these are you reforms and ideas are they not? And Henry is helping you to install them along with a few ideas of his own, excuse my ignorance but what does SAGE stand for? Is it ‘Sex and girls everywhere?’, of course, I am not accusing you of playing the field like old ‘enry. You may have sound and valid reasons for supporting him, but I am afraid I am not convinced it is for the sake of the party, but as someone has alluded to, your own self interests.
Time to come clean David, as your ideas may be good but not necessarily a priority at this present time.
I agree Graham, was thinking the same. What are all these reforms. I do not understand SAGE, is that the software for accounting ? Plus the electoral reforms, again what are they, I am sure they will have already been debated and published ? Whatever was being planned does deserve an open hearing, or is it a case of taking bat and ball home ?
My guess is SAGE is one of those management acronyms, like ‘Strategise, Analyse, Something beginning with G, Execute’, something like that.
I like the ‘Execute’ bit best – preferably Bolton.
Regards
I’m rather fond of ‘deliver’ – I always associate ‘stand and …’ with that and imagine myself with a blunderbuss in my hand, aimed at his midriff … since he can’t deliver, the consequences are obvious. Bang.
🙂
Viv,
Are you comparing him to Adam Ant? I don’t think so Adam is much better looking although he does have a mental problem I believe Bipolar or something like that.
This article is about as deluded as if Henry himself had written it.
“The NEC have killed the party”, “It’s a plot”, “It’s a conspiracy” … anything but facing reality and admitting that Henry has caused all his own problems himself. Problems which are also a problem for the rest of us, for UKIP and for Brexit. But no, it’s everyone else’s fault — the NEC’s, Jo Marney’s, his wife’s, a conspiracy, a plot, the left wing media, …
Who caused a scandal for himself? Who lied to the members and to the public about it repeatedly? Henry’s injudicious acts are well known and by now, excessively numerous. He is finished.
I supported Jane in the Leadership election. Henry was an unknown quantity and I wasn’t convinced he could listen (and didn’t both of those come back to bite us). But I was happy and supportive when he got elected. He seemed like a good guy. He was my no. 2 choice.
I was supportive of him taking his time to implement the necessary changes, but after 3 months, he had not achieved enough. Now we know why — he was doing other things, getting himself embroiled in a massive scandal.
The NEC fell out with Nigel primarily because he wanted at all costs a young lady who was totally unfit for the position to be gifted a Welsh AM seat, despite not making the cut under any objective and impartial process. That’s at the root of the calls to abolish the NEC.
Now Henry wants the NEC abolished because of his scandal with Jo Marney.
The Leader’s private life is private so long as he keeps it private and it doesn’t interfere with his job.
It is not the job of the NEC to cover up scandals caused by philandering Leaders who can’t keep their fly zipped, and damage the Party in the process. It very much is their job to keep the Party going and to remove a Leader who has become unfit for purpose.
The NEC did the right thing, the ONLY right thing. By defenestrating the lame duck Leader Henry has become, it did what the vast majority of members wanted done and demonstrated why its continued existence is so essential. Well done, NEC. Henry, please resign. An EGM will be a bruising and embarrassing humiliation for you and for the Party. I’m astonished you still cannot see that.
Tomaz, Your contributions are usually worth reading, but on this occasion I think you are wrong. The party decline has been rapid, we are on our fourth leader in just over a year, we are irrelevant in the Brexit debate, yet, according to you, the directors of the company bear no responsibility. That is the problem. Oversight, yes, but it is dispensed by people with no responsibility for the consequences. We have a commercial type structure but lacking the commercial reality. It was the NEC who authorised a rebranding of the Logo before the new leader was elected, a clear ‘get out of that’ move. £10,000 chucked down the drain. IT expenditure a massive waste of money and it gets worse and worse. Yet you suggest the NEC bear no responsibility? Look at the facts Tomaz. Contrary to your assertion, the EGM is a real opportunity to begin the reforms necessary. It’s not a leader’s relationship issues that should be the principal concern her but the party’s survival. If Henry goes, everything else stays the same.
David,
There may be some truth in what you say, the members were not consulted about the expensive rebrand neither was the new leader, is this how other parties work I wonder? And Tomaz you were in the NEC and left with a long letter of complaints I seem to remember, so who is at fault here is it the NEC who the members have selected or is it the ‘management’ who we have not selected.
If anyone should know it must be you.
I believe Lenny the Lion is Steve Crowther’s brainchild and no, I do not think the rebranding was a good idea either. Henry had the opportunity to champion reversing that decision on becoming Leader and had he chosen to do so, he would undoubtedly got his way. But he expressly chose not to, instead choosing to spin the story that the members had approved this change of logo, which I consider to be not quite true, as members were never given the option to keep the pound sign logo. I found that to be a disappointing first move and, with hindsight, perhaps this was a red flag we should not have ignored. You will note that Gerard Batten proposes to scrap Lenny the Lion and revert back to the pound sign if he becomes Interim Leader, which I think is a very sound plan. But I think the rebranding (although an important error) is, relatively speaking, a sideshow in light of everything else that’s been going on.
Tomaz, It does your former and welcome contributions no good to now dabble in tittle tattle without justification. The way the re-branding was done was outrageous and handed the new leader an immediate problem. This was deliberate, as it could be nothing else, and the NEC was the authorising body. You have been scathing about the NEC in the past, so you will be aware of it’s dysfunctionality. It is why you resigned from it. A course of action I usually regard as self-serving as you let down all those who voted for you.
The logo was discussed at cabinet. Most felt we shouldn’t over-react, because, even though it’s method of introduction was underhand, it may be liked by the membership. The general view was that we ought to wait. Only one person was so upset by it he threatened to resign if it wasn’t dropped. That was Gerard, that’s why he wants to be interim leader (only). Henry Bolton said he would decide. The current position is that we can use both, the pound or the lion. Actually both the pound and new logo work quite well together. Many members also like it, but if Gerard gets his way, nobody will be asked.
David, you are blinkered and flogging a dead horse, to double up on the equine references. In the same way that you seem to believe UKIP can deliver the country via some complex version of PR, you have now been bewitched by a man who has proven himself every which way to be a turbocharged jackass. Awake!!
Reading your article Mr Allen, i can at least see why Henry Bolton believes he has the support of influential party “insiders”, which might allow him to ride out this storm and continue as party leader.
You talk of a UKIP situation where it is an influential group of people, you mention Nigel Farage for example, against the NEC. These groups fighting for control of UKIP, its heart and soul.
The problem i have with your plea to me as a grass roots, pretty much in the dark UKIP member, is i have absolutely no idea what you are asking me to vote for.
After 4 months of Henry Bolton’s leadership what do i know of him, what do i know of what direction he wants to take the party in.
I know he is an ex-Lib Dem, strange for a leader of the only true Brexit supporting political party.
He appears to be a serial womaniser.
He is someone who is prepared to leave his young children at Christmas to be with someone else.
He is not an effective communicator when facing the media, that is my opinion of him based on his QT appearance and recent TV interviews. He seems easily flustered and prone to showing flashes of anger and annoyance when asked difficult questions.
None of this gives me any confidence that he is the real deal as a UKIP leader. Plus, like Paul Nuttall before him, Henry Bolton is now damaged goods as far as the media and general public are concerned.
You say that Bolton has instigated new initiatives to revitalise UKIP, you yourself have been an important role in this vital work for the Party.
Surely this is not the job of the Party leader, he should be setting up his underlings, like your good self to these tasks.
The leader then should be setting out the the future of UKIP, inspiring the rank and file before the upcoming local elections and laying out UKIP’s position on the important issues that the country now faces. Brexit, immigration, the NHS, Education etc etc.
To be honest the leader should be there to lead, not to be enjoying a full! Social life whilst his staff try to sort out the running of the party.
In essence i need to know who Henry Bolton really is, what he stands for on the big issues, before i would even consider voting against the NEC decision in this apparent war for the heart and soul of UKIP.
John, thank you for a thoughtful intervention. Henry Bolton has made mistakes and he is no Nigel Farage. His efforts in the preceding (and only really about two effective months) have been to set work in motion to professionalise the party so that it can compete and function well under any leader. You’re right, in that he is a planner and a thinker and a get things done person, but not a ‘Speakers Corner’ orator. His intent was that the spokespeople would take a much more public role and that we would all work together. We actually had one cabinet meeting which has never happened before. In short, his skills are the ones we need now as even with a following wind we are looking at a three year recovery plan. If he goes we may not see the year out. Henry’s plan and the reforms that had begun were essential to keep our donors on-side. Now, everything has stalled. That’s not good at all.
David,
The way you describe Henry even you concede he is not leadership material but may be effective in the back room as it were (as long as there is no susceptible ‘totty’ there). In effect you have answered our question, the party and the public will not listen to some one who wants to stay in the back ground, I would have thought that was a known fact.
However, this did not keep Henry quiet during the election process did it? He had plenty to say then specifically about AMW. I now think that some one else is pulling his strings and putting words into his mouth, and that person I suspect is Nigel Farage, he is after all Nigel’s man and he hates the NEC which is strange because they are mostly different people now. However, Nigel admits they thwarted him at every turn, maybe for good reason I don’t know, so how better than to get back at them this way.
Well, it is not going to work because we the members have cottoned on, Nigel has left as leader and should have no further influence on the party, he is just an ordinary member like me. So, he needs to butt out and take his friend Henry with him if need be find him a nice cushy number in Brussels somewhere, but we want him gone.
David, I cannot say it any plainer than that, make of it what you will, I am sure you will contradict every word I have said, but you need to decide whose side you are on and stick with it I’m afraid.
Thank you David, I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my ramblings!
After considering your reply in detail, I am happy to accept that Henry Bolton might well have a very important role to play in perhaps modernising and organising UKIP.
However, I do not think that the important role is that of leader of the Party.
I am sure that he has many skills and qualities that would benefit UKIP going forward, but I am also coming to the conclusion that his undoubted skill set does not include the attributes that will be required to galvanise the Party and bring it to the voting public in an inspiring manner. I believe that a great many UKIP voters are out there if we can get the message across in the right way.
Hopefully Mr Bolton will soon come to that conclusion.
I also hope that you are able to continue to work away in the background, modernising UKIP and giving it the necessary structure to ensure It’s future success.
Dear David,
You say “Henry’s plan and the reforms that had begun were essential to keep our donors on-side”.
If the plan went to the donors, it must have been in writing?
Are you able to publish the plan here?
Regards, Toby, 01932-873557
I believe more will be said about this over the coming days.
Sorry to say it, but I think its time to call it a day. Why bother having a political ‘leader’? Why not just have a chair and turn it into a think tank/pressure group like The Tax Payer’s Alliance or The Freedom Association? There’d be loads of possibilities – it’d be an honourable decision to make, and one that would gain a lot of respect. But please, let’s not have about 3 more leaders leading up to March 2019. Such a farce undermines Brexit – the very thing that UKIP has worked to hard to bring about. UKIP needs to behave in a sensible fashion now. No more nonsense and please, no more daft candidacies in forthcoming local elections that will only benefit the opponents of Brexit.
The difference between campaign groups and political parties is that the latter contest elections. That is what really counts. As for a leader it’s simply the law. All political parties must have a leader.
Parker has gone now. Who next? The list of good guys grows longer by the minute.
I don’t think Parker has gone, i.e. left the Party. She and John Bickley have resigned their posts in protest at Henry not resigning his. Once Henry has resigned or been dismissed all these people will be available and within the Party.
Don’t exaggerate what is happening.
Are you really a good guy if you wait until the bad guy is definitely on the way out before you stand up to be counted?
John Bickley (Immigration spokesperson) Margot Parker (Deputy Leader and spokesperson for aid and international development).
Much criticism has been levied at Henry Bolton for not being visible enough, for not shouting Brexit from the roof tops.
Does anyone know what our current immigration policy is? what about aid and international development, has anything changed? Silent spokespeople don’t help also.
David,
That simply is not true and you know it, they have been speaking out, is’nt policy making Henry’s department? You cannot start laying the blame on others now, Henry hardly said anything and when he did it was ‘mumble jumble’, just give up on him for God’s sake.
Anyway, he is going to make a statement at 4pm (now there’s a novelty), let’s hope and pray he is going to resign and we can finally put this distasteful matter to bed, then he can go back to bed with his ‘floozy’ or ‘fling’ as Farage calls it,as we all know he does not want to give her up so he has already made his choice.
Err, David I don’t think you can blame Mr Bickley for confusion over our immigration policy, he had a very clear one which was zero net migration, but Henry threw it out on day 1 when he said he wanted to return to the 2015 GE manifesto (which the leader does not have the unilateral right to do as the NEC must agree to policy changes, such as the wholesale throwing out of policy). I doubt Henry consulted John or replaced it with anything, indeed Henry’s statements on immigration policy are basically the same as the Tories.
David, with respect, this time the NEC was responding to the members. As a branch & county chairman I have received a large email bag from my members, all but a handful were adamant that Henry has made us a laughing stock ( Like Paul Nuttall before him) and must go. It was my responsibility to pass this on, I did, noting it was not unanimous.
When the tale unfolded it’s fair to say that most of us – NEC members included hoped that we could batten down the hatches and weather the storm. I have as much contempt for the former candidate’s actions in obtaining private text messages as I do for their revolting content. However the material out in the public domain is damning enough. Unfortunately the leader’s response to events in the last week to 10 days has become increasingly idiotic, egomaniac and embarrassing. The worms that were horrified at the prospect of yet another leadership election rapidly turned. Chairman Paul Oakden can attest to this, he attended a meeting (arranged long before the scandal) in Surrey last week.
NEC reform is on the agenda- all of us want it, including the NEC itself! It is up to people like me to make sure your good work is carried on to make our structure fit for purpose and responsive to the membership.
You know Henry was doing some good work regarding the overdue and essential reorganisation, so do I. However, as Paul Oakden admitted last week, he neglected the leadership side of his role regarding communication of his vision with members and the general public. Consequently there were those already complaining he was ‘useless’ already primed when this kicked off.
For them, this was the last straw, as it was for a number of members who told me he was effectively ‘on probation’, they would give him 6 months. Sadly, but for this wretched escapade he may have grown into the role.
It seems that the reforms, all the necessary work that was underway has simply stalled, as could have been predicted. I understand the anger, but it stems from government betrayal, Labour party somersaults and a relentless torrent of negativity from the establishment and the complete irrelevance of UKIP in the debate. An irrelevance not caused by Henry Bolton. I agree with Paul that Henry has made mistakes in not keeping the members informed of the reforms and their progress and that his personal circumstance have acted as a catalyst to direct all that anger toward. He’s only had an effective two months as leader, so much of the expectation was unrealistic.
The truth and the real options need to be presented. The party is ungovernable, the NEC needs to go, a new constitution and management structure need to be put in place and the EGM is a once in a lifetime opportunity to do that. From adversity can come salvation and we need to help people to see that.
David,
Just tell us what he and you have done towards reform for God’s sake before it is too late, if you want to save him tell us what good he has done which will cancel out all the bad things. We are not asking for much just a list of his achievements so far, the more you avoid telling us, the more I suspect there is nothing to show us.
So far you are the only one really defending him and I would like to know why? We need evidence and pronto.
My principal concern is to save the party. At this time I think Henry Bolton remaining as leader is the best way forward. I realise however that the tide is currently against me. I hope that all of this will become evident. for myself, I’ve already published on the UKIP daily an entire strategy for electoral reform and I’m speaking around the country at branches. Our first SAGE meeting has been held and we’ve drafted, already, revised manifesto commitments, a new leadership election procedure and a new NEC election procedure, both of which include branches in the decision making process. However, the NEC have to agree. Just as soon as it is finalised I’ll publish.
David,
Keep up the good work, but forget HB, I am sure you will achieve a lot more without him, as we will also.
I would suggest that Cnut, against whom the tide certainly was, was infinitely more self aware than you are. Bolton is a strapped in kamikaze, get used to it.
I agree, David please tell us what reforms to the governance system were proposed, we know all about the IT systems so please don’t mention those. This was the frustration we had with Henry, he seemed to band about words like ‘reform’ but after 3 months there seemed to be no meat on the bone. I would really like to know whether or not he had any practical proposals, so far I have seen no evidence of any.
Graham,
I’ve answered this point in a reply to another comment.
Pull the other one David. One one man is responsible for Henry Bolton’s situation, and ours. He should do the decent thing and take responsibility for his own actions.
The party’s internal organisations structures are a joke. We all know that. what isn’t appreciated is that it is the entire fault and responsibility of the NEC not the leader. The leader has to fight to get anything changed against an all powerful group. Our decline began 18 months ago, our organisation has been unable to cope, the NEC has been in control of this mess forever. what a great opportunity to change everything.
David,
Somehow, I don’t think Henry has proved himself to be the person to do this. If indeed you are his friend and have all this respect for him then please have a little word in his ear, and advise him that the best thing to do for him and the party is to leave.
I am sure he will not hold anything against you for giving him this sound advice, then hopefully you can carry on all the good work he has been doing, as you and you alone seem to be privy to what this work he has done thus far.
OK, if that is the case, what were his proposals to reform the NEC???
David,
Why do you utter such tosh? You don’t have a clue about the recent history of how the party has been run. If you did you’d take your foot out of your mouth.
The NEC has little to do with the day to day running of the party or its organisational structure. That’s down to the leader, their chairman and the staff they employ and direct. We’re still waiting to find out what Bolton wants to do – do you know?
If what you say is true then why did Henry give the NEC all the ammunition they needed to call for his resignation? Henry has shot himself in the foot. He is either just too clever, a fool or just naïve. Many members have been willing to give him a chance but he has exhausted that initial goodwill. The NEC may need reform but in this case their unanimity is resounding. Add those who have stood down and those who have openly criticised Henry then they can’t all be wrong. I wish you well in your efforts to bring better accountability to the party.
Henry has made mistakes, that is evident. But the NRC have presided over our decline as they run the party. As of now we’ve simply slipped into neutral, which is where we may stay. All reform has stopped.
Yes, Allen, it’s an opportunity, but not the type you prefer.
Your disrespectful references to me in these comments, say much more about you than they do me. Often the hard of thinking don’t get that.
Someone asked yesterday, who were Bolton’s nominators in the Leadership election? Would Allen be one of them? Yes, we need to have proposers, seconders and supporters clearly spelled out in all UKIP internal elections, as in council and parliamentary elections.
You could be accused of not paying attention. I was a leadership candidate, so not a supporter of anyone else.
David,
Yes, but you stepped down to support Henry who made all those obscene remarks about AMW’s and her supporters who were in UKIP, do you stand by what he said after what has been revealed about his girlfriend’s comments? Admittedly, he did not say them but he continues to stand by her, this is so ironic it is beyond words. He cannot have it both ways, what does he put first, it is obviously not his wife or children, nor is it party before girlfriend.
Can you not see how the public perceive this? we just cannot afford this scandal which continues to escalate because Henry is digging a bigger hole for himself, quite honestly you are not helping his cause either. David stop supporting him it is hopeless, you can still remain his friend in his hour of need, but at the moment you are not doing him any favours or us for that matter.
Nigel was a tyrant. The NEC, like any board, is there to be a check on an unbridled, excessive and arbitrary exercise of power by a leader. It was Nigel who pettily and spitefully turned on the NEC for not always getting his own way. Sheep uncritically swallowed the line.
The NEC is not “unqualified”. It comprises experienced business people, barristers (two), solicitors (two) and they were elected by members. That they did not take a decision you wanted does not merit this evidence light, partisan tirade. Even if Bolton survives – God forbid that he does for that will kill the party – the constitution, the one Nigel himself promoted, is unchanged.
It is unknown what administrative changes that an interim leader will continue. Don’t confuse fears about your own self-interest with others’ intentions (as yet unexpressed).
It is self-serving nonsense to suggest the NEC are trying to finish off the party. It is Henry doing that by refusing to resign, by having stooges like you, pursue an attack the NEC line.
Your own leadership bid went nowhere. You made your pitch and failed to make an impression. You appear to be democratic only when things go your way.
It is a calumny to suggest that the current NEC does not have the interests of the party at heart. Imagining that others who think like you (so far as what you wrote can be described as thinking at all) will be elected is fantasy.
The EGM does indeed represent an opportunity for real change – we get rid of Bolton.
Actually, my own leadership bid went exactly where I wanted it to as expressed inn public when I declared my intention to stand on 21st July. As for the party, it’s internal structures are in a mess and we are technically insolvent. All the responsibility of the NEC. We’ve lost support and relevance and three leaders so far. How’s that for careful handling of he baby? You are spectacularly wrong. Getting rid of Henry Bolton means business as usual, not change. You have to be pretty detached not to see that.
Bolton is showing himself to have infantile ego needs that are impervious to reality. You have to share in them `not to see that’.
The party is indeed in a mess in part due to the leaders the members elect. The NEC bear some blame for subsequent performance but if Bolton’s alleged reforms are so good then intelligent people will see that and continue them.
The party overspent on Stoke and the general election and led directly to the current membership.financial crisis. That was a wild, political misjudgement. Nuttall led on that – as leaders are supposed to do and at the time the awful crash in voted was not foreseen (or not fully). Members `were up for it’ – 1000 came to Stoke – but the real demise came courtesy an artful (and dishonest) Thereas May in June. The NEC are not responsible for that.
It is lazy and simplistic to blame the NEC. If we do not have effective political leadership it is all pointless, no matter how satisfyingly pure in theory the admin.
The members now want Batten. They do not want Bolton. Respect the members please.
Very well said. I salute you, Stout.
Kind regards.
Stout,
We had no choice but to get behind Paul Nuttall in Stoke. It’s obvious why he failed to win, or get a very good 2nd place (maybe even beat my 39% vote share in Heywood & Middleton in 2014).
We spent very little on the GE because finances were tight after Stoke (at the time did anyone think Theresa the Appeaser would call a GE). Maybe the poor Stoke result triggered it with her thinking she’d pick up 3.8m votes?
Allen,
Go back under your traitorous establishment stone. Farage did not do anything for the party because he was a spiv who rode UKIP for his own personal glory without contributing one iota to the party as an organisation.
Thinker it’s not the party that counts it’s the political result obtained. Farage obtained a huge result. What has gone wrong in UK politics is the thinking in parties that the predominant consideration is the ‘good of the party’.
If UKIP can’t formulate and doggedly pursue a radical program then all it’s doing is creating a log jam inhibiting anything else. Sure looks like it lately.
It’s novel to be associated with the establishment. Someone else not been paying attention?
Yeah, he only brought in thousands of new members, donors and media, but your right he should have been beancounting too.