I’m offended!
Why shouldn’t we be offended by the Westminster press? They – not we peasants! – are indeed in it together for themselves: the MSM editors and their Westminster whisperers, i.e. the covert ‘sources’. Look no further than this morning’s print front pages under the headline composed by BBC ‘staff’: “Newspaper headlines: ‘Inflation hammer blow’ and Russian spy threat” (link).
It’s good to know that inflation is finally being felt by our ‘governing’ classes in Westminster. I wonder though why they are so surprised. Shouldn’t the reports earlier this year, on food shortages caused by high energy prices, have provided hints that such higher prices will work their way into shop prices?
There are already the first cries that the Bank of England please not raise interest rates and Hunt to lower taxes. For other items there’s always the wail that government please hand out some more taxpayers’ money in the form of innocent tax breaks to achieve ‘a good thing’:
“The government risks missing its electric vehicle uptake targets unless it offers motorists tax breaks, the UK’s largest online car retailer has warned.” (link, paywalled).
It’s of course perfectly fair to keep energy prices high, thus fuelling inflation, while demanding ‘incentives’ for EV buyers so they can come and buy.
Now let’s look at yet another fine example for how our glorious Westminster press editors collaborate Yesterday we read in The Times about the ‘bullying report’ on Dominic Raab being given to Sunak and how his resignation would lead to a female MoJ Minister. It was based on ‘sources’ and I remarked that this was a blatant attempt to force Sunak’s hands.
This morning there’s a report in the Guardian, not in The Times, which is an even more glaring attempt by the Westminster cabal of forcing Sunak’s hands:
“One official told the Guardian: “If he stays in the department, senior people will want to walk.” Another said that several senior colleagues would start looking for new jobs and “leave in the near future” but stop short of quitting on the spot. MoJ officials believe that it is likely, given the breadth of the evidence, that Sunak will have to sanction Raab – warning that if he does not, it would be “so demoralising” for staff.” (link)
Interesting: the ‘sources’ for The Times become ‘officials’ for the grauniad, disguising the fact that they must be the same. Moreover, yon ‘sources’ are talking to the various papers’ editors who seem to agree between themselves who is going to get to publish the latest ‘whispers’. After all, if more papers run such ‘stories’, then surely the impact on Sunak will be maximised!
‘Tis noteworthy that the papers are very careful not to provide any text quotes from the report as of yet. I’m certain these editors have got the report in their hands already. Obviously, I don’t have the text and so can only speculate. However, in a report on the interview of the sacked CBI director I mentioned yesterday, there’s a sniff of how this Raab report will be spun:
“But this isn’t about your feelings, it’s about your conduct and the need to show firm leadership of an institution that many feel has become toxic.” (link, paywalled)
See – it’s about ‘feelz’, which the staff are permitted to have and which must be taken so seriously that nobody could be ‘offended’. The boss – be it that of the CBI, be it Mr Raab, is not permitted to have ‘feelings’. It’s interesting that ‘firm leadership’ is demanded from a boss, but only as long as such ‘firm leadership’ isn’t declared to be bullying or ‘toxic’ by someone who can then complain about hurty feelz. Obviously, having a female boss means such ‘conduct’ can’t happen and everybody will be happy ever after …
As for those ‘Russian Ghost Ships’, so lovingly reported, with maps, in the DT: well, we peasants needed our daily dose of ‘the Russians are coming’. This is the established domain of the DT, and so the other papers wait until they can copy yon report later. The headline is meant to scare us: “Russian ‘spy ships’ threaten to sabotage UK energy supply”, but ‘help’ is at hand, according to the subtitle: “‘Ghost’ vessels mapping wind farms and communication cables prompt Tory calls to expand Armed Forces to deal with Kremlin threat” (paywalled link).
Naive as I am, I wonder how these can be ‘ghost ships’ when clearly our military authorities know so much about them that they can brief the papers. I wonder if this is an attempt to show us peasants that our various spies are so good that nothing can be hidden from them. But then I saw this:
“Tobias Ellwood, the Tory chairman of the Commons defence committee, told The Telegraph “the penny must drop” over Russia’s attempts to undermine British security as he called for an expansion of the Armed Forces in the wake of the revelations. Mr Ellwood said: “We simply can no longer protect our near seas and, rightly, step forward further afield, with our current peacetime-sized Navy, Army and Air Force.” (paywalled link)
Well, the penny dropped for me! This report is about enlarging our Armed Forces – the ones who’ve given away most of our weapons stock to the Ukraine. It’s about changing to a war-time-sized Navy, Army and Airforce. Is it aimed at Hunt, to hand out more money? How will this be possible when “we” also need to hand out more money to the NHS and when more money is needed to support all those newly arriving ‘guests’?
The report quotes ‘intelligence officers’ from the UK, Denmark and the Netherlands as well as some MoD spokesperson. There isn’t a word from Labour. Don’t they have a Shadow Defence Secretary? Shouldn’t Starmer tell us if he prefers saving the NHS to ‘saving the realm’’ from Russia? They can’t be in bed with Putin, can they? Surely we voting plebs should be told!
That’s all I have for today. I find it intriguing how Whitehall so blatantly attempts to force Sunak’s hand, by using the Westminster press as their campaign mouthpieces. Me, I’m simply offended by this transparent ploy and by the MSM playing the Whitehall games. Have a good day.
“I don’t believe – I know”. Do you understand the difference between knowledge and belief? Can a scientist say “I just know” or does there have to be some evidence and reasoning? Can a policeman just tell a jury “I know” the defendant is guilty?
David Icke “knows” there is an inter-galactic race of reptilian beings. You ” know” Vachha was removed unconstitutionally. How does this knowledge reach you? Divine revelation? Icke at least announces his source of knowledge – the spirit world.
By the same token how do you know Freddy Vachha was removed according to the UKIP constitution. Bolton definitely was but no such process was followed with FV. He was appointed leader under the constitution and at a duly called meeting named his choice of party chairman as Marietta King. Ben Walker went full Henry Ford and said you can have any chairman you like as long as it’s me. I’ve shortened the proceedings a bit but under UKIP rules the leader has every right to their own choice of chairman. After several more NEC zoom meetings Walker purportedly suspended FV, something not even a legitimate chairman has the power to do. Especially since Walker was himself suspended by the legitimate chairman. I hope you’re following me ! So we have the situation where the replaced chairman refuses to give up the chains of office and with the connivance of others in the hierarchy clings to power for their own ends. This is the NEW ukip ? Sounds like the old ukip with the same Brown envelope serial liar / bankrupt – convicted rogue builder duo still pulling the strings.
Thank you Keith – I’ve given up, the same way I gave up on those beyond hope in other areas (trying to educate people who claimed viruses don’t exist for example)
As you know, Bolton had meeting with NEC to explain himself, VONC followed by EGM for we, the people, to decide democratically. As per constitution. Maybe Richard Braine would have got that if he hadn’t resigned in despair but Freddy definitely didn’t.
And, as you observe, the leader appoints their chairman. Yes, NEC approves (or not), there is a difference between not approving Liz Phillips or Marietta King and telling the leader they have no choice but to have Walker as chairman – oh and a little matter of Walker, when still legitimate chairman, muting NEC members to rig that vote (days of Zoom)
As for knowing? If you were present/involved with events, if you can read a constitution & judge action against that, of course you know.
No committee is trustworthy. They are too easily captured. All over Britain are committees captured by the left. Ukip just happens to be captured by the conservative party’s old and ignorant old men ,and their acolytes working cliques, and grimley hanging on.
And Farage is figuratively. correct…. If every member of a committee had actual responsibility, instead of being hidden, the world would change immeasurably for the better…. Has nobody read Gibbon. And a democrat committee is too difficult.
“ignorant old men”? Six members of the NEC are female and the deputy leader is Rebecca Jane (from GB News) who is not old. The NEC are elected. They are listed on the website and they publish minutes of their meetings. Not hidden at all.
TG Spokes…….the tape recorder wont switch off. Same old same old with regard to Committees. You would feel at home in Reform UK or the Chinese Communist Party…
Colin. They say .. If you repeat a song 9 times , it’ll get to top of the pops. ( Or in our case, Grandads sayings.)
TG Spokes…….okay. So, I take it your song would be ‘Doctor in the Tardis then’. Didn’t that get to the No 1 in the Top of the Pops hit parade….. What is all this thing about Grandad and Grannies you come out with. Iwon’y say what I would normally say, because Biscotte might get the hump.
I laughed out loud at the DT’s: “Russian ‘spy ships’ threaten to sabotage UK energy supply”.
My instant thought being, why would they bother? Our WEFtminster masters are doing a superb job of that themselves.
Indeed Phil.
Yes, indeed our WEFtminster masters are doing a superb job in sabotaging our once reliable energy supply ably complied with by what seems to be the majority of a supine and servile British people.
If we on the centre Right ignored the never ending drivel and trivia poured out by the MSM the Westminster bubble and the commentariat in general and volunteered more of our attention, time and energies in engaging with and promoting, centre Right challenger parties to the wider public would this not be more worthwhile?
Isn’t time and energy better spent on positive and productive things rather than wasting our limited energy on negative adversaries?
Just musing.
Assorted celebrities in the US threatened to emigrate if Trump was elected. None did. And civil servants will not leave if Raab is kept in post. They are on too good a screw in the civil service. Their cushy working conditions and golden pensions will not be replicated in the private sector.
The civil service has been briefing against government ministers for a some time, but it seems to be reaching a crescendo with Raab after failing to oust Braverman. We await the report into Raab’s alleged bullying. It may provide damning evidence but one suspects it will be borderline in some way and so a test for Sunak therefore.
An infant has tantrums when the world does not conform to its wishes. Increasingly, we see the infantilisation of politics as people have tantrums, in effect, when they do not get their own way. It seems to happen to the left mostly but the right is not immune.
Farage had tantrums when he did not get his own way in UKIP noticeably in 2015 and culminating in that most revealing remark of August 2016, quoted in newspapers, that the NEC were “people who bring their own sandwiches”. Well, not everyone on the NEC enjoyed an MEP’s pay and expenses. They were ordinary members elected by members. They travelled into London for meetings on their own dime and could not afford the capital’s prices or the three figure sum for lunch that Farage would often spend. The snobbery, the sneering, was revealing – and very disappointing.
UKIP’s constitution requires the leader to work with the NEC. It does not work for the leader. The constitution is designed to avoid capture by authoritarian demagogs as Batten found out. The history of UKIP is mainly of leaders failing to respect its constitution though Bolton, to give him credit, did try to alter the constitution democratically – and was ousted democratically.
I am glad that many who do not respect UKIP’s constitution have left. They should never have joined. It has left a much diminished party that may soon be bankrupt, but the very few kippers left, including this returner, are having fun. The last two conferences were refreshing and entertaining more so than before the referendum. with various guest speakers from outside the party. We in UKIP believe in the manifesto. We are not cultists following a cult leader, as many in UKIP seem to have been. The cult following peaked with Batten. There was no coup to remove him. It was a lawful vote by the NEC in accord with UKIP’s constitution.
There was a photograph on twitter of Batten holding a meeting with Robinson and some of his acolytes. There was a second photo, on a different account, of two of those lieutenants with Nazi regalia on a wall and them giving Hitler salutes. I doubt they were real Nazis and more likely indulging an adolescent desire to shock. But, the NEC felt that admitting Robinson would have been an electoral liability – Nazi salutes, which the press would have uncovered, are not vote winners – and they were entitled to defy Batten on this and did so for rational reasons. But losers’ consent was not forth coming from Batten or Braine with Braine having a tantrum when the NEC, per the constitution, failed to endorse Liz Philips, loyal sidekick to Batten, as chairman.
I have met quite a few ex-kippers like Helen Windsor who believe that Hamilton and Walker staged a coup, but none have ever produced any evidence that the NEC acted unconstitutionally. Innuendo and rumour are not evidence and all I have heard are various conspiracy theories, imputations of fraud, theft and worse. The theme seems to be that people who did not vote the way they wanted are somehow evil. They should join the left where such infantile attitudes, where cancel culture reigns, where they would be more at home demonising political opponents.
I joined UKIP because of its constitution, but found myself among assorted people who had not actually read it or understood it. The party is almost certainly going nowhere but there is nowhere else for me. I am not a serf and so cannot support personal fiefdoms like Reform UK. For now, I am happy to be back among this band, this happy few…
If the UKIP haters can produce genuine evidence of a coup or whatever they accuse Hamilton and Walker of then I will reconsider my membership. Meanwhile, I expect to enjoy this year’s conference. It may the last as insolvency beckons.
That seems to be the long and short of it SY. I fully share your dismay and anger at the behaviour and attitude of Farage toward the quiet dedication and honesty of the NEC members.
I have though, now joined other centre Right challengers too, because I want to give 100% to any challenger party that is active in my constituency. For me 2024 is the last chance saloon for any centre Right/populist revival and so I am prepared to overlook the ‘personal fiefdom’ aspect of the Reform Party and the Heritage Party if I can play an active role in helping to destroy the Tory Party and at the same time further the fortunes of a centre Right revival.
I’m in three right wing parties myself at the moment, all no-hopers nationally. But, I will vote for one of them if one ever stands in my constituency. I too will overlook the personal fiefdom angle in a general election. It just prevents me getting involved in a party.
Stout Yeoman……….how many candidates standing for Reform UK in your council area for the local elections. Indeed how many are standing for UKIP and the Heritage Party? In my neck of the woods, there are two Reform UK candidates, one Heritage Party candidate, and no UKIP candidates at all. If ever there was an indication as how much of an impact Reform UK is having on local politics this it. Two candidates where all the seats are being contested in 44 wards. Nothing short of appalling, and yet they claim to have 650 candidates standing in the next general election, some hope of that I think. Even after the heyday of UKIP in 2019 when all the council seats were last contested we had seven candidates and one of them in a traditional Conservative ward got 1400 votes. I doubt that had Reform UK had someone standing in that ward in 2023 they would have got anywhere near that number of votes, and that is why I will now stay with UKIP through thick and thin. I wish now that I had stood under the UKIP banner myself if only to keep the flag flying.
Seconded Jake and SY.
Two points, Stout. I am surprised to see you using the Leftist go-to trope of ‘haters’ for those who simply believe UKIP is past its sell by. I was a member back in the day, and remember particularly Roger Helmer on energy and Stuart Agnew on Agriculture nailing those issues getting on for a decade ago. Unless they find a new charismatic leader to draw attention, like him or not as Farage was back then, they will remain a busted flush, however good their invisible-to-the-masses manifesto might be.
And, genuine question; I had not heard the “people who bring their own sandwiches” quote (in the papers, so it must be true), and was wondering whether it was a literal sneer or a metaphorical allusion to non-collegiate people bringing their personal baggage to the table, deliberately misconstrued as the papers are won’t to do?
I am responding to Helen’s and Mary’s allegations of yesterday. They did not say UKIP is past its sell by date – I agree about that as I say above – but expressed something quite different. Their comments were claims about the moral character of those now running UKIP. For that, I think there should be some evidence of impropriety supplied. Had it been just an observation – self-fulfilling when support is withdrawn – that UKIP has no prospects anymore then there would be no dispute. But I have had enough of the people who have left UKIP justifying it on puritanical and moral grounds alleging a coup or worse and demonising people who did not vote the way they wanted. What turned out to be the party’s fair weather friends only are perfectly entitled to leave and go elsewhere but so far as they slander on the way out they will get reply from me.
AMW was described as “far too sincere and honest to get mixed up with that lot”. She is indeed now mixed up with ‘that lot’, but the implied evaluation as morally superior compared to other UKIP members is somewhat misplaced. She would have been a shoe-in for the NEC but on coming second in the leadership election immediately flounced out (such was her commitment to the manifesto and kippers). Just another person using the party, and its members, for personal ends. I agree though that she is sincere and I am happy to see her back.
It is not just UKIP that lacks a charismatic leader. Which party has one currently? I know parties on the fringe will remain there without a leader able to attract attention but is that a reason to stay away? We should only support parties with charismatic leaders? It is too late to rehabilitate UKIP with Hamilton as leader, but the people still in the party are decent, ordinary people whose company I enjoy.
I can assure you – but choose to disbelieve it if you wish – that Nigel’s remark was a sneer. And repeated on LBC in equivalent words before he lost his radio show. Even so, I supported the Brexit Party. For me, it is about policy not personality though the opposite seems to be true for a lot of people, perhaps most.
Thanks for that. UKIP’s manifestos have always been sound, but got them nowhere. It is an unfortunate fact of life that one may have to hold one’s nose and go with charisma. On the ‘sneer or not’, it wasn’t belief; I have no idea; that’s why I asked and you have clarified your own belief.
“I have met quite a few ex-kippers like Helen Windsor who believe that Hamilton and Walker staged a coup, but none have ever produced any evidence that the NEC acted unconstitutionally. ”
The mind boggles. Let me be clear, the Banana Republic Coup was NOT the removal of Gerard. Technically, he removed himself, despite pleas from Piers Wauchope, he declined to attend his vetting. TBH that should have been that, disqualified for that alone; it would have upset members less.
There WERE breaches of the constitution in the treatment of Richard Braine but it was merely a muscle flex for what was to come. When there was a VNOC against Henry Bolton, the NEC followed the book constitutionally – in which case a mere comparison of the treatment of Freddy Vachha (do try to spell his name properly) will demonstrate the constitutional deficit to anyone but a numskull. That was merely the apex of a series of deliberate attempts to undermine his leadership – mainly executed by Walker.
OK. What breaches over Richard Braine? I can recall him boycotting the conference in Newport, even though he was leader at the time, and setting up an alternative meeting in nearby pub, but that is hardly a breach by others against him. It was one of a series of behaviours by certain people showing disrespect toward the ordinary kippers that were the party.
I do not know what constitutional deficit involved Vachha. He approached me to fund a court case but I declined. (I havre dozens of emails from him that got wilder and wilder and none of which persuaded me.) So far as I know – well obviously – he never won a case showing he was unconstitutionally ousted. Why do you believe he was?
We all believe various things but to get others to believe the same you need to give them reasons to believe what you do. It is called evidence. For example, if I were to claim that a religiously motivated cabal sought to take over the party for purposes inconsistent with its constitution with the aim of starting a religious war as a ‘street movement’ then I would have to provide evidence if I wanted you to believe the same.
Apart from Nigel, the party has had few decent media performers. Richard Braine was one of them. It is a shame, therefore, that he would not work with the NEC (as the constitution requires). He refused to nominate another chairman when his first choice was rejected thus fomenting yet another crisis. He good have ben a good leader.
I do not expect moral purity from politicians or friends, and I certainly offer none, for which reason I am still friendly as when I last met Richard and even Batten recently (at a British Hungarian event of all places).
I look forward to your reasoning about the unconstitutional behavoir over Braine and Vachha. I and willing to be wrong. Are you?
Stout Yeoman………I rejoined the UK Independence Party as a member about six weeks ago because like you there was no other political home for me. You are obviously in the know as to the party’s financial predicament, but how near is it to insolvency, and how many members has it presently got? I had read somewhere that at the beginning of this year there were 800 members. When I re-joined I was sent a message that it might be some weeks before I received a membership card as the party was overwhelmed with people either joining or re-joining which is a good position to be in, and whereas at one time it had a more or less fully staffed office in Newton Abbot, these days I suspect those activities are probably now done in someone’s back room. You are probably right in that presently the party is going nowhere, but surely somebody like Anne Marie Waters would not have joined a sinking ship. I think too since that announcement was made about her re-joining the party and becoming Justice spokesman, there is a fair chance that she will have another tilt at the leadership perhaps, as people like her will not sit on their haunches. I didn’t vote for her in 2017 and unfortunately was persuaded to vote for Henry Bolton although I had intended to vote for David Kurten. In hindsight perhaps it was wrong to have dismissed Bolton at that EGM in Birmingham as the party has been in a downward spiral ever since and was already in the last chance saloon when he was elected. I don’t know whether it was coup by Neil Hamilton and Ben Walker, but UKIP had to be wrestled away from the control of Gerard Batten as the party was becoming unelectable. However, under Hamilton’s leadership the ship has been steadied and has more or less lost its far right tag, but the time is rapidly approaching where the party needs to take stock of things and decide where it is going politically. If it is in an upward spiral it needs a younger and more dynamic person at the helm. The whole point to a political party is to gain representation on Borough and County Councils and ultimately MP’s in the House of Commons, and if it isn’t doing that, it might as well pack up and be done with it.
I think there are between 2,500 and 3000 members. It is solvent still (just) but vulnerable to inflation, members failing to renew etc.
Lexdrum House could not be afforded after the Batten/Braine/Vachha debacles which did cost the party dearly. It is run from a couple of laptops these days. Despite this uninspiring state of affairs, last year’s conference in Skegness – all that could be afforded – was quite remarkable with Anne-Marie a guest speaker along with Calvin Robinson, two people from GB News, and Lembit Opik! (He of cheeky girls fame). Opik is emphatically opposed to the climate change and net zero nonsense and gave a serious but humourous talk. All very enjoyable. In politics you have allies not friends. On net zero Opik is an ally. There were only about 50 of us but these guests still thought we worth coming all the way to Skegness for. They do not share the view of Mary or Mrs Windsor. Even if there is some history to Hamilton and Walker (yet to be explained) it remains that we had great fun especially at the evening party.
A turning point was the Birmingham conference with Batten as leader. Nigel turned up and gave a speech against Batten then left. It is remarkable that the party survived at all after that.
Hamilton and the NEC are well aware they need a new leader. Rebecca James appears to be being groomed for that. How that will work out is unclear. So far as it can field candidates in local elections it will.
Batten appeared not to care that the party haemorrhaged members in his ‘oh Tommy Robinson’ obsession and Braine refused to work with the NEC. Vachha simply went mad. The only leader that did not pursue his own agenda or use the party for ego needs was Hamilton. Yet he is the one that gets vilified. I await someone explain what Hamilton actually as leader that merits writing off the entire party. For now, it looks like the Guardian’s character assassination triumphs.
If the party can garner some more members it can have a future. It will be a long game. One may have to vote for some personal fiefdoms meanwhile or independent candidates until UKIP can resuscitate branches and stand more candidates.
Well you write a balanced viewpoint here, but a current membership of 2500 to 3000 is a lot more than I thought to be the case, and if correct then it can serve as a springboard to better times in the future. I think we will have to wait for the implosion of Reform UK first which will surely come if it fails to deliver any meaningful headway in the next general election. If it continues to poll the current percentages in opinion polls and in elections then I am sure that it will implode, and then maybe the UK Independence Party with the right leader could benefit by scooping up what support Reform UK had. Farage has more or less made it clear that he does not wish to be a party leader any longer, and if Reform UK continues along its present track Tice will probably call it a day I feel, and where would that leave a party with only two owners. I mean how long can you go on flogging a dead horse. The problem with allowing Anne Marie Waters on board again and possibly having another tilt at the leadership, would she renew her acquaintance with Tommy Robinson and his beliefs all over again. Its a tricky decision by UKIP to accept her into their ranks once again and hopefully she has learnt from her past mistakes.
If AMW stood for leader and won then she would have to work with the NEC. That would rule out Tommy Robinson not that I think AMW would want to associate with Robinson again. When she and Robinson ran UK Pegida they split up quite quickly. Having flounced out once AMW may not be as popular a candidate for leader as she was when she came second. I don’t mind her as a spokesperson on Justice. The speech she gave at Skegness was very good. Managing a proper party with an NEC may not come naturally to her and she may recognise that. ‘For Britain’ was a fiefdom.
As to Reform UK I doubt it will displace the Tory party. Its front bench has no recognition. Tice has put a lot of his own money in and at some point he will stop if the party does not do well.
Colin. Thank goodness you now accept that Farage is not going to be Party leader of Reform UK. IMHO it is best that he just has a cameo role and sticks to his GB News slot. May I venture to suggest that if you had been in Derby last Saturday you would have both enjoyed yourself and feel more positive about Reform UK. The rally certainly raised my confidence and trust in the Party giving their best in the run up to 2024 GE. Being amongst 800 hopeful, cheering, likeminded people all pulling in the same direction is always a confidence booster. I really hope they can organise similar style rallies all over the country. Very well organised indeed.
I have met Neil and Christine Hamilton on many occasions at a Branch level and found them to be very honest and knowledgeable. They amazingly had good memories for names too as I chatted and asked questions on a few occasions and never had to reintroduce myself. I am pretty sure Neil is thinking about stepping back a bit as soon as is possible as he admits to feeling his age as well as past health issues. He was the main reason I stayed with UKIP but like others have said, will support a local candidate or verified Independent of necessary. We have had unscrupulous people claim to be Independent and then go rogue.
Jake……..going to Derby just for a rally would have been a bridge too far as I live in south Kent. I was once positive about Brexit Party/Reform UK, but I have seen at first hand how it works and how the people at the top stifle ideas from below. I was a constituency campaign organiser and could not convince them to release the details of the registered supporters so that I and the GE candidate could contact them to enlist their help for the campaign. We had to do everything ourselves, but I did enlist the assistance of some UKIP activists to help out with residential leafleting. It was so bad that our original GE candidate stood down and we were given another candidate who experienced the same problems, but he was one of 317 candidates who were eventually stood down. He wasn’t apparently contacted directly by the party but learnt of the decision via the news. The whole situation was a shambles, and the UK Independence Party in its heyday was far more organised than Reform UK will ever be. Since then I have been a Reform UK candidate myself but pulled out with others to stand as an Independent instead. It was the best decision we made. At least we were in charge of our own destiny, whereas with Reform UK nobody answered emails or answered telephones, and we never knew when or if we could we would receive a campaign leaflet. And of course the same problem of not having access to registered supporters details. I have accepted the fact that Farage will step up the plate again and take a leading role in a party. He has disappointed a lot of people.
I think it could be Ann Maries time. I like her. I like her approach. Her support for women is vital and sound, a game changer, and cannot be denied. She could break the centre right parties deadlock. But she comes with some weird and worrying baggage.( The problem is :- which to ditch.) , and she could still have the NEC problem ( Solvable but anxious to interfere ).. But she’s a clever girl.. I would more than support her if ukip followed her advice occasionally without constant bickering..( But she still would need 95 % support to change a broke constitution.) ( And she must not put on weight,. Am I allowed to say that )
Anyway, Justice is the perfect place for her for now…!.. Inspired but obvious. And as a second ‘ plus.’…. UKIP appears to have finally grasped a problem..
But as Colin says , she’ll have learned a lot since starting “For Britain “.and every day the wrong kind of recruits enter the country.
And she appears totally ignorant of much of all the other problems from economy to clean water, to potholes to fish, to the City, to police-ing, to druggies, to corporate control , to education, to the professions, to EU protectionism etc. But ukip needs a greater level of knowledge in each of these. Not just some odd bod hopeful hangers on who’re sure that they can soon learn,
TG Spokes……..whether you are allowed to say it or not is one thing, but what has weight have to do with anything? On the one hand you say it could be Anne Marie Waters time, but on the other you say she has weird and worrying baggage. Her past thoughts of how politics should be done is not weird, but it was extreme, and extremes of anything don’t go down too well in this country. The far right won’t succeed in this country nor will the far left, and you just have to look at how things panned out for Jeremy Corbyn in that respect. Insofar as Waters is concerned having been readmitted as a member and made spokesman for Justice it may work very well, but on the other hand it may be suicidal. However the party has made recent overtures to other right of centre parties to work together and contest elections under one banner, and obviously For Britain decided to do just this it seems whilst other parties will continue to go their own way.
“I have met quite a few ex-kippers like Helen Windsor who believe that Hamilton and Walker staged a coup, but none have ever produced any evidence that the NEC acted unconstitutionally”
It’s really very simple. The constitution-as worded back in 2020, flawed as it was thanks to saboteur Crowther, had a clear route to challenge and remove a leader. This was followed to the letter for Henry Bolton. It most certainly was not for Freddy Vachha or Richard Braine before him – Richard being hounded into throwing in the towel. Anyone can check the clauses against events.
I agree that the rest can be dismissed as tantrums or conspiracy theories if people so wish. They weren’t present, or involved in what happened in 2020. Maybe they would never countenance the possibility that the Tory establishment had a hand in what happened.
I don’t believe – I know (like I know the ‘climate crisis’ is false). I withdrew from UKIP after Richard won, it wanted no part in the planned direction. I came back after Freddy took on the leadership but, even if he had been removed constitutionally, I’d have had to leave due to professional conflicts of interest that were not there with a scientist at the helm. There is NO party I want to be part of right now, I’d probably vote Reform or abstain in a GE and I don’t think political parties belong in local government.
If you believe that Freddy Vachha was removed as leader in accordance with the constitution perhaps you could detail the steps needed for this to happen. If correct process was not followed then it was a coup. Alternatively close your eyes put your fingers in your ears and repeat la la la until it all goes away.