“These things happen – I should know! The fact that this is supported by the people who were with him that night suggests that he has been very unfairly treated.”
Mr Wood yesterday admitted that he was the man depicted in the photo but denied the gesture he was making was a Nazi salute.
“These are pictures that have been taken from a private Facebook account,” he said. “These are not what they seem to be. The supposed salute was my left hand reaching for a friend’s mobile phone.”
Elsewhere in his blog Mr Farage said he was “pleased” that Sushil Patel, the father of Conservative MP Priti Patel, was standing as a candidate for his party.
Mr Patel’s candidature was disclosed by Mr Farage during a rally in David Miliband’s former South Shields constituency, ahead of a by-election there on Thursday.
In an interview with The Telegraph shortly afterwards, Mr Patel insisted Ukip was not a party which tolerated racism, despite criticism of some of its candidates’ comments in recent days.
He said: “Ukip is not a racist party – it is daylight coming through the darkness hours of this country … Ukip is not racist — they are trying to make progress.”
Mr Patel, who emigrated from east Africa, added that many communities had settled in Britain and if the country “was genuinely racist it would be chaos by now”.
Mr Patel said he was standing for elderly people who live locally and who “don’t make a noise publicly, but given the chance on a ballot paper they will speak out”.
He said that he had not told his daughter about his plans: “She doesn’t know anything about it – I don’t see why she should know. She is an independent person, on her own course. I had no reason really [to tell her] – I am an independent person myself.
“I am very proud of what she has achieved — she was a local Conservative here in Hertfordshire. It is up to her to accept it because I know she is a Eurosceptic.”
However, shortly after the interview, Mr Patel said he was standing down from the election. While his photograph was being taken by a Telegraph cameraman outside his home in Hertfordshire, Mr Patel was called inside to take a phone call and emerged 10 minutes later, saying that he was “withdrawing his candidacy” from the elections and pointing to his back.
The announcement appeared to catch Ukip unawares. Ninety minutes later, the party issued a statement which stressed that Mr Patel was still a candidate, adding that he was “currently convalescing from a recent serious operation and is unable to conduct any further interviews”.
Mr Patel said in Ukip’s statement: “I am proud of being a Ukip candidate and very proud of the achievements of my daughter who represents the people of Witham in an exemplary fashion.
“My views are my own and I am astonished that there has been quite so much interest in my candidacy.”
Later Miss Patel denied that she had pressured her father to stand down as a Ukip candidate. She told The Telegraph: “I have spoken to my Dad and I told him it was up to him what he does.
“My Dad was in hospital for major surgery on his back, which is why I am so shocked because I thought he was at home recovering.
“No matter what, whatever the outcome of this, he is still my Dad and I still love him. Nothing will change that, not even Ukip.”
To read the original: LINK
UKIP candidate in Hitler picture storm. UKIP forced to apologise!
UKIP’s just lost the Jewish vote! We understand that Hitler’s surviving relatives are to complain to UKIP as they feel that Hitler’s reputation will be tarnished further if he’s seen associating with UKIP.
From the Guardian:
Ukip has stumbled into a fresh row about Nazism after a candidate posted a doctored image of himself on Twitter standing next to Adolf Hitler.
The party apologised for the Photoshopped image and said that Dick Delingpole, a candidate in Worcester who is the brother of the writer and climate change sceptic James, had a “very deep sense of humour”.
Delingpole, a businessman who re-enacts scenes from history in his spare time, decided to doctor the image to mock the way in which the Tories have been trawling social media sites to find embarrassing pictures of Ukip candidates. He placed a shot of his head on to the bodies of three men in Nazi uniforms standing next to Hitler.
Writing for the Daily Telegraph under a copy of the doctored image, Delingpole said: “It’s no secret that I’m currently standing as a Ukip candidate for the forthcoming council elections. What was a secret until now is my Nazi past.
“As the photo above proves beyond doubt, I was present at one of Hitler’s rallies. I was also clearly part of an early cloning [experiment]. And in case you hadn’t yet worked it out, this is all utter nonsense. But it has been seized upon by my Tory opponent in Thursday’s local election.”
Delingpole was alerted to the Tory interest in the doctored photograph when a reporter from the Worcester News telephoned him. He maintains he has done nothing wrong.
“When the first ‘Ukip is a hotbed of closet Nazis’ thing started to happen – ie the major parties ordered all hands to the pumps to neutralise the Ukip threat – it was suggested that candidates purge their social media of anything that might prove embarrassing. Being a Delingpole I did the opposite. I am adamant that I have nothing to hide or be ashamed of, nothing that I wouldn’t happily share with the world.”
Ukip apologised but said Delingpole would not be expelled from the party. Carl Humphries, the party’s branch organiser for Worcester and Mid-Worcestershire, told the Worcester News: “I can assure you he is definitely not a Nazi or anything like that – he’s got a very deep sense of humour. He has been vetted by me; all our candidates are clean in every respect, but I am sorry if this offended people.”
Simon Geraghty, who is standing for the Conservative party in the same Riverside ward as Delingpole, told the Worcester News: “I find it absolutely sickening and abhorrent. I think the vast majority of British people will find this shocking – it’s not funny at all, it’s dreadful and I can’t believe he’s done it.”
The row follows the suspension of a Ukip candidate in Somerset after photos were published of him apparently making a Nazi salute. Alex Wood, 22, claimed that he was simply reaching out for a friend’s mobile phone during a Halloween party where he was dressed as a pirate.
To read the original: LINK
Are worried about becoming Gay? Then do some exercise to cure yourself suggests UKIP candidate!
From the Telegraph:
John Sullivan, the party’s candidate for the Newent division of Gloucestershire county council, has been accused of making anti-gay comments on Facebook.
He is alleged to have referred to the Victoian belief that physical exercise “released tension and thus avoided homosexuality”.
Mr Sullivan is also said to have congratulated Russia when it banned gay pride events in the country, writing “Well done the Russians”.
Ukip is against gay marriage but does not oppose gay civil partnerships.
James Carver, Ukip agent for the Forest of Dean and West Gloucestershire, said Mr Sullivan would still stand for election on Thursday but added a full investigation would take place soon.
“Ukip take any allegations of this nature extremely seriously,” said Mr Carver. “We are currently looking into this matter, and the medium from which the allegations arose, Gay Star News.”
The allegations against Mr Sullivan, which first appeared in the Gay Star News, come after a string of other Ukip candidates were accused of making racist and homophobic comments on Facebook and Twitter.
The claims led to Nigel Farage, the leader of Ukip, to accuse the Conservatives of a smear campaign, claiming the Tories had wasted time and money trawling through thousands of comments made on social media websites by Ukip candidates.
He added that the allegations only applied to a handful of the party’s 1,700 candidates.
Ukip has been surging in polls ahead of local elections on May 2, with the latest survey suggesting it could win 100 seats.
The other candidates for the Newent division are Philip Burford (Ind), Andrew Fidgeon (LD), David Humphreys (Green), Janet Royall (Labout), and Will Windsor-Clive (Con).
To read the original: LINK
UKIP accused of electoral fraud
From Sky:
Northumbria Police confirmed officers are investigating allegations of electoral fraud by UKIP in the Cowpen area of Blyth.
But UKIP claims the party wasn’t informed about the allegations and the first time they heard about the police investigation was when it was announced in the press.
UKIP Party Director Cllr Lisa Duffy said: “So far all we know of the allegation is what we have read in the press. At no time have the police contacted us and our calls to them have gone unanswered.
“It is hard for us to rebut these damaging allegations while the police will not say what they consist of.”
The news of the alleged fraud comes just days before Northumberland County Council elections, which are to be held on May 2.
UKIP candidate Barry Elliott, who is standing for election in Cowpen, told Sky Tyne and Wear no allegations have been made against him personally, and that he has “nothing to worry about”.
Cllr Duffy added: “Through the media we have discovered the allegations concerned one of our supporters who helped an elderly neighbour with her postal vote form and offered to post it for her.
“We understand a complaint was made by a member of another party who arrived at the lady’s house an hour later.
“As things stand we have received damaging press coverage while the police have made no effort to contact us, the local candidate, or the member involved.”
A Northumberland County Council spokesperson said: “We are aware that an allegation has been made and that the police are investigating.
“As a local authority we have no investigatory powers although we are working closely with the police to look into this matter.
“We issue extensive guidelines to candidates and political parties nefore and during the election process and any allegations of this nature are extremely rare.
“We’d like to reassure voters in Northumberland we have well established and robust systems in place for managing local elections.”
A police spokesman said: “Northumbria Police can confirm that they are investigating a complaint of possible electoral fraud in the Cowpen area of Blyth and that yesterday a 30-year-old man attended as a voluntary attender in relation to these allegations, where he was interviewed under caution.
“This remains an on-going criminal investigation and all relevant parties have been updated including the candidate affected and the returning officer of Northumberland County Council”.
To read the original: LINK
And finally …….
Robin Page – blocked from standing as a UKIP MEP candidate because Bannerman had been promised the lead position in the Eastern Region – on local government
From the Mail:
Exactly one year ago, after three recounts, I was swept back into power as a local district councillor by a massive two votes. Despite an astonishingly vitriolic campaign against me, I unseated a Liberal Democrat — and life as a district councillor began again.
I say again because I had already done 36 years during an earlier stint as an Independent on South Cambridgeshire District Council. I’d resigned in 2006 as a matter of principle, fed up with the pervasive culture of political correctness and the crazy rules on ‘standards of behaviour’ for councillors introduced under Labour by John Prescott.
That’s right: John Prescott, the man who romped with his mistress on the desk of his Whitehall office, issuing edicts on standards of behaviour. What a joke!
Anyway, I stood for election again last May as an Independent because I felt someone had to speak out against the environmental vandalism the council was wreaking in the name of ‘planning and development’.
In conjunction with Cambridge City Council, South Cambs seemed determined to trash the once beautiful university city and parts of its surrounding Green Belt.
Now, as the country votes on Thursday in local elections, I feel duty-bound to offer an insight into what really goes on in our town halls.
Public service? Forget it. Councillors are more interested in feathering their own nests, wasting money on the trappings of office and imposing politically correct drivel on council taxpayers.
Public money is not only being thrown about like confetti on non-jobs and PC projects in my council: I know that it’s happening right across the country.
Democracy and independence? Cobblers! I believe the sheep on my farm have more individuality and freedom of thought than most councillors, who are merely party hacks obsequiously following the diktats of their political masters in Westminster.
Once, our council meetings started with a Christian prayer. Today, oh no, we can’t have that in 21st century Britain: Christianity can’t be seen as having a part in ‘diversity’.
So NOW, the chairman begins each meeting with the fatuous sentence: ‘We’ll stand for a minute to remember the reasons why we are here and the people we serve.’
Presumably, this means that the Tories are thinking of Conservative Central Office and the Lib Dems are praying to the god of diversity for the soul of the liar Chris Huhne.
Councillors are endlessly told we must ‘embrace diversity’, even if by doing so we’re robbing needy people of help and wasting money. It’s a farce — and an undemocratic one at that.
I recently attended a diversity evening course that cost the council £1,900. It was held in the council chamber where £45,000 had just been spent on new furniture — to replace some that was barely eight years old.
Public money is not only being thrown about like confetti on non-jobs and PC projects in my council: I know that it’s happening right across the country.
Only this week, we learned that Middlesbrough council had appointed a so-called ‘thrift tsar’ to save the council money — on a salary of £95,000.
And while local authorities are chucking good money after bad and bleating about the austerity drive, it also emerged that, in total, councils have failed to collect £2.4 billion owed in council tax.
Amid all this waste, an elderly couple in my ward have been told that their twice-weekly check-up phone call from the council is to be stopped.
They are in their 80s and have health problems (diabetes and osteoporosis).
The calls were a replacement for the warden who used to visit them to make sure they were all right. But she was axed last July and now the council says it can’t afford even the two phone calls a week.
As you might expect, the couple were distressed, but a sense of pride and dignity meant they refused my request to try to highlight their case in the local newspaper.
Instead, I raised their case during that diversity course meeting — asking my fellow councillors how struggling local people such as this couple fitted into the council’s vision of ‘diversity’.
I was stunned when one of the Tories told me: ‘They represent old, entrenched views. Quite unsuitable for the 21st century.’
Perhaps I, too, am not suited to the 21st century!
For me, life as a councillor started so differently. Back in 1970, as a 26-year-old, I decided to stand so I might be able to represent my village and to help to retain the good things about rural life.
I’d spent all my life in the village of Barton in Cambridgeshire. I still live in the house next door to where I was born, on the small farm where my father worked for 60 years.
I had an idyllic childhood and the pace of life was as it had been for generations. Two carthorses stood side by side in the stable, and during summer, the dairy shorthorn cows walked to and from milking to the spiralling song of larks and yellowhammers. It was a life in which farming and nature were in harmony, and the whole village appreciated the land and the seasons of the year.
But then the roads were widened, cars started going faster, commuters moved in and cattle were no longer to be found in the fields, which were turned into prairies of wheat or used for new housing developments.
I felt I had to do something.
Once elected onto the council, I fought for local issues: to get a speed limit in the village; and to secure the the appointment of a ‘conservation officer’ to protect the historically important areas of our locality. I backed the idea of the Green Belt to check urban encroachment. I even orchestrated a successful battle to stop the rents of 134 council houses being increased in 1973.
One of my most satisfying achievements was to get permission for an extended family of Romany gypsies to remain on a small field, in the Green Belt, which meant they were protected from living on the increasingly busy roads and from potential harassment.
Back then, it was possible to discuss contentious topics such as gypsy camps openly and honestly.
Today, that is impossible.
Recently, I raised the issue that there was a problem with Irish travellers in our district, but I was shouted down for being ‘racist’.
In the Seventies and Eighties, we were a fiercely independent council, dominated by no single political party. Of course, there were liaisons and deals, and — just as today — dubious planning decisions that suggested the brown envelope was more persuasive than the democratic vote.
But open debates were held and for the most part it was democratic. We councillors — the local butcher, the baker, the teacher, the farmer and the housewife — were all doing our bit, and we got no payment at all.
I was working as a part-time postman and money was tight, but I regarded my council duties as a public service. Back then, there was no such thing as an ‘attendance allowance’.
But council life began to change for the worse during the years of New Labour in the late Nineties.
First, there was the introduction of ‘allowances’ (as pay for councillors is euphemistically called).
Almost uniquely among my colleagues, I have never claimed my expenses entitlement.
‘Scandals are happening right across the country. Decisions are being made to shut much-valued local hospitals or make cuts to policing levels’
And as for the idea of getting paid allowances, I can’t see any justification at all. Some colleagues argue that these allowances compensate them for having to take time off from their work during the day.
But when I suggested that we switched to evening meetings, there was an outcry from those worried that it would deprive them of their council income!
We’re talking sizeable money here. The chairman of South Cambridgeshire District Council, who, as a fruit farmer, I assume makes a perfectly good living, also gets more than £16,000 a year from the council. Seven other councillors rack up more than £10,000 a year, and our total bill for councillors’ allowances comes to more than £369,000.
I wonder how many old people’s warden wage packets that would pay for?
At the same time, councils have become depressingly politicised. Gradually, the party machines have edged out Independent councillors. Today, there are only seven of us left out of 57.
The Tories are in power and they vote as a block. They join the Lib Dems for ‘pre-meeting meetings’ to decide the agenda.
The result is a shamocracy in which the public rarely hears the real issues. Free speech becomes stifled. For example, I once dared to scold another councillor for risking accusations of impropriety by attending a ‘soirée’ hosted by a property developer
She reacted very badly and I found myself summoned before the Standards Board.
This quango was part of the £8 million-a-year town hall ‘thought police’ introduced by John Prescott to ‘monitor’ councillors and prevent them from championing local issues — it has fuelled thousands of petty and malicious complaints. I had to attend what was tantamount to a kangaroo court, with big-wig lawyers who argued over the meaning of the word ‘soirée’.
Eventually, after six or seven hours, they decided that the councillor had not been to a ‘soirée’, but had enjoyed tea and biscuits.
The case must have cost the council at least £5,000, and I received a mild reprimand. What a waste of time and money.
Shocked by the whole experience, I realised that local democracy had become a charade. Shortly afterwards, I resigned. I had already been upset by the decision to sell South Cambridgeshire Hall, where councillors met, to a developer — and to move the council offices to the artificially created village of Cambourne.
The place where we now meet is utterly soulless and looks like a nuclear power station.
No one can ever convince me that this was not a deliberate decision to lend legitimacy to council decisions to concrete over the Cambridgeshire countryside.
For this is what the construction of thousands of new homes in places such as Cambourne amounts to.
There was a time when local councillors would have tried to block such proposals.
‘I regarded my council duties as a public service. Back then, there was no such thing as an attendance allowance’
But having served on the planning committee for 20 years, I witnessed the shift away from making decisions that were in the interests of local people towards a slavish toeing of the line of central government.
Or worse, the risk of councillors offering themselves for hire to property developers — trading on their inside knowledge of the planning system to receive fees of up to £20,000 for advice on how to get developments approved.
It should be remembered that as part of the Government’s drive for more homes, for every new house, local authorities receive a ‘New Homes Bonus’ of several thousand pounds as an outrageous financial inducement for councils to grant planning permission.
These are nothing less than legalised bribes.
The most outrageous scheme in my ward — though I am not saying that anything untoward has happened during the negotiations — is for a new stadium for Cambridge United Football Club, along with 420 houses, to be built on the Green Belt. If it happens — close to the poet Rupert Brooke’s famous village of Grantchester — it will be nothing less than an act of environmental vandalism.
Yet thanks to the ‘New Homes Bonus’ — or should that be ‘Bribe’? — South Cambridgeshire District Council could get a share of £3 million.
This, despite the fact that local people are overwhelmingly against the development.
Similar scandals are happening right across the country. Decisions are being made to shut much-valued local hospitals or make cuts to policing levels.
A
s a long-standing countryside campaigner, it was this wrecking of the environment that inspired me to stand again for election as a councillor.
I realised that my earlier resignation on a point of principle had achieved nothing. It had simply allowed a bad council to continue on its way with less criticism.
On my return to the council, I noticed that the bureaucracy of ‘officers’ had become ridiculously bloated. For instance, we have a ‘monitoring officer’ to dictate what we councillors can and cannot say.
No, it’s not 1984 — it’s 21st century Britain.
Councillors risk being accused of ‘bias’ and banned from proceedings. There is a monthly magazine, produced in council time by council staff.
On my return to the council, I noticed that the bureaucracy of ‘officers’ had become ridiculously bloated. For instance, we have a ‘monitoring officer’ to dictate what we councillors can and cannot say.
It’s nothing more than a propaganda sheet that peddles the myth that the council is operating wonderfully — when I know it is often inefficient and sometimes incompetent.
These bureaucrats inundate us with reams of useless information. (I think they do it to make themselves indispensable). They seem determined to bump up costs.
It’s not just my local council, either. A few weeks ago, I read that cash-strapped Durham county council had given its chairwoman, Linda Marshall, an annual clothing allowance of £8,850 a year.
After all, perks are all the rage in town halls today. When I was re-elected, almost the first thing I was asked was: ‘Of course, you’ll want a free council computer.’
I replied that I wouldn’t. I had my own computer and didn’t want to waste public funds on computers that cost £843 each, plus running costs of £129 per computer per year.
Of course, my parsimony was not shared by my fellow councillors. I learned that out of 57 colleagues, 50 have gone for the ‘free’ computers.
Though, of course, they are not free. All told, they cost council taxpayers almost £50,000 a year.
But then, what’s the odd £50,000 frittered away on computers, or £45,000 on buying unnecessary new furniture, or to pay the salary of a monitoring officer to keep councillors in line, when you can make savings in other areas, such as cutting services to the elderly
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2315521/Democracy-Dont-make-laugh-This-really-goes-Town-Hall.html#ixzz2S7aiaqcB
Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W)
. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
Ukip-vs-EUkip 