Ukip-vs-EUkip

We aim to inform YOU & provide an archive re: Ukip to TRY to make it fit for purpose

Archive for the ‘Farage Cult’ Category

Ex Ukip MEP Facing Further Criminal Charges

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 13/10/2014

Ex Ukip MEP Facing Further Criminal Charges
.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Clean EUkip up NOW make UKIP electable! 

.

The corruption of EUkip’s leadership, 
their anti UKIP claque in POWER & the NEC 

is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!  

.

Ex Ukip MEP Ashley Mote is Facing Further Criminal Charges including ‘Misconduct in Public Office‘, ‘Fraud’ etc. amounting to 9 charges, to be heard at Westminster Magistrates Court on 03-Nov-2014.

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
having observed some very questionable decisions of the CPS over recent times and the abject failure of OLAF in the EU and CPS in Britain to bring to book criminals in public office – be they the likes of MEP Giles Chichester who used somewhere in excess of £100K from the public purse to fund his ‘Letts’ diary business, the failure to prosecute Nigel Farage and his cronies for what seems to be abuse of office, self enrichment, the enrichment of their low life cronies thus bringing the body politic into disrepute, the failure to prosecute Ukip MEP Derek Clark for abuse of office and misuse of somewhere between £35K & £100K, nor prosecution of Ukip MEPs Stuart Agnew, Nigel Farage, Jeffrey Titford, David Bannerman, Graham Booth and probably others for both known and publicly identified misuse of public funding – not to mention what would seem to be a number of ‘stitch ups’ endorsed by The CPS.
Yet there has also been a serial failure on the part of The CPS structure to bring to Court and prosecute a considerable number of police officers who have been involved in various crimes not least of which have been numerous outrageous murders!
Hence I am sure readers will understand why I am more than a little sceptical of the integrity of the 9 charges brought against Ashley Mote the ex Ukip MEP!I make no claims of innocence for Ashley Mote relative to these charges as The CPS has all too often over egged their claims and a great deal more details are required before any responsible judgement of the claims can be made.
I wonder will this be just another crass series of claims cobbled together from lies, inuendo and misrepresentation as would seem the case against Jasna Badsak and that against Nikki Sinclaire where it would seem corruption of due process has played a significant part in the hands of what would seem to be corrupt police and dubious judiciary too closely associated with Ukip and other parties in the case yet lacking the integrity to prorogue themselves!
One is forced to wonder why some are harassed and persecuted over paltry sums, eg Badzak £2K and Sinclaire less than £15K (in reality at most around £8K alleged!) whilst others never face prosecution over infinitely larger sums purloined?
Is this what British Justice has debased itself to under the influence of EU Corpus Juris?
Let us see more details regarding the claims against the retired 78 year old Ashley Mote so long after the offences would seem to be alleged
MOTE, Ashley 02

Ex-MEP charged with fraud offences and misconduct in public office

13/10/2014

Zoe Martin, of the CPS Special Crime Division said, “The CPS has today issued charges against Ashley Mote of obtaining a money transfer by deception, fraud by false representation, false accounting, receiving the proceeds of crime and misconduct in public office. We have decided there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest.

“Ashley Mote will appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 3 November 2014.

“A decision has also been made that no further action will been taken in relation to a second individual who was investigated for offences of obtaining money transfer by deception, false accounting and fraud by false representation, as there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. In addition no further action will be taken against two other individuals who were investigated for offences of money laundering.

“These decisions were taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

“May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against the defendant have been commenced and of his right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

“Any decision by the CPS does not imply any finding concerning guilt or criminal conduct; the CPS makes decisions only according to the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and it is applied in all decisions on whether or not to prosecute.”

Note:

The CPS’s function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

Details of the full charges:

Ashley Mote

  • Charge 1: Misconduct in public office, contrary to Common Law
  • Charge 2: Acquiring criminal property, contrary to section 329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  • Charge 3: Obtaining a money transfer by deception, contrary to section 15A of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 4: False accounting, contrary to section 17(1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 5: Obtaining a money transfer by deception, contrary to section 15A of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 6: Obtaining a money transfer by deception, contrary to section 15A of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 7: False accounting, contrary to section 17(1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 8: False accounting, contrary to section 17(1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968
  • Charge 9: Fraud, contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006

Ends

To view the original of these charges CLICK HERE
.

Regards,

Greg_L-W..

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 

 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance

&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Deny the self serving political clique ANY Democratic claims to legitimacy
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
.
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337
Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General Stuff archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General Stuff ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN

&

To Leave-The-EU
 

Posted in Ashley Mote, CPS, David Bannerman, Derek CLARK, Farage Cult, Fraud, Graham Booth, Greg Lance-Watkins, Jasna Badzak, Nigel FARAGE, Nikki SINCLAIRE, Stuart AGNEW, UKIP | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Annabelle Fuller is back in Nigel Farage’s office

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 17/08/2014

Annabelle Fuller is back in Nigel Farage’s office

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership, their anti UKIP claque & the NEC is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!

The unstable, attention seeking, dishonest thief and odious liar Annabelle Fuller is back in Nigel Farage’s office presumably providing him with her usual range of services!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
between jobs out of doors enjoying the sunshine today I was fossiking around on the internet as I waited for a friend to arrive and I found this.
One would be hard pressed to conceive of a better display of Nigel Farage’s complete contempt for the well being of UKip, his electorate and followers of his Cult – it is clearly a me, me, me Cult where The Cult claque act in pursuit of preferement to positions on the EU gravy train, funded from the public purse – largess in the gift of Nigel Farage!
EU MEP Cartoon 03
I had heard rumours of this a few days ago but without sufficient substantiation to publish it as a fact – however these details of Nigel Farage’s much denied ‘mistress’ who he had on the payrole at public expense – just as he paid his wife at public expense when even his constituency office did not know and could identify absolutely no work she did for UKip that jusdtified her employment let alone at a salary of around £30K pa.
FULLER, Annabelle 10aNigel Farage, Annabelle Fuller & Ray Finch!
Many have alleged that the £30K from the public purse was paid as a bribe for Kirsten to turn a blind eye to her husband’s alleged mistresses or at least his various sexual dalliances!
Credibility for this widely held belief would seem to be the various occasions when Farage has employed and re-employed Annabelle Fuller in various positions and the fact that the question in the last sentence of the article below may well be answered by the fact that now that it is banned by The EU for MEPs to employ their spouses.
FARAGE, Kirsten 03
Kirsten Farage has been transpherd to the employ of Nigel Farage’s lackey Ray Finch!

Annabelle Fuller is back in Nigel Farage’s office

 
Senior figures in UKIP are reported to be furious that Nigel Farage is allowing Annabelle Fuller back into his office, according to one well-placed source in the party hierarchy. It’s still unclear if she has returned to work for the party or is she is merely providing decoration. If the former is the case then it confirms the story that my source gave me some time ago which was that Farage had promised Annabelle that she could return to work for him once the dust had settled.
The question is has the dust really settled? We need to remember that German born Kirsten Farage is reported to have gone seriously Teutonic over her husband’s alleged relationship with busty Annabelle. So if she really is back and drawing a salary for her activities, then it is unlikely that Kirsten will be unaware of this fact.
This leads people to ponder what deal has been done to stop Kirsten Farage screaming her head off?
To view the original article CLICK HERE

.

Regards,

Greg_L-W..

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 

 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance

&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Deny the self serving political clique ANY Democratic claims to legitimacy
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
.
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337
Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General Stuff archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General Stuff ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN

&

To Leave-The-EU
 

Posted in Annabelle FULLER, Farage, Farage Cult, Kirsten FARAGE, Ray FINCH, UKIP | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Farage-istas may well call it an ‘Establishment’ Attack when it Happens to Them

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 15/08/2014

The Farage-istas may well call it an ‘Establishment’ Attack when it Happens to Them
.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Clean EUkip up NOW make UKIP electable! 

.

The corruption of EUkip’s leadership, 
their anti UKIP claque in POWER & the NEC 

is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!  

.

The Farage-istas may well call it an ‘Establishment’ Attack when it Happens to Them but that overlooks the duty of that very ‘Establishment’ they seek to be a part of!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
I presume the Faragistas, The Farage Cult and his UKip claque will claim this is just another example of ‘The Establishment‘ picking on a long term UKip supporter and member of their inner sanctum – that may suit ‘Godders’ but strangely ‘The Establishment’ are seen, by responsible individuals, to have a duty to expose corruption, dishonesty, incompetence and deceit be it in business, in politics or merely amongst the various scrotes involved in and on the periphery of criminality.
GRAVY TRAIN 01
On that note one is bound to look forward to Panorama’s projected programme either with a view to seeing the criminality of Nigel Farage’s party exposed or as a means by which they can clear their befouled name and reputation and can be cleaned-up to represent people other than the racists, low lifes and destructive under belly of Britain who they so readily appeal to – destruction and criticism of those seeking to build the economy and society turning around the catastrophic economic illiteracy of 13 unlucky years of Labour and taking and enforcing hard decisions being so much easier to achieve than construction.
EU MEP Logo 03
As Godfrey Bloom has so ably shown giving advice is all too easy, but when your snout is buried in the trough giving trustworthy advice is a different matter.
Let us not forget that Godfrey Bloom spoke out from his position on the ‘Establishment’ Gravy Train and advocated that Central Bankers should be araigned for ‘War Crimes’ CLICK HERE One wonders just what he now believes Incompetent and dishonest Financial Advisers  be arraigned for – particularly as this is not the only financial offence with which he is closely associated!
You may also find this of interest CLICK HERE
You may also recall the fact that Godfrey Bloom obtained his position as an MEP by the corruption of due process and the duplicitous intervention of his chum (another failed Financial Operator with City connections, who not so long ago bought himself a Freemanship of The City!) Nigel Farage!
Let us also not forget just how involved in UKip leadership clique ‘Godders’ was, sharing (providing) a flat with Nigel Farage over a prolonged period, and even when drunk he was all too willing to pontificate on UKip’s behalf in the EU Parliament!
Judgement seems to be a failing not just of Bloom’s but all too common in UKip amongst The Farage Cult, who have lost numerous Court Cases showing a propensity for dishonesty, abuse of position and financial ‘irregularities’.
EU MEP Cartoon 03
There really is nothing clever about being a drunk or a fool, a clown or a performer, and happy chappy at the pub is no image to cultivate for a politician unless one is desperate to scrape the barrel for the votes of the dregs of society to stay on the Gravy Train!
UKIP ARCHIVE SKELETON 01

Former Ukip bad boy Godfrey Bloom ‘horrified’ as his firm is fined for gambling couple’s £2m

 
 
 

An investment firm whose major shareholder is the controversial former Ukip MEP Godfrey Bloom has been ordered to pay a retired couple more than £2m in damages after losing a High Court case where it was condemned for giving “negligent advice” and gambling their money on mining and natural resource funds.

Andrew and Kirsty Mohun-Smith said they were horrified after discovering that York-based TBO Investments Ltd had ignored their request for cautious financial planning and instead placed almost all their money in unregulated high-risk schemes which were later suspended. TBO made no attempt to make any offer to the Mohun-Smiths after the couple complained, nor did the company agree to mediation. TBO Director Scott Robinson, a former business partner of Mr Bloom’s, did not bother to attend the court hearing in June and sent a sick note which Judge Richard Seymour QC dismissed.

TBO must now pay £2.24m and were ordered by the judge pay an interim payment of £30,000 by 14 July, but the Mohun-Smiths are yet to receive a penny. A subsequent appeal by Mr Robinson was also thrown out and TBO was ordered to pay an extra £10,000 in court costs.

Mr Mohun-Smith, 57, said: “I relied upon [TBO] to put in place investments for us that would provide a reliable and comfortable standard of living for the rest of our lives. However, to my complete horror it has become clear that nearly all our money was placed in unregulated collective investment schemes which have been suspended with an almost complete loss of capital.

 

“This company and its advisor Scott Robinson must be stopped from giving financial advice to members of the public. They provide negligent and misleading advice. They do not seem to realise that they are playing not only with people’s money but their lives and it cannot continue.”

Since the High Court ruling, TBO has ignored all communication from the Mohun-Smith’s solicitor Jonathan Mortimer, from Raworths in Harrogate, including requests to provide details of TBO’s insurance policy. Mr Mortimer has now written to all three TBO directors – Mr Robinson, David McLaughlin, a former Ukip employee in Mr Bloom’s office, and Christopher Tresidder – as he pursues them individually for the £2m compensation advising them to take independent legal advice in respect of personal liability.

 Latest company accounts show that Mr Bloom owns 53.5 per cent of TBO Investments. He was director of TBO between 1992 and 2004, the year he became an MEP, although he remained a consultant until 2007. TBO was also fined £28,000 in 2008 over an “’unacceptable risk of unsuitable investment advice being provided” for six years from 2001-07. There is no implication that Mr Bloom was involved in any of TBO’s advice to its clients.

Ukip withdrew the party whip from Mr Bloom in September 2013 after he struck a journalist in the street and referred to woman as “sluts” at his party conference. He sat as an independent MEP until the end of his term in office in May this year. In 2009 it emerged that Mr Bloom, then Ukip MEP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire, used his parliamentary staff allowance to pay three assistants, including Mr McLaughlin, who were also employed by TBO.

In a separate case TBO was hit by the Financial Ombudsman Service last month when the watchdog ordered the firm and Mount Sterling Wealth (MSW), another financial company run by Mr Robinson and Mr McLaughlin from the same address as TBO, to pay a pensioner £20,000 after she received “negligent” advice.

The woman, who only wants to be known as Mrs Q, was left “devastated” after discovering Mr Robinson invested 60 per cent of her £50,000 life savings in high-risk mining and natural resource funds between 2007 and 2011. Mrs Q was 64 and drawing her state pension when she first invested with TBO and living with her partner in a property with a “reasonably significant” mortgage. She was one of several TBO clients who received letters from Mr Robinson in 2011 inviting them to transfer into his new firm MSW. Mr Robinson subsequently increased Mrs Q’s exposure to high-risk funds to 80 per cent and she has fought for two years to get her retirement savings back. Ombudsman James Harris ordered both TBO and MSW to pay Mrs Q “fair compensation”, which has been estimated at £10,000 from each firm.

Andrew and Kirsty Mohun-Smith lost £2m after getting poor advice from Bloom’s firm
Andrew and Kirsty Mohun-Smith lost £2m after getting poor advice from Bloom’s firm

Mrs Q, who turns 71 on Monday, told The Independent: “I entrusted the majority of my life savings to TBO Investments and more recently Mount Sterling Wealth. I was devastated when I found out that I had lost so much of my original investment particularly as I had just retired. What has made the experience so much more frustrating has been their response to the claim – in particular, they have denied liability throughout, failed to keep to deadlines imposed not only by their own internal procedures but also by the Financial Adjudicator and even suggested that I was an experienced investor who should have known the risk that I was taking on.

“I have only been paid £5,000 by MSW after numerous letters from my solicitor threatening to wind up the companies and it looks as if I have no alternative put to take enforcement action to recover the majority of the money still due to me.”

Mr Mortimer, who is also representing Mrs Q, said: “I would understand if the directors put their hands up and admitted to a mistake but the way they have conducted themselves is absolutely disgraceful.”

Mr Bloom told The Independent  on Friday he was “stunned and horrified” to hear about the rulings against TBO and size of compensation owed to the Mohun-Smiths and Mrs Q.

Godfrey Bloom said he was “stunned and horrified” to hear about the rulings against TBO
Godfrey Bloom said he was “stunned and horrified” to hear about the rulings against TBO (Getty Images)

He said: “I’m just back from holiday and don’t know anything about it. I’m majority shareholder but left the company in 2004. When I was there TBO never handled any money. I simply can’t understand how this has happened. When I was there at no time would we have allowed investments to be made in unregulated funds as we would simply not have passed regulatory inspection had we done so.”

Mr Bloom said he “bumped into” Mr Robinson and Mr McLaughlin every year but was unaware of any problems with the company.

He said: “I assumed my shares were worthless. I was told there was a management buy-out of TBO and I understood that it was being wound down. I never received any recompense and just assumed it would happen at some point. I suspect there is much more to this than meets the eye and I certainly hope some good comes of it for those concerned.”

Mr Robinson is believed to be on a two-week holiday and did not return calls. A spokesperson for TBO said: “All the matters relating to the Mohun-Smiths’ claim are in the hands of our solicitors. It would be inappropriate to comment any further pending the Court of Appeal reviewing the matter, save to say that Mount Sterling Wealth Limited has no connection to the Mohun-Smiths’ claim.

“As to Mrs Q, we have no wish, and do not think it would be appropriate, to discuss the specifics of cases or clients. However, whilst we are disappointed with the decision made by the Financial Ombudsman Service the outcome is fully acknowledged.”

To view the original article CLICK HERE
.

Regards,

Greg_L-W..

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 

 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance

&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Deny the self serving political clique ANY Democratic claims to legitimacy
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
.
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337
Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General Stuff archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General Stuff ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN

&

To Leave-The-EU
 

Posted in BLOOM, BLOOM Godfrey, Farage, Farage Cult, Godfrey Bloom, Nigel FARAGE, UKIP | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

> GUEST POST Showing The Ineptitude Of The Farage Cult

Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 13/07/2014

> GUEST POST Showing The Ineptitude Of The Farage Cult
.

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Clean EUkip up NOW make UKIP electable! 

.

The corruption of EUkip’s leadership, 
their anti UKIP claque in POWER & the NEC 

is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!  

.

> GUEST POST:
Showing The Ineptitude Of Patrick O’Flynn, Nigel Farage & The Farage Cult that is UKIP!

.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
having had my attention drawn to this pronouncement by the inept Patrick O’Flynn, who it would seem bought his position in the leading position as an MEP candidate for the Farage Cult by prostituting his position as a journalist for the Express ‘news wrapper’ where he was presumably salaried as a reporter of political new but abused his position by using his employers ‘paper’ as a vehicle for UKIP propaganda, which was seemingly rewarded with an MEPship by The Glorious Leader (TGL) Nigel Farage of the Farage Cult.

Realising O’Flynn’s pronouncement on the party web site was complete factual rubbish, following on the heels of the off the cuff dishonest bunkum by TGL regarding NGO funding by the EU when he claimed Greenpeace was directly funded by The EU of which neither Greenpeace’s nor The EU’s books show one Iota of proof.

I decided it was suitable for this blog which aims to expose corruption, stupidity and incompetence in UKIP in an effort to clean-up the scam and make it a party fit for purpose to lead Britain to Leave-The-EU, which clearly under Nigel Farage’s inept andf self serving leadership it is not!
Having decided to use the foolsih comments of O’Flynn as an example I spent the day enjoying the sunshine, which is my wont hence the reduction of factual articles on this blog (so may I suggest the Farage Cult pray for a continuance of this good weather!).
When I got around to doing something about the research for the article I find I was not alone in realising the standard of  accuracy of UKIP was as ever risible and numerous well informed individuals were well aware of the folly of ‘O’Flynn’s propaganda and as they had written the matter up I have opted, in indollence, to GUEST POST an article on the subject (to enjoy more sunshine).
GUEST POST:

 UKIP: the embarrassing stupidity of O’Flynn

 Saturday 12 July 2014

000a UKIP-011 veto.jpg
To view this UKIP official bunkum CLICK HERE
Following the example of TGL in falsely accusing Greenpeace of taking Brussels money, UKIP’s Patrick O’Flynn is now vying for the top slot in getting things completely wrong.

Falling for the meme that has been floating around on diverse websites, including this one, we see the myth perpetrated that: “On the 1st November 2014 the right of Parliament to legislate over us in 43 areas … will be removed and be made subject to … QMV”.

Included in a magical mystery list is Article 50 of the TEU – that which relates to the procedures for leaving the EU – the supposed removal of the veto translated as making the withdrawal of a member state conditional on QMV. Needless to say, there are no original sources cited for the assertions, but that doesn’t stop O’Flynn swallowing the myth, hook, line and sinker.

In fact, there is no loss of veto coming into force on 1 November. The change over from unanimous voting to QMV in about 40 areas has already taken place. It came with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, so these changes have already been in place for nearly five years, without O’Flynn apparently noticing.

What does change on 1 November 2014 is that a there is a new system of QMV. A new “double majority” will apply when, according to Article 16 of the consolidated treaty, “a qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55% of the members of the Council, comprising at least fifteen of them and representing Member States comprising at least 65% of the population of the Union”.

Despite the sterling attempts of Denis Cooper, Autonomous Mind and this post by Boiling Frog, followed by this one to put the record straight, this has not stopped Patrick O’Flynn urging party members to support a new petition that calls for the Government to begin moves to leave the EU “before the wholesale loss of national vetoes occurs”.

Sadly, there is no stopping this rather stupid man, even if his members deserve better. It is bad enough having these silly memes thrashing around the internet, but senior members of UKIP should not be leading people astray.

To view the original article CLICK HERE
The items to which Patrick O’Flynn would seem to be claiming I list below but draw your attention to the fact that the Lisbon New Constitution Treaty, which was unopposed in The UK by Nigel Farage’s cult and UKIP at large, passed into Treaty Law and those agreed areas of competence covered by The Nice Treaty come into effect as subject to QMV on 01-Nov-2014 through to March 2017.
Administrative co-operation – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Asylum – Nice: QMV; Lisbon: QMV
Border controls – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Citizens’ initiative regulations – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Civil protection – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Committee of the Regions – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Common defence policy – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Crime prevention incentives – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Criminal judicial co-operation – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Criminal law – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Culture – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Diplomatic & Consular protection – Nice: Unanimity Lisbon: QMV
Economic & Social Committee – Nice: QMV Lisbon: QMV
Emergency international aid – Nice: Unanimity Lisbon: QMV
Energy – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
EU budget – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Eurojust – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
European Central Bank – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
European Court of Justice – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Europol – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Eurozone external representation – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Foreign Affairs High Representative election – Lisbon: QMV
Freedom of movement for workers – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Freedom to establish a business – Nice: Unanimity Lisbon QMV
Freedom, security, justice, co-operation & evaluation – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Funding the Common Foreign & Security Policy – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
General economic interest services – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Humanitarian aid – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Immigration – Nice: QMV; Lisbon: QMV
Intellectual property – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Organisation of the Council of the EU – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Police co-operation – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
President of the European Council election – Lisbon: QMV
Response to natural disasters & terrorism – Lisbon: QMV
Rules concerning the Armaments Agency – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Self-employment access rights – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Social Security Unanimity – Nice: QMV; Lisbon: QMV
Space – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Sport – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Structural & Cohension Funds – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Tourism – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Transport – Nice: Unanimity; Lisbon: QMV
Withdrawal of a member state – Lisbon: QMV
During their daily check on this blog to see if they can concoct a legal excuse to silence me perhaps UKIP staff and MEPs might care to take note of certain facts regarding QMV (in this instance selected on a Finnish web site):
 The treaty reform process started in December 2000 in Nice, but the voting rules of the Council of the European Union are going to take full effect only in April 2017 – if the Treaty of Lisbon enters into force.

It is hardly the overpowering strength of the European Union we as EU citizens have to fear, but its impotence.

***

Current treaty

The member states have been accorded votes in the Council roughly in line with their population numbers. Article 205 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found in the latest consolidated version of the treaties, published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 29.12.2006 C 321 E/136-137.

A few days later, on 1 January 2007, Bulgaria and Romania joined the European Union. But the amendment of Article 205 TEC by the 2003 Act of Accession, and the situation after the entry of Bulgaria and Romania is indicated only by a footnote and presented in an Appendix to the consolidated treaty (starting on page 325).

By inserting the changes, we present Article 205 TEC as it is in force since 1 January 2007:

Article 205 TEC

1. Save as otherwise provided in this Treaty, the Council shall act by a majority of its Members.

2. Where the Council is required to act by a qualified majority, the votes of its Members shall be weighted as follows:

Belgium 12‘
Bulgaria 10
Czech Republic 12
Denmark 7
Germany 29
Estonia 4
Greece 12
Spain 27
France 29
Ireland 7
Italy 29
Cyprus 4
Latvia 4
Lithuania 7
Luxembourg 4
Hungary 12
Malta 3
Netherlands 13
Austria 10
Poland 27
Portugal 12
Romania 14’.
Slovenia 4
Slovakia 7
Finland 7
Sweden 10
United Kingdom 29

Acts of the Council shall require for their adoption at least 255 votes in favour cast by a majority of the members where this Treaty requires them to be adopted on a proposal from the Commission.

In other cases, for their adoption acts of the Council shall require at least 255 votes in favour, cast by at least two thirds of the members.

3. Abstentions by Members present in person or represented shall not prevent the adoption by the Council of acts which require unanimity.

4. When a decision is to be adopted by the Council by a qualified majority, a member of the Council may request verification that the Member States constituting the qualified majority represent at least 62% of the total population of the Union. If that condition is shown not to have been met, the decision in question shall not be adopted.

***

Original Lisbon Treaty

The original Treaty of Lisbon was signed by the heads of state or government on 13 December 2007. It contains horizontal (general) amendments, i.e. terms used throughout the treaties, and amendments specific to each Article. The Lisbon Treaty was published in the OJEU 17.12.2007 C 306.

The specific amendments to Article 205 TEC, to become the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) were (OJEU 17.12.2007 C 306/104-105):
:
191) Article 205 shall be amended as follows:

(a) paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be replaced by the following:

‘1. Where it is required to act by a simple majority, the Council shall act by a majority of its component members.

2. By way of derogation from Article 9 C(4) of the Treaty on European Union, as from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council, representing Member States comprising at least 65 % of the population of the Union.

3. As from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council participate in voting, a qualified majority shall be defined as follows:

(a) A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member, failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained;

(b) By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.’.

(b) paragraph 4 shall be deleted and paragraph 3 shall be renumbered 4.

***

Comment

We have to wait until 1 November 2014 for the new rules on qualified majority voting to take effect. Even then they are subject to further delays under the Protocol on transitional provisions.

***

Consolidated Lisbon Treaty

After a few months and the publication of a number of “private” consolidations, the Council graciously published a readable (consolidated) version of the Lisbon Treaty, first on its web pages in April and then in the Official Journal, on Europe Day 2008. In part, the amended Article 205 TEC became Article 238 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/153-154):

Article 238 TFEU
(ex Article 205(1) and (2), TEC)

1. Where it is required to act by a simple majority, the Council shall act by a majority of its component members.

2. By way of derogation from Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, as from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council, representing Member States comprising at least 65 % of the population of the Union.

3. As from 1 November 2014 and subject to the provisions laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council participate in voting, a qualified majority shall be defined as follows:

(a) A qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

A blocking minority must include at least the minimum number of Council members representing more than 35 % of the population of the participating Member States, plus one member, failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained;

(b) By way of derogation from point (a), where the Council does not act on a proposal from the Commission or from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the qualified majority shall be defined as at least 72 % of the members of the Council representing the participating Member States, comprising at least 65 % of the population of these States.

4. Abstentions by Members present in person or represented shall not prevent the adoption by the
Council of acts which require unanimity.

***

Article 16(4) and (5) TEU

The basic provisions on voting in the Council are paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 16 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), presented here as a reminder (OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/24):

Article 16(4) and (5) TEU

4. As from 1 November 2014, a qualified majority shall be defined as at least 55 % of the members of the Council, comprising at least fifteen of them and representing Member States comprising at least 65 % of the population of the Union.

A blocking minority must include at least four Council members, failing which the qualified majority shall be deemed attained.

The other arrangements governing the qualified majority are laid down in Article 238(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. The transitional provisions relating to the definition of the qualified majority which shall be applicable until 31 October 2014 and those which shall be applicable from 1 November 2014 to 31 March 2017 are laid down in the Protocol on transitional provisions.

***

Protocol on transitional provisions

Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions is an illustration of treaty reform, which requires unanimous agreement between the member states and ratification by every member state. Three different stages are distinguished.

1) From the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon until 31 October 2014 the current rules on voting remain in force.
2) In principle, the Lisbon Treaty rules on qualified majority voting (QMV) are in effect between 1 November 2014 and 31 March 2017, subject to a request by a member of the Council to apply the old rules.
3) From 1 April 2017 the intended rules of the Lisbon Treaty become operational.

Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions (excerpt; OJEU 9.5.2008 C 115/322-323):

PROTOCOL (No 36)
ON TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,

WHEREAS, in order to organise the transition from the institutional provisions of the Treaties applicable prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon to the provisions contained in that Treaty, it is necessary to lay down transitional provisions,

HAVE AGREED UPON the following provisions, which shall be annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community:

Article 1

In this Protocol, the words ‘the Treaties’ shall mean the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community.

—–

TITLE II
PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE QUALIFIED MAJORITY

Article 3

1. In accordance with Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union, the provisions of that paragraph and of Article 238(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union relating to the definition of the qualified majority in the European Council and the Council shall take effect on 1 November 2014.

2. Between 1 November 2014 and 31 March 2017, when an act is to be adopted by qualified majority, a member of the Council may request that it be adopted in accordance with the qualified majority as defined in paragraph 3. In that case, paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply.

3. Until 31 October 2014, the following provisions shall remain in force, without prejudice to the second subparagraph of Article 235(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

For acts of the European Council and of the Council requiring a qualified majority, members’ votes shall be weighted as follows:

Belgium 12
Bulgaria 10
Czech Republic 12
Denmark 7
Germany 29
Estonia 4
Ireland 7
Greece 12
Spain 27
France 29
Italy 29
Cyprus 4
Latvia 4
Lithuania 7
Luxembourg 4
Hungary 12
Malta 3
Netherlands 13
Austria 10
Poland 27
Portugal 12
Romania 14
Slovenia 4
Slovakia 7
Finland 7
Sweden 10
United Kingdom 29

Acts shall be adopted if there are at least 255 votes in favour representing a majority of the members where, under the Treaties, they must be adopted on a proposal from the Commission. In other cases decisions shall be adopted if there are at least 255 votes in favour representing at least two thirds of the members.

A member of the European Council or the Council may request that, where an act is adopted by the European Council or the Council by a qualified majority, a check is made to ensure that the Member States comprising the qualified majority represent at least 62 % of the total population of the Union. If that proves not to be the case, the act shall not be adopted.

4. Until 31 October 2014, the qualified majority shall, in cases where, under the Treaties, not all the members of the Council participate in voting, namely in the cases where reference is made to the qualified majority as defined in Article 238(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be defined as the same proportion of the weighted votes and the same proportion of the number of the Council members and, if appropriate, the same percentage of the population of the Member States concerned as laid down in paragraph 3 of this Article.

—   

On a different note I gather Nigel Farage’s old flatmate Godfrey Bloom, despite his denouncing Farage’s womanising most publicly and his having been overhead telling Herman Ke3lly an EFD goffer running flack and spin for TGL that effectively he should run along and stop making a fool of himself having threaterned Bloom with court action if he dared to repeat the fact that Nigel Farage had a sexual relationship with Annabelle Fuller and would likely bankrupt UKIP were he so stupid!
Despite Bloom’s rather belated various announcements of the truth to journalists and others regarding UKIP’s inner machinations and those of TGL in particular I gather Bloom was approached to wt nurse the incoming batch of thoroughly inept and inadequate UKIP MEPs none of whom would seem to be upto the job or carry with them the remotest gravitas, many of whom it has been shown bought their way to their own preferment and a number of whom clearly seek their own enrichment both of stature and income, a number being rejects and failures from the Tory Party.
I gather the new position as wet nurse was to be unsalaried! Whether Farage is still looking for someone to do his job for Free I do not know, but I do note he has sidestepped the bulk of his responsibility by appointing the Tory reject Roger Helmer as leader of UKIP in the EU – whilst he moves on to greater rewards and income as leader of the extremist and all too racist EFDD.

Regards,

Greg_L-W..

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 

 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance

&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Deny the self serving political clique ANY Democratic claims to legitimacy
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
.
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337
Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General Stuff archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General Stuff ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
TWITTER: Greg_LW

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 
To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN

&

To Leave-The-EU
 

Posted in BLOOM, EFDD, Farage Cult, Godfrey Bloom, Nigel FARAGE, Patrick O'Flynn, QMV, Richard NORTH, Roger Helmer, UKIP, UKIP anti Judaism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: