It is just a treadmill for enrichment of a small claque it seems!
Well what EXACTLY has UKIP achieved in 18 years that has moved us one inch closer to Leave-The-EU?
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 06/09/2011
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 25/08/2011
With merely disasters and surrounded by the spineless and liars where can UKIP possibly go with Farage as pretend leader?
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 29/06/2011
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 06/06/2011
AS FUTURUS CLEARLY SHOWS!
THINKING is an natural action for some – NOT a cost center!
Just read the output of Dr. Richard North, Junius, The Purple Scorpion & this blog each day to start to learn THE FACTS. It costs NOTHING.
What UKIP lacks for a ‘Think Tank’ is NOT money as they overpay a large number of hired praise singers of no other value.
What UKIP needs is adequate brains and intelligence TO THINK – something they have shown they are utterly incompetent to do as they are much too busy copulating, carousing and squabbling like ferrets in a sack!
18 Years and still they have NO VISION, NO STRATEGY, NO TACTICS & have NEVER had any meaningful training.
What is UKIP’s exit and survival strategy?
18 years and they haven’t a clue.
UKIP just runs around in chicken suits, inflatable toys and hurls childish insults, suffice for them to pass as competence!
It would be funny were it not MY COUNTRY they are betraying!
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 25/04/2011
For More Facts On PEPP CLICK HERE
To View The Rules CLICK HERE
This vote is about three vital opportunities for our Party. First, this vote is about the Party being able to pay for a wide range of activities in the UK using, effectively, UK Taxpayer’s money returned to us by the EU.
Secondly, this vote will provide the Party with the services of a Think Tank which will enable us, for the very first time, to match our opponents in strategy and policy-formation. If we are to be a serious contender in British politics, this is a vital strength we must add.
Thirdly, this vote is about denying our enemies approximately £1,300,000 in funding which will otherwise be divided up between them.
Above all, this vote is about building upon our successes from 2009 to today to displace the Liberal Democrats and win the European Elections in 2014.
UKIP has lost its ONLY MEPs with any integrity.
Vote “NO” if you want UKIP to languish on the fringe of politics.
Vote “YES” for progress in our noble cause.
and creating a professional Think Tank to enable us
– for the first time – to produce policy papers explaining our messages.
Starting from our current, comfortable set of working relationships with our prospective allies, we are advised that the ANNUAL allocation of funds would be:
For the political party € 850,000 (£733,000 approx) and;
For the Think Tank € 500,000 (£431,000 approx)
That gives €1,350,000 (£1,164,000 approx.) gross per year.
Deducting administration and salaries leaves about € 600,000 (£518,000 approx) for the political party and €350,000 (£219,000 approx) for the Think Tank.
UKIP might expect, with the size of its delegation, to get approximately half that sum every year. This would mean that, EVERY YEAR, we would have the benefit of the sum of up to € 475,000 (£400,000 approximately) from the political party and the Foundation. To put this in perspective, the 2010 general election cost us some £350,000. We currently have nothing like that at our disposal.
By the end of this Parliament we will have had access to more than £1 million. This is a sum which we scarcely dream of raising by conventional methods.
The grant is used to meet expenditure linked to the objectives set out in the European party’s political programme, such as:
Publications, studies, advertisements
Administrative, personnel, travel costs
Campaign costs connected to European elections.
For example, we might use it to produce a flyer for the UK’s young female voters on the effects of the recent European Court of Justice decision which will drive up their insurance premiums – in the name of equality!
Given its direct connection to EU Law, we can pay for it under the publications heading.
As part of EFD we already have to conform to similar rules about what we can do and how. It has not caused a problem – and it will not cause a problem if we take this grant.
We cannot use the grant to meet expenditure such as:
Campaign costs for referenda1
Funding national parties, candidates
Debts and debt service charges.
Much may be made of the exclusion of “direct or indirect funding”. But when 2014 comes along, we can use a big chunk of our share for the campaign costs of that year’s European Elections quite legitimately.
The EU itself makes that clear.
In other years imagine what we could do with our grant to campaign on issues such as the European Arrest Warrant, European Court of Human Rights’ judgments or how the EU and the Treaties undermine our immigration policy.
Right now we simply do not have the money.
Given that at least 75% of our laws are now made in Brussels, almost every subject that UKIP campaigns upon is affected by EU legislation.
That means that we can direct this money to help us in the UK.
Indeed it is probable that 90% of the funds can be so utilised.
On top of that we will have the Think Tank (Foundation).
We would be able to match the likes of Open Europe and the Tories in producing high quality research and policy proposals.
We can produce strategic material to set the agenda for political debate in the UK instead of always being the party which has to react to others’ ideas.
We can use Think Tank funding to give professional presentations to the press.
In short, a Think Tank will help UKIP to punch above its weight and mix it with the Old Parties at an entirely new level.
If we are to match our ambitions to become the third party of British politics and winners in 2014, this is a vital step to attain the professionalism so roundly endorsed by our membership in the 2010 leadership election.
All this does require a small amount of matched funding: as little as 10% of the amount. And initially we only have to raise a share proportionate to our size – and of that only a small proportion has to be found up front. The rest can be found as individual projects are brought forward. We can achieve that.
If conditions or the Regulations change unfavourably, we can leave at any time, just as one can leave an alliance or a coalition.
There is, in addition, another side to these grants. Our €1,350,000 (£1,170,000 approx) comes from a finite pot. Presently 10 parties take money from that pot. If we become number 11, then the other ten parties lose, on average, €135,000 (£117,000 approx).
So, there are benefits to UKIP which at one and the same moment harm our enemies: a double-whammy with our enemies in the middle!
Just as the Salvation Army used to go around pubs and sell their publications with the slogan “Take the Devil’s money to do God’s work!”, so might we take what is after all UK Taxpayer’s money and use it to bring us victory in our noble cause. Would you rather that YOUR money is used to fund our enemies’ campaigns or to fund UKIP’s?
If you think that this money might just come in a bit handy to help destroy Federalism and Integration, vote ‘YES’!
The ‘NO’ campaign alleges that the UKIP brand would be diluted. This is nonsense.
The Conservatives are part of a European Political Party. Which is better known in the UK: ‘The Conservative Party’ or ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’?
Indeed has anyone ever heard of ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’? Of course not, because the Tories still fight under their own name and their brand is not diluted in any way.
The ‘NO’ campaign claims taking part in a European Political Party is ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’.
But surely to do so is no more ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ than taking part in European Elections or, once elected, taking your seat and being an MEP.
Every month our MEPs receive substantial sums. Are they thereby taking the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ Shilling? No! The money for the party is no more ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ than the money paid to MEPs.
And, remember, using this money, they are daily carrying the fight to the very heart of the EU in Brussels and Strasbourg.
Stuart Agnew’s ONLY National coverage has been for his corruption, dishonesty and fraud!
The ‘NO’ campaign says that “accepting its money is corrupt”. So is the ‘NO’ campaign saying that our MEPs and their staff are corrupt?
Of course not.
That they make this allegation merely demonstrates the absurdity of their argument.
As we see below, some time ago, after proper debate, the Party took the pragmatic decision to fight and take up seats in the European Parliament. It did so notwithstanding the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ nature of the institution.
Who now says this was the wrong decision?
May I remind the author that at the UKIP Party Conference there was a very clear debate against joining Pan EU Political Parties – Yet just like the EU those who hope for self enrichment seek to overturn the Party Members’ Decision to seek a different result.
And some claim UKIP MEPs have not adopted the morays of The EU!
No one, for the simple reason that it provides the noble cause we all serve with an enormous platform to fight the enemies of British Independence
– a platform which the gerrymandered Westminster electoral system denies us.
Taking what some called the ‘Federalist’ and ‘Integrationist’ Shilling has boosted our cause exponentially.
The ‘NO’ campaign alleges UKIP will have to pay tax to HMRC on this money. They are wrong. The only tax that a European Political Party will have to pay is VAT.
A TAX Dummy!
The ‘NO’ campaign contends that this money may not be used for UK political activity.
This too is nonsense.
As we have seen much of our grant may properly and legally be directed at our target audience.
YES THEY ARE THAT STUPID!
Moreover, does anyone imagine that the Tories take all their money (the best part of €2,000,000 or £1,750,000 approx) and spend it all in Brussels? Only the utterly naive would credit such an idea.
The contention of the ‘NO’ campaign that we must concentrate on the UK media to the exclusion of Brussels is, once again, deeply misguided.
The ‘NO’ campaign asserts that a European Political Party might endorse integration. Hardly, as we would have a major part in drawing up the party’s political programme. Are we likely to endorse a programme encouraging integration?
I believe my point is clearly made!
The absurdity of the question demonstrates just how weak are the ‘NO’ campaign’s arguments.
It is suggested that a European Political Party would somehow lead to the end of national political parties.
Ask yourself this: is the Conservative Party likely to abolish itself and campaign in UK elections as ‘The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists’?
A moment’s thought reveals that this too is absurd.
The Tories would be committing political suicide.
We may think the Tories stupid, but they are not that stupid.
The Regulations make it clear we can use this money to campaign for European Elections.
In 2014 we aim to come first.
How are we to fund that ambition?
Will access to several hundred thousand Euros help or hinder us?
As to raising money, the EU’s rules on donations are, compared to the UK’s, short, simple and elastic.
Thus we shall be able to receive donations from expatriates and others who are otherwise prohibited in the UK.
This will provide a new, untapped resource.
And, remember that UKIP will be one of the big beasts in this party and so will be able to call the shots.
Already we know that Bannerman is making further overtures to the Tories as has Andreassen in the past and it seems likely the dim wit Wee Willy temper tantrum will also jump ship. Then since John Bufton’s aims and values are those of UKIP members rather than the corrupt EFD and Farage it seems likely he will have the integrity to leave.
I doubt Batten will have the integrity as he lacks both integrity and moral conviction and I would guess that those outside of The EFD whether calling themselves UKIP or not would rather he did not join them as he is both untrustworthy and of very little merit or competence.
Finally, are we about to compromise our principles, as the “NO” campaign suggest?
The Regulation says that a European Political Party must subscribe to the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.
UKIP might be said to support these principles more honestly and more comprehensively than any other party in the UK or, indeed the EU itself.
This issue is the third substantive battle within UKIP between the purists and the pragmatists. Taking the money is the pragmatic option. It has prevailed twice before – and if the party is to succeed, then the pragmatists need to win again.
Yes twice before the pond life and filth have demeaned UKIP and yet again they seek self enrichment at the expense of the Party and principles –That is not pragmatism, that is prostitution.
In 1994 there was furious debate about the proposal to fight seats for the EU Parliament elections but not to take them up. Then in 1998 we agreed to take our seats if elected.
One of those who left the party in disagreement over these very issues was Gerard Batten. Now an MEP, Gerard is a valued colleague, using his position (and money from the EU’s taxpayers) to fight – hard and effectively – for this great cause.
How many of UKIP’s members would seriously oppose those decisions now?
The next step was to form part of a Group.
Many saw it as a betrayal. Now, not only has it helped financially but it boosts speaking time and thus our profile: would UKIP and Nigel Farage have any hope of such exposure if he was not a Group leader?
We know that the Parliamentary authorities try every legal trick in the book to censor and silence Nigel.
Being in a Group means they can no longer freeze him out at key moments.
Do read the column inches in the press and the near total lack of National coverage of UKIP of any gravitas – because none is earned!
Above all, the formation of an opposition Group was exactly what the Europhiles and our enemies didn’t want us to do.
That equally applies to creating a new political party in the Parliament. It is exactly the step our enemies do NOT want us to take – which is why we MUST take it.
Winston Churchill said in a speech in April 1941:“Give us the tools and we will finish the job”
That clarion call might have been crafted with this issue, this Party and this moment in history in mind.
This vote is about giving the Party the tools to finish the job.
It is clearly NOT the Tools at Fault but the corrupt leadership.
1 As a result of a vote in committee in March 2011, it is very likely that the restriction on using grants for referenda will be totally abolished. This is particularly relevant to any referendum held under the proposed European Union Bill 2011 currently going through Parliament. If a sovereignty referendum is called, all three of the old parties will in future be able to use this money to campaign for a “YES” vote. If we do not take this money we will be severely at a disadvantage in such a referendum. If we join up, however, we can use their funds to fight for a “No Transfer” vote.
My Word YOU have Gone Native – YOU can not be real quoting EU woffle as justification for your foolish claims.
YOU imply that EU committees have some relevance in the law making process – SINCE WHEN!
To View the original CLICK HERE
For More Facts On PEPP CLICK HERE
To View The Rules CLICK HERE
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 08/04/2011
08-Apr-2011 – UKIP Seems Willing To Prostitute Principles For MORE Tax Payers’ Money!
John Stuart Agnew, on behalf of the EFD Group.
– Mr President, this legislation will allow the EU to throw money at referendum campaigns to ensure that it purchases the right result first time, for a change!The UK will in future be holding a referendum each time the EU proposes to remove power from its electorate. The EU is frightened out of its wits that we may give a series of wrong answers. So it intends to remove money from UK taxpayers to indoctrinate them into its version of the path of true righteousness.Fronting the legislation is Andrew Duff, a liberal democrat MEP from my own region. Support in the UK for his party has collapsed recently – a party of course desperate for EU institutions to govern the UK. Never has the EU’s gerrymandering been so clearly displayed alongside its contempt for UK voters. It is sowing the seeds of its own destruction, because the legislation will allow us to fund the referendum campaign that many in my country have for a very long time been waiting for – the one that gives us the opportunity to remove ourselves entirely from its control.
Would my colleague Mr Agnew agree with me that a political party that would accept funding under this legislation, as a single European party, and which in particular would have to observe the EU’s programme and activities and the founding principles of European law, and the development of European law at all levels regionally, nationally and at European level, em> would be a party which has lost its principles?
Would you agree with me, Mr Agnew?
I say to Ms Sinclaire that we will take what we can out of this because we use the devil’s money to do God’s work. That is what we do, and well you know it.
Will you accept the principle of European law though?
No, of course we do not. That is why we are here.
For the original comments by Agnew and Sinclaire: LINK
What UKIP MEPs seem not to understand (well one fact clearly of many) as shown by their clearly out of his depth spokesman Stuart Agnew, is that if they are foolish enough to join a PEPP not one Iota nor EUro will accrue to UKIP.
UKIP seem to be trying to dupe their more gullible members into the belief that if they vote for PEPPs and join one they will have extra money to promote their claimed withdrawalist agenda.
One wonders if UKIP MEPs are so stupid that they believe this or are they so dishonest that they are deliberately telling lie and employing their muppets and parasites to lie to the members also.
It will not be long before the members receive a rude awakening!
The new centralised funding whether it is like the extra funding that is currently obtained seemingly used to bribe others to join the group to keep the numbers up or if it is like the formerly titled 4000 Account now abbreviated to being the 400 account (keep changing the names! It help obfuscate the scams!) seemingly unaccounted and falling under the control of the group leader even possibly used as bribes and even possibly trousered!
The funding for PEPPs would just fall under the control of the group, be that the extremist pro EU membership EFD Group or some new group such as that which the racist and generally irresponsible buffoon Godfrey Bloom and others have joined CLICK HERE.
The new money thus extorted from the tax payers might seem a bonanza but firstly it is only available on compliance with the aims and ambitions of The EU but also its disbursement would be a matter of group voting and as at the moment UKIP would find that its diminished authority would once again leave them as the junior partner – out voted in The EFD which is by a large majority a pro EU reformist body and not in favour of withdrawal as are several of the UKIP members of The EFD – no doubt with a view to their future self enrichment!
Thus, whatever The Group decided, UKIP would only be able to enact the Group policy within these United Kingdoms.
Thus although the original rules CLICK HERE may predicate against domestic use of the new funding the rule changes covered on this blog back in March CLICK HERE will make little or no difference to the domestic funding of National referendums that could be construed as positive.
In their stunning ignorance or more likely utter duplicity, UKIP aspirants to yet more money claim that the new rules permit them to fund opposition to membership in UK Referendums – a particularly disingenuous claim as what it conveniently overlooks is that FIRSTLY UKIP would merely be the representative of a Group and would legally be bound by Group Policy – Secondly The Group’s funding will be determined by The Group’s performance in ‘PROMOTING’ the views, values and aspirations of The EU!
The very stupid or singularly dishonest leadership of UKIP and its parasites will do much to get their hands on more money but their argument that it would be other than for themselves is unconvincing!
Let us consider for a moment that their foolish claims were just stupid – Yes UKIP by virtue of their group might have more money and by flouting the rules and risking the money for EVERY member of The Group they were legitimately permitted to campaign in the interest of their members ( a rare occurance these days!).
The down side risk of their tactic with a mere 30 or so members in their Group and with maybe 10 or less UKIP members – so UKIP could fund from their cut of Group funds activities in these United Kingdoms in a referendum – Wat of the other 700+ fully funded MEPs, they of course immediately become eligible to fund EU policy and EU interests in such a referendum!
I note the sound words of Barbara BOOKER on the subject:
An inkling of the near impossibility for UKIP of drawing up a political programme with Europarty colleagues whose aim is to stay in the EU and improve how it works and develops and is perceived, can be gained from studying the way the EFD voted following Tuesday’s Europarties debate. UKIP’s MEPs and three others voted against the resolution. With one exception the Italian MEPs abstained, as did one of the Lithuanians. One Italian, the two Greeks, the Slovakian and another Lithuanian all voted in favour of the resolution.The significant thing about this is that four of those who either voted in favour or abstained (Imbrasas, Paska, Provera and Paksas) were named in Sharon Ellul Bonici’s e-mail last October as being already confirmed/about to confirm their membership of the Europarty that Godfrey Bloom has already joined, and presumably the one that Nigel Farage wants the rest of UKIP also to join.These group colleagues who act against what UKIP MEPs see as being in the UK’s interest, are among the very people for whom UKIP principles will be compromised or abandoned in the cause of agreeing a joint programme for the promotion of an improved EU.
Clearly prostituting what few principles UKIP has managed to hang onto, though for the life of me I’m not sure what they are would seem a very poor exchange for the 30 pieces of silver they hope to trouser!
Let us also not forget that Sharon Ellul Bonici stood as a Marxist in her home constituency in Malta! Is there nothing nor any gutter UKIP leadership will befoul themselves with for money?
TO VIEW THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE CLICK HERE
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 06/04/2011
I note from my Inbox and from the internet that this week was off to a rapid start in The EUroRealist camp with Indepemndent ex UKIP Nikki Sinclaire MEP putting out a Press Release from Brussels on Monday morning and then in Strasbourg for the plenary on Tuesday and I have tracked down 3 video clips made by close of play on Tuesday!
Having watched the debate on PEPPs live on video link I must congratulate Daniel Hannan MEP for his very good speech repudiating the very concept of PEPPs funded or unfunded by the Tax Payers. the EFD and NFU rep Stuart Agnew MEP gave an exorable speech and embarrassingly voted for more money for Politicians and to help the EU gain more control and power over Britain and other vassal states!
When challenged on the Blue Card intervention Stuart Agnew was mistaken for The BNP MEP Andrew Bronze, clearly he is seen as an extremist and has had little impact in his 2 years on The Gravy Train!
The Blue Card question by Nikki Sinclaire MEP was to clarify how the principle of wanting more money and Pan EU Political Parties to aid The EU helped Britain – Poor man had a hissy fit and clearly lost his temper and was unable to answer the question so he invented a question of his own to answer and gave a rather silly answer – even when charged to clarify the morality he was unable to act coherently!
Here are the video clips I have found so far and I will add Dan Hannan’s if I can find it and also van Orden’s when they come to light!
There was also an EU style non debatet on The Common Fisheries Policy but it did show what a con The EU is having factory fished the food from the third world from under their noses off West Africa, forcing 1,000s of Africans to risk the 800 miles at sea in small boats to The Canary Isles rather than starve without fish in their homelands – The EU has fished out the waters of Somalia leaving the Somalis with their ancient survivalist methods of piracy as their only way to live.
The EU is now exploiting Seychelles, Madagascar and Mozambique in The Indian Ocean handing EU tax payers’ money to the rulers and then systematically stealing the fish from local subsistence fishermen!
Much was made of a new ‘agreement’ with The Comoros Islanders and Capulo Santos MEP explained how The EU was entering an agreement with The Comoros and paying them what sounded like €600K a year for 70 EU fishing boats to destroy their fisheries as well!! 30,000 of the 80,000 Comoros peoples WERE dependent on fish and fishing!
A Mr. Alphonsin MEP did point out that there was nothing really to discuss and that a vote on the matter, due on Wednesday, was a total farce as the Commission had already signed the ‘agreement’ without consulting the parliament – rather shows how irrelevant the parliament is in the face of the unelected dictator committee of The Commission!
A Mrs. Leben? MEP of the Greens went on to point out that the agreement had been in place long enough for EU Tax Payers to have given the government of The Comoros €2.7Million meanwhile EU private enterprise fishermen had TAKEN €13Million of fish – so The EU Tax Payers pay The Comoros Government so that Privately owned fishing vessels can make over €10Million stealing fish from subsistence fishermen!
Doesn’t it make you proud to be a member of the EU – meanwhile Austin Mitchell MP Labour has in his career watched his constituency of Grimsby diminish from a fleet of 120 vessels to 4 and the fishermen of Ireland with inshore and coastal boats are now forced 800 miles out to sea to find fish!
My word what a great policy The CFP has been well yes if one wishes to destroy the fishing fleets and the fish stocks of the world but NOT if you want a thriving industry that is sustainable that feeds our peoples!
Back to the videos for Tuesday that I have found:
OPPOSING YET MORE MONEY FOR POLITICIANS & PEPPs & EU EFFORTS TO BUY THEIR WAY TO POWER
Nikki SINCLAIRE MEP explains why she believes her constituents have no interest in paying for more politicians as The West Midlands are suffering from economic deprivation as it is without The EU Buying its way to Power with funded PEPPs.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
Nikki SINCLAIRE MEP explains why she believes this is a con & souinds like a time warp to the Politically Correct issues of the 1970s being exploited by The EU to introduce ever more laws to their shame.
Leave the legislation to the member states!
GLOBAL FINACIAL AJUSTMENT FUND – THE VOTE AGAINST
Nikki SINCLAIRE MEP explains why she believes that the £48 Million a day tax payers in Britain pay should be kept at home and why her constituents in The West Midlands deserve to keep the money having been damaged by membership of The EU.
Posted by Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) on 03/04/2011
IT ALL LOOKS LIKE LEADERSHIP INCOMPETENCE TO ME!
They now claim they have a cash flow problem and can’t produce the comic – WE THOUGHT prostituting UKIP to The EFD was to get that MONEY!
Has the sad figure of Stuart Wheeler had ‘A CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE’?
It won’t be his first!!
MINDED THAT MARCH HAS GONE!
Here is a new LINK for YOU.
despite the abject failure at UKIP Conference to convince the membership that they should comply with The EU and help The EU put in place Pan EU Political Parties (PEPP) Nigel Farage was heard to angrilly accuse a fellow MEP of having just cost HIM A Million A Year by his defeat in debate!
One starts to have an inkling what all this is about!
Minded that I am a little short of time this week with playing medical games I thought it only fair to put my notes in the public domain for YOU to view pending my eventually sorting them out.
Make of it what YOU will.
That I repudiate totally the betrayal of Britain by both membership of The EU and also of even contemplating prostituting principles for cash by helping The EU in any way – Least of all by forming PEPPs you will find my notes a muddle but they may give you a starting point.
Prof. Tim Congdon did much to stir the debate with his comments in October last year which you can find on the blog under the appropriate date if you CLICK HERE
I will do what I can during this week to try to sort these notes into an order which you can follow but I think much of the info. is already here in the muddle.
I had hoped that UKIP’s in house comic would have been produced by now – you may remember that it was promised for early March!!
It will of course be likely to have a pro PEPP bias and be shoddily dishonest in the extreme if previous issues are to be the model!
However had it been anywhere near on time or showed any signs of competence we could have written our blog addressing its points on a level and fair basis rather than use the types of lies so often resorted to by the undeniably corrupt leadership of UKI(P amd the ever fattening maggots that feed on the corpse of the party they are destroying for their personal gain.
Whilst on the subject of UKIP’s incompetence let us be minded that several members of their scrophulous NEC are time expired and it has been the custom to announce new candidates before Christmas for inclusion in The House Comic in February and election in March for their first NEC on the firts Monday of April!!!!
Then again much was made of summoning Mike Nattrass to their NEC on Monday 4th. only to find it conflicts with Strasbourg Pleniary!
Did someone tell you, as ever, their aim was to professionalise the party. Well he said that to get elected on previous occasions – this is the man who PROMISED not to employ Family and whilst trousering over £2 Million paid his wife £30K a year as a child minder!
YOU’LL FIND MY NOTES: CLICK HERE