The weather was much too nice yesterday to fossik around and see what others have made of it but this morning the showers provide ample search time ;-(I note that
as had others!& Milton had blogged on the subject:
Tory MEP Expenses Cheat Switches to UKIP
Milton July 28, 2013
Den Dover is a former Tory MEP who was forced to pay back hundreds of thousands of pounds in expenses. Mr Dover’s expulsion was personally ordered by David Cameron and his offences were originally reported by a jubilant UKIP.
Imagine Milton’s surprise when a ‘Densmore Dover’ appeared on the UKIP South East speaking list and took part in the South East UKIP MEP hustings.
Nigel Farage was caught boasting about his large expenses bill, while UKIP MEP Tom Wise was jailed for expenses fraud.
Other notable disgraced Tories who are now running for UKIP include Neil Hamilton, who was reported to have been heavily implicated in the cash for questions scandal.
When UKIP urged Tories to ‘come home’ Milton didn’t think they meant it quite like this…
It seem UKIP with its present lack of competent, ethical or credible leadership, strategy, tactics or ‘Exit & Survival Plan’ is all too willing to show just how amoral and irresponsible the bulk of their members are – not just by setting up a thoroughly dishonest and corrupt selection process that puts control in the hands of the self serving clique surrounding their ONLY performer of any note – Nigel Farage but by drawing up a list of cheats and crooks as candidates:
Most will by now be aware that Neil Hamilton the disgraced Tory MP is already in situ:
Neil Hamilton, the disgraced former minister, yesterday walked away in humiliation from a £10 million libel suit against the Guardian over the “cash for questions” scandal hours before the case was due to start today.
The former trade minister abandoned the case and agreed to pay some of the Guardian’s costs after a bitter two-year battle. He had recruited 421 Conservative MPs and peers, including Lady Thatcher, Lord Archer and cabinet members to change a 300-year-old law, which had prevented him, as an MP, bringing his action.
Ian Greer, the parliamentary lobbyist, also dropped his claim, part of the same libel suit, just minutes before a legal deadline to do so. He, too, agreed to pay some of the paper’s costs.
The Guardian stated on October 20, 1994, that Mr Hamilton had received thousands of pounds for asking parliamentary questions for Mohamed Al Fayed’s Harrods group. Mr Greer, who had been retained by Mr Al Fayed, was identified as the middleman.
Another MP, Tim Smith, resigned his post as a Northern Ireland minister after he was accused in the same article of taking undeclared cash. He immediately admitted the Guardian story was true. Mr Hamilton, MP for Tatton, had instead tried to tough it out before resigning under pressure from Mr Major.
The settlement, on the eve of what was labelled the libel trial of the century, came after a dramatic weekend of legal developments. Those began when the government disclosed crucial documents to the Guardian. The papers led to Mr Greer and Mr Hamilton falling out, and a conflict of interest developing. Mr Greer’s accounts were also in the newspaper’s possession.
The Guardian also served on the men’s lawyers three statements from employees of Mr Al Fayed. They said Mr Hamilton and Mr Greer regularly called for envelopes stuffed with £50 notes in return for parliamentary lobbying.
Alan Rusbridger, editor of the Guardian, said: “The decision by Neil Hamilton and Ian Greer must be one of the most astonishing legal cave-ins in the history of the law of libel.”
He called for the trial papers to be examined by John Major, Sir Gordon Downey, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, and the Inland Revenue.
Although hampered by the law on what evidence it can publish, the Guardian today reveals the extent of Mr Hamilton’s covert links with Mr Greer. It also details the network of MPs linked to Mr Greer, including Mr Smith, Sir Michael Grylls, chairman of the backbench trade and industry committee, Sir Peter Hordern, MP for Horsham, and Sir Andrew Bowden, MP for Brighton Kemptown.
It was because the Guardian had subpoenaed Mr Major and Michael Heseltine to give evidence in the case that the government handed over key documents to the newspaper’s lawyers, Geoffrey Robertson, QC, and Geraldine Proudler. It would have been the first time this century a serving prime minister had appeared in the libel courts.
The trial would have re-opened the vexed question of parliamentary sleaze during the Tory party conference, and only a year after the government had made strenuous efforts to bury the issue. It implemented the Nolan Committee report and appointed a new Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards to handle complaints about MPs.
Of the embarrassing climb-down by both men, Mr Rusbridger said: “Both Hamilton and Greer knew that the evidence the Guardian had obtained would have blown their action out of the water and revealed a pattern of parliamentary sleaze more far reaching than anyone had ever imagined.
“The Guardian has never doubted the truth of its original story. We would have produced damning evidence of Mr Hamilton and Mr Greer’s lack of integrity if the case had proceeded. No doubt that is why they dropped the action.
“The Greer accounts and the government documents tell an outrageous story of corruption which the public should know but which we are prevented, for legal reasons, from publishing.”
Mr Hamilton said he was ‘devastated’ at having to withdraw. He claimed he was innocent, but because of the conflict of interest with Mr Greer, each had to instruct new solicitors and counsel.
“The consequence of this is that the trial would have had to have been postponed to enable new sets of lawyers to go through the huge volume of papers and prepare the case afresh at enormously increased cost.”
His costs were already £150,000, and he did not have the cash to continue.
Mr Greer said: “I would want to continue on a matter of principle, but I have had to take a sensible commercial decision and I am happy a compromise has been reached.”
A spokesman for Mr Al Fayed said: “He was looking forward to telling the court of his experience of dealing with a number of Conservative MPs who describe themselves as “honourable members”. He will be sending his papers on the matter to Sir Gordon Downey.”
Downing Street last night insisted that the end of the libel action was purely a “matter between Mr Hamilton and the Guardian”.
Damning evidence
Sometimes he (Mr Greer) would ask me bluntly whether Mr Al Fayed had his money ready.
Mr Hamilton was as persistent as Mr Greer, if not more so, in asking for his envelope.
• Mohamed Al Fayed’s ex-personal assistant
I remember on several occasions that prior to a meeting with Mr Hamilton, Mr Al Fayed would make a remark… that he was coming to collect his money and would prepare an envelope for him with a bundle of £2,500 (in) notes in my presence.
• Mr Al Fayed’s secretary
On at least two occasions when I was sitting at the front desk, an envelope was brought down to me from Mr Al Fayed’s office and I was informed that Mr Hamilton would be stopping by to collect the envelope.
• Mr Al Fayed’s security man.
To view the original article CLICK HERE
Why would UKIP possibly wish to add to their long list of self serving liars, abusers, drunks and cheats like Tom Wise, Stuart Agnew, Clive Page, Annabelle Fuller, David Bannerman, Derek Clark, Mark Croucher, Mick McGough, Andrew Smith, Graham Booth, Douglas Denny, Marta Andreasen, Godfrey Bloom etc. even their showman supreme Nigel Farage has fallen foul of the law & with Jeffrey Titford was ordered to repay money falsely claimed, not to mention a long string of his defunct companies and voluntary agreements regarding debts!
Just why would anyone in their right mind wish to add to the pond life at the help of UKIP with such an odious and corrupt specimen as Den Dover – is it just that UKIP are willing to provide a refuge for dishonest Tories thrown out of the party, when they make such a dishonest song and dance (that fools no one) about banning ex members of other parties!
The Tories were well rid of Neil Hamilton & Den Dover – what next for UKIP Jeffrey Archer and a lifetime membership for Stuart Hall?
Already UKIP is embroiled in various issues of sexual abuse, including Court Judgements against them! We even note the allegations about UKIP’s sometime PR guru Max Clifford and the much boasted of perversions of Gawain Towler such that one wonders just how safe anyone would be in association with some of UKIP’s leading lights, in so far as it has any!
Just why would ANY organisation want Den Dover or Neil Hamilton and I note in the scrabble for ‘celebs’ few have heard of Jon Gaunt is doing all he can to disrupt the Werst Midlands and Delingpole who is tipped for the East Midlands pitched up at the West Midlands hustings!
Based on UKIP’s track record it must be a relief to lesser members that Jimmy Saville is dead or it is all too likely he would be added to the UKIP MEP list!
Little wonder that their party funder, the professional gambler Stuart Wheeler, is betting against UKIP but has taken political bets due to the long odds that UKIP will get maybe 2 MPs at the next election!
Why he thinks UKIP will get anyone elected in a General Election is clearly a gamble deserving long odds as on form to date they have never been anywhere near getting anyone elected in a General Election and tyheir 147 elected Councillors is far from notable out of 1,700+ UKIP candidates who stood and with not a single elected Mayor nor Police el supremo they seem only of note to the gullible andf protest voters!
Lets face it even Stuart Wheeler knew UKIP were untrustworthy and was not prepared to let them have access to any of his money unless he was in total control as treasurer, an office he fills in his own interest NOT the interest of the party or its members!
To QUOTE A Circular being widely distributed in UKIP circles:
Letter Begins:
This missive is primarily intended for UKIP members living in the SE of England, though regions still to hold their own selection meetings would be well advised to heed what is written below.
We had all rather hoped that with the re-organisation of the way in which Ukip is run and its business conducted, the selection of candidates for the Euro Elections next year would be above board.
In my humble opinion the process of selecting candidates to represent UKIP should be rather like Julius Ceaser’s wife: ‘not only should she be above board but she should be seen to be above board.’
Who, therefore, is selecting candidates here in the South East? The answer may surprise you, and you may reach the conclusion that the intended format for your meeting will leave an unpleasant taste in your mouths. You see, at each meeting (which we are told is to be more of a public speaking competition rather than a proper hustings) there are to be three votes to oversee each of the 21 candidates. The casting of one of these votes will be the responsibility of 20 (only) of the audience of SE Members at this Saturday’s conference in Woking, selected at random – hopefully.
[The total votes given for each candidate by the ’20’ will be counted at the end of the day and averaged out solely by the Chairman, Roger Bird.]
- Will this process be transparent? Probably not based upon past experience.
- Will candidates be permitted to oversee the count? If not, why not?
The responsibility for the casting of the remaining two thirds of the votes – ie two votes – will be in the hands of just two assessors: Mr John Moran and Mr Harry Aldridge.
To state that Mr Moran is an old chum of Farage is understating the case. Mr Moran has been a side-kick of Mr Farage in almost every tactic, trick, scheme, intrigue and machination since Mr Farage began to build his career with Ukip. He was involved in the Ashford Call Centre, where nearly £1m disappeared into a black hole and where an audit was refused (see additional info lower down this page).
The choice of Mr Moran for the panel is akin to asking a junior appointee of Stalin’s Central Committee to appraise the performance of his boss, Joseph Stalin, and the latter’s potential rivals with total impartiality.
Next there is, Harry Aldridge, a twenty something youngster with ambitions to make a career within Ukip. How impartial is the lad? What discussions has he held with his boss? What discussions has Harry held with Mr Moran? Will he deny that he’s already been promised 2nd place on the SE candidate list? If so then the whole selection process is nothing but a deceitful scam, a cruel charade perpetrated open the membership! The purported purpose of the meeting is to produce a short-list on which the membership can vote, but given the machinations taking place behind the scenes can this possibly be correct.?
Almost inevitably, members are going to be forced to the conclusion that it will be Mr Farage’s favourites who will appear on the final list whilst those he does not favour will be dropped well before the membership has its say. Indeed, I hope that this flawed process outlined above will bring back memories of the gerrymandering that occurred in 2004 and 2009, the saga relating to Marta Andreassen (now a Tory MEP) (another of Mr Farage’s dreadful judgements), John West and many others. A saga that involved dishonesty and underhand activity which by-passed the membership. Mr Farage will be present, so ensure that you voice your concern to him directly that it is going to be exactly the same this time around. Nothing seems to have changed, and, it seems, the membership is yet again going to be treated with contempt.
On Saturday, Roger Bird, Steve Crowther, and their colleagues, really must be required to explain to the members present why the selection panel is comprised as it is, and equally importantly, who chose it. Ask them why the members are not to be permitted total oversight instead of a mere 33% of the votes (1 vote of 3)? Emphasise to them that with these two ‘gentlemen’, Aldridge and Moran, being able to cast two thirds of the votes, how can anyone truly believe that any candidate, other than those preferred by Mr Farage, will be successful. Let them explain what it is that Messrs Moran and Aldridge know that the membership does not? Is Ukip not a democratic party?
Members attending the event on Saturday must really keep their wits about them. For as things stand it seems the day’s activity has every likelihood of producing the type of ‘fix’ that would make dictators on a neighbouring Continent rather pleased.
Written with deep concern
Alistair
PS: Additional background information:
Roger Bird
Roger is Chairman of UKIP’s South East region. An alumni of the Bow Group, he served as Treasurer 1999-2000 and wrote two research papers for the group in the 1990s. He is a defector to UKIP from the Conservative Party, having served as a Conservative Councillor in Wandsworth 1998-2006.
http://www.bowgroup.org/events/deal-or-no-deal-what-possibility-toryukip-electoral-pact
E-mail outlining the format for this Saturday’s meeting
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:41:51 +0100
From: bird.roger@rocketmail.com
Subject: UKIP Public Speaking – 27 July in Woking
To: bird.roger@rocketmail.com CC: John Moran <jdmassociates@talktalk.net>; Harry Aldridge <aldridge.harry@gmail.com>; Steve Crowther <sjcrowther@btinternet.com>
Dear All, I am writing because I have been asked, as UKIP regional Chairman for the South East, to chair the public speaking day on Saturday. I am not standing as a candidate in this election. I believe that the Party Chairman has already been in contact with you regarding the format of the event, but it might be best if I make certain points clear, to avoid confusion: – This is a public speaking contest, not a hustings as such. This is inevitable given that we will have 21 would-be candidates speaking – In consequence, we should remember that there will be more than one winner. We are helping to produce a shortlist of SE candidates on which the membership can vote. I am sure that everyone will approach the event in a harmonious and constructive spirit. – Candidates will be allowed to address the meeting for five minutes. The assessors (John Moran and Harry Aldridge) will then each ask one question from a list. The list of questions which assessors use is the same at all the public speaking events around the country. There will then be two questions asked by members of the audience. It is essential that answers are short (no more than one minute) or the event will over-run substantially. – Twenty members of the audience, selected at random, will be invited to assist in the scoring. The average of the audience marks will be calculated by me at the end of the day. The audience’s averaged vote will then count as one vote, while John Moran and Harry Aldridge also each will have one vote in the deliberations. – The audience will consist only of UKIP members, who may be asked to produce their membership card at the door. We will have a membership list with us, just in case. – Candidates will not be permitted to listen to each others’ performances. We will therefore ask candidates to wait together in a separate room before being conducted into the hall. – Candidates’ spouses, partners and families can attend the event in the audience only if they are paid-up UKIP members. – To avoid keeping you all waiting around unnecessarily, we are inviting candidates to come at particular times, in batches (see list below). The order shown is random, as provided by the Party Chairman, although in a small number of cases where candidates have had unavoidable business or public service commitments that day we have tried to accommodate them early or late on. – There may be some candidates for the SE who have attended public speaking contests in other regions, for convenience. If there are names missing from the list below, you may find that a candidate has been assessed elsewhere, therefore. – Candidates are reminded of the advice already given by the Party Chairman not to leaflet the event with flyers or similar material in support of their candidacies. – Finally, let me thank you for giving up your valuable time on a Saturday to come to this event. It is an essential part of UKIP’s quest to find the best candidates and to offer the membership the widest possible choice and so I would like to thank you on behalf of the membership for helping to bring this plan to fruition.
The timings for candidates are: 1st batch (0945-1045) Nigel Farage Alan Stevens Richard Palmer Janice Atkinson Toby Pilling Alexandra Swann 2nd batch (1045-1145) Andrew Moncrieff Tony Smith Tim Cross Ray Finch Piers Wauchope Nigel Jones Lunch (1145-1215) 3rd batch (1215-1315) Patricia Culligan Ian McKie Barry Cooper Densmore Dover Laurence Hodge 4th batch (1315-1415) Mark Cribb Donna Edmunds Steve Harris Ralph Atkinson I hope you all find the event stimulating and I wish you well with it. My mobile phone number is 07786 104 198, should you need to get in touch. Best regards, Roger
Concerns over Mr Moran
UKIP Surrey produces a county newspaper, UKIP Surrey News, which asks for donations to be sent to John Moran at a PO Box in Ashtead. None of these county branches – West or East Sussex, Berkshire or Surrey – appears on the Electoral Commission’s list of UKIP accounting units, ie, where does the money actually go? We simply don’t know!
Ashford
It was reported in the Sunday Telegraph, dated 12th February 2007, that outrage over the Ashford Call Centre has been blamed for the resignation of six senior UKIP officials over the previous 18 months. In the same article, Farage is reported to have confessed that a London based UKIP call centre had lost between £5,000 and £6,000 every month and this was the reason he was keen for a ‘professionally run call centre’ to be set up under John Moran in Ashford.
Extract from letter written by John de Roeck (he was National Treasurer at the time)
“We must consider if Central Office should be burdened with liabilities of the Ashford telesales department unless it is also receiving the profits. If John Moran and Nigel Farage continue to take responsibility for the operation and remain the signatories to the bank account for Ashford telesales, it is important that the Party receives a written agreement from them, in which they agree to indemnify the Party from any losses, consequential losses or other liabilities incurred by the Ashford operation, or give a similar written undertaking acceptable to the NEC. A detail to consider is whether the operation should be converted into a limited company.”
“Accounts from the Ashford telesales operation should also be prepared for the NEC in future on a monthly basis so that we can establish the effectiveness of the operation. As the operation is using data collected nationally from UKIP, we have a duty on the NEC to receive reports and in turn report to membership. This is in addition to the Party Treasurer responsibility of reporting to the Electoral Commission. In the September NEC meeting Nigel Farage agreed to supply accounts although none as yet have been produced.
Kind regards,
John de Roeck
Party Treasurer
Harry Aldridge
“Nigel Farage is seeking to change UKIP’s Constitution in order to allow the NEC – controlled by him – final say who gets on the MEP lists.”
“Harry Aldridge – a is known to be a leading sycophant of MrFarage – rumoured to have been offered second place in the South East. It will come as no surprise to learn that Aldridge is one of the most vocal in support of the new constitution!”
http://juniusonukip.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/civil-in-ukip-over-nigel-farages.html
.
Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W)
. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
GLW info.
Reply
Rutland’s decision allows officers to sue UKIP Councillors
Ukip-vs-EUkip 