.
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
From: Greg Lance-Watkins (Greg_L-W)
At: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com
Hi,
You may be interested in the eMail below and the relevant attachments.
So that I keep lines of communication open please acknowledge source as
http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
If you choose to use it or forward it.
It will be on my web site later today, when I have time.
Do note that I have a copy of the MP3, which is very clear and as per the transcription I have supplied – sorry my tecNoSkills are not up to posting a copy on this web site and as it may aid in disclosing my sources I have made no effort to upload the item.
ALSO you will be amused to note that I reminded people that today was UKIP’s 20th. Anniversary of foundation in 1993, earlier this morning.
I get the impression it was a good thing I did as it seems to have reminded UKIP, who published the fact at about 15:40hrs.!
Thanks.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
PS. Sorry about the delay in posting this but at 14:30hrs. today my Aunt died, so I have been a little preoccupied!
G.L-W.
http://GregLanceWatkins.com
http://GregLanceWatkins.com/my-other-blogs-etc
http://GregLW.com
http://GL-W.com
http://GLWdocuments.wordpress.com
http://Leave-The-EU.org.uk
http://HollieGreigetc.wordpress.com
http://ChristopherStory.org
http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
TWITTER: @Greg_LW
Skype: gregl-w
PLEASE NOTE:
I never post anonymously on the internet.
For details on accuracy please see:
https://ukip-vs-eukip.com/ensuring-accuracy-the-truth
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 10:36:12 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Conversation re Steve Crowther’s actions to take Cllr chris Pain out of UKIP
The conversation attached below, is between ex UKIP CEO Will Gilpin and Chris Pain, re Steve Crowther’s actions to take hard working, long standing, UKIP activist Cllr Chris Pain out of UKIP.
This relates to late 2012 / 2013, before any of the fake face book posts were posted late May and raises the issue of the total handling of the situation by UKIP. The full conversation would have a serious effect on UKIP and this is not the intention, so the parts are only attached that have a direct impact on the handling of Chris Pain.
This raises the issue that Chris Pain has not been handled fairly by the party.
Questions were asked re the issue that Steve Crowther had apparently picked the final MEP lists, rather than them being selected as a result of merit on the selection process.
This has been highlighted by Doug Denny, who has been thrown off the NEC, because he was trying to correct what he believes to be a floored (sic) process.
The response was that the only way of challenging the process, was via the courts and not through the party or the NEC.
This is not democratic or fair as stated in the UKIP constitution in how we should act as a party.
The main problem is the defamation of character against Chris Pain, which has not been addressed.
Apologies for the rough transcript, but it was done from 2am until 5am in the morning.
Written Words of Recording Re Telephone Conversation with Will Gilpin
Chris Can I ask you a straight question which is involving me, yes, did Steve Crowther have any involvement, on my side, when it came in front of the NEC.
Will When it came to your three months suspension?
ChrisNo No before that.
Will What did you mean
Chris Did Steve have any conversations with you or separately
Will I’ll give you the honest answer I can’t remember the details, but I was well aware that Steve had lots of antipathy towards you, and made it very clear he would like to get you out of the party, and would do whatever he could to achieve that.
Chris that ties in with what somebody else has said.
Will Okay yes
Chris Somebody else quite high up has said exactly the same
Will Yes, when you arranged your conference and invited me and Kate to speak at it or me to speak at it and I turned you down, because Steve gave me a direct order, that I wasn’t to attend or have anything to do with you, and giving that he was paying my pay cheque I went along with it.
Chris That’s obvious and unbelievable
Will Just because his argument to me was that the conference was project designed to get you elected, and he didn’t want to get you elected, we had to do our best not to support it.
Chris That explains on my lead through Lisa and everybody cancelled on the Sunday as well, because they cancelled on the Sunday and we were doing the Sunday training for people and they cancelled, they got the same…
Will I imagine so I am not aware, but I am sure Steve I didn’t really know him that well, but I had done a couple of bits with him and I liked him, and because he thought that I liked him he could get me to do what he wanted. You know, it has taken me quite a while to realise that, I still haven’t quite figured him out
Chris But to be honest with you how can I say it
Will I know he doesn’t like Nigel, but on the other hand this is his carer isn’t it
Chris You say he doesn’t like Nigel but
Will He doesn’t like him, But he knows Nigel is his paymaster, his gravy train
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
ChrisMore than understanding it he kept going on the same tact that it didn’t matter that they weren’t on your site. I said well of course it does because that’s what people think it is on my facebook site
Will yeh yeh yeh you were dammed if you did and dammed if you didn’t in fact weren’t you cos if you had admitted they were on your site he would have had you for that, and if you said they weren’t he would have accused you of lying, so
ChrisBut the downside is he knows the fact they weren’t there, he knew they weren’t there afterwards, I actually gave him the proof and sent it to him directly and showed him where they were, and I didn’t get that until the I approached the news editor who sent it through to me. I didn’t know what open part, because I’d been told by somebody else he was using it to take me purposely out of the MEP position, and take me out of the party, which coincides with what you said
Will Yes I know that is something he wanted to do, I can’t tell you is there was any specific plan, other than he just saw this opportunity and thought, it looked good, you know
Chrishow long .. has he ever said why he wanted me out of the party? Has he ever drop that reason out or, is it down to Nigel or what,
Will yes probably down to Nigel probably because you are pushy and Nigel doesn’t like anyone pushy, that might go for the leadership at some point
Christhat’s ridiculous
…………………………………………………………………………………
Will Steve and Nigel think you are getting too big for your boots, building a power base for yourself, they only want one power base in the party, in other parties there would be lots of power basis
………………………………………………………………………………….
Will Steve saw his opportunity he got me to get somebody to have a look at your site and obviously it was their report that was read out, you know, I am not going to tell you who they are obviously because they are still in the party, I don’t think they particularly had a part dropping, they were just doing what they were told
Chris obviously portrayed it in a way, just by him getting you to say all the stuff had been deleted,
Will yes
Chriswhen he knew the fact that it wasn’t on there in the first place
Will yes yes
ChrisAlthough is sounds damming in front of the NEC, and in front of disciplinary proceedings he wouldn’t have got away with that, I would have had witnesses and evidence and gone through it bit by bit.
Will Yes
Chris it was like everything he threw at me at that meeting, from about the rally in Boston, which he knew about, which had been passed by Paul, and the motion that he told me to do exactly what I did do, and he knows he told me exactly what to do and Piers said the same and to throw all these things in, it was obviously bazaar, I should have had a disciplinary action where I would have got seven days notice where I could have took each bits of evidence in with me, to go through them
Will which is what Piers said isn’t it
Chris obviously he didn’t want that, because he thought he could con people as a full NEC and twist the facts marginally enough to hit me with other stuff to get it passed
……………………………………………………………………………………
Will it was gerimanded
Chriswithout a doubt
Will why they excluded me from the process of course
Chris yes the thing is it is quite obvious, Steve has done it from day 1 the whole process, pushed it rammed it through, made sure he was showing the subcommittee no minutes from the subcommittee tour at all, which to be fair is not unprofessional it is crooked
Will yes
Chris and then actually pushed it forward even further to leave selectors where people are, without the NEC passing a mandate about how people should be point scored and these always through
Will it’s a win win, either we’re sent the list they’ve given or we reject the entire process at which point Nigel operates the list,
Chris it would probably be a bit fairer
Will at lease its know
Chris I look at what they have done so far, although I don’t agree with that, at least it would save a lot of people time energy and effort in the party
Will and money
Chrisand money, and a lease it would be straight forward and say that’s Nigels choice and that’s it
Will yeh yes
Chris all Steve’s done is pushed it through regardless
Will well that was the final straw for me in terms of my enthusiasm for the post
Chris what you doing now then
Will nothing I am on holiday for a week and then gonna start working out what to do.
Regards,
Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W)
. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
Ukip-vs-EUkip 
That really turns UKIP into a bed-blocker. Far from educating the voting public at large, Farage isn’t even reaching his own members. This is the response of a branch chairman to a question on UKIP’s policy to Art 50:
“My understanding is that Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is designed to prevent the sheep leaving the fold. We must leave on our own terms, even though we know the technocrats will try to make it as difficult as they can”.
I suppose, though, that if this is the level of ignorance in the party, it is better if UKIP keep away from EU issues and leaves them to the grown-ups.
It’s a fork – bank on about the EU and stay on the outside, quieten down on that subject in order to increase your vote and get accused of abandoning your principles. The question is, do you really think Farage has given up Brexit as a goal?
A couple of points. Where is the sense in going quiet on the EU just as the ‘in’ campaign is dominating the debate? And surely the question to ask is if Farage has Brexit as a goal, what is he doing to bring it about? Finding evidence to support his exit credentials is getting harder all the time. I believe he is leaving EU withdrawal behind for personal reasons.
In answer to your question, I think Farage will do anything that helps him realise his ambition. If that means turning UKIP into just another mainstream party to help him into Westminster, then I have no doubt he would do whatever suits him.
The reality of the hustings may have been overlooked in this piece. Connecting with the voter and backing up the EU withdrawal case with other policies that appeal is important and probably necessary to attract votes.
It works like this, “That Nigel Farage who wants the UK to leave the EU, well he talks a lot of sense on HS2 (etc. etc. etc.), so maybe he’s onto something when it comes to Europe”.
Furthermore the complexities of withdrawal, via Article 50 or indeed any other means, will remain opaque until the process of withdrawal begins. No one in Brussels or London ever imagined Article 50 would ever be used in anger. Nobody, whether that be the Commission, Council or indeed UKIP can second guess this one. It is simply uncharted territory.
This is not to say that this issue should not be discussed, and that the possible options, mechanisms and pitfall analysed; but I suggest that for Mr. Farage to publicly raise this issue, at the present juncture, would be both foolish, unnecessary and counter productive.
First we ideally need the settled will of the people to be firmly in favour of withdrawal and for that to be demonstrated democratically and unequivocally. At this point the UK will presumably play its hand (badly or otherwise).
However, today we are not even sure if Lisbon will be politically or even legally the most important Treaty. Indeed if Cameron’s timetable is followed, it does seem possible that by 2018 a fully federalised Eurozone could be in-place (assuming that insolvency and civil unrest hasn’t put paid to the centralist agenda). This may well change the dynamic in Europe so that it is a new Treaty, not Lisbon, that federalists will rally around.
The criticism of Mr. Farage’s strategy is rather harsh, his job is to attract voters and at this stage not to inform them about the technicalities of the possible mechanisms of withdrawal. This is made especially so at this time when even the most prescient would be hard pressed to offer a credible forecast as to how things might actually pan out.
In light of that Farage, and UKIP’s over all approach of weakening the Conservative Party in its Europhile form at least (and of course to a lesser extent the others) and raising UKIP’s profile on EU and non-EU policy areas is working. So much so that even the President of the United States (whilst remaining philosophically a Europhile) raised the Referendum issue on the steps of the White House. It is UKIP’s rise that has forced the issue onto the agenda. So far their strategy not only looks relatively successful, it is also the only democratic game in town.
That does not mean those with more in-depth knowledge should not continue to debate, explore, and advise on the consequences, mechanisms and possible outcomes. Or that UKIp’s approach should not be criticised, as it has been consistently done on this site and at both a credible and intellectually coherent level .
Never-the-less there comes a time, especially as support and electoral success increase, when the politics of analysis and election separate.
The most important thing is votes cast in the direction of the UK’s withdrawal. With those votes comes moral authority, a force that may prove to be more powerful than Article 50, or indeed any other piece of ill thought out EU legislation (for in reality Lisbon was never designed to be a Treaty but a law within which the powers and functions of the EU were re-codified and increased).
It seems not unlikely that if, when and indeed how the UK leaves the EU, will be most influenced by the number of votes UKIP can attract in 2014 and the threat to repeat any success in 2015 and then ultimately on the size of any majority in favour of exit, should an IN/OUT be held and won.
It would seem that without UKIP none of this would be even a faint possibility. I might add that I am not a UKIP member, but it seems to me that you are asking them to jump a relatively distant fence when the electorate are still undecided at the water jump.
I am sure AT is right in all that he (and Richard North similarly) says about and criticises UKIP/Farage. For me, Farage has provided a valuable service in promoting EUscepticism and having brought it or helped to bring it to public attention. The success of UKIP now gives concern to the Conservatives and others and it was Farage with his tub-thumping who largely achieved this. For this I am appreciative.
But that, I know, does not mean he has the ability to lead a mainstream parliamentary party. The difficulty is that we have no alternative at this stage. Just for whom do I vote in the coming European elections and in the subsequent UK GE? None of the main 3 parties is worth considering so it just leaves UKIP or my not voting at all.
If AT or others have any helpful suggestions. my thanks in advance.
Sorry, I meant “AM”.
LeoSavantt,
Things can be seen that way.
However, the view you take depends on how much faith you have in Farage’s initial intent and then steadfastness to remain true to UKIPs primary purpose of leaving he EU.
I think Leo has put more strategic thought into one post than Farage has into one year of UKIP activity.
People don’t seem to grasp that Farage’s priorities are Nigel Farage and money.
Leo’s argument reminds me of the hundreds of comments on Conservative Home arguing Cameron was only pretending to be a social democrat Europhile and that once in power he would suddenly reveal his inner conservative. We all know what happened there. Why suppose Farage has any more depth than Cameron?
AM,
Yes, I was thinking about Cameron the supposed eurosceptic wolf in europhile sheep’s clothing, playing his cards close to his chest. He turned out to be a sheep and a lot of us thought he was nothing else from the outset.
Being a political party carries temptations and compromises.
In UKIP’s case it was argued that if they got MEPs they’d ‘go native’ and there’s certainly an argument to be made for that.
In the case of representation at Westminster, especially with no immediate prospect of power, there has to be the temptation to fit in with the social-democratic consensus and occupy the LibDem niche of being a general protest party – and letting the question of leaving the EU fade into the background.
Most UKIP supporters are I fear politically naive so it is not that they don’t care it is that they just simply don’t know or haven’t worked out what makes Nigel tick.
@Dufyken
“…For me, Farage has provided a valuable service in promoting EUscepticism and having brought it or helped to bring it to public attention. The success of UKIP now gives concern to the Conservatives and others and it was Farage with his tub-thumping who largely achieved this…..”
Well, you’re not wrong. Farage has, to an extent {promoted] EU-scepticism, but what has he done to advance it?
Can you name a single crowning achievement of any UKIP MEP since 2009?
No, neither can I.
No MPs, some county councillors (unless disgraced and resigned), sabotaged mayoral and London Assembly elections… at what point do you wake up and realise it’s a personality cult?
@Nailer
Thanks for the response. I do not take issue with anything you have said but I still have no answer as to how I should vote in forthcoming elections – who else but UKIP?
@ Dufken
I vote for them as by far the least worst remotely credible option, but I don’t believe in them as it were. They’re a political party and while we’re stuck with electing one team or another of dictators, there’s no reason to believe UKIP are immune to the forces which made LibLabCon what they are.
Actually, I don’t even see LibLabCon as elected dictators, more like the current suit worn by the permanent government of civil service, local government, the EU, NGOs, QUANGOs etc., all untouched by elections every five years. The answer I’d say, is some measure of direct democracy where political parties are much reduced in their role, and we’d be far less likely to have the likes of Blair and Cameron taking very unpopular and far-reaching actions on a whim or for completely self-serving reasons.
The other problem we have is the major players in the political party game having a gentlemens’ agreement not to address certain issues of wide concern, and then fighting over a middle-ground which they feel comfortable with. Is it heretical to suggest that UKIP could be drawn into this if they had enough tribal support?
@Nial Warry
Most (enter political party) supporters are I fear politically naive so it is not that they don’t care it is that they just simply don’t know or haven’t worked out what makes (enter first name of leader) tick.
Admittedly, we do expect far higher standards of UKIP, notionally the outsiders seeking radical change.
Dufyken don’t vote for any of them it only encourages them!!