Sunday, 31 October 2010

Farage's Cabal have no idea how to get us out of the EU

This is the lacuna at the heart of the Cabal. They have no strategy to get our country back. The party membership has halved from its peak of 30,000, branches are closing and local election results in the few wards where there is a UKIP candidate are appalling.

Nuttall seems to think that pointing out the results of the latest opinion poll showing that 75% of respondents want a referendum on EU membership is a strategy. It is not. The poll could show 100% of its respondents want a referendum and the government will just ignore it the same way Nuttall and Farage ignore the wishes of the UKIP membership to avoid joining a Pan European party.

I think we may get a referendum but it will be at the time of the governments choosing when the 'right' result certain. Just as Nuttall bans discussion on UKIP's members forum so the ConLibs will ensure the referendum, if they  call one, will be fixed.

Being in the EU suits the Cabal's wallets very well. Add in that all Farage wants is to be a media celebrity and it is obvious that if you want to get your country back UKIP is not going to do it.

Tim Congdon has his downside but he does recognise the political reality that only by winning seats at Westminster can we hope to get our country back. That involves a mountain of grass roots hard work plus a serious intellectual presence in London. Tim knows this. That is his strategy that he is prepared to back with his own money.

Where is your strategy Mr Farage and where is your money?

Friday, 29 October 2010

Notes on the huge downside to UKIP joining a pan European party

On the day Cameron returns from Brussels having agreed to a de facto EU Treasury crying triumph I have saved the UK £400mn although we still have to pay an extra £400 mn I reproduce below Tim Congdon's notes on UKIP's similar triumph bought by Bloom for a similar huge strategic give away.

Bloom and his boss Farage are quite happy to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage as it says in the Bible!

The funding of pan-European political parties

The following notes have been sent to me by Mr. Richard Teather, senior lecturer in tax law at Bournemouth University, to whom I am most grateful.

1) Pan-European political parties (or “Europarties”) are meant to be funded "from the general budget of the European Union", although funds are actually administered by the European Parliament.

2) Europarties are alliances of national political parties.  Although theoretically individuals could join a Europarty directly, they generally do not.

3) Europarties overlap with, but are different from, the "groups" within the European Parliament. (Thus, before 1999 the Conservative Party was not a member of the European People's Party as a Europarty, but it was a member of the EPP Group within the European Parliament.)

4) The party must meet various conditions to be approved as a “Europarty”, the main ones being:
  a) it must have political representation (at MEP, MP or regional assembly level) in at least a quarter of EU Member States [i.e., in seven states];
  b) it must "observe, in particular in its programme and in its activities, the principles on which the European Union is founded, namely the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law"; and
  c) it must "have participated in elections to the European Parliament, or have expressed the intention to do so".

5) Funding of 10.6 million euros per year* is available and to be shared between all the recognised Europarties.  Some funding (1.6 million euros) goes equally to each recognised Europarty, but the remaining 9 million euros is divided up according to the number of MEPs each Europarty has.  It is therefore very valuable for a Europarty to have MEP members. At a rough calculation, each MEP member must be worth almost 15,000 euros p.a. to the Europarty. (* The number relates to 2008 and is probably much higher in 2011.)

6) Restrictions are imposed on what a Europarty can do with its funds. In particular funds can only be used for pan-European campaigns, not for "direct or indirect funding of national political parties or candidates", and funds cannot be used "to finance referenda campaigns". 

7) Additional funding of 5 million euros (again, the figure relates to 2008) for European “foundations” where “foundations” are think-tanks linked to each Europarty.

8) A Europarty based on the current EFD group (which has 32 members) would get funding of almost 600,000 euros p.a. plus funding of around 250,000 euros for an associated "foundation". 

These notes make sense given what I have heard elsewhere about the funding of pan-European political parties, but raise further questions. In fact, the whole subject is puzzling.

On the face of it, the EFD group would pick up a little under one million euros a year if all its constituent parties – including the UK Independence Party – decided to form a Europarty. Frankly, this is chickenfeed relative to
i.         the larger issues raised by the UK’s membership of the European Union and
ii.       the sums of money routinely discussed in British political fund-raising.
I am astonished that anyone involved in the leadership of UKIP could want to convert the party into a Europarty for such a trivial amount.

True enough, the basis of allocation between the notional Europarties is such as to encourage “groups” to convert themselves into “Europarties”. The European Union imposes a limit on the total that can be spent on Europarties. In other words, the trough has only a finite amount of swill inside it. If one group in the European Parliament does not convert itself into a Europarty (such as the proposed “European Alliance”), the amount of swill available for the other groups (i.e., those which do convert themselves) is higher than would otherwise be the case. Hence, the two sentences in the Bonici e-mail (which I sent out yesterday), “The European Alliance will help parties dissiminate [sic – she meant ‘disseminate’] information by using European funds available to us, and if we don't apply the other Parties/Alliances such as the PES, EPP, Greens etc... will have the money which is allocated to us to share between them. Basically it is like giving ammunition to your enemy for free.”

Nevertheless, it remains unclear to me what advantage UKIP would get from belonging to a Europarty such as the proposed “European Alliance”. The 600,000 euros (plus or minus 250,000 euros) could not be used for a specifically British political purpose in this country, but must instead be part of a pan-European political programme of some sort. Since the UK Independence Party is the only significant political force in the European Parliament committed to its nation’s withdrawal from the EU, how could such a pan-European political programme be to UKIP’s benefit?

Interestingly, Europarty money cannot be used for the purposes of promoting referendums. Indeed, this seems to be specifically identified as an unacceptable destination of Europarty money. There is an obvious - indeed hilarious – discrepancy between item 6 in Richard Teather’s notes above, and item 4, with its assertion that the EU “is founded” on “the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law". Democracy? Oh, yes, the EU is founded on the principle of democracy, until Europe’s peoples vote against further European integration. When any of Europe’s peoples vote that way, the EU and its related “political class” ignores their democratic verdicts. Remember how the EU’s politicians and bureaucrats overrode referendum results in Ireland, France, the Netherlands, etc.

Since any money arising from Europarty status cannot be used to promote UKIP in the UK, I cannot see any purpose in seeking Europarty status. My view is that UKIP should have nothing to do with Europarties.

Tim Congdon
28th October, 2010

Thursday, 28 October 2010

Bloom joins Pan European Party

I copy below an email sent out by a Maltese lady, Sharon Bonici, naming Godfrey Bloom as a member of the pan European party of which she is chairman.

From: European Alliance For Freedom []
Sent: 26 October 2010 12:57
To: xxxxxxx
Subject: European Alliance For Freedom
Dear xxxxxxxxxxx,

 We are currently setting up
a new European Alliance and most members I spoke to who are joining or joined would really like to see you on board. I would like to set up a meeting with you to discuss and hope to get your interest in being part of this new poject. I will be in parliament today Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday this week and would appreciate if we can meet up at your convenience. We need to hand in all the paper work and signautres by the end of the week, so this is a bit urgent.

The Alliance will serve to build campaigns across Europe to promote various causes; For example one of the first campaings we can engage ourselves in is to generate 1 million signatures to be able to instigate a pan wide European referendum on Turkey. The idea is to use the million signature clause according to the Lisbon Treaty.

We can build a multilingual website for people to sign up and advertise it in every member state. This will automatically gives us a huge database of Eurosceptics and people across Europe with the same ideology. In time we need to campaign again on another issue we can engage these people on various campaigns and keep the Commission on their toes.

We will print research publication in various languages.

The Alliance will help parties dissiminate information by using European funds available to us, and if we don't apply the other Parties/Alliances such as the PES, EPP, Greens etc... will have the money which is allocated to us to share between them. Basically it is like giving ammunition to your enemy for free.

The Alliance can finance various campaigns in your country if you are members with billboards, TV adverts,newspaper adverts,leaflets etc...or any other campaigns you decide you want to do in your country.

The Alliance will not get involved politically in any country without the consent of its members.

You can join as a Party or as individual members of the European Parliament. We would like to have you as our Danish representitives on board and our aim is to have representation in every European country including those that are not EU members such as Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. We also hope that in the next European Elections we can become a strong voice in the European Parliament in 2014

So far we have the following confirmed -

1.Godfrey Bloom MEP - UK (UK- EFD)

2.Sweden Democrats - Sweden 20 MP's in the national parliament

3.BIW - Germany - 1 member in the regional parliament

4.Frank Van Hecke MEP- Belgium
   Philip Claeys MEP

5. Paksas Rolandas MEP (EFD)
    Imbraras Juozas MEP
 Still to confirm or be confirmed -

6. PVV - Nederlands

7.Provero Fiorello MEP - (Italy -EFD)
8.Paska Jaroslav  MEP- (Slovakia -EFD)

9.Fiorello Provera MEP -(Italy -EFD)
We do have other parties and members who are interested but at the moment we would like to take it step by step until we apply and everything is set with like minded people.

I thank you for your time and attention, should you wish for more info do not hesitiate to contact me by email or on Mobile: xxxxxxxxxx.

Hope to receive a positive reply and to have you on board this new venture.

Attached please find a copy of the statute and an application form. For the moment everything is provisional and subject to change in the first congress
if we are approved by parliament as a new Alliance.

Best Regards,
Sharon Ellul Bonici

The motion at the Torquay conference on this issue and overwhelmingly approved, stated explicitly UKIP MEPs should not join a Pan European party without a majority vote of the whole party membership to do so. Bloom's action shows the contempt he has for the views of the ordinary party members.

Worse, it is the same tactic as used by the LibLabCon establishment to deny the British people a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty where pledges were given and when they became inconvenient swept aside. UKIP cannot have it both ways. Either it stands for grass roots democracy or it does not. Farage's statement that UKIP is a bottom up party is shown as another falsehood.

I expect Farage will follow Bloom very soon into Ms Bonici's party. Only a vote for Tim can halt this huge confidence trick perpetrated by the Cabal on UKIP members. I quote Tim's comments on this development below.

Memo on an e-mail from Sharon Bonici to interested individuals (including UKIP MEPs) about a new pan-European party, to be called “the European Alliance

I have highlighted key passages of the e-mail in red.

Note that the e-mail refers to:
1.      The proposed new party, to be called “the European Alliance”, without clarifying whether – for example – existing Eurosceptic parties, such as the UK Independence Party, are to keep their present names in future elections.
2.      The alleged urgency of making a decision about participation in such a pan-European party. (To whom and what are the “paper work” to be handed in? The question is basic.)
3.      “European funds” being made “available to us”. (From whom are such funds coming? The European Parliament? Assume that the funds come from the European Parliament. Then – in the event that UKIP MEPs were to participate in “the European Alliance” – their activities would be funded by the European Parliament, an institution avowedly central to the project of European integration.)
4.      The possibility of the “consent” of party members, the meaning of which is (to me at least) unclear, but may intended as a fig-leaf to pacify those UKIP members who at the 2010 Torquay party conference voted overwhelmingly that the issue of pan-European parties must be decided by the party membership.
5.      Godfrey Bloom, as already confirming his wish to participate in the European Alliance project. (Mr. Bloom is said to be “EFD”, not “UKIP”. EFD stands, of course, for “Europe of Freedom and Democracy”, the existing pan-European grouping to which a majority of UKIP MEPs are attached.)
6.      A closing line, in which the European Parliament is acknowledged as having the power “to approve the new Alliance”. This is – almost certainly – the power to approve the Alliance, meaning the power to approve the Alliance in order to establish the Alliance’s eligibility for various monies from the European Parliament because it meets certain criteria of pan-European-ness.   

(These notes prepared by Tim Congdon on 27th October, 2010.)
Tim's last comment is spot on. Joining a pan European party is supporting the EU in its aim to become the new Fourth Reich. Our fathers fought and died to keep us out of the Third Reich. Let us stop our political class trampling on their graves.

Wednesday, 27 October 2010

EU demand more money, no referendum, discussion of Natrass letter bannned on UKIP forum

The demand for a 6% increase in the EU budget has been  voted through by the MEPs.  I listened to the Radio5 clip with Nikki Sinclaire MEP and a Jean Lambert MEP of the Greens on the subject of this EU demand for a 6% budget increase. Ms Lambert talked non-stop about the need for such an increase to fulfil our Lisbon Treaty obligations particularly climate change about which she felt passionately. Poor old Nikki could hardly get a word in but contributed to her downfall by continually asking her opponent questions to which she of course she got more climate change waffle back. Nikki has to wise up as to how to handle this type of interview. She should rabbit on in turn about how many schools, hospitals and affordable housing units we could build in the UK with this money etc etc just like the Labour types do. At least that way you get your fair share of air time.

At PMQs Dave was also rowing back furiously from his referendum commitment on further powers to Brussels. The latest was the usual, it does not affect us argument and only the Eurozone countries will have their national budget subject to EU scrutiny and control. Oh dear, the boy is going to the same primrose path as every British PM has trodden to Brussels. Surely he can remember from his Eton days unpleasant experiences with a cricket stump. The French may not play cricket but they know which end of a politician to insert a cricket stump.

I was vastly amused to read that Denny and others have been banned from discussing the Natrass letter on the so called UKIP members forum. It is of course simply the Nigel Farage propaganda web site and in the true spirit of Lord Haw Haw should start Nigel calling, Nigel calling. Memo to NF, he is a Lord and must be signed up as a possible UKIP leader asap.

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

EU tax plan puts Cameron in a bind and has Clegg over a barrel or does it?

Or as the DT p16 headline has it, '..would force Cameron to hold a referendum'! The EU plans to levy direct taxes on the UK would clearly amount to a 'transfer of sovereignty' and as such require a referendum. The Pole Lewandowski recent proposals on this be it VAT, Carbon, Aviation or Bank transaction levy would in his words 'touch on holy elements of national sovereignty'. Giving the EU powers to levy direct transaction would abolish the UK rebate of £3bn a year, tough when money is tight.

But that is only money. If Cameron were to concede a referendum his government would fall as the LibDems would never support it knowing the British people would vote overwhelmingly against such a proposal from the hated EU. Constitutionally it would be a confidence vote, the government would fall, there would be another General Election in which the LibDems would be wiped out and possibly Labour would win.

The great thing for those of us who want to leave the EU is that in such an election the EU would be the major issue!

Unfortunately Sarkozy, also on p 16 of today's DT, might save the ConLib's bacon. Sarkozy is so unpopular in France as evinced by the strikes that he will act as all politicians do when in trouble and blame some nasty foreigners and who better than Van Rumpoy's and Barroso's EU. Merkel will support Sarky as she also wishes to bury this latest EU tax grab. EU functionaries are ten a euro and can be bought, sold and traded like FIFA world cup votes. Van Runpoy and Barroso are dispensable. Napoleon and Frau Bismark are not. The future of the Franco Prussian empire depends on them!

Barroso and van Rumpoy will of course ditch the upstart Pole and row back from his proposals for the time being and Dave, Nick and ConLib will be saved as will Nigel's new found Euro million.

Also on p16 of the DT is the headline 'Border squads sent to repel Turk immigrants'. Now that is something all the EU except the UK can agree on. These are foreigners that can be kicked with the approval of Sarky and Merkel. Better it will it seems be done by an EU border squad operating in Greece so the EU crats will be happy! It reminds me of the good old days in the Weiss Rossil am Wolfgangsee.

Monday, 25 October 2010

Farage, the Tory/BBC establishment stooge

I was very struck by the posting of a Mike Natrass letter on Butcher's forum today,

Dear All,

It may be too late but after all these years I can no longer stay silent.

In the previous Leadership Election I, together with all candidates EXCEPT LORD PEARSON were rubbished by Nigel Farage on TV and elsewhere. This ensured the election of Nigel's puppet Lord Pearson and allowed Nigel to continue to be the face of the party. That is Nigel's view of the election rules and I think it is only fair and high time that his methods were exposed, USING HIS OWN RULES.

Nigel already Leads the parliamentary Group and when he is also elected Leader this will amount to total control. Increasingly I am hearing the word "Spiv" used to describe him, from people who are not members but see his image. I am concerned that the UKIP party brand will be tarnished, even holed below the water line, by his monopoly of power.

Whilst Nigel is a very good speaker, he is also a control freak. He grabs all UKIP publicity to the detriment of any other UKIP spokesperson or MEP. He employs assistants with the MEP's budgets without allowing those MEPs any say. This, despite the fact that UKIP MEPs demanded a chance to interview those who were being employed with their money. Nigel agreed, then totally ignored that promise. Consequently he has his own "group funded" team around him and all "hiring" takes place via his close friend Godfrey Bloom MEP (this person is said to be banned by 4 hotels for urinating in the corridors)

Nigel's lack of experience in good staff management and his refusal to allow MEP consultation is complimented by the morals of an Alley Cat (and I will not go there). I have always said that this does not matter, because so long as we are all in the trench together with guns pointing at the enemy all are welcome. But he shot Nikki Sinclaire in the back when she became an MEP, for no Party reason, while she was giving all the effort she could give. She was expelled as a UKIP MEP for pointing out the Group facts. He does not like truth or competition.

I have put a lot of money, time and energy into promoting UKIP in the West Midlands and I watched it wrecked at the General Election by Nigel's chosen people (Lords Pearson and Monckton) who appeared from nowhere and failed to understand our basic strategy or even comprehend from where our votes are derived. Worse, Nikki, who has vast energy at election time, was stopped from being a UKIP MEP by Nigel and has not been given a chance to defend herself or to state her case (legal matters are pending). She and I were told by Lord Pearson not to get involved in the election and not to fund the campaign. In fact you will see that we both made considerable financial contributions but our campaign was deeply damaged. Also the subsequent enquiry into the campaign, requested by the WM candidates, was "dealt with" by Monckton (who thought I was behind it) and because of this we have had resignations from very keen activists.

All this West Midlands destruction because Nigel hates Nikki and wants to rubbish me!! Do you know how much money Nigel has contributed to this to nothing.

I found allegations of fraud were brought against me when I stood for Leadership. These were in the Sunday Times. They melted away afterwards and had no foundation in truth, but they did the job intended.(My legal case against the Times is pending) Nigel has had a number of very real cases against him.. funny how that word does not get out.

My first major annoyance with Nigel's manipulations stem from the time when I was first elected in 2004 and all UKIP MEPs had a meeting to agree three very basic points. One was that we could not employ wives (other Parties did) and this was agreed. In fact my wife comes to each Parliament and does not get paid (not even travel expenses) and I said that she wanted to contribute any proper payment to the Party, but no, rules were rules and she could be paid nothing. It was then later exposed that Nigel's wife was being secretly paid out of his budget, breaking this rule. He did not seek any permission (to change his own rule) from the MEPs. He was simply "caught out" with both hands in the till. I fear that the whole Parliamentary Group in the EU is run for Nigel's financial and public image. I left that ugly group.

Nigel has derailed every leader since the very first, except peacemaker Jeffery Titford (under whom I was Party Chairman). He is therefore hated by them all (except JT). plus never to be leader Kilroy Silk who must feel that Nigel gave him a wrong prospectus.

I expect that Nigel will be elected leader as no one else is effectively allowed to stand without a spin campaign against them. I can see less MEPs in the UKIP squad when he does win.

There is a false attack on Tim Congdon from Boggers 4 UKIP, this must mean he is a real threat! Good.



One of the moderators followed it up with the statement below which summarises what Del, David and I conclude about NF two years ago - he is nothing more than a very useful  establishment stooge.

"To be treated so well by the media NF must be part of the Establishment. An Establishment that wants us to be a member of the EU.

Whilst he is in charge of an ineffective and largest anti EU party, which attracts most of the anti EU vote - the Establishment have no fear that this vote will be consolidated in one determined party, which could threaten our membership."

Exactly. If you look on Butchers forum, click on link, you will see there was an immediate effort by two Farage sycophants, D Denny and a nonentity called BvL to immediately get this thread of topic. Even Tony Butcher, a man who has sat on every fence ever erected posted,

"NF's days are surely numbered; there are only so many people he can smear and discount before the remaining activists realise that he is entirely unsuitable to be a party leader, a leader of the MEPs or even to hold public office."

Everyone who has ever had any dealings with NF will atest to the truth of what Mike Natrass writes and Tony Butcher's conclusion.

M3 however poses the right question. The answer is, as M3 knows, NF is very useful to the Tory and BBC pro EU establishment. As long as NF remains UKIP leader no serious person will take leaving the EU seriously. NF is the performing monkey but the organ grinder is the Tory and BBC Establishmemt. As long as he is there posturing on QT etc which the BBC are quite happy with as he promotes their fruit  cakes and loonies agenda image of UKIP. And Yes he does it very well and the EU is very pleased with Mr Farage.

Farage as MN points out has blocked every serious attempt at EU opposition within UKIP with the result that Daniel Hanaan, a Tory, is the leading anti EU spokesman. He is a far better orator than NF as his speeches address each point as it arises. Once you have heard on Farage speech you have heard them all. To coin a phrase you cannot put a cigarette paper between any of them!

If Farage wins on 5th Nov UKIP is finished and I fear the BNP and EDL will step into fill the vacuum that will be created by Farage's increasingly and irrelevant media performances.

Saturday, 23 October 2010

Hanaan now leads the anti-EU movement

I listened to Daniel Hanaan on Radio 4 this morning attacking HMG's decision to up their contribution to the EU by 7%. The Polish EU female representative & rapporteur presented this as a necessary consequence of the Lisbon Treaty, also rubber stamped by HMG , decision to set up an EU diplomatic service, Cathy Ashton is obviously a very high priced woman, plus the EU federal police. She also added in the costs of the three new financial regulators designed to shaft the City of London had also to be paid for.

Hanaan had a field day and expressed himself well and objectively. He clearly has Cameron worried. Dave is now reported as saying he will lead the fight against this proposed EU budget increase. That is a result that Farage with his personal abusive attack will never achieve. Clearly the BBC now regard Hanaan as the leader of the anti-EU movement and I agree with them.

There are 3 protected budgets in Osborne's review the NHS, Foreign Aid and the EU. All three, even the NHS, go to support a dictatorial over paid bureaucracy with little money percolating to the front line.

Tim can match Hanaan for intellect but not presentation but he is still a better option as UKIP leader than the vacuous abusive Farage.

Friday, 22 October 2010

Junius reveals Bloom has signed up to the EFD Pan European party

Last week I wrote how one Sharon Bonici had been lined up by Farage as chair of the supranational EFD party. Ms Bonici, a Maltese lady is currently working for Godfrey Bloom the UKIP MEP and pot plant fancier. Junius broke the story today that Bloom has signed up to the EFD, the first UKIP MEP to do so. Its a worse betrayal than Clarke signing us up to subsidiarity. Signing means you support the EU aims for a European state.

Last month at Torquay UKIP members voted for a motion requiring a vote of all members before any UKIP MEP signed up to a pan-European party. Farage was furious and stated it would cost him a million Euros.

Well there we have it in a nutshell. When the wishes of the party in the country conflict with the EU's Euros its a no brainer for some of our UKIP MEPs, take the money and forget the members wishes. Just like the ConDem coalition! I am confident Farage will soon sign up once the votes are in for the leadership election and I reckon it will happen by Halloween. Principle or Euros?

Talking of Farage I switched on the TV at 12:00 and their he was on the Daily Politics show wearing his Arthur Daley velvet collared overcoat looking every inch the spiv. The opinion of the political gurus on the show was that Nigel was quite wonderful but I think they meant he was a godsend for the LibLabCon.

Meanwhile the Bloom supported EU continues to rob our children of their birthright. The DT has a small story headlined, 'British students hit as EU entries rise'. UCAS reports UK home admissions fell by 0.2% from last year while EU admissions rose by 7.2%. Not quit the whole story as EU admissions are concentrated at the Oxbridge end of the spectrum. There are not many EU students on media studies at Midsommer University, Chancellor DCI Barnaby. 

Thursday, 21 October 2010

Farage's UKIP behaves like a third world country

I was struck that Osborne yesterday approved increase in two budgets, the EU up over 5% and the ODA up 35%! Together these two budgets will cost the UK taxpayer £14bn next year with more rises to come. That is around 18% of Oik George's 'cuts'. With that £14 bn we could have saved our armed forces and built a few public infrastructure projects in deprived areas like the South West.

Heffer yesterday in the DT was the only dissenting voice in opposing overseas aid to countries which he described thus, "... many of them despotisms where the good done is felt by a ruling clique rather than by a benighted people". Thus it is in UKIP. Part of the EU budget increase will go to support the development of Pan European parties, the sort Mr Farage wants to take UKIP into for the financial inducements offered by the EU. The benefits, may Euros, will flow to UKIP's ruling Cabal and possibly then onwads to tax avoidance havens like the Isle of Man.

One thing is certain, UKIP's ordinary members will see no benefit from this EU 'largesse'. On the contrary it will embed our country further into the EU just as overseas aid ends up with third world countries increasingly in debt.

UKIP like these countries is now dependent on hand outs from its imperial masters to maintain its ruling Cabal in the style it is accustomed to, expensive cars, foreign jaunts and the like. The solution for these countries and UKIP is to generate funds from its own resources. This takes hard work and stops the cushy life style of the political elite. It will never happen in Zimbabwe etc short of an armed insurrection but we can take a first step towards this in UKIP by voting for the Tim Congdon/Gerard Batten ticket.

Wednesday, 20 October 2010

Farage familiar with Arsenic. A silly electioneering letter to today's DT.

In today's DT, 20th Oct, there is printed a brief letter from Nigel Farage that I reproduce below:


Bob Pearson tells us we must be familiar with metric measurements and by extension we must be legally forced to use them. I am familiar with arsenic but choose not to take it.

Nigel Farage MEP (Ukip)

The second sentence of this letter on the surface is very silly. His claim to be familiar with arsenic would worry me greatly if I were one of his close associates. Clearly the letter was printed as he is an MEP. The extension mentioned is not in Pearson's letter.

What is in Pearson's letter is 'Regulation of these matters by the EU has been remarkably cautious and the EU's plan to enforce metric only labels and ban any supplementary indicators (imperial measurements) has been abolished.' Exactly! Three years ago, pre Lisbon, the EU did some market research that showed metric measures were deeply unpopular in the UK. The EU, no fools they, immediately rowed back on imposing metric measures solely on food etc.

This is why Farage chose this topic. He knows it resonates hugely with UKIP's grass roots who largely read the DT.That his letter is published alongside another equally silly letter from a Shaun Priestly supporting Imperial measures and under the same headline, 'Imperial beats metric in the logic stakes' is even better. Mr Priestly gets metricisation mixed up with decimalisation.

The Kent address at the end is a nice final touch and implies he is UK based. So much better than a Brussels address where Nigel spends a great deal of time.

Its an astute electoral move by Nigel that will play well with the UKIP voters. Tim and Gerard better get their skates on and get something in the DT and Daily Mail quick!

Tuesday, 19 October 2010

Time for UKIP members to get their party back

Junius printed a thoughtful essay last week related to the above topic. I quote from his blog.

The problem with politicians, these days, is that politics is all they know. That truism has been amply stated with regard to the new double act in Downing Street and to what is likely to be facing them across the dispatch box after the summer recess. But what is now becoming evident is the extent to which the “full-time” political web is ensnaring every party which gets anywhere near it. UKIP, once a gloriously bottom-up party, has been transformed by stealth into as lopsidedly a top-down party as any on the circuit, dangerously over-dependent on the money its MEPs bring back from Brussels and upon the insidious group system from which they derive still more Euro-funding. On the back of that, it gets a press office in the heart of the Westminster village, absurdly detached from reality given that it has no MPs in the Commons, because that is where the European Parliament, as opposed to ordinary UKIP members, says its press office should be – though Farage’s rather pathetic wannabe inclinations, it must be said, do not help.

Of course Farage is guided by the Westminster set. He’s part of the Westminster set. And when it comes to the political establishment, UKIP, sad to say, isn’t part of the solution – it’s part of the problem.

I have written previously on how we are now dominated by a political class of careerist politics students who have never done a proper job and never will. All Farage's talk of 'professionalising' UKIP, a word not in the dictionary because it is meaningless, simply tells us he wants to be like Milliband/Cameron/Clegg and lead another LibLabCon.

These politicians all do the same useless thing. They talk endlessly and pointlessly, scheme, conspire, spin and smear. As Junius says they can never solve the problems facing us. They are the problem!

Note what happened to Liam Fox this week for opposing Cameron on defence cuts. He is suddenly smeared anonymously as 'having a drink problem'. I know how it feels. I was smeared as having a violent temper. Completely untrue and I challenge anyone to produce evidence that I ever lost my temper at a UKIP meeting or at any other time.

Its somewhat trying to be smeared with the behaviour of your opponents. When you are accused by Duffy of having a hidden agenda with not a shred of evidence,  and are repeatedly shouted down by Farage telling lies about the ERS etc, Malcolm Wood altering SWCC meeting minutes, Denny and Zuckerman shouting hysterically at the NEC and Bloom, the pot plant fancier, having to be restrained. When you see an incompetent Tory stooge like Pearson foisted on UKIP as leader for the tightest General Election in 35 years whilst Farage plays at being Biggles!

But that is the Farage UKIP hypocritical way. Read what he said to the BBC when Bannerman rightly  complained to the BBC about Farage going on QT in the middle of the leadership contest.

Farage told the BBC,

"Mr Bannerman clearly thinks that his own ambition and his own ego matter more than the interests of the party. Frankly I am appalled by that. I think that the act of getting hold of Question Time and saying it was all wrong and against party rules was just an act of envy".

The same old Farage Cabal tactic. Accuse your opponent of your own behaviour! Its the way the schoolboy politicians behave in Westminster and that is what we have to change.

UKIPers, if you don't get your party back you can never get your country back. Vote Tim Congdon!

Monday, 18 October 2010

UKIP Ballot papers arrive and Tim stars on BBC West lunch time Politics Show

At last my ballot paper arrived from the ERS with an enclosure from each of the four candidates plus a prepaid return envelope. It is all very professional and above the board. I take a huge amount of satisfaction from this as it was what I argued strongly for in my brief period on the NEC. Farage and Whittaker insisted I had got it wrong as the ERS would only do STV ballots. Both claimed they had looked into this and I was wrong. Well now we all know I was right and Farage, Whittaker (another Farage assentor)  etc were not for the first time talking without doing their homework.

 The ballot paper list the names of the candidates proposer and 10 assentors. For Farage these were, vote Tory Pearson, Clark the EU freebie specialist (when awake), Agnew who tells journos how it so easy to fiddle the EU financial rules, Bloom the dedicated pot plant fancier, Nuttall the Liverpool scally and Dartmouth our belted Earl currently being taken apart in the pages of the Western Morning News by odious LibDem Watson. Both Nuttall and Dartmouth desperately want a second term and see keeping in with Nigel as the way to do it. Add in the wannabe juvenile Heaver and it says it all about Farage's supporters and why they support him.

Trevor Colman, Mike Nattrass and Gerard Batten support Tim and Farage supports Winston! So including Bannerman we have 10 UKIP MEPs. Now if we exclude Nikki can we assume John Bufton and Andreasen have no strong views on the leadership candidates. Ho hum. I think Andreasen is distancing herself from Mr F. Rats ans ships maybe? John is just hedging his bets. He may need Tim's support in the future but wants to be re-elected.

Tim gave an excellent performance on the Sunday West politics show. He starts about 35 mins into the prog demolishing some bash the bankers trade unionists and a vacuous LibDem MP. He did very well in the general interview on UKIP even getting the interviewer to opine Farage was a useless leader.

If Tim wins I can see a lot of activists and general good guys rejoining UKIP. If its Farage there will be a lot of resignations especially when his Pan European affiliation becomes public.

Saturday, 16 October 2010

Nigel's key players for the Pan Europeans

Rumours are now circulating in the Brasseries of Brussels that NF, like Fabio, is already pencilling in players in the key positions for his post 5th Nov Pan European party. Its a tight schedule as MEP applications have to be in by 15th Nov. At the Torquay conference in Sept the party passed an overwhelming motion not to be involved in such a party. NF pointed out to these subversives that this would cost him one million Euros of new money and he was most displeased.

Well I can reassure his faithful Cabal that this is a no-brainer for NF and strong rumours from Brussels say he is proceeding with his pan European plans. The NEC Cabal will off course rubber stamp these proposals. It might make a good question at the next hustings. "Can you assure us you will honour the party approved motion on this topic and promise never take UKIP into a Pan European party?" But of course such a question if submitted would never see the light of day.

Brussels sources mention Sharon Bonnici as the proposed Brussels chairperson of this new group with A Fuller figure tipped as the London end of this Pan European operation. Both Ms Bonnici and Ms Fuller are alleged to be close friends of Mr Farage. Ms Bonnci is alleged to be a left of centre Maltese lady and is alleged to be an associate of the leading patron of Brussels hotels pot plants

Mr Farage is also polishing up his EU credentials as evinced by the clicking on the photograph link below:

I particularly like  the Wagnerian scene on the poster in front of Farage with the word 'Diktatur'. Mr Hitler was also very keen on Wagner although the Merry Widow was his true love.

Let us hope Mr Farage is more successful with his selections than Mr Capello was on Wednesday evening. Is Montenegro in the EU?

Friday, 15 October 2010

Tim & Gerard answer uncensored questions

Below is the text of an email I was copied into by Tim. It is self explanatory.

Announcement from Tim Congdon, Gerard Batten and Stephen Allison   

We want to give as many members as possible the opportunity to discuss our plans for the UK Independence Party and to outline the policies we want to develop for the party. Some people have difficulty attending the hustings. We are therefore very pleased to announced that all members of UKIP are invited to put live questions to us from 7 pm to 8 pm on Monday, 18th October, on 0203 0032 666.
We look forward to hearing from you. The harder the questions, the better!

Put questions to Tim, Gerard and Steve LIVE

on our UKIP Leadership Tele-Conference

between 7.00pm to 8.00pm on Monday 18th October.

Dial 0203 0032 666 (local rate call) to put your questions and listen to the debate.


You are not only free to circulate this message more widely to other party members. You are positively requested to circulate it widely to as many party members as possible.
 With best wishes                      

 Tim Congdon 

This is an excellent initiative by Tim. He shows he does not have to hide behind vetted questions like Farage who is scared to face tough questions.
It also opens up through the use of conference call technology the debate on UKIP leadership. I did a similar thing in the SW where such UKIP luminaries as Malcolm Wood & Elizabeth Burton had never realised how they could use this technology to promote UKIP.

I urge all UKIPers to call in and put their questions to Tim & Gerard and start to return democracy to our party.

Wednesday, 13 October 2010

Bannerman was right to complain about Farage going on Question Time

As I had to drive my wife to the airport early this morning I switched on my PC to find that, following Bannerman's complaint to the BBC that their QT invite to Farage was unfair to the other leadership candidates, the BBC withdrew their invite to Farage to appear. This has been greeted with scathing criticism of Bannerman's action from Nigel's Tory friends like Ian Dale and the sycophantic Bloggers for UKIP.

Dale is the Tories number one blogger and gives the game away that Farage is a Tory mole as was his friend Pearson and many others. Its not the BNP that are infiltrating UKIP its the EU loving Tories!

During the recent Labour and LibDem leadership contests the equally EU loving BBC was very careful to give all leadership candidates equal presence on Question Time. The BBC promote Farage on their programmes knowing full well his appearance does great dis-service to the leave the EU cause. Every intemperate rant by Farage against van Rumpoy or criticism of Archbishop Williams or ill judged support for Bankers plays right into the EU's hands. Fruit cakes and loonies will be the cry.

If Farage really cared about UKIP and getting out of the EU he should have declined the BBC invite himself and suggest either they invite the current UKIP leader Titford or wait until after Nov 5th to invite the new UKIP leader.

Bannerman was right to complain as it did give Farage a huge unfair advantage over the other leadership contenders. We had a similar situation in the South West during the MEP selection process with the RO Malcolm Wood organising speaking engagements for only one of the MEP slate candidates, Dartmouth. Alan Wood complained about this to his namesake and I supported him but of course nothing changed and Malcolm Wood is now employed by Dartmouth.

One should also ask why is UKIP in this mess. There is a two word answer, Nigel Farage! His ridiculous shenanigans in Buckingham, his stooge leader Pearson, his temporary leader Titford and now he wants to be leader again makes UKIP a laughing stock. To parody Bruce Forsyth, 'Didn't he do well' is what Nigel's Tory friends will be saying. Yes indeed, very well for the Tories! UKIP members should ponder on this before voting for more Farage farces.

I hold no brief for Bannerman but I do believe in fairness and equal opportunity. Tim and Gerard are the only leadership contenders that will deliver this return to British values. Farage has been too often to the EU Euro trough.

UKIP Hustings questions censoring continues at Peterborough

Junius reports that this practice continued at last nights UKIP husting. Questions had to be submitted to Peter Reeve a paid UKIP employee. His partner Lisa Duffy is also on the UKIP payroll. A large chunk of their household income would be at risk if Farage loses and the UKIP controlling regime changed.

You can guess what happened to any awkward questions about the widespread corruption that has flourished under Farage's leadership. Junius reports several UKIPPERS wanted to ask Farage and Bannerman about the lack of financial transparency within UKIP but never got the chance.

It makes it difficult to argue against LibLabCon and EU ignoring and inconvenient questions when UKIP does exactly the same. UKIP has got to clean up its act! Junius reports that the lack of financial probity within UKIP was a hot topic of conversation by attendees outside the formal, heavily controlled, proceedings.

It is reported Farage gave his usual arrogant performance. UKIPers have to waken up to the fact that they are voting for a leader who can organise the party in the UK not a Brussels play actor whose speciality is scoring own goals and providing an easy target for the EU Tories to label us fruit cakes and loonies.

The attendance was reported as around 100 which given it was a joint Eastern/East Midlands meeting is very poor. Junius reports UKIP's most useless MEP Clarke was not present. I well remember Clarke, who is an avid consumer of EU freebies, telling me at an NEC meeting hat he had no time to oppose the Lisbon Treaty as he was so busy with his EU committee work. Even John Whittaker remarked to Clarke that he was not elected to work for the EU but unfortunately Clarke either did not hear or ignored Whittaker's reproof and has continued to work diligently for his EU paymasters.

UKIP has to do as Tim wants and base its main effort and staff in the UK.

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

Farage scores some more own goals

Farage gave a recent interview to the C4 religious spot and managed to score a couple of spectactular own goals in as many minutes. I quote from Alan Wood's verbatim transcript.

"My name is Nigel Farage. I was born an Anglican but I was also born a capitalist because I worked in the City of London during the Thatcher heydays of the 1980's and I don't think that money is wrong, evil or bad.

It has become fashionable to bash the bankers, to say we must limit what people can earn (and) we must stop them having big bonuses, and this is all based on a huge misunderstanding. We cannot have nurses, doctors, schools and a civilised society unless we have wealth creation. If we tax punitively those that are most successful in this country they will leave our shores and go and work somewhere else.

Well, I was christened into the Anglican church and I chose as a teenager to be confirmed into it but I am a very lapsed Anglican now, I feel very disconnected. We have a Christian Socialist as Archbishop of Canterbury in Rowan Williams and he has joined the chorus of attacking the banks and the bankers, and money, and capitalism, and all through the crisis, ever since the banks started collapsing back in 2008, all we have had from the Church of England is endless negativity. Without the money the City of London has generated this country would literally be sunk."

As well as that C4 captioned him as a former City banker. If anyone knows which bank formerly employed NF I would be grateful for a post naming it.

Calling the Archbishop a 'Socialist' and the C of E's attitude to the banking crisis is silly. Farage was obviously operating in his disastrous van Rumpoy mode, again! It can only help alienate the many millions of Anglicans in the UK and reinforce UKIP's 'fruit cakes and loonies' image.

Supporting bankers is another sure fire vote loser in the current circumstances. Far better to go for the middle ground and call for a reduction in the gap between the poorest paid and the most highly paid in the UK.

Farage's economic ideas are what Alan Sugar called prune juice. The City does not create wealth for the UK only money for bankers just as the EU does not create wealth for the ordinary citizen. It only takes our money and gives it to MEPs like Mr Farage and their ilk. Wealth is created by engineers and designers in manufacturing companies of which Germany has a great many and we have far to few. That is why Germany currently prospers and the UK does not. Other companies such as miners and traders also create wealth but definitely not banks. Banks provide the capital not the ideas and management that creates wealth.

Monday, 11 October 2010

Cabal dirty tricks against Tim have started

GLW on his blog has revisited the tale of Gawain Towler,  Elizabeth Burton and male sexual physiology. It seems that GT according to GLW has been smearing Tim Congdon using the historic involvement of some of Tim's assentors with Nikki Sinclaire and her campaigns. Strange, as Nikki has consistently fought the UKIP cause in the UK while GT has spent most of his previous career in Brussels. I  recommend clicking on this link to read the full salacious details as only GLW writes them. Enjoy.

It all started in my 6th Jan 09 on my blog here where as a post script to an economic post I added:

"I read with sadness that Gawain Towler may be in some difficulties re his MEP candidacy. If true, it is disappointing this was not detected earlier in the MEP selection process as it may be potentially damaging to all candidates on the SW list. The SWCC passed a resolution before the MEP selection process started that the candidates selected by the SW selection sub-committee of Elizabeth Burton, Jeff Mager and David Bendall and non-voting chairman Malcolm Wood should be presented first to the SWCC for approval before being sent to Mr Gill and the NF's national political committee. This resolution was not accurately reproduced in the final SWCC committee minutes and was not implemented by the selection sub-committee. The sub-committee's recommendations went straight to Mr Gill bypassing SWCC scrutiny.

Whether this would have helped Mr Towler we will never know. I am portrayed by some as anti UKIP. I am not. I stand for sticking to the rules and upholding democratic decisions. Those who think that they know better put us on the slippery slope that leads to the swamp of endemic sleaze that engulfs the UK's three main political parties.

My views have not changed since I stood for MEP selection and can be found on my web site."

Click link to go to my website.

I should add that Malcolm Wood, a long time Farage associate now employed by Dartmouth,  was forced by Roger Knapman to subsequently admit altering the correct draft minutes taken by Sue Palfrey of that meeting.

At that time I was very much part of the SW MEP election campaign. It looked like a struggle then to win one MEP seat in the SW let alone retain the two we held. The Telegraph would not break the expenses scandal which changed everything for another 3 months. I was deeply concerned that the bad publicity Gawain Towler seemed to be courting would not only torpedo our SW campaign but could sabotage our national campaign as well. (Read GLW's blog)

I was also concerned at the way Mr Gill was waiving UKIP electoral rules to favour Farage's  approved candidates like Andreasen. Complaints raised by Piers Merchant about the MEP selection process in other areas were not investigated and simply ignored. Also of course proper democratic motions of the SW committee were ignored. I stand by my words above and add subsequent events have proved me right. UKIP is now further down the slippery slope to dictatorship.

At the next SWCC meeting I was attacked by a Faragista plant on what I had written. The plant could did not even know my actual words when I challenged him later when were alone in the gents toilet but then he was not then sitting next to Malcolm Wood! I was accused of seeking to oust Gawain Towler from the SW list to further my own prospects. I was 5th on the list and GT 3rd. I had stood simply to try and put some independence onto the slate. At the hustings and on my website I had made it clear that if selected and elected I would give the entire MEP salary after paying UK tax to UKIP. So where was the financial advantage to me? The only financial advantage would have been to UKIP! I would work as much as possible in the UK and only go to Brussels to collect the UKIP earmarked net salary of around £45k.  The Faragista plant had no answer.

Like Tim I see no point in being an MEP but I would have been delighted to take the EU money and give it to UKIP. This offer is still there on my web site for all the world to see and I would have honoured it.

No other candidate made such an offer but I was the one deselected and Mr Towler after being deselected by the SW committee was reinstated by the Cabal dominated NEC and is happy to do the Cabal's bidding.

Mr Towler sits there on the SW list today, a ticking time bomb under UKIP, and if Trevor Colman or the belted Earl walk under a bus GT will be in as an MEP. Many in Brussels have information on  GT's past indiscretions. With GT as an MEP they will then be in a position to blow UKIP out of the water any time they choose.

It was Mr Farage not Mr Towler, who put UKIP into this perilous position. Mr Farage's flouting of UKIP rules and proper democratic UKIP decisions makes him completly unsuitable as party leader. Mr Scholefield's letter in my previous blog makes it clear this behaviour has gone on for many years. Farage's judgement is so badly flawed his re-election  would sign UKIP's death warrant.

Only Tim Congdon can get our party back for the ordinary hard working honest UKIP members!

Saturday, 9 October 2010

How UKIP has been perverted by the Cabal

Tim Congdon has published an email to Gerard Batten from Anthony Scholefield, UKIP party secretary around 2000 that largely speaks for itself. I reproduce it below:

Dear Gerard, 

I thank you for your letter of 24th September, announcing that you have decided to stand down in the UKIP leadership election and support Tim Congdon.

Your action reflects credit on yourself.

I believe that the view expressed by yourself, and also by Tim Congdon, that the leadership of UKIP must be in the UK is correct.  The MEP wing of UKIP has its own sphere of activity and can be useful as similar parties to UKIP are growing in other EU countries, but it must be incorporated into and directed by the national party in the UK.
As you know, up to 2001 the party was based either in my offices in London or in offices funded by myself when I was Party Secretary.  I was also a substantial contributor to the risk-capital of UKIP to get the party started in its early years.  However, after the election of UKIP MEPs in 1999, I immediately became aware that some of the new MEPs had different and unconstitutional ideas of the role of the MEPs in the party.

At this point I ceased any funding to the national party, but continued to contribute to your own and other campaigns in London and elsewhere.

If Tim Congdon is elected Leader and in accordance with the published agreement between you and him carries out 'a commitment for the party to abide by its own Constitution, with a fair and impartial application of the rules', I look forward to rejoining, and to injecting some funding into the national party.  I would expect to see commitment and action by the MEPs to make substantial financial contributions to the national party.
The current political situation in the UK and the rest of the EU offers immense opportunities to UKIP with a wide field of action.  However, the turnover of members and activists has been far too high over the last few years and is linked in most cases to lack of confidence in the constitutional behaviour of the party, its officers and executives.  For progress to be made, this confidence must be restored.


Anthony Scholefield

Anthony's letter outlines the party I thought I was joining in 2007. A party of volunteers that would be based in the UK and work in the UK to try and get us out of the EU. Instead I found a corrupt Brussel's based ruling group who were quite simply there to line their own pockets. This continues to date and if anything has got worse dragging us in to alliances with Fascists and Racists for financial gain for the Cabal.

I endorse wholeheartedly what Anthony writes especially his comments on the Cabal's complete disregard for decent constitutional behaviour. They perverted the UKIP constitution to remove elected NEC members who sought to restore financial and administrative probity. They waived the rules to pervert our democracy and allow Andreasen, a non-UK national, non-resident  to stand and be elected for our party. Worse Mr Gill,  charged with seeing the rules were obeyed was the man who having waved through Andreasen in complete breach of 5 or 6 UKIP rules was unobtainable to deal with the the resulting justified complaints.

Only the Tim Congdon/Gerard Batten ticket can hope to extricate us from this festering EU swamp that the Cabal has dragged us into. Not only is Tim financially independent of the EU. He is a patriot who has no ambition to be an MEP. He will put money into UKIP unlike the Cabal who are only interested in taking money out.

There is as Anthony says a huge opportunity for UKIP. The EU is mired in its worst ever financial crisis. The PIIGS are protesting in the streets of their capitals. The City of London is turning against the EU Franco Prussian regulation designed to suck business out of London to Frankfurt and Paris. A God given opportunity which Tim is easily the best equipped to exploit.

Vote for a serious candidate not a spiv. Vote Tim and see UKIP strong again!

Friday, 8 October 2010

UKIP Cabal is fiddling Yousook leadership poll

I am grateful to Junius for for giving the link to this poll. To see cabal manipulation in action click on the link and then on Nigel Farage. I give below the current poll results for the various categories.

 Farage                             Yes No

Honest 12 2
Clear 13 1
Well informed 13 1
Inspiring 13 1
Consistent 11 3
Well intentioned 12 2

Well you can see who has been voting but who for? On these replies it looks like Nelson Mandela not Nigel Farage. The callow Youf of YI don't seem to know the difference.

As is much quoted, in order for evil to triumph it only needs good men to do nothing. I urge all my readers to go on to the site, register, record their opinion of the candidates as above and most importantly ask precise questions of the candidates. If you want rid of Farage bury him in sharp precise questions and nail his numerous dodgy statements just like Andrew Neil yesterday nailed the obnoxious Warsi on his show. Charlie Kennedy opined last night that Warsi is out of her depth as Tory chairman and will be gone by next summer. Lets make sure Farage is gone by 5th Nov!

For completeness I give the recorded votes for the other candidates:

Bannerman                      Yes No

Honest 5 2
Clear 6 1
Well informed 6 1
Inspiring 2 5
Consistent 5 2
Well intentioned 6 1

Congdon                        Yes No

Honest 6 0
Clear 6 0
Well informed 6 0
Inspiring 2 4
Consistent 6 0
Well intentioned 6 0

McKenzie                        Yes No

Honest 7 3
Clear 4 6
Well informed 5 5
Inspiring 3 7
Consistent 2 8
Well intentioned 6 4 

Youf like this sort of thing linked as it is to Facebook and Twitter. Its up to older UKIPers to use their experience of life and ask the sharp questions eg  'What are your precise plans to get us out of the EU?'

Thursday, 7 October 2010

How the Athenians dealt with Faragistas in 500 BC

I always regret I never did classics at school. I have attempted to remedy my educational deficit over the intervening years and my interest in Direct Democracy, and the knowledge that it is loathed by careerist politicians, lead me to start reading Robin Lane Fox's recent book on the classical world from Homer to Hadrian. As it says in the bible, 'The sun rises and the sun sets and there is nothing new under the sun'. People like Farage and his nauseating Cabal will always be with us polluting the body politic. So how do we deal with them?

In 508BC the Alcmeonid clan who had been active in expelling the Athenian tyrant failed to win the supreme magistracy for ine of their own. Their elder statesman, Cleisthenes, proposed from the floor of a public meeting that the constitution should be changed and that in all things sovereign power should rest with the entire adult male citizenry, some 6000+ men. The Athenians in 508BC were more liberal than UKIP's Caball is today! Motions from the floor to change the constitution. We are not allowed by the Cabal at a small meeting to even put a question from the floor at a UKIP husting!

Cleisthenes knew the system from the inside which he was now so cleverly subverting. He had been Athen's chief magistrate 17 years previously selected as were all Athenian magistrates by the tyrants. Now replace tyrant by Farage, magistrates by his UKIP placemen and what you had in 525BC Athens looks very similar to UKIP even down to the numbers involved. As an insider Cleisthenes knew what he was dealing with. In UKIP its the same. Only people like me, David and Del Young who have seen the Farage Cabal from inside know what they really are. But were David, Del or I ever given the chance to state our position to the general membership? Of course not!

Cleisthenes proposals ensured every major public decision went to a popular assembly by rights. Oh but if we had that in UKIP how different things and policies would be. The surviving decrees from the period start with the phrase, 'It seemed good to the people'. Thus was democracy born and flourished in Athens for 200 years in this most direct form without the need for MPs, MEPs etc.

Cleisthenes opponents who wished to return to the old system summoned the Spartans, the EU in my analogy, but democracy had taken deep root in the citizenry and the EU Spartans withdrew. The Athenians had no difficulty manning their system. The had a day to day council of 500, chosen by lot, not elected on which every citizen expect to serve at least once. The Athenians were strongly motivated to attend as they had no wish to return to the internecine strife between the aristocratic tyrant families or in modern day parlance, party politics and careerist politicians!

But Cleisthenes foresaw the danger that a leader of a frustrated option whose proposals had been rejected might try to rush a proposal through the assembly a second time. Shades of Farage and his demands for yet more 'power to his placemen' disguied as constitutional reform. Cleisthenes proposed that once a year, with the 6000 present, the Athenians would hold an ostracism. The would write the name of any person they wanted ostracised on a bit of broken pottery (an ostrakon) and he who attracted the most votes was sent of into exile for 10 years. He would leave knowing there was a majority against him and on his return he would be 'yesterday's man'.

Nigel Farage is certainly yesterday's man and if he were ostracised to Brussels for ten years UKIP would be much the better for it and we might start to make real progress in leaving the EU.

The country which comes closest to the Athenian system of direct democracy is the richest and best run country in Europe, Switzerland. They have proved that a country and its people prospers without career politicians who always claim they enter politics to serve the people but of course the only people they are interested in serving is themselves.