junius on ukip

Exposing corruption in Nigel Farage's UKIP

Archive for October, 2009

UKIP leadership election: Nikki Sinclaire

Posted by juniusukip on October 31, 2009

You may recall that Gregg Beaman was a UKIP MEP candidate in the North West. He resigned in disgust after the odious Nuttall and McManus fabricated complaints against him in an attempt to remove him as the lead candidate.

Here is a recent entry from his blog:

There are few, if any, more honest politicians than Nikki Sinclaire, UKIP MEP for the West Midlands. Whereas many MEPS get to Brussels opposing the EU, or its ever increasing interference in our lives, only to be seduced by the lifestyle, I would bet my house on Nikki never, ever ‘going native’.

In these days of MPs and MEPs constantly appearing in the media for being on the fiddle, it is nice to highlight an elected representative who is open and transparent. But don’t just take my word for it.

Here is where Nikki details her MEP allowances on her website.

Here is where she details her staff and their roles. No family members you will note.

Nikki said she would be open and transparent during her campaign earlier this year, now elected she has kept to her word. How refreshing.

Needless to say, if I were still a member Nikki would get my vote in the leadership election.

End of article. To see the original: LINK


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

UKIP leadership election: Mike Nattrass

Posted by juniusukip on October 30, 2009

Just in case you are thinking of voting for Mike in UKIP’s leadership election.

He actually thought this would be a suitable picture for his Crewe by-election poster!

And here is the text that accompanied it:

Politics is a beauty contest –
no policy, no conviction.

He won’t win a beauty contest,
but he does have policies!

End of quote

And who thought of that? Mr Bean?

I wonder why he lost? But at least he has a nice figure. But why has he got such a small head?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

UKIP leadership election: Alan Wood

Posted by juniusukip on October 30, 2009

UKIP leadership election: Alan Wood

Alan Wood is a decent man and a patriot. We have met very few ordinary members who have a bad word to say about him.

However, his election statement did raise a few eyebrows in the Farage/Pearson camp.

Here is the part that had Farage spitting feathers:

I do not approve of Lord Pearson’s intended election strategy of making “the threat of radical Islam the major focus”. This is the wrong approach to winning an election. It will automatically make UKIP candidates unelectable for its negative ‘hate’ message. Radical Christian Tony Blair, who went to war in Iraq on a lie and helped to kill thousands of innocent civilians, might be a better target. Let me make it clear that if Lord Pearson is elected as Party Leader I will leave the party after 13 years of service. He will lead us into the wilderness.

Our enemy is the EU and I will have a ‘Manifesto for Government’ of the British for the British.

Most importantly, the anti-EU parties in UK have to work together rather than splinter the vote. I am already in discussion with others outside of UKIP to explore where all anti-EU people other than BNP can work together for the benefit of the ’cause’. The BNP have hijacked the anti-EU cause and we have to show the people affected by EU immigration policies that its the EU and not ethnicity or religion which is the problem.

End of extract.

Attacking Farage’s chosen successor in your election statement is not a very wise move.

It is just as well that Mr Wood has said he intends to quit UKIP if Pearson wins – Farage never forgives and never forgets!

Alan has a webpage: Link

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

UKIP: Let us weep for Nigel Farage

Posted by juniusukip on October 29, 2009

How sad that Nigel Farage has been denied the right to appeal to the Supreme Court over the fine they received after taking illegal donations from Alan Bown.

But at least they saved UKIP from losing another £300,000 in extra costs! Where does he get his legal advice from? Ask Jeeves?

UKIP now faces total costs of about £750,000. What a great way to go into the General Election!

When UKIP faced prosecution by the Electoral Commission there was an announcement by Farage that if they lost a certain Alan Bown would pay all the costs.

So what happened to that promise? Mr Bown is now strangely silent. But can we really blame him? Would you want to hand over £750,000 because of Farage’s crass incompetence and arrogance?

It is a shame that Nigel can’t afford to foot the bill. Remember his January appearance on The Politics Show?

“Don’t talk to me about money! I don’t have any money!”

Poor chap! So that’s why he has NEVER EVER made a substantial donation to the party!

So what will he do now?

The answer is simple. UKIP’ membership will have to find the money.

But will the ‘it’s not our fault, it’s all a plot’ scam work? Will they be as stupid as Christopher Booker and Iain Dale?

Only time will tell.

Also see: LINK

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

UKIP: Peter Reeve. What has he got to hide?

Posted by juniusukip on October 28, 2009

You may recall that Peter Reeve – Eastern Region RO – became a UKIP councillor earlier this year. He is also a school governor.

Lisa Duffy, on the other hand, failed to get elected to even her local council.

It has been brought to our attention that Mr Reeve has resisted at least two attempts to undergo a full CRB check.

This could be to do with the allegation that he has received a caution for assault. We understand the assault took place in Ramsey about 18 months ago.

He also seems strangely reluctant to supply his previous address in the North West.

His fellow councillors are now beginning to wonder if his reluctance to supply a full CRB is deliberate. Is he hoping for an earlier offence to time out under the conditions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974?

This clearly has serious implications for Mr Reeve. Should a man cautioned for assault be allowed to work with children or represent his fellow citizens on a council?

It may also interest you to know that many members of UKIP’s NW Cambridgeshire branch are very concerned about his attempts to bully and remove Robert Brown as their selected PPC.

Is Lisa Duffy waiting in the wings? Or does Mr Reeve want the job himself?

Peter Reeve also made himself look rather stupid after he clearly abused his position as RO to promote David Bannerman in the leadership race.

It was also amusing to note that Bannerman ‘forgot’ to tell his number one supporter that he had decided to withdraw from the race. This decision to quit followed ‘instructions’ from Nigel Farage.

So it appears that Mr Reeve is no longer part of the coveted Farage inner circle. What a shame! It appears that all his arse licking was for nought!

You will remember GLW was banned by the British Democracy Forum after he mentioned that Peter Reeve had been reported to the Police for assault. Despite confirmation of this from another source his ban still remains in place.

Also see: LINK

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

UKIP: Nigel Farage, OLAF & the French Madame – don’t tell Annabelle!

Posted by juniusukip on October 26, 2009

Tempers are flaring amongst the disciples, it would seem.

Farage, as we know, likes to surround himself with idiots, on the basis that they can never be a threat to him. Farage, of course, never completed his education, a source of great embarrassment to him and to his father, as is the fact that despite his obsession with the Great War, he himself never actually served.

But it is not just the MEP list that he seeded with imbeciles, it is his staff in Brussels. Ralph Atkinson may be gone, but McManus is back, and the drunken Andrew (Steve) Reed, famously given a humiliating kicking by Tom Wise’s assistant Gary Cartwright in his own office, remains, as does a certain French lady. This latter one was a former staffer with the “French Hunters”, a jolly good bunch of chaps, who have sadly departed from the EP. She did not get on well there, so they decided to sack her. Making up a disgusting story about how she was locked in an office and abused by her boss, a lovely chap whose main concerns in life were the preservation of liberal democracy and his own family interests (he dotes to this day on his disabled child) she brought scandal upon an otherwise sound right of centre euro-sceptic group, and was unwittingly brought into the UKIP fold. That was, we must now admit, a fearful mistake.

Described by those who know her as “best suited to doing the photocopying”, she seems to have a bit of a hold on Farage. You can probably guess what that is – he does have a weakness for those fat bottomed gals!

But Madame is getting a bit outside of herself, and is now taking upon herself the right to make political decisions that affect the UKIP delegation. More than one MEP has expressed concerns about this state of affairs.

Junius also learns that OLAF have expressed an interest into the syphoning of money to Madame and her brother, who it would appear was put onto an Ind Dem “contract”. This came to light when previously unasked questions were raised by OLAF investigators to witnesses in other recent investigations in the UK.

It just gets dirtier and dirtier. Good luck, Lord Pearson. You are being lined up to take the fall for all of this.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Greg Lance-Watkins on the lies of Mark Croucher

Posted by juniusukip on October 26, 2009

GLW has asked us to post the following statement. We are happy to oblige.

At the time and date Croucher’s faked ‘e’Mail was made John West had not received any monies from what was called the defence fund. Regardless of the malicious and all too frequently dishonest and childish taunting and twisting claims and inferences of such as Mark Croucher his incubi and succubae, Brendan Padmore, Michael McGough and various cowards too ashamed to put their name to their postings.

Usually Croucher is quite good with his weasel words and computer fakes and set ups.

May I point out that he has shot himself in the foot by attributing the time line on TWO counts.

Firstly this item does not provide proof of anything relative to the point he is trying to make it is a mere snap shot taken out of context to try to prove matters long subsequent.

Secondly he has categorically stated the posting from West was made on the 18th. Feb 2009 – Croucher has foolishly failed to recognise that the thread he attributes this to was locked on the 17th. Feb 2009.

It is noted that Brendan Padmore is wriggling and squirming to supply ways to support the duplicitous and untrustworthy Mark Croucher a vile little failure of a man without honour, integrity or morality and proven on substantive matters to be both a liar and a cheat. Brendan Padmore yet again displays his dishonesty as he desperately tries to do as he is told by EUkip to suppress the truth.

I note the moderator C-Steam would seem to have the measure of Croucher and comments he has not received the screen capture Croucher CLAIMS to have the implication being that he is somewhat smarter than Padmore and does not trust the false evidence provided by Croucher. To comment the item has not arrived would indicate it was requested!

Here is the posting that shows Croucher’s dishonesty – but we can expect weasel words to try to wriggle out of the facts from him once he realises he has been exposed.

The bottom line is that Croucher CLAIMS to have evidence of a statement made by John West which somehow proves 8 months later that subsequent to the 18th.Feb 2009 John West did or did not get money from some private source or other!

This is no more than vexatious and spitefull mischief making of absolutely no relevance to the fact that there are those who have proved beyond doubt that there is every possibility that upwards of £10 Million may well have been industrially skimmed from UKIP by the corrupt individuals who have dishonestly and corruptly seized control of the party.

It is appreciated that as an official spokesman for EUkip from time to time and as a serial liar there is every reason to believe that Croucher is being used yet again to try to muddy the waters so as to shelter the undeniable lies, corruption and dishonesty of EUkip and its leadership.

You will note a poster ‘Barboo’ forensically exposes the dishonesty and duplicity of Mark Croucher.

First here is Croucher’s unsound claim followed by Barboo’s detailed evidence.

Mark Croucher
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dartford, Kent
Posts: 1,643

Sorry, I would have posted this in the proper complaints thread, but West ensured it wandered so far off topic that the thread was closed. I’m hoping all interested can find it here. It was posted on the 18th February 2009 and the time looks like 4:32pm, but as it was a screen print and the date and time text is in reversed print, it hasn’t come out very well on my printer. The significance of the date was that it was after his case was thrown out at Ipswich court as an abuse of the court process, which was the only reason I printed it. You may recall there was a whole load of threads which were deleted at that time. To put it into context, I was mocking West’s non-existent legal advice and pointing out that any competent firm of solicitors would have told him the correct court to file his case with, and had suggested that the defence fund money was wasted. I don’t have all of my original post – just the last few lines of it, but I distinctly remember it.


Originally Posted by johnwest

I have not received a penny from any fund. You are a liar. You do not need to worry about my legal advice as Nigel and his cabal will find out how good my legal team is soon enough when certain other matters come to court as this is just the starting point. Already a national newspaper is interested and there will be more to come so you can mock now but your boss wont be pleased when the full story comes out and you will be laughing on the other side of your face when your corruption is exposed.

So put that in your pipe and smoke it, West. And stop abusing the complaints system for your own ends: you know you said it, everybody else knows you said it, and yet you make a complaint after thinking that nobody had a copy of your comments. I’m surprised the moderators don’t ban you for being such a glib onanist and making such a blatantly false complaint.

End of Croucher’s statement

Barboo’s statement shows Croucher for what he is:

Yesterday, 05:18 PM 647
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 597


Originally Posted by B.A.Ware

Thread re-opened as MC has provided his evidence.

Where is this evidence, BA? Have you retrieved a deleted thread and found John West’s alleged statement? Can we see it, please, because what Mark Croucher has provided so far is an embellishment of his existing claim which does not stand up to scrutiny. It is not ‘evidence’.

Mark Croucher informed us at post #592 of this thread So what did happen to the defence fund money? that John West’s alleged statement, “I have not received a penny from any fund” was in a posting on a deleted thread


Clicking on that link from #592 brings up an ‘invalid thread’ page, the full address of which shows that the deleted thread MC referred to was entitled ‘Judge dismisses West case as abuse of small claims process’.

Mark Croucher enlarged on this at #641 of this thread by giving the date and time of John West’s alleged post on the deleted thread as 18 February 2009, 4:32pm, and saying, “To put it into context, I was mocking West’s non-existent legal advice and pointing out that any competent firm of solicitors would have told him the correct court to file his case with, and had suggested that the defence fund money was wasted”.

The problem with this is, the thread ‘Judge dismisses West case as abuse of small claims process’ was deleted on 17 February, as Mark Croucher himself complained at the time he started a new thread to replace it, so John West could not have made the alleged posting on the 18th. The sequence of events can be checked as follows:

In the Complaints section (P.25) at 02:11pm on 17 February, John West reported a post Reported Post by johnwest Mark Croucher had made to the thread ‘Judge dismisses West case as abuse of small claims process’, on the grounds that MC had given a link to a blog which had published what JW claimed to be an untrue version of his court case.

At 4:18pm on 17 February Mark Croucher started a new thread So now we can’t talk about John Wests court case being dismissed?, in which he referred to the previous thread as having being deleted, and restored the blog link.

At 07:43pm on 17 February John West made a further complaint Reported Post by johnwest saying, “Despite complaining about Mark Croucher’s original posting I now see that he been allowed to repeat the allegations under a new title . . . . What is the point of removing a thread if you then allow the allegations to be repeated by the same person using a new thread?” Following this, moderator B.A.Ware allowed the new thread to remain open but removed the link to the offending blog.

Also, it was at post #3 of this complaint that John West made what is so far his only proven comment on the funding of his legal action: “I also noticed that in one of Mark Croucher’s posts he accuses Geoffrey Collier of helping to fund my legal action. This is also not true”. Geoffrey Collier has since confirmed at #464 of this thread that JW’s statement was correct.

The new thread ‘So now we can’t talk about John Wests court case being dismissed?’ continued and Mark Croucher did make the mocking comments about John West’s legal advice that he describes above, but his barbs (at #23, #30 and #67) were aimed at Geoffrey Collier, not John West. JOHN WEST DID NOT CONTRIBUTE AT ALL TO THIS THREAD so, despite all his spinning, Mark Croucher has still not provided the evidence of John West’s alleged statement required by the moderators.

Will you repost it, please, if you have found such evidence in a now deleted thread that forum members can no longer access?

End of Barboo’s statement

It is worthy of note that the thread Mark Croucher relies upon was started by Croucher as another malicious and spiteful thread to attack someone (John West) seeking to expose the truth of the corruption of EUkip.

The interesting FACT is that the thread was locked because of the undeniable FACT that Mark Croucher had in contempt of Court attributed a comment to a Judge firstly which was never made and was thus a lie and a libel a fact compounded by the fact he attributed the comment to a Judge who was absent from the court and had NOT attended The Court concerned.

The thread was locked because Mark Croucher had lied – yet again and for malicious purposes. This being not just a misrepresentation but and outright lie.

Interestingly Brendan Padmore in a desperate attempt to aid Croucher in his dishonesty again fails to seek the truth and makes the utterly implausible claim that he remembers the details of a posting from 18th. Feb 2009 – a posting we have shown beyond doubt did not exist and even if it had provides Croucher and his little help mate Padmore with no substantiation of their claims merely substantiation they are dishonest and untrustworthy.

I once again state that beyond any doubt, however Croucher his incubi & succubi may seek to rewrite facts to suit themselves – John West at no stage in time received a single penny piece as cash or cheque, nor any other sum of money, from the so called defence fund, Niall Warry or myself towards ANY legal costs he may have incurred in seeking to expose the corruption of EUkip nor UKIP nor any individual therein – either for past cases, current cases or ongoing cases. There was NEVER an intent to fund his costs, particularly in the light of the Sanders findings!

I can also confirm that none nor any donors to the fund in question have voiced or made any complaint as to the handling of the fund and having spoken to all the donors known to me all bar one has stated they were entirely happy with the handling, were aware of the dishonest implications of Croucher and have offered further monies if required.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

John West on Mark Croucher: The statement UKIP did not want you to read

Posted by juniusukip on October 26, 2009

Mark Croucher – left wing extremist, Searchlight supporter and Farage sock puppet – has been using the British Democracy Forum to attack and smear all those who dare to expose corruption in UKIP.

You may recall that Mark Croucher formally worked in UKIP’s press office and was the editor of UKIP’s Independence magazine. He was later sacked by Farage after it became increasingly obvious that Croucher was incompetent.

Croucher then threatened to make public a recording which he claimed to have in his possession. Annabelle Fuller was said to be the subject of the recording. It is alleged that she was not aware that Croucher had made it.

In this recording she is alleged to have made some rather intimate comments about her relationship with Farage.

Farage and Croucher quickly patched up their differences and Croucher later started running his own pub.

Where he got the money to do this is still the subject of much debate. It is believed by many that he got the money due to his ownership of the tape. Would Nigel Farage like to comment on this?

And now back to the BDF.

Croucher has accused John West – a former UKIP member and currently UK First Party Secretary – of lying about a defence fund.

This fund was first adverstised by GLW on his blog. The aim was to help all those who had suffered injustice at the hands of UKIP’s leadership. It was very much like the defence fund started by UKIP MEPs to help all those who had fallen foul of the EU.

Croucher has claimed that John West and others have lied about the nature of this fund. He also accuses John West of having denied receiving any money from this fund in an earlier statement on that forum.

John West has accused Croucher of being a serial liar. Here is his rebuttal.

It was published on the BDF but was apparently pulled within minutes. Fortunately, it was copied by GLW and we at Junius would like to publicly thank him for sending us a copy.

Start of statement

That you are able to fabricate a so-called screen print is of total disinterest to me as you have a track record as a serial liar with a record of dishonesty from lies to the media, lies to the Press complaints Commission, lies to radio, lies to members, lies to readers of The Independence – lies about candidates, lies about supporters and lies about members live and dead. An odious and untrustworthy individual who has deliberately lied by omission and commission to mislead people.

You even see fit to repeat the lie that my small claims was thrown out as an abuse of the court process going so far as to claim dishonestly to quote a Judge who was not even present and fabricating a quote never made.

You are a past master of abuse, smears, misrepresentation and half-truths. You have a track record of tampering with computer records hence your lies about Piers Merchant when you knew, as a terminally ill man, he would not expose your vile behaviour and obvious dishonesty.

That B. Padmore can justify your latest insults as ‘banter’ speaks volumes for his impartiality and integrity, not to mention the gutter level he finds acceptable for this forum a standard which clearly suits you Fuller and other staff and supporters of EUkip.

Croucher’s behaviour has been consistently distasteful and the way he has abused this forum in order to smear and lie about good people has been disgraceful.

You have repeatedly brought the eurosceptic cause into disrepute with your constant lies. That this has been done for your own self-interest is clear.

You are a low grade fixer for a collection of self-centred, self serving, fifth rate, pretend politicians. The recent £¾ million Elcom fiasco confirms their utter incompetence and third rate status.

You even went as far to smear a man dying of cancer. You are beneath contempt and belong in the gutter with the other EUKIP vermin who have done so much damage to UKIP and euroscepticism. Clearly dedicating your energies and malign talents to attacking anyone who tried to expose the corruption and bring integrity to the fight to get Britain out of the EU.

Mr. Croucher you are a liar, a cheat and a disgrace to euroscepticism even stooping to fabricate false evidence as you try to smear people who have tried their best to clean up UKIP. Tried their best to introduce decent values, tried their best to expose the corruption.

The statement you claim as your proof falls on the first count as a fabrication – on the date you used it is no more than proof of the fact that on that date I had received no money from anyone relating to any defence fund or similar.

Let me state one more time for the dishonest and the corrupt: What money or monies were or were not received and who from in a private manner is absolutely none of your business or anyone else save those who are directly involved. However what happened to possibly as much as £10 million which seems to have been all but industrially stolen by a small cabal of crooks who have lied, cheated, dissembled, misled and squirmed to cover-up their crimes endlessly attacking the messengers to hide their own involvement.

These thefts and frauds and serial dishonesties, in abuse of trust and public office, are a matter for each and every one of us both as members, past and present, and as tax payers, supporters and donors. I can understand as the errand boy of the corrupt they need someone more vile to front their cover-up and it does seem that Croucher, McGough and their cronies are ideal for such serial bullying and dishonesty.

End of statement.

John West was apparently banned from the forum for making this statement. Clearly you are not allowed to defend yourself from attack if that attack comes from an EUKIP supporter.

Croucher – on the other hand – has been allowed to continue his attacks on West and others.

You may recall that Anthony Butcher – owner of the BDF – was recently threatened by the odious Paul Nuttall. Nuttall said that he would take legal action against him if he continued to allow criticism of EUKIP on the forum.

Butcher shamefully agreed to this. However, if Mr Butcher had bothered to contact Junius or GLW we could have told him that Nuttall’s threat was a bluff.

1. UKIP could not have won as the threat was based on lies and dishonesty.

2. UKIP’s MEPs were not prepared to finance a costly legal action against Butcher.

3. Several MEPs were also worried that the case could generate a lot of bad publicity as UKIP would be seen as trying to suppress freedom of speech and thus stifle any criticism of Farage and the leadership. Not a good idea for a party that claims to believe in freedom!

Now back to the BDF.

Since Nuttall’s threat Anthony Butcher has abdicated almost all responsibility for the way the Forum is run.

He has allowed certain UKIP moderators to abuse their positions of trust. They try to stifle any criticism of UKIP’s leadership and have even banned several members for doing this – including GLW and Junius. They also lock threads if the critics of UKIP raise too many unpalatable questions – even when these questions are based on hard facts.

Their agenda is set by UKIP’s leadership. The UKIP moderators have little choice but to comply as failure to do so will hardy improve their career prospects within the party.

One of the worst offenders is B.A. Ware. His real name is Brendon Padmore.

Mr Padmore is a typical example of the disgusting filth used by Nuttall to do EUKIP’s dirty work. Mr Padmore is well known in UKIPPER circles as someone who will eagerly collude in covering up UKIP corruption – a man who will always put his own sordid self-interest before the common good.

We predict that he will go far in EUKIP!

We should also add that at least one BDF moderator has been passing on the ISP numbers of certain forum members to a UKIP staff member. This is a total breach of trust and a breach of the Data Protection Act.

This number is then used to identify their critics. We can confirm that the Junius ISP was also given to UKIP. However, they were unable to identify us as we post from various locations.

This is done in order to protect our identities, our jobs and our sources. Failure to do so would result in UKIP’s leaders being able to hide their dishonesty and corruption from the general public.

For more on this see: LINK

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

UKIP News: Godfrey Bloom and the Phantom Chairman

Posted by juniusukip on October 25, 2009

Godfrey Bloom banned from the Mansion House

You may recall that Godfrey Bloom got into hot water after he became drunk and started to heckle a speaker during a recent Mansion House dinner. See: LINK

He has now been banned from all future events. The Lord Mayor’s office recently sent him a letter which read:

“Mr Bloom will not be receiving any further invitations to Mansion House events nor will be welcome at the Brussels Annual reception…at which Lord Turner is the keynote speaker.

“As to future Mansion House events we will be seeking a different MEP from UKIP as a potential guest.”

We at Junius pity the poor people of Yorkshire and Humberside. To have Godfrey Bloom representing them is nothing short of a tragedy.

To some he is regarded as a lovable rogue. To most he is regarded as a drunken fool and a liar. We favour the latter.

For more on Bloom: LINK & LINK

The Chairman that never was

GLW has kindly sent Junius a copy of an email which claims to be the resignation statement of a certain UKIP branch chairman.

We will not be using it as we agree with GLW that the email is a badly constructed fake.

However, if you want to read it please go to GLW’s blog where it can be read in full: LINK

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Dan Hannan & Nigel Farage: A new party?

Posted by juniusukip on October 24, 2009

There has been much discussion about Farage’s intention to re-position UKIP within the context of a pan-European party. This would, of course, undermine UKIP’s withdrawalist principles, and several MEPs are privately fuming about this. But Farage won’t care about that, he knows that he has successfully surrounded himself with “Yes” men, who would never dare to question him to his face.

UKIP’s principles can go hang, of course, because that party is possibly facing bankruptcy, whilst a new pan-EU party will bring in even more money, and that is what really matters.

These parties, like EU political groups, require a certain number of elected representatives from a certain number of member states. They don’t have to be MEPs, they can be members of national parliaments, or of regional assemblies. Each one they sign up brings in a cool 16k per annum for the party. That’s another quarter of a million, near as dammit, for Farage to milk from his disciples each year. Of course, in accordance with the rules they will have to agree to promote the aims and values of the EU in order to qualify for the dosh, but they will shut up and do as they are told. Just as they always do.

But now it gets juicy…

As is often the case during plenary sessions in Strasbourg, and one took place this week, drink tends to loosen tongues. And so, we learnt something very interesting indeed. It seems another British MEP is preparing for membership of a pan-European party. A certain Dan Hannan, no less.

Are we talking about the same party here? This might bring a number of unclear issues into focus.

If there is a new alliance forming, I am sure that UKIP’s MEPs will be the last to know. As always.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »