UKIP: Interesting campaign video

Rude but rather funny!

UKIP: Marta Andreasen versus Robin Collet

Here is a very interesting email exchange between Marta Andreasen and Robin Collet

We all know about Marta. See: LINK

But who is Robin Collet?

Robin is a Farage sycophant who was given the job of trying to hoodwink the public into thinking that UKIP’s MEP accounts are open and transparent.

The website can be found here:

http://www.ukipmeps.org/mypage_16_TR.html

A quick look on the website will quickly tell you otherwise. The accounts contain only a minimum of information and are frankly a joke.

For instance:

Farage states that his wife works for him. Her salary is between £25,000 – £30,000 a year. But he fails to state what she does for that large sum.

Derek Clark mentions that he employs several members of staff. So what are their salaries? What do they do? Who are they? You won’t find the answers there. So much for transparency!

The same goes for the odious Paul Nuttall. No details, no real information.

And so on.

It is amusing to note that Marta is rather less than happy with Robin’s handling of the accounts.

Read on……

From: robin.collet@btopenworld.com
To: william dartmouth (william@williamdartmouth.com); dcbdcbuk@yahoo.co.uk; derek clark (mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk); gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; johnbufton@tiscali.co.uk; martaandreasen@hotmail.com; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; k.farage@yahoo.co.uk; paul nuttall (ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk); Douglas Denny (greg_l-w@btconnect.com); stuart.agnew@btconnect.com; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevorcolman@btconnect.com

Subject: Transparency
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:33:19 +0000

Hello all,

I hope you do not mind, but I have attached transparency drafts for all MEPs to this e-mail – it saves me time to do it that way

The only one you need to look at is your own one.

I would be grateful if you would confirm that you are happy with it (or advise any changes) – ideally asap – and by end of weekend as I hope to send to Kevin Bonici for putting on EFD MEPs website late Monday, before I disappear to Spain for a week, early on Tuesday

One general point –as you know, we have removed all ?? amounts. On the text in first para on Parliamentary Assistance Allowance, I have added an extra sentence at the end – not least at Marta’s request. I hope you will find this acceptable – as ideally you should all have the same text

For individual MEPs

Godfrey’s is blank – and I am talking to him this pm

Marta has to revise her numbers, from these initial estimates

Mike N ‘s expenses are round sum guesses and he will tell me correct figures on Monday (and figures for item 3 & 4)

William D is hopeful of Expense figures later today (and number of days)

Nigel – did you get figures for return trips and number of days

So I hope to hear from each of you soon, please

Thanks

Robin

PS – Just to remind – I will not be at next Strasbourg but to be at next Brussels on 24/25th March

Robin Collet robin.collet@btopenworld.com
Home Office: The School House, Wimble Hill,
Crondall, Farnham, Surrey GU10 5HL.
Home Tel : 01252 850824.
Mobile: 07774 107471
Mobile is best for contact

From: Marta Andreasen [mailto:martaandreasen@hotmail.com]
Sent: 27 February 2010 22:29
To: Robin Collet; william@williamdartmouth.com; David C. Bannerman; mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk; gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; john bufton; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; Kirsten Farage; Paul Nuttall; stuart agnew; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevor colman

Subject: RE: Transparency

Dear Robin,

Thank you for sending this.

I can live with the comment that you have added to the secretarial allowance about any amount not claimed going back to the EU budget, even if this is not my preferred option.

In the case of General Expense allowance however I cannot adhere to the text you propose, for the reasons I explained at the meeting last week and which I reiterate below.

Section 3 Article 25 of the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament states that ” members shall be entitled to a flat-rate general expenditure allowance to cover expenses which arise in the course of their parliamentary activities and which are not covered by other allowances under these implementing measures or other Parliament rules”.

There is no mention on where you incurr the expense whereas in the paragraph you propose you limit the “cost of carrying out the duties of the MEP, incurred in the United Kingdom”. I do not see the need to add this limitation when the regulation does not require this and moreover you have advised me to use the general allowance to cover costs that I have incurred in Brussels, such the case of the media training by Martin Jay for example.

I therefore propose that the paragraph to be used in reference to General Expenses should be the text of Section 3 Article 25 of the Implementing Measures as quoted above.

I await for your final version to introduce my final numbers.

I take the opportunity to inform all that the travel reimbursement office can issue a summary of amount paid for daily allowance and number of missions.

Best regards
Marta

Marta Andreasen MEP
Rue Wiertz, 60
ASP 4F154
B-1047 Brussels
Belgium
Tel: 0032 22845726
Email: marta.andreasen@europarl.europa.eu
Website: http://www.martaandreasen.com

From: robin.collet@btopenworld.com
To: martaandreasen@hotmail.com; william dartmouth (william@williamdartmouth.com); dcbdcbuk@yahoo.co.uk; derek clark (mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk); gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; johnbufton@tiscali.co.uk; martaandreasen@hotmail.com; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; k.farage@yahoo.co.uk; paul nuttall (ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk); Douglas Denny (greg_l-w@btconnect.com); stuart.agnew@btconnect.com; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevorcolman@btconnect.com

Subject: RE: Transparency
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 23:51:27 +0000

Dear Marta – and for all MEP’s
Thanks indeed to allow this to go forward – I would have preferred this only between Marta and me – but she has sent to all Authorities

For clarification, you quote word for word the basis set out in Article 25 – which is as you say is just these 3 lines and no more

This 42 page document covers lots of other things – Document Reference 2.1.2

Where I have taken authority on is the another 42 page document – known as the PEAM rules – reference number 2.1.1. (Rules governing the payment of expense and allowances to members) My last copy was drawn down on 11th November 2009 – It needs updating on some things – but not yet published (as you will know)

This document at Chapter 4 – article 13 – giving a whole page to it, – not just the 3 line you quote, explains the headings of expenditure, but also says, in the heading “This allowance is intended to cover, inter alia, the following expenses incurred in the member state of election”

Discussion

From the above, I think you have not seen all the rules

We do not have time to discuss this

Action suggested

While I am very unhappy about it, I propose to all MEPs that we remove the words “incurred in the United Kingdom” , but leave all other words as is
You know my view – publish soon the minimum and add extra later if demanded

Marta – please

Would you be happy to publish with those words removed

Please

And Marta

Update on figures please – – I have a very tight timetable to work to

Please provide now

Thank you
Robin

Robin Collet robin.collet@btopenworld.com
Home Office: The School House, Wimble Hill,
Crondall, Farnham, Surrey GU10 5HL.
Home Tel : 01252 850824.
Mobile: 07774 107471
Mobile is best for contact

From: Marta Andreasen [mailto:martaandreasen@hotmail.com]
Sent: 28 February 2010 00:33
To: Robin Collet; william@williamdartmouth.com; David C. Bannerman; mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk; gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; john bufton; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; Kirsten Farage; Paul Nuttall; stuart agnew; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevor colman

Subject: RE: Transparency

Dear Robin,

I copied all because we have been having this discussion among all and because I think my observation is valid for all. I did not understand we needed to have separate conversations on different matters and I had already expressed my views during the meeting where you agreed.

I have seen all the rules but the paragraph I refer to is the one in the implementing rules which is the specific application rule. I frankly do not understand why you insist on limiting this to the UK when implementing rule does not but what worries me more is that I have incurred expenditure in Brussels out of this allowance upon your advise and I refer to Martin Jay?s fees for media training.

So I am sorry but in my page I will state the paragraph of the implementing rules.

As regards the final figures I have now obtained the official report for the number of missions and daily allowances and I have 18 return trips and 65 days allowance instead of the numbers I put in my draft. But I still need to confirm certain figures in the general allowance and this may take until next week.

Assuming you have all the accurate info from the rest of the MEPs I have no problem in that their figures are published on Monday and mine are published some days later when I am happy the information is accurate. If you leave for Spain I can ask Kevin Bonici to load mine in your absence.

Best Rgds
Marta
Marta Andreasen MEP
Rue Wiertz, 60
ASP 4F154
B-1047 Brussels
Belgium
Tel: 0032 22845726
Email: marta.andreasen@europarl.europa.eu
Website: http://www.martaandreasen.com

From: robin.collet@btopenworld.com
To: martaandreasen@hotmail.com; william dartmouth (william@williamdartmouth.com); dcbdcbuk@yahoo.co.uk; derek clark (mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk); gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; johnbufton@tiscali.co.uk; martaandreasen@hotmail.com; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; k.farage@yahoo.co.uk; paul nuttall (ukipbootle@yahoo.co.uk); Douglas Denny (greg_l-w@btconnect.com); stuart.agnew@btconnect.com; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevorcolman@btconnect.com

Subject: RE: Transparency
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 09:49:17 +0000

Dear Marta,

Thanks you – you may have missed it? – I had said in my email below to remove the words ”incurred in the United Kingdom”

The wording used had been discussed and agreed at a number of previous meetings with MEPs, but when you were unable to be present

I think it is far better that all MEPs have the same wording – so my new suggestion is not only removing the words “Incurred in the United Kingdom”, but adding instead “not covered by other allowances”, so it reads
“This allowance covers the cost of carrying out the duties of the MEP not covered by other allowances, and includes running an office and associated expenditure.? All costs incurred meet the published Parliamentary rules”

Are you able to accept that please?

(and hopefully others will agree too – I will assume so, unless I hear differently)

Very good wishes
Robin

Robin Collet robin.collet@btopenworld.com
Home Office: The School House, Wimble Hill,
Crondall, Farnham, Surrey GU10 5HL.
Home Tel : 01252 850824.
Mobile: 07774 107471
Mobile is best for contact

From: Marta Andreasen [mailto:martaandreasen@hotmail.com]
Sent: 28 February 2010 15:49
To: Robin Collet; william@williamdartmouth.com; David C. Bannerman; mep@derekclarkmep.org.uk; gerard.batten@btinternet.com; gbloom@ukip.org; john bufton; mikenattrass@hotmail.com; Kirsten Farage; Paul Nuttall; stuart agnew; susanpalfrey@btinternet.com; trevor colman

Subject: RE: Transparency

Dear Robin,

I don´t like your way of treating me with contempt. Yes I have read your emails and the rules and I have only been absent from one of these meetings but this did not preclude you from facilitating the info agreed to me on hand or by email. Nor does it preclude me from having a different opinion.

I regret to say I have lost trust in you. You will not assume responsibility for MEPs expenditure but want to dictate your differing interpretation of the rules according to the circumstances.

Others may not have the professional experience to deal with their own expenses but I certainly do and lost a very well paid job for defending transparency and accountability in the EU something that few or no one can boast of.

While I have put effort on reaching a common presentation of expenditure for all of us UKIP Meps I reserve the right to put the comments I wish and will also deal with the publication directly myself.

NOW I ask that in the name of transparency you deliver to me without delay the same type of presentation for UKIP´s portion of group expenditure which we all contribute to finance – this should include the 4000 budget line plus all the group recruits under UKIP´s part of the group´s budget and for which at least I was not consulted upon – and make available to me – I leave to others their choice to request the same-all supporting documents for me to audit this expenditure.

I am aware that you are trying to help without even being paid for your work but this is not an arrangement that I have been given the opportunity to agree to nor does it imply that I grant my authorization to you to decide what should be published and what should not.

Best wishes
Marta

Marta Andreasen MEP
Rue Wiertz, 60
ASP 4F154
B-1047 Brussels
Belgium
Tel: 0032 22845726
Email: marta.andreasen@europarl.europa.eu
Website: http://www.martaandreasen.com/

Also see: LINK

UKIP: Lord Pearson on the campaign trail

An election is just days away and Lord Pearson has been very busy campaigning for his favourite party.

But is that a blue rosette we can see?

He has been in Kettering.

Mr Hollobone, the Tory candidate, was VERY pleased to see Pearson.

“I’m honoured Lord Pearson should take the effort to come to Kettering and give me his support”.

Lord Pearson was equally gushing:

“UKIP would be potty if we kept Philip out of the House of Commons.

“We haven’t put a candidate up against him and we will do everything to get him in.”

Mr Hollobone has been absolutely clear with his views on Islam, the burka and Sharia Law. To do that in the House of Commons against your party whips must have been pretty uncomfortable.”

But some UKIPPERS in the constituency were not so keen on UKIP supporting a rival party.

“Bloody traitor” was how one UKIPPER was heard to describe Pearson behind his back .

See: LINK

He has been in Shipley.

What a shame that Shipley’s Tory candidate was less than eager to share a platform with the dotty Lord:

“I’m really grateful for him coming to support me, that’s absolutely fantastic, but it was never the plan to do a joint event.”

A slightly miffed Pearson was not to be deterred by this rebuff and was later seen walking around the constituency with a Tory rosette on one lapel and a UKIP rosette on the other. His lackeys were also seen holding a sign which read: “UKIP 4 Davies”.

Pearson has also dismissed criticism from leading UKIPPERS who are extremely unhappy with Pearson’s support for the Tories. See: LINK

He said:

“UKIP is a very democratic party. They (the south west committee) can do what they want and I am on this ticket, so I can do what I want.”

Sieg Heil!

See: LINK

The madness of Lord Pearson is getting much worse. We now have a situation where he would rather campaign in constituencies where the Tories are standing!

And his own candidates? They can go to Hell.

Will someone please phone ‘Help the Aged’ and get Pearson removed to a care home?

And why was Nigel seen sniggering when told about the backlash against Pearson? Is he planning a return from Elba after the GE? But will ELCOM and OLAF be his Waterloo?

UKIP: Lord Pearson’s betrayal

Pearson to personally campaign for Labour in Stroud!

The farce continues.

Pearson’s contempt for UKIP’s membership has to be seen to be believed.

Lord Pearson will actually be campaigning with David Drew and Labour activists in Stroud on Thursday.

They will be handing out leaflets which urge UKIP voters to support Drew. An example can be found here:

http://www.thestraightchoice.org/full.php?q=2270#l5479

David Drew is not in favour of leaving the EU. He believes that the EU can be ‘reformed’.

Pearson is also set to take to the streets with Tories Philip Hollobone in Kettering, Northamptonshire, and Philip Davies in Shipley, West Yorkshire, and will back Mark Reckless in Rochester and Strood in Kent on Friday.

This move must signal the end of UKIP as a serious alternative to the old party system. Farage and Pearson’s decision to support Labour and Tory candidates is a complete and utter betrayal of UKIP’s manifesto and their supporters.

How can UKIP be taken seriously when the leadership is prepared to stand down candidates and actively campaign for parties that are committed to keeping Britain in the EU?

More on Pearson’s betrayal of UKIP PPCs in the South West.

You will recall that Pearson has urged the voters of Wells, Somerton & Frome and Taunton Deane to ignore UKIP’s own candidates. Pearson wants UKIP supporters to back the Conservatives in those constituencies.

Pearson didn’t even see fit to inform his PPCs before sending the letter to the media in Somerset!

See: LINK

UKIPPERS in the area are rightly livid and are now fighting back.

UKIP South West is in meltdown.

We have the ridiculous situation where UKIP’s leadership are telling voters not to vote for their own candidates and to vote for the Tory candidates. Simultaneously, we have UKIP candidates telling the public to ignore what Pearson has said and to vote for them!

From the Worcester News:

A row has broken out between UK Independence Party (Ukip) members and their leader after the life peer asked electors to vote against his own party.

Members of Ukip’s South West Regional Committee said they were “at odds” with Lord Pearson of Rannoch after he wrote to a media group urging voters not to support his party in three Somerset constituencies.

The committee said Lord Pearson had a “long-held belief” that Ukip should not stand against eurosceptic candidates in other parties.

As a result, he has asked constituents in Wells, Somerton & Frome, and Taunton Deane to back the Conservatives.

The statement from the Ukip South West Regional Committee said: “The UK Independence Party in the South West has the greatest respect for our leader, Lord Malcolm Pearson, and regret finding ourselves at odds with him over one vital area of his policy.

“Lord Pearson has written to media outlets in the region with the message that he does not want people to support his own party in three Somerset constituencies but to give their support to the Conservatives.

“We understand that Lord Pearson has long held this belief that Ukip should not stand against eurosceptic candidates in other parties.”

The statement said that, during a visit to Bristol in April, Lord Pearson, 67, was confronted by more than 50 Ukip candidates who did not agree with this policy.

It went on: “Regrettably, Lord Pearson has chosen to ignore this firm and clearly expressed decision and has taken the step of asking the electors to vote against his own party.

“The South West Regional Committee has once again endorsed the decision to ignore Lord Pearson on this policy matter and will fight the seats in Wells, Taunton Dean and Somerton & Frome”.

To see the original: LINK

It is interesting to note that Pearson is a personal friend of the Rees-Mogg’s. Annunziata Rees-Mogg is the Conservative candidate in Somerton and Frome. What a strange coincidence!

And why is UKIP so keen to support Heathcoat-Amery in Wells? Wasn’t he the MP who claimed £29,691.93 for gardening and cleaning? He was later forced to pay it back. Hardly the sort of person that UKIP should be supporting!

But what are we saying? At least he didn’t claim £2 million in expenses like a certain UKIP MEP called Nigel Farage!

And would Pearson like to explain why he wants UKIP to stand aside for untried Conservative candidates in Taunton Deane and Somerton and Frome.? We know that one of them is a family friend but does that really make it right? They are loyal to David Cameron and his ‘vision’ of Europe. Does he really think that they would have got though Cameron’s selection process if they were truly regarded as anti-EU rebels?

Niall Warry of the Independent Leave-the-EU Alliance is standing in Somerton and Frome. He was, until recently, a UKIP member.

This is what he had to say:

STOP PRESS –PRESS RELEASE – STOP PRESS!

Niall Warry of the INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance standing in Somerton and Frome has told us of an interesting election development.

Apparently the leader of UKIP Lord Pearson has written to the Mid Somerset News and Media Group to say he is advising UKIPPERS in Wells, Somerton and Frome and Taunton Deane to support the conservative candidates.

Niall Warry said “ I believe this typifies the problem with ‘Party politics’ and I sympathise with Barry Harding, the UKIP candidate in Somerton and Frome, who has clearly been stabbed in the front by his leader.

Niall Warry added that as an INDEPENDENT he would always put the wished of his constituents and country first as he had no party loyalties to get in the way. He urged all potential UKIP voters to vote for him as he was 100% committed to a policy of leaving the EU.

Contact details are:
T: 01749 831546
M: 07957 87 20 74
E: Niall@Warry.go-plus.net
W: INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU

UKIP: The Madness of Lord Pearson

Lord Pearson gets stranger by the minute. He is now threatening legal action against the BBC after they refused to give him an equal platform with Brown, Clegg and Cameron.

An extract from Pearson’s most recent letter to Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC, is reproduced below.

Should you and the BBC fail to accede to this request by noon tomorrow, Wednesday, 28 April, 2010, please take this letter as notice, in terms of the pre-action protocol in judicial review proceedings under the Civil Procedure Rules, that the United Kingdom Independence Party, of PO Box 480, Newton Abbot, Devon, TQ12 9BG, and I as UKIP’s leader, as claimants, will apply to the Administrative Court at or as soon as practicable after 2 pm tomorrow afternoon for judicial review of your decision and that of the BBC, as defendants, expressed in your letter to me of 15 January 2010, to refuse to allow UKIP to participate in the third and final leaders’ debate, and for an injunction requiring you and the BBC to permit me, as UKIP’s leader, to participate in that debate on an equal footing with all others whom you and the BBC shall have permitted to participate.

For his own sake – and UKIP’s – it would be better if he did not appear on the show.

We, and many others, have just about got over his comedy turn on The Campaign Show! See: LINK

Admitting that you are not a politician, getting shirty with the presenter and refusing to discuss your manifesto is hardly a vote winner.

We also hear that Pearson has took it upon himself to write to the Mid Somerset News and Media Group advising UKIPPERS in Wells, Somerton and Frome and Taunton Deane to vote Tory.

Pearson did not have the courtesy to inform the UKIP PPCs standing in those constituencies. The first that they heard about it was when the BBC contacted them for a quote! To say that they are rather miffed would be an understatement!

So once again UKIP’s leadership show their TOTAL contempt for the membership. Publicly humiliating and undermining PPCs by asking UKIP supporters not to vote for them is now apparently official UKIP policy.

But what do you expect? UKIP is, after all, just a Tory pressure group.

Her is a report from the BBC News:

UKIP asks voters in Somerset to back the Tories

The leader of UKIP has written to a newspaper group in Somerset urging voters to support the Conservatives rather than his party’s candidates.

Lord Pearson said constituents should back the Tory candidates in Wells, Somerton and Frome, and Taunton Deane.

The party has asked its candidate in Wells, Jake Baynes, to stand down, but he has so far refused.

UKIP have a policy of supporting eurosceptics from other parties, which they choose not to stand against.

The party’s candidate in Taunton Deane, Tony McIntyre, said last night that he had not been told to step aside, and knew nothing about the open letter to Mid Somerset News and Media until he was contacted by the BBC.

‘Betrayal’

Mr Baynes is standing in Wells against Tory eurosceptic David Heathcoat-Amory.

Speaking earlier this month, Mr Baynes said he disagreed with the policy that UKIP should not contest Westminster seats against other genuinely eurosceptic candidates.

“To stand down would be a betrayal… it probably has ruffled a few feathers, but it’ll be water off a duck’s back at the end of the day,” he said.

Lord Pearson has admitted there has been some “disagreement” with Mr Baynes, but that he would not force him to stand down.

Mr Heathcoat-Amory has said he did not believe the number of people voting for him would be affected by whether or not Mr Baynes stood for election.

The other candidates standing in Wells are Richard Boyce, British National Party; Chris Briton, Green; Andy Merryfield, Labour; and Tessa Munt, Liberal Democrat.

Taunton Deane’s other candidates are Jeremy Browne, Liberal Democrat; Mark Formosa, Conservative; and Martin Jevon, Labour.

The full list of candidates in Somerton and Frome, is Barry Harding, UK Independence Party; David Heath, Liberal Democrats; David Oakensen, Labour; Annunziata Rees-Mogg, Conservative; Niall Warry, Independent Leave-the-EU Alliance.

To see the original: LINK

Also see: LINK

UKIP: More from the surreal world of John Humberstone

John Humberstone has had a rather strange and lengthy journey to the wonderful and wacky world of UKIP.

He was in the SDP. From there he went to Plaid Cymru to Forward Wales to Libertas and finally UKIP.

Where he intends to go after UKIP is anyone’s guess. Veritas?

We understand that he rents his house in Wrexham to immigrants/students who have come to Britain from outside the EU. He even persuaded some of them to join his campaign team. See: LINK

One was recently seen in Wrexham handing out a leaflet highlighting the problems of uncontrolled immigration to the UK.

One eager resident asked him for some more information on UKIP’s immigration policy. He was unable to reply. And the reason for his silence? He can’t speak or read a word of English.

Priceless!

UKIP: Nikki Sinclaire, Clive Page & UKIP lies

Some of our readers will be aware that Clive Page – pictured above- no longer works as Nikki Sinclaire’s press officer.

UKIP’s corrupt leadership have been telling various UKIPPERS that Mr Page left her employment because his ‘working relationship with Nikki had broken down to the point where he couldn’t stand to be in the same room as her’.

They also claim that Mr Page ‘had very serious disagreements’ with Gary Cartwright and Josh Onyons.

These allegations are totally without foundation.

Here are the facts:

Clive Page also works for five UKIP MEPs. He was ’advised’ by Farage and UKIP’s leadership that his UKIP contracts would be terminated if he continued to work for Nikki Sinclaire.

Clive Page was basically blackmailed into leaving her.

UKIP: And yet more confirmation that UKIP is a Tory pressure group

The following article should be of interest to all those who still believe that Farage and Pearson want UKIP to be a genuine alternative to the old party system.

We have highlighted the relevant section in red.

Pearson confirms that if Cameron had promised a referendum on Lisbon, UKIP would have been campaigning for the Tories!

Please note that there is no mention of UKIP just standing aside for Tory Euro-sceptic candidates.

UKIP would have actively campaigned for Cameron, stood down ALL their candidates and thrown UKIP’s manifesto into the recycling bin!

And all this would have been done without consulting the membership or those PPCs already selected to fight the General Election. Such is Farage and Pearson’s contempt for the membership.

Pearson and Farage claim that they made the offer to Cameron because their primary aim is a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. All very laudable.

So why haven’t they offered to stand down in favour of the Lib Dems?

Nick Clegg is offering a lot more than just a referendum on Lisbon. He has stated that the Lib Dems are committed to a holding referendum on ‘in or out’ of the EU.

UKIP has wanted such a referendum for years. So why no deal?

Some UKIPPERS have told members of the Junius Team that the Lib Dems can’t be trusted to keep their word on a referendum. Apparently, that is the reason why Farage and Pearson didn’t bother to approach them.

But could David Cameron have been trusted to hold a referendum on Lisbon in exchange for UKIP standing down for the duration of the GE? Cameron’s duplicity when it comes to the EU suggests not. See: LINK

And would you really want to put your trust in a man who has described UKIP members as fruitcakes and loonies?

So why were Farage and Pearson so keen to do a deal with Cameron?

The answer is a very simple one. Pearson and Farage are still Tories at heart.

They have no loyalty to UKIP or the membership. Pearson’s loyalty is to his old Tory chums. Farage’s loyalty is largely to himself, a few Tory chums and his various off shore bank accounts.

From The Telegraph:

General Election 2010: UKIP leader Pearson warns of ‘Tory blood on carpet’

The UK Independence Party has claimed there will be “blood on the carpet” for the Conservatives and has admitted it is campaigning for a hung parliament.

In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Lord Pearson of Rannoch, the Ukip leader, said his party wanted to ensure David Cameron did not win an overall majority so that the Conservative leader would be forced to listen to Ukip demands for a referendum on whether Britain stays in the European Union.

The peer said that if Mr Cameron had not ditched his promise of a referendum on the EU Treaty, Ukip would have been campaigning for the Tories.

As it is, they are fielding candidates in more than 500 constituencies, hoping to split the vote in marginals where the Tories can ill afford to lose support.

“Unfortunately, I don’t want it, but there will be blood on the carpet,” Lord Pearson said.

The leader had wanted his party to stand aside in at least 15 seats to give eurosceptic Tories a clear run, but activists would not go along with the plan.

Instead, Lord Pearson, a former Tory who defected to Ukip in 2007, has adopted the unusual tactic of urging voters in seven constituencies not to vote for their Ukip candidates, and instead to back a eurosceptic from one of the main parties – six Tories and one sitting Labour MP.

“If Ukip can do well enough, say a couple of million votes, then we will be in a position to show David Cameron and the failed old parties that they can’t form a government unless they give the British people the referendum, in or out of the EU,” Lord Pearson said.

Mr Cameron has now promised to introduce a Bill to ensure that no further powers can be transferred to Brussels without a referendum. Lord Pearson said that was “useless” because the important powers have been transferred.

To see the original: LINK

UKIP in Stroud

You may be interested in this leaflet. UKIPPERS in Stroud are now busily distributing it around the constituency.

Who would have thought it? UKIP activists are doing their very best to ensure the election of a candidate who is not even in favour of leaving the EU!

Labour’s David Drew has confirmed that he does not advocate a complete withdrawal from the EU, but favours “a much more loose confederation…”

There is not much point Farage and Pearson attacking the ‘failed old party system’ if you are then going to tell your members to vote for them.

The words ‘stinking’ and ‘hypocrite’ spring to mind.

UKIP: The surreal world of John Humberstone

We were interested to hear that John Humberstone – UKIP PPC for Wrexham – has been handing out leaflets calling for a halt on immigration to Britain.

We were rather amused to be told that the leaflets in question were being distributed by several non-English speaking gentlemen from Sri Lanka!

The irony of this was apparently lost on Mr Humberstone, John Bufton and their Sri Lankan colleagues.

Some UKIP PPCs have been using a leaflet featuring a photo of a Native American to highlight the consequences of uncontrolled immigration.

A few wags in UKIP have suggested that the ‘Native American’ is actually a 1970’s publicity photo of David Bannerman and dates from his time in The Village People.

Naughty!

Here is an example:

Native American or is it David Bannerman?