 |
| Mr and Mrs Hamilton |
 |
| Nigel 'Spiv Boy' Farage |
"I have had a few calls and texts from people in the last couple of days regarding allegations on this forum and elsewhere that I am "Spastyk"."Spastyk" is our pseudonym for a particularly nasty and unpleasant blog that smears decent people, mostly those who oppose UK membership of the EU but who do not necessarily support UKIP or the current leadership of UKIP. We have changed the name as we see no point in giving it free publicity.
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not "Spastyk", I do not know who "Spastyk" is and, frankly, I do not care. The same thing applies to all who post anonymously on the internet. If you do not have the courage to post in your own name or at least acknowledge your identity, then you are, to be brutal, a coward. Those who know me will know that, for the last few months, I have had extremely limited time on the internet due to illness in my family. This is not likely to change in the near future. I have not indulged in any UKIP related business, apart from a couple of days in Oldham to assist the campaign there last week and attendance at the UKIP Eastleigh Christmas party, for a couple of months for the same, and other unrelated, reasons.
Those who still believe this mistaken opinion are welcome to speak to the board administrator here. Anthony Butcher has my full permission, if he so chooses, to examine any logs he keeps of my activity on this forum to see if there is any correlation between myself and "Spastyk".
I will not indulge in any correspondence on this, or any other, issue for the time being for the reasons mentioned above.
I wish all, including those who apparently believe me to be somebody I am not, a very happy new year.
Regards,
Ray Finch."
"The UKIP policy making process was always a bit different. Although I was one of those who called for a widening of the policy base from the moment I joined the party, I eventually came to agree with Roger Knapman who argued for a narrower and more focussed set of policies concentrating on withdrawal. Britain does need a new party, but UKIP clearly ain't it!
I was very surprised, however, to read that UKIP is now coming out in favour of farming subsidies, a la the Common Agricultural Policy. Opposition to the CAP is one thing that traditionally unites all eurosceptics - and quite a lot of europhiles as well. Maybe UKIP has become so obsessively contrarian that it has even turned against conventional euroscepticism now, who knows?
I recall a transport policy paper which called for the electrification of a line that had, in fact, been closed for many years. There was also a local government paper that was quite probably the most politically illiterate thing I have ever seen.Taken from Gary Cartwright's Brussels Blog.
The biggest question that observers will be asking, however, is not whether UKIP has done an about-turn on farming subsidies, but whether the party is, as it appears to be, out of control".
"Ukip’s Ray finch was easily the most despondent man of the evening. He had spent a large portion of the campaign canvassing in Buckingham on behalf of former Ukip party leader Nigel Farage who had been injured in a plane crash earlier in the day.So, Ray had been lured away from a serious campaign with the offer of a quick flight in a plane that crashed, just like the UKIP vote on polling day.
Ray said he had been due to take a flight in the aircraft himself".
"On hearing the result Ray commented that if Nigel Farage won in Bucks then he would feel vindicated at having spent so much time away from his own constituency".As ever Finch's hero was thrashed, pardon the pun, in Buckingham getting 4,000 votes fewer than a pro-EU independent. Mr Finch seems to be blinded to reality by his hero worship of a third rate political chancer. How sad that he seemed to be the only person in the world who thought Farage could beat Bercow. But that's Ray Finch, UKIP's useful idiot.
 |
| Young UKIP members parade before their Leader |
"Sometime treasurer of UKIP Hodge Hill and Yardley,a two constituency branch and forum moderator.Appears to be more anti UKIP than pro and is close to Nikki".Nikki being Nikki Sinclaire who was unconstitutionally hounded out of UKIP and has recently won a court case against them for discrimination. More on that here.
"I am the Secretary and Treasurer of my local branch. Last year I was a local election candidate, election agent for 7 other local candidates and election agent for two general election candidates. In the last year I have delivered over 25,000 UKIP leaflets, donated the best part of two thousand pounds and incurred out of pocket expenses running to several hundred pounds. As someone of relative modest means this is a substantial financial contribution. This year I will again be a local election candidate and the agent for several other candidates and no doubt I will again put my hand in my pocket whenever it is necessary to do so.If this is waht UKIP are like when they have no MPs and very few councillors, what would life be like in their form of Stalinist dictatorship if they ever did achieve anything in the UK?
That you, as a member of UKIP's National Executive Committee should attack me in public as being "more anti UKIP than pro" only shows how pathetic you are and how utterly undeserving you are to hold a position of responsibility in the party".
UKIP NEC
"In my opinion MEPs can do absolutely nothing in Brussels as they are merely ciphers employed to offer a veneer of democracy to an anti-democratic regime. There is a place for Nigel to be there to make news by being interviewed using it as a backdrop and when Marta is elected she can cause trouble by getting on the financial committees because she knows where the bodies are buried but ordinary MEPs sitting there pressing voting buttons like so many Pavlov's dogs whilst getting fatter on free lunches is a waste of time, money and talent".I bet the other Ukip MEPs love Mr Finch for likening them to Pavlov's dogs, but not as much as Mr Finch obviously loves Mr Farage and Ms Andreasen .
"Winston would have come to UKIP, had a fight with Nigel over whether brandy was better than best bitter and defected back. Pre war Winston was best known for putting country before party so he was a UKIP man before his time really".So Winston Churchill would have defected to Ukip, had an argument about alcoholic beverages with Nigel Farage, then defected back to the Tories, presumably leaving Ukip after his brief defection to put country before party as Mr Finch pointed out. We can see why Mr Finch doesn't get elected can't we?
 |
| Paul "Roderick Spode" Nuttall |
 |
| Nigel "Bertie Wooster" Farage |
A TEACHER has won a legal battle with the UK Independence Party (UKIP) over an attempt to use his former membership of the British National Party to expel him.
Judge Peter Fox ruled that UKIP and the party’s Stockton branch chairman Gordon Parkin acted unlawfully when they tried to throw out member Alan Hardy.
The High Court in Middlesbrough heard how Mr Hardy, the branch’s former press officer, was initially expelled after falling out with Mr Parkin, who stood for UKIP in the Stockton North constituency at the last general election.
In his ruling, which declared Mr Hardy’s expulsion as null and void, Judge Fox summed up the relationship between the two men.
He said Mr Hardy, from Stockton, accused Mr Parkin of being “incompetent, dishonest and self-seeking”, while Mr Parkin accused Mr Hardy of being dishonest and so disruptive that it was impossible for the branch to function.
The row came to a head when Mr Hardy asked Mr Parkin to resign as branch chairman.
An argument between the two men resulted in UKIP Stockton branch being temporarily banned from the venue it used for meetings.
In September last year, Mr Parkin wrote to Mr Hardy saying he should no longer attend branch meetings.
In January, when Mr Hardy tried to renew his membership, Judge Fox found that UKIP general secretary Jonathan Arnott contrived to exclude him from the party on the grounds that he was a former BNP member, despite party leaders being aware of his past when he joined.
Mr Hardy, from Stockton, who is teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi Arabia, last night welcomed the ruling.
He said: “This has been about accountability. Gordon Parkin, aided by the UKIP hierarchy, now knows he cannot treat those who may disagree with him like dirt.
“Indeed, in light of the outcome of this case, I think he should do the decent thing and resign his membership.”
UKIP executive chairman Steve Crowther told The Northern Echo that the party was very unhappy with the judgement and would be reviewing its position.
He said: “UKIP is a tolerant, inclusive and non-sectarian organisation and it is important to our members that those values are maintained.”
In January, when Mr Hardy tried to renew his membership, Judge Fox found that UKIP general secretary Jonathan Arnott contrived to exclude him from the party on the grounds that he was a former BNP member, despite party leaders being aware of his past when he joined.
THE North-East branch of euro-sceptic party UKIP has been investigated by trading standards officials after making a bogus application for cash from an EU quango.
Members of UKIP North- East created the fake Hartlepool and East Durham European Language and Culture Club to apply for a £50 grant towards a fictitious event to celebrate the European Day of Languages.
Once the scam was exposed, trading standards officials in Durham were alerted and looked into the case.
Europe Direct, an arm of the the EU’s European Commission based in Durham, which promotes European culture across the North-East, initially agreed to pay the grant in an email sent to the fictitious club in July.
UKIP claimed they had set up the bogus club to expose Europe Direct for not making the necessary checks before it agreed to hand out EU cash, and said UKIP would never have cashed the cheque had it arrived.
The UKIP sympathiser behind the stunt, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “This all started to wind up the EU – when I created a totally fictitious organisation.
“I was surprised to learn that Europe Direct North-East fell for it and decided to give us a grant.”
Europe Direct approved the grant by email, and even offered free bunting, booklets and prizes – but the ruse was exposed before it sent any money out.
The organisation had agreed to hand out 20 of the £50 grants to schools, colleges, youth and community groups to fund a European Day event next week.
Dave Pascoe, of UKIP North- East, said: “Through this hoax we have gained a modest victory over the EU machine and managed to kick the malevolent EU monster in the ankles.”
However, Dorothy Gibson, manager of Europe Direct North-East, said: “The checking and vetting procedures we have in place raised concerns about this application and guidance was sought from Durham County Council’s trading standards service.
“It is now the intention of the county council to inform the National Anti-Fraud Framework, which alerts all local authorities to incidents of this nature.”
It is understood that Durham County Council’s trading standards officials ruled there was no further action they could take because they would have difficulty proving UKIP intended to defraud Europe Direct – especially as the party claimed it would not have cashed any cheque received.
Ms Gibson said: “From a very early stage we had serious concerns about this application.”
Dear Ms. Sinclaire,
I apologize for not having contacted you earlier.
I understand from your telephonic message to OLAF Free Phone, that you wanted to be informed whether OLAF has opened an investigation into possible irregularites you may have committed as alleged by a former assistant of yours.
I can confirm to you that OLAF has not opened an internal administrative investigation into this matter.
Yours sincerely.
Danny De Raedt
Investigator
European Commission
Europe Anti-Fraud Office OLAF Unit A 1 - EU Institutions.
Office 05/58 - Phone : + 32.2.***.**.**
The UK Independence Party (Ukip) is to be taken to the High Court by the West Midlands MEP claiming it discriminated against her because she is gay.
Nikki Sinclaire is taking action over Ukip withdrawing the whip from her in the European Parliament and preventing her standing for the Commons as a candidate for the party.
She claimed that her treatment had been in breach of Ukip's constitution and was motivated by sexual orientation discrimination.
A directions hearing is to be held by the High Court. The MEP is also taking the party to an employment tribunal, with a preliminary hearing on December 28.
Ms Sinclaire was kicked out of the party after she refused to sit with the eurosceptic group Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) which Ukip joined in the European Parliament last year.
She said she quit the EFD because it contained "extreme elements", including people with "openly homophobic opinions".
"I think that is homophobic in itself, the fact that they expected me to sit next to such people and engage with such people in the Parliament, while taking a holier-than-thou attitude to parties like the BNP (British National Party) in the UK," she said.
As well as withdrawing the whip from the MEP, Ukip's national executive committee also ended her position as the party's candidate for Meriden at the general election.
She said she still believed in the aims of Ukip, whose principal goal is to take the UK from the European Union
, and would be prepared to be one of its MEPs again if it was "more tolerant".
"It is unacceptable in the 21st century for people to be marginalised and treated in an offensive and derogatory way on the grounds of their sexuality," the MEP said.
Read More http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories//tm_headline=ukip-were-homophobic-towards-me-claims-west-midlands-mep-nikki-sinclaire%26method=full%26objectid=27607957%26siteid=65233-name_page.html#ixzz153a0YrTb
No doubt, in picking the Fifth of November as announcement day for yet another of its leadership elections, UKIP was once again displaying the arch “sense of humour” which it, though not the rest of us, seems unable to resist. But the Tory Right needs to understand that UKIP’s set to become an even unfunnier joke, and that this will weaken still further Euroscepticism in the UK.
It’s apt – fitting would not be the right word – that UKIP’s joker-in-chief, Nigel Farage, looks set to be declared its leader, resuming a post which, in another “only with UKIP” quirk, he meekly surrendered just a year ago, conveniently before the general election. It could also only be with UKIP that we could witness a leadership contest during which the frontrunner has proceeded with apparent inevitability to the prize and yet, at the same time, has suffered grievous, even fatal blows to his reputation. This concerns all of us who would like to see UKIP mature into at least a voice of conscience on the Right, a prospect which frankly receded in the course of Mr Farage’s last stint in the job. Sadly, however, neither “maturity” nor “conscience” serve as les mots juste when we contemplate Nigel Farage. The party’s prospects of serving as such, let alone anything more, is likely to recede still further, should the once-and-future leader return, given what we have seen and heard in recent weeks.
Mr Farage’s eagerness to treat everything as a sort of silly jape – think Boy’s Own meets The Beano, his many declarations, prior to his previous election and, tellingly, again now, that he intends to “professionalise” his party notwithstanding – has long been to UKIP’s detriment, beyond the eyes of those in the media, usually sharing no actual affinity with the party, who consider him “good value”. Now, though, light has now been shed on the bumptious ‘Nigel Farage’ figure the press likes to exploit for its own, hardly Eurosceptic, purposes. Dismally this Nigel is some distance removed from the Woosterish image he likes to cultivate.
Farage has always brushed aside as sour grapes from the disaffected claims, or revelations, about an unpleasant quality to his political leadership. Yet in this latest UKIP leadership campaign something unexpected has happened, with at least two major attacks upon Farage coming from senior UKIP figures previously regarded as essentially sympathetic to him. The first of them, Douglas Denny, is on the party’s NEC, from where he has been one of Farage’s principal apologists. No longer. Two weeks ago, he wrote on a public forum that Farage, ‘stabbed the party in the back by abrogating his responsibility to the party as Leader – by not taking the party into the general election.’ The next day, Mr Denny went even further – much further – by stating that Farage is ‘prone to temper tantrums, bullying tactics and condescension to try to belittle those who oppose him’ and that he ‘has repeatedly ignored the NEC or attempted to by-pass what he does not like’; ‘has shown he does not have a future vision for UKIP’ and ‘is much too tied-up with Brussels and his fiefdom over there’. For the icing on the cake, Denny revealed that he had made these criticisms out of the public gaze on the party’s members-only forum, but that, even though he was on the NEC, the comments had been censored there.
A week later, Farage took another barrage, this time from within that Brussels fiefdom. His second critic, Mike Nattrass, is not only a fellow UKIP MEP; he is also a former Deputy Leader of the party. In a widely circulated email, Mr Nattrass made observations about Farage that were even more damning than those of Mr Denny.
Increasingly, I am hearing the word “Spiv” used to describe him … [He’s 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 … he does not like truth or competition.
That was only the start of Nattrass’ devastating attack. Farage, he said, has ‘the morals of an alley cat’; he has been ‘caught out with both hands in the till’ after breaking a UKIP MEPs’ agreement not to employ spouses and ‘secretly’ paying his wife out of his budget; he ‘has derailed every leader since the very first’, bar one; ‘the whole Parliamentary Group in the EU is run for Nigel’s financial and public image’; he has contributed ‘next to nothing’ financially to the party (a very interesting allegation, given that Farage once famously explained away his brag that he had received over £2million in non-salary expenses and allowances by saying he had used it ‘to help promote UKIP’s message’). For good measure, Nattrass also took aim at Farage’s ‘close friend Godfrey Bloom MEP’, who, he claimed, does ‘all the hiring’ and ‘is said to be banned by four hotels for urinating in the corridors’. Such is the volume of ‘professionalization’.
Despite all this – or perhaps because of it – Nattrass concluded that he expected ‘Nigel will be elected leader as no one else is effectively allowed to stand without a spin campaign against them.’ As disturbing evidence of this, he added that he ‘found allegations of fraud were brought against me when I stood for Leadership. They melted away afterwards and had no foundation in truth, but they did the job intended’. Then, breathtakingly, Nattrass stated that, in contrast to the fake charges against himself, ‘Nigel has had a number of very real cases against him.’ Whatever the substance of these charges, in a normal, even, professional party, the would-be leader might have been expected to keep the lid of the petrol can, but as if to prove that, at the centre of any UKIP firestorm, one will find Nigel Farage, he promptly proved at least two of Nattrass’ accusations. First, in an astonishing act of petulance, by publicly falling out with fellow leadership candidate and MEP, David Campbell Bannerman, over the latter’s quite legitimate complaints about Farage’s planned appearance on Question Time in the middle of the campaign. Indeed, Mr Farage went as far as to roar at the BBC microphone helpfully put in front of him:
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.
If irony survived Kissinger’s Nobel Peace Prize, this charge, from this source, will undoubtedly have finished it off.
Could anything else go wrong for Mr Farage during this fortnight from hell? Amazingly, yes. The next leaked email came from the keyboard of one Sharon Bonici, who it transpires is a Maltese socialist with strong links to Farage (try to keep up: this is UKIP), whom he has entrusted with the setting up of his latest Brussels project, a lavishly taxpayer-funded pan-EU party. The email confirms this ambition of Farage, executed in the face of an overwhelmingly supported motion at the recent UKIP conference not to establish any such thing without the explicit approval of UKIP’s membership.
While Farage defying his members is standard-issue behaviour, what’s truly toxic for any British Eurosceptic who thinks that UKIP under Farage is worth even a protest vote is whom he has already signed up to this latest costly project. Top of the list is his alleged fixer, Godfrey Bloom. No surprise there perhaps, but go further down the list and one finds representatives from the Sweden Democrats, a party born out of the Swedish neo-nazi movement, and the extreme-right Flemish party, the Vlaams Belang, with proposed additions from Geert Wilders’ party in the Netherlands and Italy’s notorious far-right Lega Nord, with the latter of whom Farage has already closely embroiled UKIP in the group he leads (jointly with the Lega Nord itself) in the European Parliament. That group, the ludicrously styled Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD), has been the subject of much controversy within and outside UKIP over the past year, not just because of the membership of the Lega Nord, which has countless allegations of racism and paramilitary violence stacked up against it, but of various other far-right parties as well, including the Danish People’s Party, the Slovak National Party and Greece’s Popular Orthodox Rally (LAOS). The leaders of the last-named claim 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy and were properly condemned by the US State Department in 2005 as an ‘extreme right-wing party (which) supports virulent nationalism, anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia’. They’re also into their seventh year propping up Nigel Farage’s Brussels fiefdom. For understand this, Farage’s hegemony within UKIP stems directly from the powerbase afforded to him by this EP group. In other words, if you think that Nigel Farage is wrecking British Euroscepticism, it’s the EP’s money that lets him do so. Funny that.
Disgust over the EFD’s composition caused one UKIP MEP, Nikki Sinclaire, to leave it, closely followed by Mike Nattrass, but while Farage subsequently withdrew the UKIP whip from Sinclaire in Brussels and has tried to hound her out of the party altogether, he has thus far left Nattrass’ status intact, fearful of the latter’s clout within the party, not least in terms of his generous funding.
Despite all this controversy, and despite always rubbishing the suggestion that the EFD has far-right elements, Farage now seems not to care as he desperately tries to move into open electoral alliance at pan-EU level with partners whose extremist credentials are in no doubt at all. It will be interesting indeed to see who else now slithers out from under the EU’s rock garden to join Farage’s grand project. The Bonici email suggested that one of the pan-EU party’s first campaigns would be ‘to generate 1 million signatures to be able to instigate a pan wide European referendum [sic] on Turkey. The idea is to use the million signature clause according to the Lisbon Treaty.’ By a strange coincidence, three days before this email was sent, Austria’s far-right Freedom Party organised a two-day conference in Vienna, to organise an EU-wide referendum on Turkish EU entry, using the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty regarding a million signatures.
Attending the Freedom Party’s conference were parties remarkably similar to those on the Bonici email – far-right politicians from Vlaams Belang, the Sweden Democrats, the Lega Nord, the Slovak National Party and the Danish People’s Party, the latter represented by one of the EFD’s leading MEPs, the appropriately named Morten Messerschmidt, who, amongst many controversial moments in his delightful career, said in 2006
I think we need three sets of rules of immigration. One for Europeans, who will be regulated by EU-law. One for people from the rest of the Western World, including parts of East Asia, South America, etc. And then a third set of rules for the third world, who in general do not really offer anything we can benefit from, speaking of education, labour craft and knowledge.
This is the coalition which Nigel Farage has been carefully and quietly cultivating across the Channel for many years, whilst an indifferent British press have looked the other way. One school of thought holds that Farage has been indulged deliberately, to some extent, to thwart the BNP, but with friends like these, what exactly has been the point?
UKIP can perform a valuable service to Britain: they can keep the Tory Party, if not honest on Europe, then at least rather more honest than leaders like David Cameron and John Major would prefer to have it. With Nigel Farage leading them, whatever threat UKIP poses, it won’t be an honest one.
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 party...next 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.
Mike
