Latest from UKIP Daily

Peter Whittle – Leadership Campaign Launch Part 2

[Continued from yesterday’s Part 1]

Unlike the money-is-everything Tories, and the Britain-haters of Labour, UKIP has always believed in and celebrated our nation, our values and our history. It is not just about money, the bottom line, or knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. For years now, as Culture Spokesman, and then as Deputy Leader, I have championed these issues as being of paramount importance.   Alongside being the only true party of proper migration controls, we must be the party that cares – and talks – not just about the economic effects but also the cultural impact of mass migration.

From my work as UKIP’s group leader on the London Assembly, I know that so many of the problems we face – housing shortages, the pressure on social services and education – stem substantially from the fact that a city the size of Hull is being added to our population every year. I would make sure that the truly historic levels of migration we are experiencing are once again dragged to the centre stage of politics, rather than being side-lined or, as is happening now,  accepted as the new normal.

We must be the party that speaks up about the threat we face from Islamism from without and within, at a time when the established parties are mute either from fear, denial or sheer cowardice. Contrary to what many might now believe, this is not an issue we in UKIP have shied away from. Far from it. I see it as of paramount importance and indeed I have been talking about this very thing since first joining the party.

We must be the party that fights the increasing encroachments on free speech which have come from an entrenched but misplaced cultural sensitivity. I believe that a nation springs not just from a balance sheet but from a shared connection to a place and identity, whether it be family, local community or indeed, nation.

UKIP has always been at its best when it is radical. We have never been afraid to discuss those issues which mean so much to ordinary people, but on which the old parties have closed down debate for so long.

Under my leadership, UKIP will be the party that stands for a country united under the same set of laws and values. Britain is becoming more fragmented. This is the direct result of a public policy of multiculturalism.

I have continually spoken out in the party and in the media against this misguided approach. It has emphasised separateness. It has vehemently disallowed criticism. It has treated all practices and traditions, however much they might offend our values and laws, as being of equal standing. It has been championed most fiercely by those who have little interest in preserving British identity, or who are indeed hostile to the very idea of it.

Over generations, we have seen where this has led us. Far from getting people to mix, it has instead produced in many parts of our country what can only be described as a series of mono-cultural islands. We should remember this: nobody voted for multiculturalism. And yet we all now live with the results. It is no wonder that even some voices in the old parties have raised concerns about the failure of such an approach. Yet they do nothing.

Under my leadership we in Ukip will stand up for our values. We will say firmly that a multi-ethnic society can be a harmonious one if it is bound together by an over-arching attachment to Britain and British identity. Britain has always been a welcoming society to people of whatever faith, nationality or creed who have wanted to make this country their home.

But we believe that those faiths and beliefs must exist firmly within a British framework. The time has come when we have to put markers down and say, this is what we are, this is what we believe in. We must do this, because no other party will.

I believe firmly in the rule of law. That law is British law. A society that can pick and choose a legal system gradually ceases to be a society at all. No parallel system should ever be allowed to impinge on the integrity of British Law. There must be no tolerance of systems which deny the equal rights of men and women. The rights of women – for these are the most affected by such practises – should and must extend to all parts of our society, regardless of religion or ethnicity. The public are rightly alarmed at the growth in sharia courts and the apparent unwillingness of the political class to face up to this. Under my leadership therefore we will continue to fight for a ban on sharia law – a system which is intended as a rival to our own and which undermines women’s rights – from being applied in the UK. It is simple: there should be one law for all.

I take the same approach to our values: whether it be the need for English as a common language, the need for our history and achievements to be celebrated in our schools, or the need for zero tolerance of cultural practises which go against our values and our laws, we have to have confidence in ourselves if indeed we are to promote a unifying British culture. That culture can be one that is open to anyone who wishes to identify with us and our values, but our own belief in the greatness of our traditions, values and culture is vital.  

As leader of UKIP I will not shy away from expressing this, loud and clear. Rebuilding patriotism, confidence and a belief in ourselves would, under my leadership, be one of our Party’s biggest priorities.

I said earlier that it would be an honour and privilege to be your leader. It would also be hugely exciting, for I believe we have a vital role to play in the coming years.

I have got to know every part of the party over the past five years. I have spoken at countless branches and conferences, attended fundraising meetings with potential donors, formulated policy and represented us at every level of the media. I stood as our Mayoral candidate in London, and was elected to the London Assembly last year. As one of our senior nationally elected representatives, I’m proud of our strong record there. Over the past year, I have been at the very top of the party, supporting our leader and experiencing all the trials and tribulations of some rocky times for us. All of this has put me in good stead. We have a great new project: a Post-Brexit UKIP for a new era. I hope, together, we can get started on it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

34 Comments on Peter Whittle – Leadership Campaign Launch Part 2

  1. I am appalled at some commentators saying that they supported Brexit “despite the economic cost”! I believe that UKIP has failed miserably to point out to the public the huge costs to the UK of being in the EU. Peter Whittle and all the other candidates need to get hold of the figures and keep telling the public that UKIP was, and still is, the only party which exposes the lies of the europhiles and remainers. Please contact me for further information.

    • Hi Jerry. Freedom & democracy & self determination & control of your own nation higher priorities than economic cost. The EU is about dissolving our homeland into something unacceptable. We had to get out. Anyway I reckon the economy will be stronger for being out. During the referendum I heard this opinion a few times “our freedom not for sale at any price”.
      “If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too.” — Somerset Maugham

    • Maximus, I think you are missing the point I am making. If being in the EU was hugely financially beneficial to the UK there might be some merit in arguing about how much better off we are by losing our freedom, independence etc. However, the facts are that whilst we are losing all the good things you mention we are ALSO losing an obscene amount of money as well! In fact being in the EU has cost the UK a vast fortune for absolutely no benefit whatsoever: except to our exporters to the EU who saved approximately £80/taxpayer in (for example) 2014. By doing so they were expecting every UK taxpayer to pay an extra £1,500/annum in costs due to being in the EU. Is it any wonder that the CBI, politicians, the Richard Bransons of this world want the UK to stay in the eU? What we must get much better at is pointing out to the public at large, particularly the young, how much they are all being ripped off by the europhiles.

      • Hi Jerry.
        Yes. I think I did miss your point.
        Thanks for the info and data on the economics. This is new to me.
        Nigel Farage seems to be thinking that we will end up with a watered down Brexit in 2 years – maybe end up with a Norway like agreement. So the debate will run for years with the elites attempting to slow down or stop Brexit.
        It will be important for those who understand the economic issues to keep presenting their case and maybe provide UKIPs leadership with quality info to enable them to be effective in debate. The main case of the remainers was that the economy would be stronger if we stayed in the EU so being able to challenge this position is key.

      • Thanks for that contribution.

        Regarding not caring the economic cost, was more about consumers (remainers) losing confidence and spending less, possibly leading to a possible recession. Not because we are actually suddenly “poorer” but just due to their own emotional reaction to having officially left the EU.

        I fully believe we’ll be richer as a nation outside of the EU.

        But I do not think we will be anywhere near as prosperous as we can be until we halt low skilled, no skilled immigration.

        But since both tory and labour are in favour mass uncontrolled immigration I don’t see that happening.

        We really need a ukip govt.

  2. Peter, were you aware in advance of the “special” pro-Halal leaflet delivered in Stoke?

    Did you try to stop it being delivered?

    Many members have expressed their disquiet regarding this leaflet. I went several times to help with the Stoke campaign. I was not aware of this leaflet at the time. If I had been, I would not have gone to Stoke at all.

    If the party is to be anti-Sharia then it must also be anti-Halal and anti-Kosher too. You cannot have different rules for religious abattoirs, with inhumane concessions relative to non-religious abattoirs, and then say you support “one law for all”. It just loses all credibility.

    • Well said

    • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT. // July 19, 2017 at 8:13 pm // Reply
      Hugo,may I take it upon myself to answer both questions,of course Peter knew about that vile and disgusting damn Leaflet,and did nothing to stop it being delivered,as did the rest of the dullards who still control UKIP.Everyone please click on my link,and you will see how mad I was when our dear friend and colleague Dee,both an activist and contributor,here on UKIP Daily,told me about that sickening bloody Halal leaflet.
      The sheer stupidity of all those involved,was it was all for nothing,and what still makes me mad was that no explanation was offered to us activists and members,just one huge wall of silence,they all just buried their heads in the sand,hoping that their monumental mistake would just disappear,and what comes to mind is this: least said soonest mended,that could not be further from the truth,as they lost us huge support,from not only the general public,but our members who left in droves.
      Hugo,you know how much we both hate especially bloody Halal accreditation,which actually funds Sharia Law,and also terrorism,that is the honest truth.Thank God Nutall is gone,yet still those others complicit with appeasing Muslims,and drafting that most vile Halal leaflet still remain,and worst still these are the self same dullards who are attacking the only person who is prepared to speak the truth about the greatest threat we face today,and that is The Islamification of Britain,that is no other than the courageous and brave Anne Marie Waters,who knows that both Sharia Law and bloody Halal,are inextricably linked.They should never ever have been allowed,it breaks my heart when I think of all that our poor and peaceful animals have to endure at the hands of those savages,who seem to take a perverse pleasure in causing all animals,the most unimaginable pain and suffering.
      It takes nothing away from a Human to be kind to an animal,non-stun ritual slaughter has no place in Britain in the 21ST Centuary,I want it banned,and I want it banned now.

      • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT. // July 19, 2017 at 11:55 pm // Reply
        Everyone click my link,and you will see for yourselves all the horrors of bloody Halal.Read the truth about the link between Halal and Sharia Law.
        See the photo of the sheep being stunned with the full head and body stun,
        which with the rise in the number of bloody Halal non-stun Slaughterhouses,is no longer used in Britain,see the video(if you dare) of the little lambs having their throats slit,and shackled upside down writhing in agony,while still alive,as they choke on their life blood to appease the blood lust of the death-cult Islamists.Today in Britain,more animals are slaughtered by the vile and despicable Halal non-stun slaughter than the rest of Europe.
        See the great Pat Condell in action,a man who has been a great inspiration to me.I make no apologies for posting this,i wanted everyone to see how totally stupid and absurd was the change of policy,so defined by Nutall and his dullard advisors appeasement of Muslims,and that despicable pro Halal bloody leaflet,UKIP had become the useful idiot of Islam.This was the beginning of the decline of UKIP,thank god Nutall has gone,unfortunately the dullards responsible for that disastrous change of policy,are still entrenched within the hierarchy of UKIP.These are the self same people who no longer represent the membership of UKIP,these people are the Muslim Dhimmi Appeasers,the same ones who are attacking the wonderful Anne Marie Waters,who is Brave enough to speak the truth about the greatest threat we face today in Britain,and that is the Islamification of Britain.Believe me everything else is totally meaningless,we are fighting for our very existence.

  3. An example of the failing of which I spoke at 8.31pm is found on the UKIP website:’foriegn sectetary’.

  4. Many moons ago I was one of nine guys in a band who were invited to play at the 25th anniversary of (big deal)the Hamburg Police Athletic Club. Wow! – an all expenses paid jolly for tyros. We only had to play twice and the first time was to a group of not-too senior citizens. We went down like a lead balloon. Dispirited, we asked our German interpreter how we’d fouled up. ‘Preparation’, he replied. ‘No preparation means no respect for your audience’. He put us right on this matter. One suggestion – a few words of greeting in halting German by our pianist – didn’t go amiss and we brought the house down. He knew what the audience would appreciate. It’s a lesson I’ve never forgotten but one that UKIP – by and large – has never learned or appreciated. I’ve since learned that nowadays the concept is termed “production values”. As I happened to be in town, I took a friend to the last UKIP public meeting before the most recent Euro Elections at Marsham Street, SW1 for a laugh – watch ’em foul up again. I would put money on the claim that UKIP had been told of the failing of which I speak and had hired a West End producer to knock the event into a highly professional ad for “The product”. An absolute knockout is what it was. Seamless. My friend, who was a socialist, was on his feet within 10 minutes, clapping and claiming he absolutely agreed with what was being said. I sat dumbfounded; they’d at last recognised one of their greatest failings. I enthusiastically re-joined the following day. Except for the “Reckless” reveal at conference, UKIP is back to square one. I can give knuckle-biting examples of complete amateurism since then. An appearance of professionalism in all we do HAS to be our starting point.

  5. PurplePottymouth // July 18, 2017 at 1:57 pm // Reply

    Your TV appearances and radio broadcast have been measured, competent and you’ve got better with experience, a credit to UKIP BUT – always a big but isn’t there?
    You have been Paul’s deputy since last November – back down here grubbing amongst the grass roots we and our branch members all wanted reform, Diane wasn’t allowed to and Paul just never got round to it. Then there was our idiotic GE emphasis – It’s the f-ing economy stupid! As deputy you must take some responsibility as our total failure to counteract the ‘UKIP’s job is done’ meme and our toxic image paved the way for Corbyn – oh and did I just mention our utter failure to take command of electronic media platforms

  6. Peter, you are a strong candidate. And if you’ve earnt the ire of Tomaz, a fine one too.

    But I hope we’re going to hear much more from you and the others on the economy. That’s what wins general elections. It’s just waiting for a dose of judicious nationalism.

    • But the people voted to leave the EU despite a huge wall of information and propaganda saying that this bad for the economy. Suggests the people were more concerned about freedom & democracy & self determination. The economy was not the key factor for many. I think the people want freedom and for the UK to be an independent nation state whatever the economic cost.

      • A referendum and general election are clean different things, Max.
        And people either didn’t believe all that doom and gloom on the economy or thought the EU issue trumped it anyway.

        • Quercus. There were people who did not care what the economic cost was. I was one of them. Freedom is not for sale at any price. No idea how many have that outlook though. Your judgement is probably the correct one.
          Yes. The EU isue trumped the economy. How about next election ‘saving the nation from the various existential threats’ trumps the economy as an issue. After all working class people are irreversibly patriotic.

          • By all means Max – just don’t tell them it trumps the economy.
            Wilders and Le Pen are the nearest exemplars, and should be telling us that.
            MSM will try to make ‘saving the nation’ the UKIP issue anyway – ie racist, bigoted, insular, dinosauric. If they succeed, we sink.
            Do something different – take the indirect approach.

      • I too want the UK to be a normal self governing country regardless of the economic cost.

        The whole point is that once we are an independent nation again we can choose how we wish to structure our economy.

        But the truth is, just being free from the EU and (hopefully) free from Islam won’t actually make a jot of difference if we still have a parliament full of marxists. They will find another way to pursue their plan to institute a world government.

        We will continue to face existential threats.

        And these threats will undoubtedly involve manipulation of the economy. The vulgar manipulation of the economy is always important in marxism.

        We will only be “safe” once every corner of this country has been purged of marxists and draconian laws put in place to prevent the appearance and or proliferation of marxism in this country.

        Only then can we truly flourish as a nation and create meaningful prosperity for all.

        • Lauren. I think the battles between globalists and patriots and the right & left & traditionalists and cultural marxists will never end. Our grandchildren will be fighting the same battles.
          However as cultural marxism was brought in by propaganda and schools & universities and media etc maybe similar methods can reverse it.

          • Yes, I suppose we’ll have to go on our own long march through the institutions to reverse marxism.

            Though I’d prefer a swift purge.

    • You ain’t going to hear much about the economy from Peter. “It is not just about money”. Money doesn’t matter – not if you come from a *certain* sort of background, and those fragrant enough to move in Peter’s circles will surely understand what I mean by that. Thus, I suspect Peter considers questions about money and economics to be somewhat common and crass, and learning economics certainly of no interest if not actually somewhat beneath him. Which is probably why economics isn’t exactly his forte.

      What matters is the preservation of the *culture* of the patrician metrosexual liberal London elite, and it costs what it costs. If the peasants don’t have bread to eat as a result, well, they can bloody eat cake. Those enjoying a cushy political appanage courtesy of the taxpayer (courtesy of the Party) will be alright in any event.

      • Peter deserves more respect than that, Tomaz.

        And cake really would be restricted to the rich if your way prevails.

        • Funny that, isn’t it. Communists always malign libertarians with lies of the latter working for the interests of the rich.

          But it’s always those same communist demagogues who promise poor people the Earth and then always lead them to abject poverty, starvation and death.

          And it’s always the libertarians who have to pick up the pieces and rebuild what the communists have destroyed and bring people back to – if not prosperity, at least a decent standard of living. Only for the communists to snipe enviously from the sides and incite the masses whom they themselves have impoverished and enslaved to blame and take it out on those who have rebuilt their prosperity for them.

          And isn’t it funny too, how it is those same communists who work to protect the wealth of the “vanguard of the proletariat” and their cronies, to keep the plebs down and enrich themselves at the expense of the masses? And the libertarians the ones who fight for the equal opportunity of the poor to better themselves through their own initiative and hard work.

          And yet demagogues like you continue to repeat the same old lies.

          I’ve lived through decades of communist oppression by exactly the sort of regime you idolise and praise. Run by exactly the sort of people like you. I know exactly who and what you are, Quercus.

          Apart from copying and pasting the same decades old lies from the Comintern foot soldier field manual, is there anything else you know how to do?

  7. Peter you offer nothing new in the above article from previous postings. This is very weak for a leadership candidate.
    You do not tithe your GLA income for UKIP party benefit yet you were put at the number one spot on the candidate list which almost guaranteed a political income hence following in the footsteps of our MEPs. You were not voted into office by the list system – UKIP was.
    Diane James fiasco Nuttall fiasco and the ongoing duo of Crowther/Oakden is destroying UKIP. How would you stop it?
    JRE wants direct democracy and a mass membership as does AMW who is prepared to march in the streets for liberty justice and reform. This is the way forward – I get the distinct impression you are too public school old tie to engage in the verbal fisticuffs that would awaken the JAMs to join the People’s Army.

    • We need a leader with the warrior spirit. A fighter is required.

      • Agreed, Maximus, it’s now or never. Marches are getting going, 5th August Veterans led by Phil Campion,, 10 am Parliament Square – 10th September Bristol – Gays Against Sharia (AMW representing UKIP, and what the recent accusations of Cultural Marxism are about – she alerted organizers to tweeted views of an invited speaker who has since been stood down – rightly so) and sometime soon another Football Lads Alliance March – Justice 4 Chelsey marches every month – all these people need a Party to vote for, and a Leader to follow.
        If Peter Whittle has the courage of his convictions he would have been there representing UKIP at the last GAS march and will be at this one – was he? this is where our future voters are and they are increasing by the day. Incidentally, Tommy Robinson leads and supports these marches and strangely, people aren’t put off by his past the way that some UKIP elite are!

        • Yes Dee. It would be great to have a leader willing to share a platform with people outside the party because the leader considers it is the right thing to do. Great to have a leader who not driven by what media may print but who instead says what needs saying and then defends that case.

      • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT. // July 19, 2017 at 7:19 am // Reply
        And that leader is Anne Marie Waters,without her believe me UKIP is well and truly finished.UKIP is in a mess,we are haemorrhaging members like there is no tomorrow,in my very own Branch,which covers a huge area in the former coal mining areas of the South Wales Valleys-RCT,before the recent
        election we had 60 members,but since we have lost 10,who have not renewed,and possibly more who feel totally let down by the failures who are still in control.I will just remind everyone in the heady days of the 2015 GE.
        3,881,099 voted for us,then consider that had fallen to just 594,068.These figures show beyond all doubt the huge loss of support from people who have felt totally let down by UKIP.When I spoke to the ordinary men and women while out canvassing,the vast majority feel there is little point in voting for UKIP,as they disliked Nutall and all his lies,and of course that damned Halal leaflet.Many of these are traditional Labour voters,who voted with us for Brexit,these are the very people whom we should have been targeting,to build up the party.We keep hearing that UKIP needs to become more Radical,we heard it in the manifesto,we hear it from all those failures who still control UKIP,believe me that is the last thing they want.They all want to continue in their cosy little jobs,as I write these are the self same failures who are going to reinvent and rebrand UKIP,apparently all will be revealed at the Torquay Conference,I for one am not impressed.I urge all my fellow activists and all our other members who comment on here,that if you care for UKIP,
        and if you care for our once great country,and if you want there to be a future for all our children,grandchildren and great grandchildren,here in the country of their birth,back the only person who I know in my heart really is Radical,
        Anne Marie Waters,I hate the thought that they might have to live as Muslims
        especially when their Ancestors died in Two World Wars fighting for their freedom.

        • Geoffrey,
          I listened to AMW at Lingwood Hall on Monday and have changed my mind about voting – I am voting for her, as opposed to not bothering to vote.
          I have been particularly impressed by the fact Stuart Agnew is sponsoring her candidature, a man I have known for many years. I asked her bluntly what she would do when she hits the brick wall AKA the NEC, and it seems she will carry on fighting. Definately not old school UKIP elite there.
          On Sunday Politics Nigel F opined that if UKIP becomes an anti-religion party it is finished. My response to that is, if Anne-Marie is stopped from running for leader the party is finished anyway.
          Hear hear on everything you have said.

          • GEOFFREY CHARLES ELLIOTT. // July 19, 2017 at 11:41 am //

            Dear Rob,many thanks for your positive reply.Rob,i too am so very impressed that Stuart Agnew is sponsoring Anne Marie.I have met Stuart at our various conferences,and he Is someone who has been a great ambassador for us for many years,and someone whom I hold in the highest regard.The very fact that Stuart is supporting Anne Marie,when other senior figures in UKIP choose to attack her in a most spiteful and dishonest way,only prove Stuart’s intelligence and strength of character.Why do these others think it necessary to denigrate Anne Marie,can’t they see their absurd attacks prove them to be inadequates,and do nothing for UKIP’s image after such spectacular and disastrous defeats.
            True Anne Marie is a fighter,and recently said this:Whatever they throw at me,I will bat it back at them,yes definitely not
            old school UKIP elite.
            Even after our huge loss of support,I still believe that we in UKIP can do great things,the problem we now face is getting other people in the country to believe that.For there to be any future in our country,and everyone we hold dear,we really must make Anne Marie our new leader.
            Rob I agree it is us THE MEMBERSHIP who,should decide
            our future,and not the handful of totally inadequate failures that still control UKIP,and their lackeys,those NEC members who voted against Anne Marie standing in Lewisham South.
            We all know who these damn people are,alas I wish I could name them,but I don’t think Viv would allow it.

  8. Mr Whittle, you are obviously too entrenched in the current UKIP setup. The setup that many UKIP members want changed. If you really were in touch with members you would know this. On here, on facebook and twitter there is the clamour for change but I don’t see where you advocate the changes called for, or any change within the UKIP infrastructure or personnel. We don’t want more of the same.
    After you are elected (big if) you will study methods used by other successful bodies. Methods (of communicating) is only one part of that success. No good telling everyone how poor your organisation is. If the members are unhappy there is no chance the public will come on board.
    You are behind the times. JRE presented his plans and objectives which we can see. You are offering something in the future, details unknown. His vision involves all members because he recognises the hiatus between leadership, branch and member. This is what will revitalise UKIP. We can’t all get what we want but we need to see fairness and transparency within UKIP or it will die.

  9. “I have continually spoken out in the party and in the media ….” He means a few times.

    “I have spoken at countless branches and conferences…” No, there have been a small, finite number of conferences during his short membership. The total number of branches is finite and those he has spoken at will be a proportion only, a minority in fact.

    “I have been at the very top of the party…” – achieving what exactly?

  10. Toby MicklethwaitToby Micklethwait // July 18, 2017 at 9:16 am // Reply

    Dear Peter (Whittle),

    Thank you for posting on this site.

    I congratulate you on your TV appearances, CV, qualifications and campaign so far.

    My questions to you:

    Do you think the NEC is “not fit for purpose” and is that a comment on the individuals or the structure or what?

    Do you wish to abolish the NEC?

    Would you wish that the NEC represent the members in the regions? How should that be arranged?

    Do you feel that the NEC should consist of the regional chairman and be a non-executive parliament?

    Do you think that the NEC should elect its own chairman?

    Would you encourage the allocation of executive roles to NEC members?

    How will you reform the party structure to use existing talent and ensure members are kept fully informed?

    In the next London (and Welsh) assembly election is it your idea that all UKIP members in the relevant region will vote to create the “party list”. Do you think it is right for the NEC to adjust the list to ensure that a tip top candidate heads the list?

    Do you think UKIP has been successful in the past (apart from Nigel’s brilliance) because it has concentrated on just a few topics (Brexit and immigration) rather than being the fourth largest “ordinary” party? Should we campaign mainly on just a few issues? In military parlance, “attack on a narrow front”?

    What are the top 3 policies which you believe will attract support in the ballot box and increase membership?

    How will you reach out to voters and counteract UKIP’s poor image?

    Do you have a comment on rebranding? Do you think it is sensible that any decisions about rebranding be delayed until the new leader is in place?

    Regards, Toby, 01932-873557

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.