Latest from UKIP Daily

What is UKIP’s future?

When UKIP was founded over twenty-four years ago, the people in the room did so with two main objectives: to make UKIP a force in national politics, and to bring about the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union. The second was dependent on the first.  Following the General Election in 2015 we had certainly succeeded in the first objective, and by 23rd June 2016 it looked as though were close to succeeding in the second.

Nineteen months after the Referendum, UKIP has managed the political equivalent of repeatedly shooting itself in the foot with a pump action shotgun. Brexit is actually no closer than it was on 24th June 2016, and indeed genuine exit from the EU is uncertain to say the least.

Regarding my first point, I have never underestimated the practical difficulties that we have faced. I never unduly criticised the Party or its officers concerning the genuine mistakes and shortcomings that have occurred. We all make mistakes, and over the years I have held my peace on many occasions for the good of the Party and our cause.

However, someone has to say it: some of the decisions made in the last few years and months can only be accounted for by either total incompetence or sabotage. Three recent examples being:

  1. Deliberately preventing candidates being selected in time to prepare for the 2017 General Election.
  2. Changing our long-established pound logo.
  3. Allowing us to be become liable in legal actions that could yet financially ruin the Party. Some of the officers responsible for those decisions are still in place or still exerting influence.

Despite all this (and more) UKIP did indeed become a force in national politics, so much so that we were able to force David Cameron to promise and hold the referendum. It was UKIP that brought about the referendum and UKIP activists’ boots on the ground that won it. It was not just the leadership of Nigel Farage that achieved and won the referendum, but also the incalculable time, effort and money of our activists and members. Those dedicated people have been let down – to say the least.

As I predicted in my book The Road to Freedom (2014) if a referendum were held, if the Leave side won, and if the government chose to leave using Article 50, then we would see a relentless campaign by the Remain side to delay and impede our exit in the hope of eventually overturning the result. This is precisely what has happened since 24th June 2016.

Many of our members, supporters and voters believed, quite wrongly, that we had achieved our reason for existing by the mere fact of winning the referendum, and they drifted away. However, it is now becoming clear to all that Brexit is in danger of not happening, and that a strong UKIP is needed more than ever.

Can UKIP salvage itself, and does it have a future? Our country certainly needs a political party that stands up for the ordinary working person and small business owner. It has been my conviction from UKIP’s beginning that our natural constituency is the patriotic working class. Those people (mostly, but not exclusively) were the people who voted leave in the referendum.

UKIP’s survival is about giving those people a voice. UKIP does not deserve to survive for its own sake but because those people are not represented by the old political parties.

I believe that to rejuvenate itself UKIP needs to continue doing certain things and to do some new things

  1. To say thank-you and goodbye to those senior officers who have caused so many of the difficulties we currently face.
  2. To reorganise our Party structure so that the National Executive Committee is not elected on the basis of two-hundred words and a flattering photograph. One idea is for regionally elected activists whose job is to recruit new members, raise funds, and organise elections, and who will be judged on results.
  3. To continue (as we have done since Paul Nuttall’s leadership) to promote a complete and unencumbered exit from the European Union. No Article 50, no more billions paid to EU, no transition periods and continued open borders. Brexit must mean Exit!
  4. To ditch the new ‘Lenny the Lion’ logo. Why would an organisation change its brand that has taken so many years to establish? Why confuse our voters at the ballot box? Incompetence or sabotage?
  5. To continue to argue the case for a strictly controlled and limited immigration system. We must have a commitment to end the age of mass uncontrolled immigration once and for all. We also need policies for housing, benefits, and the NHS that put our own citizens first.
  6. To promote economic policies that make ordinary working people feel that the economy works for them, not against them by reducing their livings standards in the interests of enriching a global elite. We need policies to address a reindustrialisation of Britain providing jobs for ordinary working people.
  7. To face up to the threat posed to our way of life by radical Islam. This means a policy of no more mass immigration from Islamic countries and policies to neutralise the influence of Islam; e.g. no more overseas funding of mosques and imams from overseas.
  8. To speak up against political correctness and cultural Marxism that are undermining all sense and sensibility in public life. We need a dedicated spokesperson on this subject.
  9. To increase our membership by adopting policies appealing to those who feel disenfranchised and unrepresented by our current political establishment; for example the police, the military, the prison service, the ordinary law-abiding tax-payer, small business owners, and the victims of crime.
  10. We need to use social media to recruit new members and spread our messages. I am the first to admit I know very little about how to do that but we need people who do.

Some of these things we are already doing but we need to do them all – and more. We cannot hope to beat the political establishment at its own game, or expect the politically correct left-wing media to promote us. If we bend to accommodate them, we will be irrelevant.

One thing we could do to appeal to a wider audience is to change the name of our magazine to ‘UKIP: Plain Truth’.  If the British people need one thing, it is that. Our magazine needs more political and policy content to attract a wider audience.

The essential issue is not just the survival of UKIP, but also the survival of the UK itself.  Our country is in danger of not leaving the European Union at all; of selling its soul to the interests of global corporations; and of submitting our civilisation to what Winston Churchill called ‘the most regressive force in the world’, namely Islam.

UKIP came into being out of necessity: it filled a political vacuum. It was needed in 1993 and it is needed now. The question is can we reform ourselves to deserve to survive and serve our country?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Gerard Batten MEP (42 Articles)
Gerard Batten in a UKIP MEP representing London. He is also UKIP's Spokesman for Brexit.

89 Comments on What is UKIP’s future?

  1. We should follow Macron and get a grip on all Muslim organisations and mosques in the UK and get the Muslim population to sign up for our laws and culture and reject terrorism in the name of Islam. Those that don’t or won’t don’t get a British passport or ID.

  2. Well Gerard’s communication certainly proved that there is indeed plenty more fire in UKIP’s belly.The question is can we coordinate all this wonderful energy and focus it sufficiently to ensure that we really do force Mrs May and her lacklustre crew to find some backbone and give our country the Brexit it demanded.Finally just a thought-if you refuse to accept donations from affluent people where are the millions of pounds needed to run a political party to come from

  3. The biggest trouble with UKIP is that they don’t do any due diligence regarding their elected leaders. Bolton has shot UKIP’s bolt by proving that he is a philandering little shit who doesn’t give a crap about his family. He therefore no longer has any credibility with me or any other person who regards “family” as important. I don’t care what he says on the BBC Politics show, he is not worth listening to.

    • My personal preference, repeat personal, notwithstanding the constitutional limitations, would be that to qualify as a leadership candidate a member would have to:

      1. have been a continuous member for the last 5 years

      2. Served as branch officer for at least 12 months in one sitting

      3. Stood as a parliamentary candidate & local candidate

      4. Be an A grade election candidate

      5. Agree to an in depth examination of their personal life

      6. Rigorous test of their political knowledge, debating skills and media suitability

      The above would be a demonstration that the qualified candidates had walked the walk and had the basic skills to do the job. Of course it wouldn’t be an absolute guarantee that the ideal candidates would be selected but it could be the basis on which to better ensure candidates are properly qualified before they are chosen to stand.

  4. I don’t understand Henry. Hasn’t he realised he hasn’t got it in him to do the job. Nice chap or not, I would like to know where all his votes came from. I kept giving myself month after month for him to show some signs of ability other than the ability to remember his lines ( A task any third rate actor could do ). Finally after 100 days waiting,,,nothing. I suppose he wants to be bought off. So ? What has he got that we might want, other than his resignation which he should give anyway, not just because of the lady,but anything else?

  5. If we lose our excellent leader, Henry Bolton, then the party will fold. Fair or not, many grass roots members are sick of losing opportunities to grow and progress as a party because of squabbling and hysterics by those wishing to put their oar in. Henry is a great communicator, like Nigel, on radio and tv. If he’s apparently slipped up and is not Jesus then lets grow up and live with it. We are exhausted with fighting the EU and we are totally fed up with the confusion at the top of the party in the last months. We are UKIP members for the sake of our country. Lets get a grip and get on.

    • “excellent leader, Henry Bolton” – I hope this is sarcasm.

    • If he is a ‘great communicator’ how come no one on God’s sweet earth ( UKIP loyalists included ) heard a peek out of him during his four months in post ( prior to the Shenanigans ) ?
      ONE outing on QT in four months doesn’t cut it, and even when he was heard to speak it was mostly to pussy foot around the topic of MUI, which UKIP should be majoring on ( together with proportional representation in my view ).

  6. Thank you Gerard, for your article. I have being calling for Henry Bolton to resign. The Sunday Times was good enough to print at least some of my letter. I supported Henry because I believed him to be a sensible, reliable family man. I was wrong He lied to my face. Now there are questions about his service history, apparently he gained his rank in the TA not the regulars, he was a Trooper in the Royal Hussars. This would be perfectly acceptable had he not of lead us to believe differently. Unfortunately, he is Amoral and therefore has to go. His task was to rid us of the likes of Paul Oakden Steve Crowther, Noel Matthews, etc. Now they should all leave together. The NEC want to keep everything they discuss a secret, so who knows what they achieve or not. UKIP was about the grassroots not the top table.

    • Beverley Roberts // January 12, 2018 at 1:00 pm // Reply

      Dear Liz,
      I agree with every word you write. Gerard’s article is exactly what was needed to give us some hope. Gerard always says “listen to what they say, but judge them by what they do”. I’ve followed that advice in the case of Henry Bolton, and I’ve decided he’s a liability, not an asset. There are two questions that need to be asked. Would people have voted for Henry Bolton if they knew then what we know now? Did Henry Bolton deceive us?

  7. Dear Gerard, the most important question you asked in that piece was ‘Incompetence or Sabotage?’ and it is blatantly obvious to most it is the latter, to some it has been obvious ever since we won the EU elections in 2014 and some of us tried very hard to point this out at the time on the then UKIP members forum, alas it all fell on deaf ears and the end result was the shutting down of that forum which effectively cut off the grassroots roots activists from the top of the party. This is one of the main reasons I quit in 2014, that and the fact the NARP’s (newly arrived, rapidly promoted) types like Suzanne Evans were determined to turn UKIP into yet another establishment party. Many who had fought tooth and nail to gain UKIP the popularity soon came to realise that we were flogging a dead horse and subsequently quit the party whilst those determined to change UKIP into a party it was never meant to be, succeeded in their aim. Remember when Nigel used to should about Labour and Tories and how you couldn’t fit a fag paper between them, it is more a case of UKIP & Tories today, UKIP comes up with the ideas and the Tories write the policies.

    You still talk about how we didn’t have to invoke Article 50 and yet we actually were legally obliged to, it is actually part of the treaty we had signed and agreed to but the Tories are not fools, they knew from the moment that was invoked a No Deal Brexit would be the only possible outcome because the EU cannot agree to any mutually beneficial deal as that would only entice 27 other states to follow our lead in Brexit. May, Davis, Barnier, Junker and all the rest have categorically stated UK will leave the EU by March 2019 and yet with no evidence to prove otherwise UKIP keeps saying it is not going to happen, I believe it will be much sooner. The Florence speech which enraged everyone was clearly to show the world we intend to be trading with that we are trying everything to come to a deal that May knows full well is never going to happen. Yet for some reason the UKIP mantra seems to be to attack May rather than attacking those Remainers who are trying to scupper Brexit, I seriously do not understand the logic there. It seems UKIP are more intent on supporting Remain than securing Brexit?

    If Kippers seriously want to save their party (not an easy task now) then they need to organise themselves and remove those at the top as you have suggested. I personally do not hold out much hope of that happening now but part of me wishes there was someone with the gall to do just that still left in UKIP… We will have to see…

    If they do have another leadership election than make sure you stand this time 😉

  8. Could not agree more with the Gerald Batten article, listened to Nigel tonight on LBC his could very be the very suggestion that was needed needed to galvanise the Brexiteers into action, I have been posting since late June !6 that the peoples army self demobbed at a time we should have been building on party membership to guard against tory treachery.

  9. Gerard please set up your UKIP – nobody is defending Brexit on the TV, or the 4 million migrants using the NHS this winter! I mailed you back in 2011 about migrants in Milton Keynes – now a majority in our schools. Get the stats out to the public about the parallel societies we have – the real Brits who you defend and the loony left who want open doors UK while living in Camden and the Dordogne. Get the Migration Watch agenda for immigration on your platform and lets all start to march with flags for Brexit and show the BBC and The Guardian who the real socialists are.

    • Well said Celia. I hope there are lots of people like myself, not a leader, but who are willing to face up to the mob, to stand with someone like Gerald. But there is no way I would ever do that for the likes of Bolton, Evans etc.

  10. IMO, all ukipers would agree with everything he says. Maybe the odd small disagreement here or there, but nothing drastic. But to solve all this you’ld need to go back to 1945. and re-argue them all over again, and probably end up in an even worse mess. Someone with an eidetic memory ( Sheldon Cooper )may be able to argue for us on all these points , but he’ld soon lose everybody else, and lose by irritating everyone. So that’s no help.

    So we we’ve got an outline. No one can answer questions, about all those things. So we have to make choices. THAT was one of Henry’s jobs.

    Leaving the EU is a partial answer to many of the list, or at least a catalyst. But now we need to go further and this is where our ignorance shows.

    We need to organise to win. This is what Henry and all the others cannot see or do.

    Again IMHO ( That’s rather a lot of IMHO’s ), The perfect answer is staring us in the face. I think GB knows this. It might upset a lot of people. However.

  11. The thing I find annoying about Gerard Batten’s ten points is that they need to be stated. I thought these were obvious UKIP principles. Anyway it is a relief to read his article, it sets the right type of energy for UKIP and is very welcome in this time of great opportunity for UKIP.

    There is one addition I would like to see to point 8 and that is for UKIP to champion “free speech”. This would mean changing laws and stating rights.

    We have a country with its so called unwritten constitution, a fading Magna Carta and foreign courts presiding over United Kingdom citizens. We have the police arresting thousands of people for writing and speaking, in some instances, a single sentence online. UKIP needs also to stand for freedom of the individual. It is not good enough for UKIP to stand by and promote free speech “within the law”.

    • Just looked it up on Wikipedia (or similar)
      “If the law supposes that, it is a ass, a idiot”
      (Mr Brumble – Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens)
      While not being completely condemnary, I do think the law gets it a bit wrong sometimes and should not be drawn into circumscribing “free speech”.
      In my opinion therefore “within the law” is not a necessary abjuration to be written down, it is just as limiting as the implied requirement always to “do the necessary fault investigation” (often a recipe for taking an ineffective solution to an immediate problem)

      • Roger – I agree it is a restrictive unnecessary abjuration by design similar to the endless costly enquiries.

        (A good example of enquiry gone bad is the so called “Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse” established in 2014 by Theresa May which saw resignations of Chairmen: Baroness Butler-Sloss, Fiona Woolf & Lowell Goddard and the survivors group itself.)

        “Uphold freedom of speech within the law as a fundamental British value. We believe all ideas and beliefs should be open to discussion and scrutiny and we will challenge the ‘culture of offence’ as it risks shutting down free speech”
        [page 61 2015 UKIP manifesto]

  12. This whole Bolton Affair may actually be the saving of Ukip not the death of it. Under the ‘leadership’ of Henry I strongly felt that Ukip was doomed. I never like the man from the moment he entered the leadership race. In fact I felt that all I could do was renew my sub and watch the party die. He was not to blame for the initial decline of course, but with his attitude he was never going to lead us out of it.
    But now the party seems suddenly energised. One thing that we can all agree on is that Henry has to go! So now I can see there is a chance of getting some inspiring leader. Gerard’s article shows common sense and political nous and gives us hope. I am thrilled to see so many on this blog reacting positively to our predicament. Even the tedious “for Britain” crowd are helping stir things up.
    Right now in the national news we are seeing the poisonous hand of political correctness trying to snowflake the British Army. There is a crying need for a patriotic party to be speaking up about this in a credible and damning way. None of the other parties will. Had we an outspoken leader think of the opportunity this would present for Ukip
    to win back the patriotic working class. This is true of other issues too. The point is you have to be in the game to win. UKIP needs a new leader soon. This is probably Ukip’s last chance. And, to be honest, things are looking better now than anytime over the last six months.

    • Hear Hear !
      Who was it said you must never fail to reap the advantages of a good crisis ? 🙂
      Under HB UKIP really was doomed, as his invisibility during his four months up to the Shenanigans demonstrated.
      Even before he ( as is inevitable and imminent ) goes, we the UKIP Plebs, can start preparing for UKIP’s and the country’s Future, and it can be better than before.

  13. Purple Potty Mouth // January 11, 2018 at 12:12 am // Reply

    Thank you Gerard, inspiration indeed from a founding member.
    I don’t know why he chose not to stand in any of the last THREE leadership elections, he has before. I would have probably backed him if he came out with the list above (But yes, fighting PESCO is now essential too). We have been betrayed. Not only have we, as a nation, been betrayed by May & her bunch of remoaners and appeasers, we the ordinary, despised working folk (UKIP activists and branch officers in this case) have been betrayed by those at the ‘centre’ of a party – the only party which could put the skids under May’s backsliding.

    Dammit – are we going to take this lying down? No I bloody well am not. We joined UKIP because we were not going to sit back while our rotten self-serving politicians lied to us, ignored us and sold us into a European version of the USSR. Some of you have seen the mood on UKIPD – the ‘plebs’ are on the warpath, this my friends is populism in action. We have to take this party back under our wing and run it ourselves. Surrey and even the SE is getting its structure back and running with a sensible new ‘controller’ (ridiculous term, we’ll have to change that!) and even a regional chairman. County committee on 27th – our agenda will, no shall be delineating how we will be getting the 2-way exchange between branches and spokesmen up and running through the chain of representatives. Just as we Kippers, as councillors, represented our residents so our officers must be answerable to the members. If the MEPs want to eke out their days in a miasma of cheap booze in Brussels let them, we don’t need them – we’ll take the good men/women & true like Gerard and leave them to it.

    In Surrey our Mole Valley branch has given us the opportunity to grill Oakden to a cinder in Dorking next Tuesday, on the 27th, if ‘Enery has refused to fall on his sword and dares to keep his appointment with us in Frimley the daggers will be out and plunged deep (metaphorically, we’re not Momentum, we don’t do death threats) Do we need a leader, someone said earlier well – do we? If we can’t find someone who will LEAD let’s do without for now
    Both meetings open to members outside Surrey BTW.
    My former branch chairman’s wife died this morning. Virtually founder members, who worked their socks off for UKIP; Tony gets a mention in Nigel’s autobiography. Thankfully June lived to see the Brexit vote but has been to ill to be aware of Henry’s betrayal. I owe her this one big time.

    • Somewhere below I have agreed with Gerard’s plan to reform the party and I must admit I was staggered to see Bolton’s interview on Westmonster yesterday. He seems determined to stay on but we the members must take control of the party and not allow him to stay, he is a serial adulterer and liar.

      Yesterday I had the following comments from another member which I throw into the mix of how our party structure can be reorganised.

      ‘Personally, I think if powers were delegated through the regions, and local counties were empowered with support for fundraising, and employed their own party officer through Patrons Clubs/Patriot Clubs, it could become self-funding, and more connected. I’m not in favour of a top down pyramid system.’

      Of course we will still need a leader and some sort of Head Office structure but why cannot the NEC be made up of Regional Officers. We also have to use technology better, I am thinking of Teleconferencing for some meetings instead of people having to travel hundreds of miles.

    • PPM you say
      “We have to take this party back under our wing and run it ourselves”
      Too right!
      I wrote to my area leader yesterday, asking him to get together with all his other officers up and down the country so a united “call” and hopefully an organisation will emerge.
      I hope they will take up the plan you suggest.
      You sound like just the go-getter we need.
      But make it now, there isn`t time to waste, in embryo it is necessary the guts of it is in place before 18th January or before the NEC meeting .
      It must be made clear to them that they must dismiss HB and appoint GB (he can`t back out now) as Acting/Interim Leader
      Slogan “GB for GB” “Gerard Batten for Great Britain”
      (Make Great Britain Great Again)

    • Agreed, I have been posting for UKIP membership build without
      a leader is feasible then elect a leader,having no trust in the ersatz tory party made time of the essence and a strong pro English / GB force was needed in place NOW.
      24/6/2016 and the mindset of many, job done and dusted was way of target.

  14. Is UKIP ever going to quell this tidal wave of unrest , t is so damaging to the party! surely it is within the bounds of plain common sense to understand and respect the kind of platform Nigel Farage created , it was a simple rule of honesty, perseverance, and genuine belief in the core issues of the members of UKIP and the reason for their existence, it did not just happen by accident ! it took many people ( not just Nigel) years of dedication and hard work, and a belief that the people would fight for the freedoms they so nearly
    lost once before, The cost for that battle can never be paid and many of us stepped up when it was under threat again . 17500 people took up the banner and got behind a strong leader and willingly gave their all. Nigel is not superman !Though their were times when I wondered how he could keep up the fight. So now we have to respect his decision to step down and prove that UKIP IS NOT ONE MAN!!!! Yes he is a tough act to follow but there will never be a better teacher ! Come on you Guys /Gals where is your courage!I feel sure Nigel would support the right oerson for the job.

    • Nigel supported Bolton despite saying on his LBC programme that he was not backing any candidate. However on Bolton’s campaign website there was a picture of Nigel cationed ‘Personal Referee’, whatever that meant.

  15. Nearly 8.15, a full day gone by and I`m still excited.
    I believe we might be on the right road at last, apart from a few misery guts who have yet to realise we are in the last chance saloon, the “end game” is now about to be played out.
    The very survival of UKIP is the stake and for the first time in over a year I am optimistic that we are beginning to think straight Gerard`s 10 points whatever order are only a starting point for instance I would add in the Commonwealth re-engagement, Pesco and the effect of immigration on the health service.
    By the effect of Immigration on the health service I mean the current “winter crisis”, so eloquently mentioned in debate in parliament today.
    All parties are saying it is due to lack of funds, lack of preparation, old folk refusing to do the decent thing and dieing or bed blocking because insufficient funds have been allocated to care in the community. Of course they are all relevant in some measure; but supervening all this bluster and nonsensical drawing of red herrings is;
    what UKIP has been telling them for the last few years – The Country is FULL UP all the services are suffering strain, Housing, Schools and most of all the National Health Service, for at least the last 10 years millions of bodies (consumers they call them these days) have been imported and boy do they consume without any or at least sufficient infrastructure either funds or physical bits and pieces put in. We`ve heard of “pints into a quart pot” our present problem is more like trying to stick a gallon into a thimble or trying to shove spaghetti up a bear`s arse (pinched from Empire of the Clouds – book which details how we threw away our world leading Aircraft industry)
    One last thought I read through this afternoon most of Dr Tomasz Slivnik resignation letter in which he detailed the war between the NEC and the then HO top echelon. He sounds to me as though he would make a good Chairman capable of sorting out this relationship amicably to the future necessary efficient running of UKIP (something like game keeper turning poacher)
    Hope Gerard gives this a thought.
    What does anybody else think?

  16. Well here you have it plain speaking from a founder member of UKIP and an MEP, who I believe has been so elected 3 times.

    I have lost count of the times that I have read on here about rule books, NEC, the Chairman, the Ruling Cabal, and also written about them. But while Kippers on UKIPD and elsewhere – either members or supporters- debate each other going round in circles, the enemy are doing the business and having a good laugh at our expense at the same time. Brexit is going nowhere fast, immigration is continuing apace, free speech is being further clamped down on daily – This PC was sacked on the spot while social workers and police officers who watched thousands of little girls being raped for years have had no action taken against them so far:

    Bolton has in my opinion let down members by spending his time doing what, apart from Ms Marney and preaching to the converted at local Kipper meetings? He certainly hasn’t been making UKIPs views clear to the general population. Most people had no idea who he was or represented until he dumped his wife. Now it appears he has no intention of doing the right thing by going.

    Membership has fallen and I can’t believe this will not continue especially after the Marney affair. It’s surely the time that someone said stuff the rule book, UKIP surely needs someone like Batten to lead them back onto the right path. Increased membership and possibly crowdfunding could pay off debts and surly UKIPs rich MEPs could be persuaded to cough up to help. But this will need a radical, strong, visible leader, IMO preferably with a long reputation in UKIP to make people want to help either financially or otherwise. Surely what is the point of UKIP if it doesn’t stand for rescuing Britain from the anti free speech, pro globalist LibLabCon.

    It’s up to remaining members really

    • I’ve just read the Westmonster article from your link. Bolton is clearly going to cause more trouble. He’s starting to look like a dictator now. I really feel for the remaining members – how much flak from the public will activists get now.

      What a truly vile creature Bolton is.

      • I had to view part of the video – to check it wasn’t a spoof. And I am even more appalled than before: talk about cognitive dissonance!

        And that is being polite.

        He said he has had emails of support: he did not say from whom (though I might have missed it, and I don’t think he was asked).

        • His Mum wasn’t happy, so she can’t have sent one.

          Yes, a vile creature, or a plant, as has been said before. It would make sense, given the meagre information we have.

  17. Totally agree. I’ve been saddened that UKIP seems to have lost its way somewhat since the referendum. A rebrand and change of tack are needed to freshen things up and give a new positive purpose to the party of the people.

  18. “the lion should always and only appear alongside the wording UKIP: FOR THE NATION”

    from the Electoral commission website: “Practical considerations when
    designing your emblem: that the text in the emblem is readable when your emblem is resized to 2cm square” (on a ballot paper).

    As UKIP has agreed that the lion and rubric together are the logo, UKIP will have to register them together as an emblem; that will then be squashed into 2cm square for ballot papers so that neither the lion nor legend will be discernable (unlike the £ logo which is perfect for the purpose). Nobody appears to have tried to register this with the Electoral Commission so it is totally unofficial at the moment.

    Therefore the £ needs to be returned because the totally unoriginal lion needs to be ditched without further ado. I put my money on total incompetence.

    • The Lennie logo as it has been presented fits tightly into a 3:1 aspect ratio rectangle. That isn’t even remotely square.

      However, the space on the ballot paper for the emblem is square.

      This would mean illegibility as well as the Lennie being reduced to a small smudge – and with the help of some anti-UKIP electoral officials with control over how much ink gets onto the paper and also over the quality of the paper, rendered absurd.

      The National Nomination Officer has, however, shown me a rejigged Lennie with the text rearranged vis-a-vis the feline, meaning it would be larger when put into a square box.

      Some would prefer Lennie put into a cage.

      Personally, I’d shoot the thing and stick with the poundland sign. It’s a well-established brand and no one questions it any more.

  19. Agree with most of that Gerard but if the order of points mean anything, then the logo nonsense is the last thing on the list, not Islam or crime. UKIP’s biggest failing by far is it’s amateur understanding of mass communication; when Henry embarked on a UK tour of pubs to talk to members I knew he didn’t have a clue what he was doing. And no we didn’t win the referendum; we did secure it but without the intervention (a bit bloody late) of Gove and Boris, we would have lost. Martin Durkin’s film ‘Brexit the movie’ was also pivotal, UKIP never produced a single Brexit video worth watching. Phenomenal performances such as George Galloway at the ‘GO’ meeting, electrified the campaign. THIS has to be one of the best unscripted political speeches of all time:

  20. Absolutely.


    • I have some thoughts to air.
      1. Whats wrong with a statement that resonates through the ages and with all Britons. Allbeit a bit cumberson but in this instance perfect to capture if only on the logo.
      ” The Truth the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth.”

      That might put the cat among the pigeons. but you’re in the dock.

      However one could put up some unpalatable truths like EU Army, or Bargaining Fish and borders away. and actually be believed even by your hairy left wing activists.

  21. UKIP and Truth.. The words are incompatible. Never and nowhere has UKIP and the likes of Gerard Batten stood on a platform to state that all our UK treaties with the EU are against our constitution. I haven’t had time to read the comments written after Gerard’s piece, except to note many complementary remarks. Why don’t you each do some individual research. Read the Kilmuir letter to Edward Heath. Batten knows about it but like the rest of the brexiteers they are either frauds or frightened. This country is losing it’s freedoms while people like Batten ‘fiddle while Rome burns@.

  22. Well said Gerard. We should restore the pound sign and take on Islam as outlined in item 7.
    Brexit and Islam are the two main issues. We must not fear offending Islam but must expose it for what it is and we all know the answer to that.
    C’mon Gerard, lead us.

  23. I wish Gerard well if Henry goes and he becomes the new leader. It’s my hope UKIP can reinvent itself and go on to become a viable political party again. If that should happen i may even rejoin though you will forgive me if I don’t hold my breath. It’s all become too farcical for me and I’ve done my share. I have told my branch that if they wish I will agree to remain as chairman at the AGM this month, to allow them time to find a replacement for me and the membership secretary, who left late last year and has not been replaced for lack of a volunteer. However when my membership expires in March I will not renew and at District council I’ll become independent.
    The point in my telling you this is that my very safe Tory constituency had the second highest Leave vote in the country and even here activists have all but given up and membership continues to fall. Electors believe May will do the job, just as she claims. Trying to explain that the government say one thing and do another falls on deaf ears and attempts to talk up UKIP now simply result in laughter, far worse than the past insults and smears.

    Whatever UKIP do about the very last straw of Henry’s affair and the future direction needs to be very swift, very clear and also attractive to at the very least 15% of people who actually vote.

    There still remain many excellent people in UKIP, some post here but since the referendum and sometimes even before, HQ, ( I include the NEC as a body), despite the good work of a few loyal paid staff, has been neither of use nor ornament, to be honest the only interaction the branch has had with them, apart from begging letters, has been a hindrance rather than a help. Remove your digits people and do try to avoid placing financial and other barriers before those members who could otherwise contribute a deal more.

  24. As one who worked alongside Gerrard in 1993 onwards I absolutely agree with what he says. No one, even David Kurten who I admire, has a better claim to be the heart and soul of UKIP and Gerrard should be leader. If another election is called then the barrier put up to good people by the absurd fees involved should be abolished.

  25. Good article. Just one minor disagreement:

    “To face up to the threat posed to our way of life by radical Islam.” I would argue that it should be “To face up to the threat posed to our way of life by Islam”. It doesn’t need radicals to change the face of our towns and cities; they have been managing it through their normal daily lives for many years.
    Without a total ban on Muslim immigration and a repatriation policy our country is lost. Of course stealth is also needed for now.

    • Yes, as the Turkish leader, Erdogan, has said, there’s no such thing as radical and modererate Islam, only Islam. It is an affront to say otherwise.

    • Well said! Islamic ‘extremism’ is to be found where there is ‘moderate’ Islam and visa versa. The 2 are united in their distrust and hatred of The West.

  26. No argument from here GB. 1st Act, repeal the ECA72..? I’d like an emphasis that exposes the pure treachery at the heart of the lib/Con/Lab establishment (which I suggest far too many are unaware of) and proscribe Common Purpose from the public sector….. but will you throw your hat into the ring?

    I think all patriots would be very grateful if you did.

  27. I have been a UKIP member for three or four years and joined just before the European election break through. I am one of the foot soldiers who has leafleted 5,000 homes on his own and covered my ward as I was the only fit person to do it, age 59.I did that more than once, stood in local election, contributed money to the national and local party, one of a small group who ran the Vote Leave work during the referendum, traveled to Stoke on Trent twice to help Paul. I just say this to show that I have tried my little part for the UKIP cause and feel totally let down by my leaders, since Nigel left it’s been one disaster after another…mostly self inflicted may I point out. I do not propose the name of any particular person except come back Nigel. I have no confidence in any of the higher officers in the party. No wonder membership has gone down from 45,000 to about 25,000 now. No offence to anyone and excuse spelling.

  28. Agree with every point except the logo. I understand the attachment to it and the brand argument and I am not keen on the Lion, a bit of a cliche, but the £ is safe now, and Ukip is so often traduced by opponents and the media as a one issue party, and whose time has come and gone, that it seems to me important that this is countered by every time anyone sees the logo they see ‘FOR THE NATION’. But this too will only work if all the appointed spokespeople actually, er, speak and present the wide range of policies Ukip seems reluctant to even mention.

    • ‘… the £ is safe now …’

      🙂 Ha, ha, ha!

      • It`s not if we eventually stay in and even if we do leave and then re entered we will have to use the Euro
        So yes HA Ha HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA(hoarse/horse)

      • I agree with everything GB says here except his comment on the logo. The £ sign is no longer relevant. It’s outdated and looks crass and amateurish. The Lion symbol appeals to patriots out there and will connect us with the younger football fans who we need to recruit before they drift over to the extreme Right.
        A change of Party name would help to appeal to a wider audience – The British Freedom Party?
        I think GB would make an ideal leader if Henry Bolton steps down.

    • > I am not keen on the Lion, a bit of a cliche, but the £ is safe now

      and the Lennie isn’t. Some of us have loaded up our guns and are out to shoot the beast.

  29. Better late than never, Gerard – where have you been all this time?

    I’ve taken a good deal of flak on these pages for trying to tell people that it’s the patriotic working class who should both be our main concern but also hold the key to our success. But even you have to understand we are not going to get their support without radical economic, social and educational policies they find attractive. Your Point 6 reads well but is the sort of thing D Cameron and T May could have said a hundred times. UKIP has no future continuing with what are essentially Tory policies in these areas.

    The way to victory is nationalist economics, reducing immigration eventually to zero and banning cultural practices the British people find abhorrent and intolerable.

    I look forward to you stepping in to save the Party – and producing the detailed and distinctive policies we so badly need.

    Thank you.

    • > Gerard – where have you been all this time

      Gerard, like me, has been keeping his powder dry. Others use it for their noses or up their noses.

      Now, it has to be used, else there won’t be any noses left.

  30. Every ill this country is facing is from a direct, or indirect, result of continued mass immigration. The country is crying out for an anti mass immigration party.
    The £ logo is neither here nor there, though in light of a possible second referendum, the British people will be faced with losing the pound for the much hated euro, so perhaps the £ symbol is still relevant.
    Please sort yourselves out, UKIP.

  31. Gerard expresses a fair summation of the objectives of the Party and I have always considered the Party to be lucky to have him as one of our most engaging, loyal and effective MEPs.

    Having said that, in theory, with 20 MEPs on incredible salaries and pensions how have we found ourselves in a situation of not being able to produce an effective Party leader from our MEPs? The last line up of leadership candidates with only one MEP on the ballot paper and the rest of whom no-one had ever heard of needs some explanation. I have grave doubts about the efficacy of the vetting procedure to weed out those non MEP candidates who would be unable to financially sustain themselves equally to the MEPs income. Why was there so little appetite from our supposedly talented and democratically selected MEPs to lead UKIP?

    Our MEPs, NEC, senior Party management and Regional representatives need locking in a room and not letting out until a solution is found to identify exactly what it is that is leading us down this path of self-destruction.

  32. Gerard, your have made my day. Would you be prepared to lead the party out of this mess?

  33. More common sense and leadership in one article than we have heard from Bolton in four months. The potential and strength is there,why won’t the party allow it to be used?

  34. A UKIP MEP saying the right things to save the party! Where have you been? Hallelujah, hope! What I like most, is not all the b****ing obvious ones, like clearing out all the dead wood, sensible and attractive policies, recruitment, cultural Marxism, radical Islam, re-organisation(big time), no they all sooo needed saying, but! What I like the most is ‘ditching Lenny the Lion’ the one thing that really took the pee after everything else. I still get a little angry at the thought of the pompous explanation that came with it.
    I very much doubt I will ever go back to UKIP that doesn’t mean I don’t want you to be successful. There is a war to be fought and we will all be there doing our bit, informing, exposing, persuading, doing what we can on all medias, to all age groups reminding others what we could lose. Radical and controversial will have to be a given and everyone’s commitment will be sorely needed. Don’t feel too bad about the present disappointment, move on.
    Eventually, ego and tribalism will have to give way to cooperation to prevent the corrupt ideologies that are ruining our country and culture. So we will no doubt meet again.

  35. Mr.Batten,
    Thank you for “plain speaking up”.
    It will not come as a surprise that I and others have been advocating that in this present leadership crisis that the party should look no further than yourself in appointing an acting/interim leader (that is without specific duration or limitation of action).
    I do hope this statement is your first move in getting to a position of taking charge and enabling UKIP to achieve the purposes you have laid out above.

    In my opinion the present time would be disastrous to have a new leadership election, never mind how ludicrous UKIP would be made to appear in the press, I would be more worried about the inevitable increased internal divisions, the continued loss of members and the probable demise of the party due completely to the obduracy of NEC, the executive and probably their seen and unseen backers.

    I don`t know how many I speak for in UKIP Daily, but I would guess a substantial number will endorse my words and they will also be representative of members up and down the country; who all of us recognise that we are the only party qualified to speak unequivocally on behalf of the 17.4 million (plus -those who only voted remain out of FEAR generated by Camoron and his henchpersons)voters
    Mrs May, despite her own words is leading us into “a half in half out Brexit”.

    You are the man who must take charge and ensure that UKIP stands up for all these 17.4 million and doesn`t let that outcome happen.
    Best of luck, you have my vote (if I`m ever allowed to give it) Please everybody get behind Gerard Batten for Acting Leader and his motto
    UKIP PLAIN TRUTH ££££££££££££££££££££££££

    • Gerard thank you for an excellent timely reminder of why we are here. I agree with almost every word.

      I say ‘almost’ because with regard to your point 10 “We need to use social media … I am the first to admit I know very little about how to do that but we need people who do.”

      For one who knows ‘very little about it’ you Sir, seem to be doing it remarkably well! 1.3k views 1:24 min.

  36. Bravo!

    I urge people to carefully read, and re-read, and digest Gerard’s fourth paragraph. I could add several other examples.

    Neither Gerard nor I indulge in conspiracy theories. We reluctantly subscribe to one only after having eliminated everything else.

    Freddy Vachha
    UKIP Regional Chairman – London

    • Someone sensible has misinterpreted my words above, which I wrongly thought were unambiguous.

      Gerard attributed certain events – and I can add others to the list – to “total incompetence or sabotage”. I too subscribe to that conspiracy theory.

      That’s a far cry from me (or Gerard) saying it is sabotage.

      Please focus upon the word “or”. It doesn’t mean “and”.

      Mea culpa to being hard-wired for mathematical reasoning and expression. Had I been asked “Are you a boy or a girl?” even when I was six, I would have replied “Yes.”, as it is logically the only correct answer.

      In today’s seething surging days of 43 gender-blends, perhaps “Yes.” is no longer the correct response.

      Never ascribe to malice that which is equally attributable to folly.

  37. Cometh the hour, cometh the man….. But the core question is how can a truly populist party focused on the needs of the ‘Forgotten Men and Women’ as Trump calls them be compatible with a donor base of 5 reactionary aristocrats? The only way is for those donors and their clique to give up power or have it taken from them. John Bickley wrote a response to say that the ‘central party’ was the NEC, this is totally incorrect, the ‘central party’ is the donors and their lackeys. Fortunately UKIP is a company. We can do a pre-pack insolvency, write off the donors outstanding loans, and become a party of the patriotic working man and woman, not the people who actually run this party – Wheeler, Mills, Bown, Birley, their ex-Tory buddies like Helmer and their lackeys like Oakden and Bickley.

    • Dear Graham,

      I despair!!

      The body that has the constitutional & legal right to run the party (made up of elected reps who are also directors of UKIP Ltd) is the NEC. No one else runs the party.

      Stuart Wheeler has had no involvement in the party for three years. The other donors you mention have nothing to do with the running of UKIP and are rarely seen or heard from (Alan Bown is an elected member of the NEC and you are on dodgy ground if you try to sully his reputation – he is an honourable man without whom this party would long ago have disappeared into oblivion). Roger has nothing to do with the running of the party; he retired from being an MEP months ago.

      The idea that we should walk away from our donor’s loans is preposterous. You cannot put a company into solvency, do a pre-pack and keep the name.

      It’s hilarious that you think I’m a lackey – funniest thing I heard for ages. Try suggesting I am to anyone that knows me and they’ll think you’re overdue your medication!

      I’m 65 in April. I retired some years ago. I used to run an international publishing operation for SONY employing 2,000 people. Before that I worked in London running a publishing business for Paramount Studios and Universal Pictures.

      I joined UKIP in 2011 (never been in a political party before) and became an activist in 2013.

      The only people that have achieved a higher vote share than me in a parliamentary election are Carswell & Reckless (both incumbent Tory MPs) & I have fought more by high profile by-elections than anyone else in the party in the last four years.

      I volunteered for the NEC over three years ago because I felt it my duty to give something back after all the support I received in the Wythenshawe & Sale East by-election and the Heywood & Middleton one where I lost by 612 votes.

      The NEC role is unpaid and I volunteered to be treasurer over two years ago to help salvage the party’s finances.

      Like most members I’m trying to do my best to make UKIP successful.

      Criticise me all you like but do try and provide some evidence for a given allegation rather than just spewing bile.

      • John, read Gerard’s article, he makes it pretty clear where he thinks the problem is, I’m not a million miles away from his position. I doubt we’ll ever agree, but logically a party that represents the interests of working class people shouldn’t be funded by a handful of rich donors. I don’t doubt you are an honourable person who has tried his hardest and you clearly have put a lot of your time into this, unpaid. But can’t you see that after so much failure its now time to give other people the chance? It seems you are open to doing a pre-pack insolvency, that’s good, if the only barrier is the name then it is straightforward to do along with a proper re-branding….. You’ll notice I haven’t sullied the reputation of any donor, apart from Birley who I believe is inherited wealth the others are all very successful businessmen who deserve everything they have got and I respect that.

        • I really dislike your idea that UKIP should just CHOOSE to dishonour its debts.
          What kind of moral basis is that from which the Party could appeal to the Electorate ?
          ALso, all this fiddle faddly discussion about the minutiae of the NEC ( and I also as I have posted elsewhere feel the mechanism of election to the NEC needs changing ~ but current NEC members did not choose the election procedure ) is really deckchair rearranging compared to getting rid of the absurd embarrassment which HB has turned himself into.

          I don’t see why rich people should not fund a Party devoted to the interests of much poorer people.
          On the contrary I would say they have a moral duty to do so.
          Yes it would be excellent to have small contribs from many thousands of grass roots members as well, but the rich are welcome to contribute as far as I am concerned !

        • Dear Graham,

          Here’s the reality: the party is led by the leader and their appointed chairman. The NEC, whilst the governing body, is somewhat hostage to the leader – unlike a company a political party can’t kick its CEO/Leader out every five minutes – it’d be a farce. Whoops! in our case it is a farce because the last three leaders have screwed up big time. A political party without a strong and effective leader will always be thrashing around – look at the Tories under Theresa the Appeaser!

          ‘A fish rots from the head down’!!

          Under Nigel we had a winner and whilst the way the party was run was frankly a mess we kept scoring lots of political goals. When you’re winning, you’re forgiving. Our problem simply is that we’re failing to score goals.

          I understand you want to blame someone/something and the NEC is the obvious target. The real problem is that after Nigel we haven’t yet found a strong and stable leader. When we do the rest will start to fall into place.

          Graham, you can replace the whole NEC and staff but if you have a crap leader/chairman then it’s going nowhere.

          • It would help if ordinary members had a clue about what the NEC were doing. e.g. all those subcommittees, are they doing anything, do they listen to the ordinary members or are they a closed shop? A party unto themselves?

          • William – excellent comment

          • John, if it isn’t the donors, if it isn’t the management, if it isn’t the NEC, then where do you believe the problem lies? I am genuinely interested to hear your analysis, this is not a trick question! It seems you put it down to the quality of the Leader, is that right?

      • > John Bickley … is totally incorrect, the ‘central party’ is the donors and their lackeys

        I certify that if John Bickley were to be my lackey, I’d fire him for total unsuitability for the position of lackey. It isn’t even negotiable. He is, in my opinion, untrainable as a lackey. Beyond hope. FUBAR.

        For that matter, the same applies in reverse. I wouldn’t make a good lackey either, even to John. I’d make an appalling one, I’m sure.

        I’m not saying there aren’t any lackeys, but there’s more than just donors and lackeys at national level.

        • Freddy, there is no chance JB will ever be your lackey as you have not generated any significant money for the party, so a donor/lender – lackey relationship could not not arise. In fact, looking through the electoral commission register of donations, London region is conspicuously absent in making any donations to the central party. Is there a reason for that? Other regional branches like West Midlands, Eastern Counties, Southwest, etc all have runs on the board, or am I missing something here? I must admit, if I was treasurer, I’d be giving each region a sales target, and London would get the biggest one of all.

          Any treasurer in JB’s position will by definition be treating the claims of the lenders and donors as a priority and will be bending over backwards to keep them onboard because unless he can show that the debt can be serviced then the party (a company) and the directors (our NEC members) could find themselves liable for charges of wrongful trading. This is the undelying dynamic that drives the nature of the relationship. As an example of accommodating their requests that you are fully aware of, we ran a candidate in Richmond Park at the GE17 which was totally against the electoral interests of the party but was requested by a donor – John told us this here on UKIP Daily. John went on to say in another post that yes, of course donors will have influence on the party but not overall material influence. Well, materiality is in the eye of the beholder, to me that was pretty bloody material as it is the constituency I live in and the Brexiteer beat the Libdem by just 44 votes after 4 recounts after we took 460 votes off him. And so what he means is that I, as an ordinary member, am not material. Just friendly fire, collateral damage. It gave me an enormous sense of belonging and loyalty to realise my position.

          • With respect – Graham, deliberately or unintentionally, you are missing the point. With square brackets inserted by me to aid parsing and interpretation – your assertion was that
            “the ‘central party’ [i.e., those who call the shots] is [only] the donors and their lackeys”.

            Your assertion is incorrect. There are others in that group.

            > we ran a candidate in Richmond Park at the GE17

            As Regional Chairman, I initially battled to prevent this. This is because Zac G’s a Brexiteer; at first glance, RP was an ideal candidate as a “stand aside” constituency.

            However, while what John Bickley said about it here (and what you reminded us he said – I didn’t see the original, because I’m an infrequent visitor) are correct, and the Richmond & Twickenham branch was very happy at their cut, there’s another dimension to what transpired. Putting it in politically acceptable terms, let’s just say that an assumption that Zac and family were hostile to him facing nominal (Jewell was but a paper candidate) UKIP opposition at GE17 would serve only to remind us of the first three letters of the word “assumption”. I decided not to field anyone against Kate Hoey MP in Vauxhall or, after several informal chats with her (we have a common friend), Victoria Borwick (ex MP) in Kensington. Both ladies were ruthlessly and predictably attacked during the run-up to GE17 for being “in league with UKIP”. In Kate’s case, graphically too. The outcome – Borwick lost, Kate expectedly survived and Zac won but by one of the smallest margins in recent UK electoral history.

            > London

            Your guess is incorrect. While I’ve no useful contacts outside Big Four accountancy practices, several substantial donations to central party, anonymised (because of a potential backlash) as far as electoral law permits, have materialised from these sources. They didn’t decide on making their support tangible for no reason. A fully PPERA (etc.) compliant name on the notional donation cheque is not necessarily that of the person or entity who decided on helping UKIP.

            ’nuff said…

          • Freddy, I cannot reply directly as we seem to have reached the limit but this is my reply to your message of 21/1 4:46pm.

            My assertion is incorrect, there are others in that group – ok fine, please name names instead of beating around the bush.

            I know you battled against the RP because you told me so at the time. So now what you are saying is the branch was happy with its ‘cut’ of the donation. So we nearly caused the defeat of a Brexiteer for 39 pieces of silver? Wow. It wasn’t even 39 pieces, from what I can see more like 2. And I am curious, who was the donor in question?

            In the paragraph ‘However…’ you seem to give the game away rather as you refer to Zac and his family. Was the donor in question his half-brother, Robin Birley? I’d be interested to understand the logic of why running a UKIP candidate would actually help Zac win.

            Its interesting, none of the other regions see the need to anonymise their donations. It really is extraordinary, there has not been a single donation to the central party from London recorded in the Electoral Commission database since 2014! For anyone interested, here’s the link:


            In the search bar type ‘UK Independence Party’ to get the data for UKIP only, then click on the column ‘Rec’d by (AU)’ to see where the donations came from.

          • Graham, I too have hit the (far too low) indentation limit.

            > please name names instead of beating around the bush

            ?? Never guilty of that. Already done.
            John Bickley is certainly central party and is neither a lackey nor a major donor. He is thus a counter-example.

            I made one hell of a fuss about RP. Finally I was referred to the Party Chairman who’d OK’d it, and had communicated directly with the branch Chairman. I was overruled.

            But I genuinely believe Zac was not unhappy we fielded a candidate in RP, which I know is counter-intuitive and which surprised me when I was told this.

            But then I consider my own later experience.

            I gave my GE2015 adversary in Chingford & Woodford Green, Iain Duncan Smith, a free ride in 2017, choosing instead to contest Old Bexley & Sidcup. My reasons were
            – IDS was a committed, bona fide, card-carrying Brexiteer and I’d worked by his side through the first half of 2016
            – IDS had the testicular fortitude and honour to walk out of Cabinet de la Cameron on principle re the partisan handling of the Referendum preparation (the cover story was, of course, BS)
            – OB&S was held by Remainer James Brokenshire, who was in charge of immigration when May was Home Sec’y, and who was in part responsible for the “down to the tens of thousands” prevarication, while in fact gross immigration was over 3.5 million during his term of office
            – OB&S was the former seat of Ted Heath, the rogue who got us into the scam in the first place
            – OB&S was the home of the BNP and its wrong-thinking crew

            But after election day 2017, speaking informally to the Councillor who is the head of the Conservatives in Waltham Forest – C&WG shockingly is now no longer an Ultra-Safe seat but a Tory marginal with Labour having made enormous gains partly for demographic reasons, I was told that with hindsight they’d have preferred me to stand in 2017 (UKIP didn’t field a candidate in C&WG in 2017) as they thought we’d have taken more votes from Labour than from them.

            Re the third area – a wealthy businessman or professional based or working in London may prefer to channel the contribution through a corporation he controls or influences based outside London, and probably himself lives outside it (I live very close to the border). And there are other possibilities with a similar effect. Hence ELCOM’s classification is indicative and identificatory but of little use for the purpose to which you apparently seek to put it.

            You ask other things I’m simply not at liberty to answer, or don’t know for sure. Sorry.

  38. Excellent article – I support almost every word. Gerard Batten for leader!

    The one thing I would add is that some way must be found to change the balance of power in UKIP away from the “central party” and towards the “fringe party”, that is the rank and file members.

    The Referendum result was a populist revolt – a rejection of traditional, top-down managerial party politics.

    The organisation and culture within UKIP does not only not reflect this populist mood but seems actually hostile to it. As a consequence it is ill-adapted to take advantage of it.

    • Why not stand in the coming NEC elections, then, Richard?

      • What forthcoming NEC elections Rob? Haven’t they been cancelled for at least twelve months on economic grounds.

        • They were due November(ish) and got postponed, legitimately up to the maximum extension of six months so the new leader could settle in etc. That’s all fine under the constitution, which is why in my tealeaves article I say the NEC are CURRENTLY capable of being quorate.

      • Because standing in NEC elections doesn’t seem to help, Rob. In theory the NEC may run the party, but it doesn’t always seem to in practice. Consequently I don’t regard the NEC as the heart of the “central party”.

        On the various ways (what I would regard as) the “central party” directs, if not controls, the NEC, please see Dr Tomaz Slivnik’s illuminating NEC resignation statement – especially section 3 “Who Runs UKIP?” – the link is here:

  39. A great article. UKIP can only survive if it adopts an understood working model. There are two, the first one is to build a traditional party team that sings from the same proverbial hymn sheet. There is too much individualism, contradictory views and open hostility across the party. The second model is to allow that individualism free reign and hang the consequences. It’s only the left wing media that will react and it will get the party noticed. This method was successfully used by Nigel but it depends on a charismatic leader and a leader that believes in “mission command” – give general aims then allow others to interpret and implement.

  40. Common sense from Gerard and 10 points for the way forward that all true UKIP members can agree with. Now lets get on with implementing those that we can immediately like ditching ‘Lenny the Lion’ on websites etc. Thank you Gerard for showing us what needs to be done.

  41. The NEC should no longer be elected on the basis of 200 words and a flattering photo, Gerard: BB of the rule book places a wide variety of tools, e.g. campaign videos at the candidates service, and the best ones will make use of it…

    • Well last time round I created a website to set out my ( please NB well thought through ! ) policy positions on half a dozen key issues ( independence / law and order / education / immigration ) and of course submitted that websites address as part of my permitted 200 words blurb : the website address was unaccountably omitted from my 200 words.
      Whilst the NEC elections remain on a nationwide basis then there just needs to be a lot more space allocated to candidates to express themselves and set out what they have done in the real world. However unwieldy the consequent document ~200 words is just not sufficient for people who have achieved things in life.
      This is why I also advocate that NEC elections should be region based ~so that candidates could hold Meetings / Hustings and set out their stall and answer questions.
      No system is perfect but the current one, whereby candidates cannot set out fully the reasons for voting for them just means that the membership vote for names they have heard of / backed by Nigel or other MEPs and so on.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.