Today’s letters touch on issues relating to UKIP and on the continuing disaster that is the Government’s Fishery Policy. These letters are all challenging Kippers to do something, from letter-writing to debates in their branches in particular or here on UKIP Daily in general. The first letter is from our contributor Malcolm Watson:
I’ve just started looking further into the workings of DEFRA and am wondering why, just why, DEFRA and the government seem so intent on betraying UK Fishing Communities by selling us out to the EU. I’m beginning to wonder if this is a case of the tail wagging the dog.
I am not an expert in finance, far from it, however I am suspicious that DEFRA’s stance on betraying UK Fishing Communities is being influenced by EU funding and by the attitude of scientists and academics at the University of East Anglia (UEA), being involved at the Centre for Environment Fisheries and Environment Aquaculture (CEFAS). I would suggest the scientists, academics and the UEA overall are staunch Remainers…
Looking into CEFAS itself is an eye-opener as well as looking into the UEA. Take a look at the CEFAS Annual Report and Accounts 2016 -2017: Operating Income, Page 37. But, I would suggest, it is probably more the Remainers’ attitude of the Scientists and academics involved.
As I said, I’ve just started looking, but it does make me suspicious. Perhaps it could be worthwhile for Kippers and FFL taking a look.
Respectfully, Malcolm Watson, North Yorkshire
The next letter is from our reader Roger W. Reed, making a policy proposal for UKIP which ought to be debated by ordinary members all the way up to the current Leadership, the previous lot having shown a remarkable amount of disinterest:
UKIP is about more than who leads it. UKIP should be about Policies. Leaders are obviously very important but Leaders come and Leaders go. Policies go on and on and sadly the Great British Public think of UKIP as a one policy party.
I have proposed a number of Policies to all our recent leaders from Nigel Farage to Henry Bolton (to whom I handed a cheque for £1,000-00 at the Torquay Conference last year, made out to him personally, with my policy ideas — not so much as a thank you did I get!). I have distributed my policy ideas to many hundreds of members and to a large number of our “Movers and Shakers” including Suzanne Evans when I happened to be in the same hotel as her at the Margate Conference, when she was in charge of Policy Reform under Nigel Farage, as well as a considerable number of the NEC — and HQ as I live nearby.
Not one person has taken the slightest bit of notice despite the fact my wife, my eldest son and I gave £1,000-00 EACH to the Party last year and we were the UKIP Hot Spot on the Newton Abbot to Torquay Road displaying the largest UKIP Banners possible on our farmland, which you may have seen if you attended the Torquay Conference.
My main idea is to drive a coach and horses straight through the middle of the Monopolies of Labour Nationalisation and Tory Big Business by making a law (Act of Parliament) that all Very Large businesses should be owned and run by their Staff through Employee controlled Trusts such as the one which looks after the interests of the Partners (Staff) at John Lewis/Waitrose. (There are others). This could be achieved by enacting that all Very Large Businesses retain 10% of their annual profit and with that money buy their own shares which are then placed in the Employee Trust until the Trust owns a minimum of 51%, being a controlling share of the company. The other 49% could still be traded on the stock market if the employees wished — and provide a place for the public to invest their pension savings. I call this idea Democratic Capitalism.
Is there anyone else out there who thinks this a good idea which could capture the imagination of the Public and put UKIP back in the Limelight again for the right reasons?
Respectfully, Roger W. Reed
The last letter today is from our contributor Alan Piper who also has proposals for the Party – from ordinary members to the leadership – to think about and debate:
Since the HB election and AMW fall-out our Branch was reduced to half a dozen active members. Last meeting a dozen people turned up to our meeting, all enthused by GB and, in some cases, reconsidering their initial enthusiasm for AMW.
Our universal hope was that a way is found to extend his period of leadership beyond interim somehow so the Party can avoid another period of extended navel-gazing and actually start giving serious thought to policy again, assuming it doesn’t go bankrupt by Easter.
Which begs the question, is UKIP ready for radical yet? And where better to ask than here?
We have members starting to think that the only strategy left that might save UKIP is to focus on policies that expose the decades of treachery embedded in the main Parties through Coudenhove Kalergi, Cultural Marxism and especially the impact of Common Purpose. Surely we’re passed the days of all that being dismissed as conspiracy theory when so many people are asking why horrors like grooming gangs are condoned rather than condemned?
Exposing the why, in the context of the 3 C’s, that it’s deliberate and the design purpose of the EU, would still come as a huge shock to most of the electorate but the anger generated could be our lifesaver. We all know why UKIP has been deflected into obscurity since the referendum but even now it remains issue-focussed and lost in the infinity of current affairs. The electorate see us as a Brexit-related irrelevance and little else.
A few ideas like:
- Proscribe Common Purpose in the Public Sector.
- Restore the Treason Act abolished by Blair
- Restore the voting age to 21,
- abolish postal voting except for military posted abroad
might get the electorate asking a few questions. Or thinking we’ve gone mad.
But everyone has a mobile phone and everyone has the means to find out for themselves by following a few links and getting their heads around what’s been happening throughout all our lifetimes, if someone shows them the way.
We’re suggesting that someone should be UKIP.
Anyone else ready for radical yet?
Respectfully, Alan Piper
Leave a Reply
13 Comments on “Letters to the Editor – Friday 23rd March 2018”
Dear Vivian, it would be great if the ‘latest posts’ extended beyond the last four.
Blinking obvious that UKIP has to be radical to survive. Perfectly polite ways of publicising Coudenhove Kalergi and the entire plan to abolish identity. Now is the right time! People are getting the idea. Get lots of screeching publicity. UKIP gets none now except on non political things like money shortage.
Dear Mr Piper,
You ask the key question of whether UKIP is willing to be radical.
Saturday could be an interesting test in Birmingham of that and whether being radical attracts support. It appears that after that split in UKIP there has also been a split in the FLA (Football Lads Alliance).
Apparently Mr Batten & Mr Etheridge are to speak to the democratic-FLA.
While just half a mile away, Ms Waters and the German leader of 120dB are to speak to the FLA.
Which is the ‘real’ FLA? Which is the real radical? Is there support for radicals?
Welcome! UKIPDaily is not controlled by UKIP, so have no worries about breach of party protocols… ??
Thanks for the welcome and the information!
Fair comment B. Not SE centric though, writing from Cumbria. Just suggesting that amongst other things, Ukip take aim at the extent to which system can be manipulated since Blair (the very pro EU Blair) extended it’s scope, for political self interest, allegedly….
Thanks all for responses. Am keen as anyone to see what Ukip’s attitude is these days. As SG says, too
much focus on endless distractions for my liking. But if NF thinks this is a conspiracy, he’s got to be part of it hasn’t he?
As overseas RO, I would not fancy the postbag from my lot on abolishing postal vites ?