Dear members of the NEC –
It is no secret that many UKIP members including this writer feel it is a matter of principle that Anne Marie Waters should be allowed to stand in the Leadership Election. Should she be blocked, on whatever pretext, I personally feel, and I don’t think I will be alone, that UKIP will be denying members a real choice as to the future direction of the Party. With the greatest respect to all other candidates, having watched the youtube videos of the recent London ‘hustings’, it is my contention that without Anne Marie’s candidacy UKIP members will simply be offered different versions of the same song – albeit with proposed NEC reform and possible Direct Democracy. But that is merely internal reform or, in the case of Direct Democracy, a way of taking a very long time getting to a place that members wish to be. In any case any decision has to go past someone, perhaps a future NEC before it’s implemented, if and when it’s approved.
Watching those ‘hustings’ it was forcibly brought home to me that there was just one woman candidate there, whose credentials, a white lesbian female, would normally have had the politically-correct brigade in UKIP dancing for joy, but they obviously aren’t because this particular woman candidate offers something different, which was noticeable that the other candidates did not: Anne Marie has the courage to address the Islamic elephant in the room, and everyone at that meeting knew it. Some were obviously hostile, some supportive, but Anne Marie took it all in her stride – she has, after all, had a lot of practice of late, facing hostility and smears, even from some of those sitting alongside her.
I had hoped that one or two of the candidates with young children might have been aware of the unprecedented threat that all of us face from rapidly increasing Islamisation, but if they were, they gave no sign of it. It’s no good John Rees-Evans thinking that because he works with some jolly good Muslims abroad that those here don’t have the intention, as they state openly and often, to achieve the implementation of Sharia in this country. Yes, all of the candidates paid lip service to the ‘One Law for All’ mantra, but only Anne Marie has the courage and intention to seriously address the reason this is necessary. Most candidates don’t subscribe to anything other than ‘integration’ which obviously is a vain hope as Integration isn’t something Mohammed ever aspired to, and he is the role model for Islam!
The British people have never been asked if they are comfortable with an alien culture being forced ever more rapidly on them and their children. Schools now have Mosque visits, selective study of Islam and halal meals. Hospitals also have those, there are halal slaughterhouses, halal food is unmarked as such and stocked in supermarkets. Whole towns are full of people wearing middle eastern clothing which means no-one can exchange a friendly smile with the wearer, as the British have always been used to doing. No-one ever asked us, it just happened, and if we spoke up we were called xenophobic racist bigots.
What some people like about Anne Marie is that she is prepared to speak up, she isn’t afraid of labels. She will destroy political correctness, a word at a time. She has the courage and determination to offer UKIP members and, if she wins, the British Public, the choice they have never had, with a manifesto that aims to put right so much that has gone wrong with our country.
And yet, every now and again the ‘great and the good’ – those few that are engaged with us on UKIP Daily – drop hints that Anne Marie will be barred from standing. How dare the NEC even think about the possibility of destroying UKIP’s reputation in this way? It shouldn’t be up to them, should it! It ought to be for the members to decide the future direction of UKIP, via the ballot!
It will be a miracle if Anne Marie wins, such has been the shocking briefing against her from people inside UKIP – even Nigel, who doesn’t want to lead the Party, felt entitled to put the knife in. In spite of all this, we deserve the chance to choose her, should we so wish. Those who joined the Party when her candidacy was announced should also have the chance to vote – not to be shut out on some technicality they were unaware of because no-one told them at the time, and after their much needed money has disappeared into UKIP coffers!
They joined because they agreed with her message and her manifesto and wanted her as a Leader. They joined in good faith. I hope their faith won’t be misplaced because of a decision apparently taken later.
If Anne Marie is barred, claims that UKIP is different will be hollow indeed – a travesty of what many members believed the Party to be. There will be no real choice of direction, merely a tinkering around the edges to give the illusion that UKIP is democratic. As Raheem Kassam said recently when being interviewed on the Jon Gaunt Show, demographics won’t matter if we fail to address the Islamic problem now, because by 2050 Britain will already be a fully Islamic country. That is a valid concern for many like myself. I want the chance to vote for someone who will address it.
Quite probably there will be comment posts telling me that everything will be above board and Party rules will be followed to the letter. At the very least though, if Anne Marie is barred, we need chapter and verse on the reasons. If, as someone suggested the other day, it turns out to be because she was barred from standing as a candidate in the General Election, that decision was taken on a casting vote: we need to know the reason the deciding vote was cast that way, given that the rest of the NEC were split 50-50.
Not that it will make a real difference, because the decision whether or not to let Anne Marie offer her Leadership bid to the members will be the defining moment as far as many members like myself are concerned: whether UKIP is, as it professes to be, a Party that listens to what the members want or whether it is, in fact, a dictatorship masquerading as a Libertarian Party.
Respectfully, Deirdre Trotman