Latest from UKIP Daily

Report of a Q & A Meeting with Henry Bolton OBE

--- Newport, Gwent, Thursday 7th September 2017 ---

This meeting was called at short notice because Henry Bolton (HB) was unable to attend the informal Grassroots Hustings in Wales on August 3rd. At that time he’d only just announced his candidacy and was moreover returning that day from his work in Brussels. It was a small audience (ca 20 members), thus everyone had the chance to ask questions which HB answered after his introductory speech. David Rowlands AM chaired the meeting.

In a welcome change from the usual introductions we’ve heard so many times, HB went straight to the point: what is UKIP for, after the EU referendum?

“On June 23rd 2016, the British Lion stood up, roared and burst his chains”,

he said, pointing out that, contrary to the MSM reports and to what voters believe, the ‘Job’, i.e. getting Brexit, is not at all done:

“We have a moral responsibility as Party to see that this is accomplished”.

Government/Whitehall still don’t know what to do; we’re still under the jurisdiction of both Brussels and the ECJ and there are numerous indicators that the process is sliding.

Brexit is an ongoing effort to turn us back into the confident nation we once were, HB said. It’s a necessary effort so we can control our own destiny. It is is for us in UKIP to shape this process. We are the only Party who can do this.

HB described the other major concerns which UKIP must address: immigration with focus on islam and the islamic influence in our country. He proposes to ban funding of mosques and schools by countries such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia and to permit only imams trained and vetted here in the UK. It’s what the Belgians do, he added.

“We are not at war with islam, we are at war with any group that aims to subvert our way of life and our historic past.”

This should shape UKIP’s policies, e.g. by demanding the reversal of government cuts to the Border Agency, to Customs, to the Police Forces, pointing out that there’s ‘no thinking going in in Whitehall on these issues’.

He then described how the Left has been dumbing down our education so that a generation has lost their identity:

“We must reclaim Britain for the British”.

Another deep issue is the disenfranchisement of the people at all levels of government:

“it is for us in UKIP to give people back their voice. We work to solve problems, not just moan about them.”

However, we as Party will fail unless we’re organised so that we can work as team, so that branches and members are no longer being left alone (details on his website). Importantly, there would be a shadow cabinet, with spokespeople of expertise drawn from members, involved in formulating policies and presenting them to the MSM.

The NEC would become a board of Trustees, elected by members in their regions. The regions would be retained. The NEC would elect their own chairman. It would have the power to conduct audits – and conducting a thorough audit would be the very first thing HB would do as Leader!

He pointed out that the new Leader, whoever it’ll be, is already being manoeuvred into a corner, given the recent appointments/announcements from Head Office, e.g the restructuring of the regions and the ‘rebranding’/’new logo’ – without any consultation of candidates or members …. [My impression: he’ll have none of that!]

HB briefly described his CV in order to explain why he stands for Leader. His experience in the EU showed him how Brussels destroys nation states. He wants to maintain the character of our country and believes passionately that only UKIP can do this. He closed this part of the evening by quoting the Sandhurst motto which has shaped his life: “Serve to Lead”.

The Q & A session followed without a break:

“UKIP has establishment problems, a leader must take the grassroots with them” – absolutely, said HB. He has seen things there which have stunned him, e.g how there seems to be a ‘right’ to give instructions without then taking responsibility: this must end! He expects to have a ‘battle royal’ with the UKIP establishment, but would not hesitate to take this to the members, calling on their support. There is a problem with unity. The party was always diverse but coalesced around the goal of Brexit. That job however is not done, so this would be a policy uniting members.

“What about that new logo? Would he keep the old one? Were the new ones costed and/or tested?” – This should not have been something for two or three people to decide, HB said. Members must decide this. If he were elected, he’d ask the AGM to vote on this, there and then.

“Who are the people who now run the Party, what are their objectives?” – HB did not want to point fingers, but said that the Party “elite” seems to sit in an ivory tower where they talk to each other but not to members, just as happens in the EU and Whitehall. That must be undone. The new leader must be aware that the old management will try to shape him/her: it’s normal behaviour in organisations, but HB will stop that, having the know-how from his work experience.

Questioned about his action against AMW HB said: ‘If we cannot take our own NEC to task, legally, how can we talk about ‘one law for all’? He has explained his reasoning to AMW who is now ok with it.

On islam, he drew on his experience of fighting in muslim countries. He pointed out that we are on the cusp of a major new terrorism offensive across Europe because, losing in Syria and Iraq, ISIS needs facilitators and ‘success’ elsewhere to be able to recruit. Therefore the cuts to police forces and the Border Agency must be reversed as a matter of urgency – a policy UKIP ought to adopt.

“Is he against halal?” – Yes, he is opposed to all non-stun slaughter, no matter the religious reasoning. He added that we must preserve our country and our culture, and that we need policies to manage this. A simple anti-islam policy does not work, as the burqa fiasco showed. But, he said, for once he is in complete agreement with the ECJ: sharia law is not compatible with our laws.

The obligatory question about Wales: HB sees UKIP Wales, in spite of our problems, as success story for UKIP which the Party ought to translate to England.

On Cultural Marxism: responsibility in our society has been turned away from individuals towards government. Everything is unravelling, the rules ensuing a cohesive society have been broken. What to do about it? Change education so that people learn to take back responsibility for themselves, for their jobs and their lives.

“Are you confident you have the intelligence to understand UKIP?” – HB says he’s held numerous conservations with many members, the other candidates and with some from Head Office, so is fully aware of the problems. Does he have all the answers? Of course not – but his aim is to bring back members’ confidence in the Party, to identify and solve the problems.

On UKIP United and perhaps setting up a ‘team’ with other candidates, HB answered that if one has a chance of winning one doesn’t step down. He has had talks with other candidates who’d be happy to work with him as leader, DK first and foremost.

With this final question the chairman closed the event, thanking HB for coming and for his excellent presentation.

Afterwards I talked to the chairman. He was very much impressed by HB who hadn’t dodged one single question but always gave concise answers. A UKIP founder member was equally impressed, stressing the high quality of the answers HB gave.

I also chatted with members who were still hanging about trying to talk to HB. They were equally impressed – some will now change their vote from their previous preference to HB while six ‘undecideds’ have now decided to vote for him on the strength of his performance.

The video of the event will be published on UKIP Daily.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
About Vivian Evans (324 Articles)
Vivian is a UKIP patron, Vice Chair of UKIP Cardiff and Editor in Chief of UKIP Daily

34 Comments on Report of a Q & A Meeting with Henry Bolton OBE

  1. Whether you love him or hate him Nigel is going to be a hard act to follow. My hope is that whoever becomes our leader will be given unanimous support from all our members; and he/she will need it because, whatever happens, the MSM will attack whoever gets the poisoned challice.

  2. I’ve read all the comments below, and many good points are made with regard to what Henry Bolton does or does not stand for. I know that not everybody will agree, but I think that Henry’s softly, softly diplomatic approach to the issues he espouses will be utterly ineffective, even if they are “right”.

    I’d like to offer my view of the context of this leadership contest.

    This election will decide whether UKIP becomes a newsworthy party, gaining publicity and members through the controversy of appointing AMW or it will become lost in irrelevance.

    We have no MPs. We don’t even have Councillors any more. Nobody cares what we think about Brexit or LibLabCon squabbles. We can just get on with our lives, whingeing from the sidelines and being ridiculed whenever the MSM can be bothered.

    Under AMW we become something again. We’ll be talked about. We’ll lose members like Bill Etheridge (hooray) and we’ll attract new members in droves.

    The choice for us all is relevance or irrelevance. AMW or anyone but AMW.

    • His background impresses me. He was a bureaucrat/civil servant who worked at a high level and with large budgets. He speaks confidently. I expect he would be a powerful force.

      The superficial impression (true or false) is of a member of the British establishment, an official someone assumed to be a Tory.

      I have not seen him under pressure from antagonistic questioning. (That would have been a useful model for hustings to see how candidates will perform in those media interviews.)

      In watching him at hustings I was left with little idea what he stood for. If I didn’t catch this, while being interested, will the general public catch it?

      None of those negative impressions means anything. He could be a wonderful leader and just the person to rebuild the internal structure. I expect that he has considerable talents which could be valuable in the Party even if not elected.

      But I can only try to imagine how he will behave when grilled on Newsnight and I suspect that if he does okay that the public will forget him and UKIP within days because he isn’t for anything memorable.

      Candidates who left me with a clear idea were:
      JRE – online democracy
      AMW – Islamic inspired crime
      DK – Cultural Marxism in education
      AP – wealth and asteroids

      others who I can’t summarise:
      PW –
      JC –
      JB –

      My impression of ideal leaders is a mix of abilities, one of which is to encapsulate in a short memorable phrase where they are leading to.

    • Completely agree.

  3. Henry seems to think he can appeal with very little actual policy (though he’s not alone there), and I see no identification with the ordinary people whose votes we need in great numbers to make any difference, especially on the economy.
    And non-stun is not enough. It would be widely abused.

    • I’m so sorry, Quercus, that you missed in my report the policy points HB actually made.
      Perhaps, if it’s not too much to ask, you might consider reading it again?
      Btw – rejecting non-stun as ‘not enough’ and ‘would be widely abused’: excellent reason for not even trying …

      • Of course I read your article, Viv.
        Those ‘policies’ concerning internal Party matters are not irrelevant to us members (Welsh or not!), though little different from what most of the other candidates are saying – but they are of zero interest to the public.
        What they want to hear about is how we propose to make their lives better, through better management of the economy and all the bread & butter issues which depend on it. Of which – nothing.
        On ‘cultural marxism’, we get “change education”. How, precisely? Perhaps Henry said a bit more on the day, but not at the hustings I went to.
        And unless all religious slaughter is stopped in entirety, abuses will be so widespread as to make any ban on its variations completely meaningless. It has to be one law for all.

  4. For me, the fact that he says “we are not at war with Islam, we are at war with any group that aims to subvert our way of life’ shows that he won’t name the problem – even among friends. How much less will he do so when under ‘hostile fire’?

    I recognize that many people in UKIP long for a credible and tidy-looking Leader who doesn’t name the problem that we face – so he will perhaps win – but I don’t think he will appeal to those whose vote we need, if we are to become once again a force, not necessarily in Westminster but strong enough to influence any Government. Corbyn will have it all his own way if the old Labour vote remains disenfranchised.

    I hope I am wrong about Mr Bolton, because I think he is now the Arron/Nigel candidate, but whether these people will have the guts to face the problem of Islam remains to be seen. Arron will come in, if Bolton wins, and try and bring members with him,is my assessment. We may have many members then, but whether it will be any use to our Country I’m not sure.

    My vote remains with Anne Marie.

    • HB has made it clear (as I hope I have conveyed) that it’s more than just and simply about being ‘at war with islam’, and he gives instances of actual policies we can and must promote as political party.
      We are at war with cultural marxism in our education system, with common purpose in public services, and above all with the EU/Brussels, all of which are supporters and protectors of islam.
      Isn’t it obvious that, if we allow Brexit to slide and wither away, that we’re still under EU Laws, obliged to follow their hate speech laws protecting islam?
      I don’t know where you get the idea from that Arron Banks is in with HB. That simply is not the case.

      • Viv, I said I ‘think’ – Nigel has endorsed Henry, Arron has endorsed David, Henry and David have said they would work together, which is great, we need people to work together, but as Arron and Nigel usually work together too, it’s just what I think!

        • Just one small but in this context a significant correction: Nigel has not endorsed HB, he is his political referee for the Party.
          Yes, David has the support of Banks, but while that is important when thinking about voting for DK, I would hazard the guess that HB, as leader, would not fall for the embrace of Banks when he makes DK his deputy.

          • Viv,
            You make a good point here. I get the impression, from what I have seen and read thus far, that Henry Bolton is very much his ‘own man’ and not someone who could be bought.

            I had intended to vote for the same person I had voted for in the last leadership contest but I am now beginning to warm to Henry. Your article above is just about starting to convince me.

            With thanks.
            Kind regards.

        • Noted! Though the money would be handy!

    • What does Bolton gain by saying “we are not at war with Islam.” It’s a phrase that goes nowhere and achieves nothing. It has no value whatsoever. No Muslim will think more highly of him for saying it. Most likely they will sense fear. I know I do. I really hope UKIP members don’t screw things up and vote for Mr Bolton though a decent guy he probably is. He’s just not what the country needs right now.
      I don’t listen to LBC that often but the following is a critique of an exchange on Maajid Nawaz’s show. To me it’s an indication of what the British people are thinking. Mr Bolton, icini and Slivnik might want to take a listen. After doing so Mr Bolton might want to think about using again the phrase ‘we are no at war with Islam’. It’s better in my opinion he says nothing at all if he thinks like this.

      • You have read what he actually said, right? Namely that we are “at war with any group that aims to subvert our way of life and our historic past.” Anything wrong with that? Or are you happy to be ‘at war with islam’ while letting Common Purpose and the Cultural Marxists keep on destroying our culture, the preparing for an islamic take-over?

    • “For me, the fact that he says “we are not at war with Islam, we are at war with any group that aims to subvert our way of life’ shows that he won’t name the problem – even among friends. How much less will he do so when under ‘hostile fire’?”

      Dee – I agree with you about most things, but not about this, HB is spot on. It’s hard to realise that in spite of the problems we have and will continue to have for the foreseeable future with Islam, they are not the real enemy.

      Let’s face it, If it weren’t for successive governments, the EU and the purveyors of Cultural Marxism in general, the Muslims wouldn’t even be here, they’re just opportunists. In fact, our obsession with Islam is a handy distraction for The Powers That Be, because it takes our attention away from them.

      Imagine, in a time of war, that I had a rifle with one bullet and I had to make it count, it would be important to aim that bullet at exactly the right person.

      Anyway, I have an article to be published shortly that talks a bit about this and I’ll be following it up later in the week.

      In the meantime, I’ll leave you with this great video from Anonymous. I don’t agree with everything that Anonymous says, but in this case it underlines some of HB’s points perfectly.

      • No, Flyer, I agree they aren’t the real enemy – but they are the tool used by the enemy. I submit that we need to get rid of the tool before we tackle the rest. To my mind, Sharia is the key, as is Halal.

        • Yes, sharia is the key, as is halal. HB stated categorically that he’s against non=stun slaughter, for whatever religious reason – and that for once he agrees with the ECJ, namely that sharia is incompatible with our laws.
          He has the knowledge and the know-how how to deal with that, by unifying the Party. For him, these are not just electioneering statements, to be forgotten once he’s got the job. Don’t forget that he actually fought islam ‘at the sharp end’ …

    • Name the problem? You think there is just one? Viv encapsulates it with “We are at war with cultural marxism in our education system, with common purpose in public services, and above all with the EU/Brussels, all of which are supporters and protectors of islam”. The growth of Islam in Europe is one of the symptoms not the cause – a point Tomasz Slivnik tried to make but was widely misunderstood. We will eradicate the symptom when we eradicate the underlying disease – the left in all its manifestations.

      Islam did not cause Rotherham (and many other places). It was the abject failure to enforce our laws caused by our institutions and public bodies, from the police to social services, from local authorities to the Home Office, being paralysed by the charge of racism. That paralysis has been a victory not of Islam but of the left’s relentless injection of political correctness into our institutions, media, and political class. Islam exploits our weakness.

      • Stout, I agree with what you and Viv, and other commenters say about the fact that we are fighting a Globalist plan in all its manifestations. But I ask you to consider whether Henry Bolton will appeal to those we need to get to join us. This isn’t about the message, which may be the same from Henry, David and Anne, but delivered in different ways, it’s about the appeal of a Leader, is what I’m trying to say.

        Imagine Jacob Rees-Mogg is the next Tory PM. I doubt if the Tories will try again with May – so there will be another election whenever they oust her, which, eventually, they will surely do – not now, but probably a year from now? Imagine Corbyn is, I expect, still in charge of Labour. It is those disaffected ordinary people, young and old, we need to attract. Many, if not all Tories that think like us will flock back to the Tories under J RM.

        Good though he is, credible though he is, I think the sort of people we need will not be attracted by Henry. They want a person with a track record of being on their side – living as they do – in my opinion. These people are UKIP’s only hope for the future growth of the Party, and UKIP is their only hope. They won’t vote Tory, cannot vote for Corbyn, but I don’t believe they will go for a Tory look-alike, sound-alike – distrust is in their DNA.

        Nigel adapted a ‘down-the-pub’ beer drinking persona – that’s how he got away with being actually a City man at his roots. I’m not sure Henry can achieve that.

        I believe that Henry David Anne and John R-E all actually understand the parlous plight we are in. I could give my vote to any one and still be assured of that – it’s who will appeal most, not to us, but to the people we need.

        I so want UKIP not just to survive but to grow enormously, and to do that we need members. I believe with of all those, hopefully working as a team, UKIP will be credible, but imo we will only get those currently disenfranchised members with Anne Marie out in front.

      • “Islam did not cause Rotherham”

        Sex slavery is endorsed within the Koran. The phrase used is “that which your right hand possess”, in other words a muslim man can have sex with any woman over whom he exerts control.

        My interpretation is that Rotherham etc are entirely consistent with the teachings of the Koran. They controlled the girls using drink and drugs, they were effectively in their possession.

        • The police and other agencies were afraid to act until shamed into doing something by a Times campaign and political pressure. Islam and other cults antithetical to our way of life only flourish if we allow them to. It is the way cultural marxism, common purpose, and all the forces trying to destroy the nation state, has infected out institutions that is the real cause. Had that not happened Islam and its backward, medieval adherents could not operate at all.

          Moral relativism must end. All cultures are not equal, all faiths are not equal. The Bible (New Testament) says love thy neighbour. The Koran says kill the unbeliever. Time to re-assert our won values, to rid the establishment of its moral relativism and political correctness. Without doing that attacking Islam will not work.

          • Yes of course the police and others failed to respond adequately. At the root is Islam. How many Sikhs, Buddhists or Hindus are behaving like this? None that I am aware of. Islam must take the blame, together with those who allowed it in, and allowed it to fester.

    • Islam certainly is at war with us. It has been at war with the rest of humanity for 14 centuries. Estimated murders vary but it is hundreds of millions due to it.

  5. I have met most of the remaining candidates, except for AMW, though I have seen a lot of her on video.
    Without doubt Bolton impressed most, followed by Kurten. He just needs to smile more.
    AMW impressed little. She appears to me to be anti muslim, a strong feminist, rather left wing and looking to take over UKIP to push her personal agenda. She is largely blind to everything else, though she’s clearly been advised to sound interested in other policy areas.  She has no subtlety whatever, I do not regard her as a good speaker, just a passionate one. She is the only candidate guaranteed to divide us.

    For me the choice is now clear, it has to be Henry.

    • I have the same impression about Anne Marie.

      (I have already voted for David Kurten; the decisive reason for not voting for Henry Bolton was that his manifesto was too inward-looking. I didn’t know what he stood for, beyond Brexit. I hope for a leadership duo of Bolton and Kurten.)

  6. What a great man! He has had first hand experience. So pleased that he opposes non-stun. This really is the litmus test for our demand for “one law for all”. If we really believe this key principle, then we cannot allow deviations from the law for this or that special interest group. They must fit in with us, not we with them.

    I hope that whoever is chosen as leader, if not Henry, that they will give him a prominent role.

    As an aside Viv, should “Islam” be capitalised? It is a proper noun, even if it is not a proper religion!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.