Listening to Henry Bolton’s press conference yesterday, I felt compelled to try to set the record straight on the subject of the UKIP National Executive Committee (NEC). Mr Bolton has sought to blame the NEC for the current problems in the party, and says that he will ‘reform’ it, should he remain as Leader.
Mr Bolton said:
“The NEC, as presently constituted, is unfit for purpose and has severely handicapped the Party’s progress and political delivery for some years, as all recent UKIP leaders will attest.”
Well, I won’t!
I don’t know Paul Nuttall’s position, but he was my predecessor as Chairman of the Committee. Diane James blamed the NEC for her early bath, despite not even having turned up to meet it. Steven Woolfe didn’t like the fact that it wouldn’t cheat him onto the ballot when he failed to file his papers on time.
Certainly Nigel Farage wants rid of it. Quite understandably, after 25 years of campaigning, he finds it an irritating impediment to doing whatever he wants, whenever he wants. But Nigel himself created the NEC, to remove power from a previous rogue leader and put it in the hands of the party’s members.
In the six years I served Nigel as his Chairman and chaired the NEC, it was an enthusiastic and loyal supporter of his outstanding leadership, a thoughtful and conscientious guardian of the party’s principles, and a dogged defender of the rights of the members and the unheard pleas of the people of this country.
For six months of this time, the NEC was used as a battle-ground, to try and disable Nigel and keep him out of the Referendum campaign, as those who have read Douglas Carswell’s valedictory interviews can attest. It was a tough time, but the NEC majority held firm, and we managed to prevent Nigel’s team being stripped away, leaving him vulnerable to those who wanted him taken out of the game.
It is true that some members brought sandwiches to meetings. That was because they wanted to save the party money. In fact, in 2013 Nigel complained about us buying a sandwich lunch for the NEC, at meetings lasting from mid-day to 6pm, to which members had travelled at their own expense from all parts of the country.
Let’s be absolutely clear. When the party leadership spends more than it raises, it is the NEC that has to pick up the pieces. When someone wants to do something that goes against our party’s core philosophy, or political sense, it is the NEC which reins them in. When people disgrace the party, it is the NEC that kicks them out.
The 15 members of the NEC comprise twelve who are directly elected from among the membership, two who have won election to legislatures in our name, and the Party Leader.
Every year, NEC members are elected promising to ‘drain the swamp’ and ‘sort out the hierarchy’. Then they arrive and discover that the Committee is comprised of fine, committed, well-intentioned members, like themselves, who are trying to keep this ramshackle, anarchic, glorious party in some sort of order.
The narrative that the NEC is not fit for purpose has been built inexorably over a period, but I would ask members to consider what they would see it replaced with. Today, Nigel writes that he wanted a more ‘5-Star’ style organisation. Which one, though? The one in which all decisions are made collectively, over the Internet, by people who cannot have been involved in any political party previously? Or the one which has only one member, Mr Grillo, who decides whether those decisions fit with his preferred agenda?
Nigel has written in today’s Daily Telegraph that, to paraphrase, he thought Henry was a pretty poor leader until the NEC said so. Now, he thinks he is a splendid chap, and will help him get rid of the bee in his bonnet that is the accursed NEC. The fact that Nigel still has this bee buzzing, after all he has achieved and having gone on to a whole new career outside the party, is really rather sad.
The current NEC is not a bunch of numpties. It consists of three retired entrepreneurs (successful ones), two practising London barristers and a London solicitor, a former international film industry executive, three health professionals (two still working in the NHS), a chartered accountant, a young marketing professional, a member of the European Parliament and a member of the Welsh Assembly.
And Henry Bolton’s attempt to make the NEC responsible for the current fiasco, rather than his own lack of political acumen, is nothing short of breathtaking. Now we find that he and Nigel intend to use this opportunity to remove the mechanism by which the members exercise control over their party (and the Leader).
Henry Bolton has said that
“it is now time to put an end to the factional infighting within the Party and to remove those who have been a part of that.”
That is absolutely correct!
Steve Crowther wrote “But Nigel himself created the NEC, to remove power from a previous rogue leader and put it in the hands of the party’s members.”
How many members feel they had power put into their hands? How powerful do you feel?
Like many here I’m very grateful to Steve C for giving us all such a detailed insight of how things have worked at the NEC.
But while everyone is understandably caught up in the Bolton/ Nigel on manoeuvres saga and so on, may I just say that much of what’s been missing for years is communication. I joined the party in 2009 and am now hearing from the top how it’s worked in 2018..!
I can’t remember how many many years ago it was that Jonathon Arnott used to report NEC meetings but are we really being told that between them and now, nobody thought about keeping the membership abreast of developments, Party thinking, etc?
Or are we to infer that Nigel didn’t want us to be told anything and the NEC went along with that?
I have long since come to the view that Branch chairmen should have somebody on the NEC specifically tasked with being a point of contact. Instead we’ve had a mishmash of regional offices, regional chairmen, county chairmen, NEC members ( known or otherwise) and now regional controllers, all of whom have done a very effective job of keeping the membership at arms length and in the dark. Until today I’ve learned more about Ukip from Ukip Daily (thanks to Viv & co).
Any chance that a reconfigured NEC and/or constitution could include provision for sensible, two way communication? Assuming anything useful survives the EGM?
I regret having to remove retrospectively the comments of “Mrs Merton” .
While banter is acceptable, trolling and personal attacks are not.
I’m guessing ‘she’ didn’t answer my politely then?
*me
Dear Vivian
Thank you for this. It had been my intention, this afternoon, to email you in this regard.
Yesterday evening, I had to give up trying to read the (genuine) comments as the nonsense this person was posting was very distracting and hindered the flow of genuine debate.
I tried again this morning and noticed that ‘Mrs Merton’s’ comments were becoming abusive. I logged in this afternoon with the express intention of emailing you but, thankfully, you beat me to it.
Kind regards.
Brenda
Dear Brenda,
I think Mrs. Merton was a troll, with a name like that. That is why I was trying to catch her out, and her comments against Graham were malicious to say the least.
We are still in Europe.
They will not let us leave
@mrs Merton, can I ask what it was that first attracted you to the polite, thoughtful, and articulate contributors to UKIPD?
The principal reason Henry Bolton was elected was because he was allowed to be elected with only a plurality of the vote. If the election had been conducted using Instant Runoff Voting [1] it is unlikely Henry Bolton would have won. Better yet, perhaps, would be to apply Instant Runoff Voting to select a final pair, and then organize a second ballot so the two main contenders can be scrutinized more carefully by party members.
I have no idea if the electoral system has been changed since the last leadership election. If not, I suggest that it is changed before the next one. A system that would allow an 11-way field to be won by a candidate with support from only 10% of party members is not fit for purpose.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
On becoming the newly elected leader of a party, it might be thought a good idea to stamp your style on that leadership at the earliest opportunity to let the troops, and others, know what you’re about. NEC reform would be a long way off and of nil interest to the public and the media. Young Independence on the other hand were, 3 weeks prior to the leadership result, obliged to abandon a planned weekend of activities in Sheffield due to the actions and threats of left wing thugs. For law abiding and fair minded citizens (including this 72 yr old member who was booked to travel there in support) might it not have been considered better for Bolton to call out these Marxist extremists and demand action from the authorities thereby confirming his credentials as – at least – a defender of the law and friend of victims of violence, particularly youthful ones. BTW, did any other senior figures in UKIP think to publicly express their disgust at the episode(and their full support for YI at the same time?)
Well said!
Anne Marie and John Rees-Evans wanted the event to go ahead and said they would attend, if I remember rightly, Roger. Senior Members – Gerard Batten. Of course.
After Bolton had claimed he was finished with Jo Marney – he was seen dining with her at the Liberal club.
Does anyone know the criteria or the rules of dining in this club?
Does one have to be a party member?
Just asking……
And the simple answer to my question…?
I would appreciate it.
No you do not have to be a member of the party. It sufficient to declare support for liberalism as a philosophy.
Thanks Stout Yeoman for that clariification.
I appreciate your time.
And UKIP is a ‘liberal’ party?
Bit of a conflict there some of us may think.
Maybe it highlights the gap between many of the membership and some at the top.
Forgive me but I hadn’t realised I had joined ‘liberalism’.
Did Mr Bolton explain to members before thsy voted that he endorsed ‘Liberalism’ to that degree.
That he had ‘declared support for’ it
to the degree of dining in that club.
Not at the hustings I attended.
Anything but.
Can it be said that he deliberately fabricated his policies and deliberately misled the membership and so lied his way into the leadership.
How many who actually voted for him realised they were voting for such a dedicated ‘liberal’?
Or was their vote based on a completely bogus, dishonest spiel. It could almost be claimed – their votes were ‘stolen.’
Would Libertarian be a qualification?
The couple could also possibly got in on the “Libertine” ticket
Dear Steve, I’ve learned more from your straightforward and for me, reassuring account of UKIP and the NEC and the response it has elicited in one day than in all time I’ve been a member of UKIP so thank you.
Being one inclined to keep my head down and keep doing what I can for the cause, working on the ‘need to know’ premise, I’ve always avoided getting sucked in to matters I know little about but always had an inkling that there was much more to it than met the eye. However, from what you describe it is, if anything, better than I expected. Certainly, people who have run successful businesses and others of their ilk that are prepared to, quite literally, give us their time, deserve not only our gratitude but at the very least, a modicum of respect.
UKIP is far bigger than any one man, no matter who that man may be.
It may be true that I don’t get out much but as a matter of fact I’m aware that he had claimed to have been ‘seeing’ this Italian au pair.
Just to be clear, I voted for Mr. Bolton once, a mistake I now feel disinclined to repeat should he fail to retreat.
Are we all swamp creatures? I wasn’t sure if the NEC was the swamp or all of us except the 4000 or so who voted for him. He is talking like a megalomaniac.
At no time has apologised for what he is putting the party through, or even said ‘I’m sorry, but…..’ . This isn’t how true leaders are. As a former soldier he should know how important morale and trust are. Henry’s main interest is himself, not the party.
Christ this is excruciating
He’s almost as unpleasant as Piers Morgan.
“Maintaining focus on the task in hand. That is leadership.”
Priceless! Got the impression that’s precisely what he didn’t do.
It begs the question, why did he agree to the interview? Did he not know he would be hung out to dry?
Good grief!
Thank God the NEC defenestrated him unanimously. Otherwise the general public might have thought UKIP were all utter nutters. It’s not often that I am lost for words, but watching this video, I am.
Well written, Steve.
I say, deriving no satisfaction at all from this whole fiasco, I could have written Steve Crowther’s letter myself. All of it.
In a way, I did so.
Over a week ago.
It was encapsulated in the very first line of a brief letter to the NEC.
It unfortunately found its way into the public domain.
Mrs. Cleo Merton,
What on Earth are you talking about, are you a troll?
Mrs. Merton,
Well, you are very amusing, I will say that!
I wonder if this is the letter Freddy refers to, where his ‘gang of four’ cast aside the constitution and rule book and make a grab for power themselves by forming an ‘interim task-force’ rather than the constitutional process of an interim leader:
https://www.facebook.com/BenWalkerUKIP/photos/a.1870642989865594.1073741829.1856356951294198/1938522936410932/?type=3&theater
Note also that this memo does not particularly focus its ire on Henry Bolton, its main target is the incompetent UKIP management, and in particular the financial management of John Bickley.
Not content with trying to mount a coup against the party – not against the leader, he is to be voted out at an EGM, their coup is against the party following Henry’s exit – their ‘radical improvements’ for which it would be worth tossing aside the constitution are – guess what – renegotiating office rent! Cutting expenses! Ideas so radical that there is no way that someone like Bickley with 30 years experience of financial management would EVER have managed to think of! Wow, I have to admit it, these guys are so smart that they do deserve to be promoted to first amongst equals, immediately.
Their hilarious lack of self-awareness is evident from where the word ‘policy’ appears in this document. It appears once, the final word. There are NO policy ideas whatsoever. And their financial analysis is totally wrong, UKIP does not have a cost control problem, it has a lack of income problem. Income has dropped so precipitously that cost-cutting can never keep up. Why lack of income? No policy, no compelling messenger.
When it later emerged that back in October Ben had asked Henry to fire Oakden, appoint Ben as chairman and split Oakden’s salary between Ben and Henry, new light was cast on Ben and Freddy’s power grab. Ben is one of the chancers who saw the party at a weak moment in the last election and put himself forward. He kept agitating for a position even after Henry won. Henry rebuffed him, then Ben keep agitating to get Henry out, basically anything as long as Ben ends up in some kind of position of power. I am very surprised that Freddy signed on to this madcap scheme but you always have to judge people by their actions, not their words.
Thank you for pointing up the letter from the gang of four. I was not aware it – why would I be if it was on Ben Walker’s facebook. It’s very revealing.
A previous gang of four received life sentences in China. A subsequent gang of four, the SDLP, enjoyed political irrelevance and eventual obscurity.
Just saying.
I tried to get Ben Walker up to speed on Islam.
Graham,
Crikey, Stuart Agnew is caught up in this as well, is this the notorious gang of four?
Oh, I see he is.
I wish to fully endorse everything Steve Crowther has written above and this is the view of my entire committee at North Hereford. Members will remember my question to Bolton on the 6th December at Walsall asking him When was he going to make some UKIP POLICY so that we could start to take it to the nation ? Hotly supported by the Ludlow Chair.He replied that he had to sort HQ first ! March seemed to be the time for his policies – far too late to support our Local Election campaigns. He lost my vote on that night .Christmas media showed where his interests lay.
I am proud of the NEC direction on this matter but I am strangely pleased that Bolton and his racist bed fellow wish to fight on – so that the entire membership can sack him and throw him out by his collar. We deserve better !
The NEC should now debate that no candidate should be considered that has not served this party for less than 5 years to any position of influence or control. Every one from Kilroy Silk AMW to Carswell and Bolton have caused nothing but trouble and unrest.
Jonathan Oakton
Chairman North Herefordshire.
Alll because you all wanted someone else to be leader just like the treatment that President Trump has and is receiving Henry has done nothing wrong his personal life is his alone l did not vote for Henry but I defiantly will now
Indeed, he is perfectly entitled to promise to call his children over Christmas and to then not do so. He is perfectly entitled to delay telling his wife of his decision to dessert his family and leave her with the child-rearing just as he is perfectly entitled to not rebut any of the statements his wife made and to concentrate on Jo Marney instead. I entirely agree his private life is his alone and how much better it would be if it had stayed that way.
But it didn’t and he and Jo Marney are very much implicated in the fact that it became the focus of public attention thereby exposing flaws in his judgement if not also his character.
It is not because we “all wanted someone else to be leader” – your hypothesis is false and thus the conclusion – but because it became apparent he lacked political savvy and was therefore unsuited to lead.
I write as a Trump supporter every bit as dismayed as you at the treatment he gets.
“He is perfectly entitled to delay telling his wife of his decision to dessert his family”
I guarantee you did not mean that.
The extra ‘s’ was a typo from rapid key presses. Only a pedant would remark upon it and so clutter the thread with self-advertisement. Have some respect for the issues being discussed and don’t pollute the comments further with a reply please.
Hear! Hear!
I didn’t vote for Henry or AMW (in fact it was that attempt to deselect her that put me off him.) I was not surprised he did well, not least because many members would not have managed to get to a hustings, so would have relied on the candidate’s statements in the magazine – his was excellent.
Not only did I not have a problem with my choice not winning – Henry won fair and square, I went home from Torquay a happy bunny, but after meeting him and discussing his progress on reorganising the administration side (much needed, including essential savings on things like a not fit for purpose members database system) I more than warmed to him. After he made my revolting MP squirm on QT I was delighted!
I am not prurient or priggish when it comes to his private life either.
So why do I concur with those who say he should do the decent thing? Because of the appalling way he has handled the situation- I could say starting from the moment he found someone with whom he wanted to form a new relationship (Not checking her social media, ensuring neither of them posted lovey dovey together pics on social media until ALL his family had been quietly advised he had a new love in his life)
Having failed the first hurdle it was downhill all the way. When in a hole, stop digging and he kept digging harder and faster. Whatever my own views, I have to say that my duty would be to pass on those of my branch and county members and the majority, but by no means all, by Saturday,wanted him to resign. (No, no-one wanted an EGM etc) A significant number felt so strongly they made it plain they would not be renewing their memberships. And to cap it all, those of us trying to hold our heads up in our communities, or out campaigning were met with derision. At the end of the day it’s the voters we need to convince.
The idea that in today’s 24/67 media you can be a political leader who has a private life is oxymoronic.
Even today he is still hinting that he might get back together (have they really split?) with Ms Marney who is now portrayed as a racist and ‘nasty’ piece of work.
Are we all going to work for the next four years, with Bolton as leader to find out the week before the 2022 general election that he and Marney, or she alone have done or said something that wipes us out.
I’m certainly not going to flog myself to death for four years on behalf of UKIP with him and Marney at the helm, days, weeks away from a major media car crash. It’s over for him; why doesn’t he get it?
Because, most likely, he has Nigel whispering in his ear that he can be UKIP’s Jeremy Corbyn.
Crowther, Oakley, Oakden and you should have a quiet word with Nigel.
There is some kind of ‘folie à deux’ going on between Nigel and HB.
Both are utterly delusional if they think there is any parallel between HB and JC.
The latter was known for DECADES, not years, as having certain extreme left policy positions.
He maintained these even when others were abandoning them during the Blairite dispensation to enjoy the fruits of office.
Then last year he went around the country campaigning FOR THOSE POLICY POSITIONS.
By contrast HB’s brain is a policy free zone.
Doubtless too much of it ( the brain ) is now dedicated by ancient custom to responding to the urgings of a certain body organ.
There is ZERO ZERO ZERO parallel between HB and JC. Zero.
I noticed last night on LBC that Nigel didn’t ask HB a single question about policy.
Perhaps that’s because immediately after the September result was announced Nigel interviewed him and DID ask questions about immigration policy and got no answer ( and he kept trying and prompting, believe me ! ) other than ‘ it needs to come down, but I’m not going to put a number on it ‘ ( Even Mrs May does actually put some kind of number on it ).
It’s not his appendage at work. Oh that he were just a philanderer. If he was he wouldn’t fall in “love” and lose all perspective. It would seem that has adolescent or infantile ego needs. The next catastrophic misjudgement cannot be far off.
Because John, he’s a narcissist. Border personality disorder. (NPD or a ‘narc’ ) He’s a nutter.
Look it up.
Well you be defiant then!
But to vote you have to be a paid up member first!
If I had wanted someone else as leader then I would have voted for someone else. I voted for Bolton and what an almighty mistake that was.
I`ll bet you walk under ladders to, just to show you don`t hold with all that silly nonsense.
Alright if HB has done nothing wrong; how about uttering such scurrilous nonsense that the “NEC is not fit for purpose”. That to my mind is a crime in itself. I would have thought the law would have something to say about such defamation, so wide in condemnation of such an august law abiding body .
Now if he had accompanied it by a specific instance…………….well!
Oh couldn`t it be said that by his utterances and lack of attention to UKIP “Leader matters”, he is not fit for purpose himself.
Oh and his conduct of his private life is our business, without his attrocious conduct having been made public by the press, we would not have known he was unsuitable to be leader of any office in the public eye.
I know John Stonehouse was eventually caught out for lying, but the original sin was association with the wrong people (guilt by association) I would have thought thye association with a Jo(ker) who dreamed up and wrote such condemnatory emails proved his unsuitability even if it was retrospective.
Anyway, I voted for AMW, I didn`t particularly want or think she was qualified to be leader, but I did not take kindly to being classed as a neo-Nazi and for that reason alone I think he should be dismissed for bringing the party into disrepute
Yes, it`s clear some Army and ex-Army are clearly incapable of accepting the definitions of obligations of acceptable public conduct that originated under Samuel Pepys in the Royal Navy (still the Senior Service)
Link to Daily Politics today, about 40 mins in. David Allan and Peter Whittle interviewed by Jo Coburn:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09pqsnt/daily-politics-23012018
Oh dear , I suppose Dave Allen will be on about some Peculiar voting system again. Why can he not be an expert in something else. It made Lib Dem look ridiculous and now us.
In these appalling times – my view was communicated to the NEC ten days ago – we shall be forgiven a moment of levity.
I am, inter alia, a mathematician. My students’ achievements indicate I’m a good one.
And David Allen is not. He confirmed this to me, if indeed this required any confirmation.
One of the flaws in his electoral “system” is that it requires a certain number, let’s call it “X”, to be equal to 1.
While possible, it’s far too much work for me to compute “X” exactly.
However, I can easily prove that “X” is greater than 1,000,000,000,000,000,000.
Which doesn’t look anything like “1” to me.
—
Inter alia, I am, or perhaps was, a physicist. With an interest in zoology. So, the next subject for entertainment:
Why didn’t former Leadership candidate (I predict he’ll be baaack) Mr Powlesland understand my point that the enhanced sexual drive of bonobos (closer to us than common or garden chimpanzees) was one of the key factors making his bold plan to mine the asteroid belt for platinum infeasible?
Hint: The asteroid belt is too far for remote control from earth to be feasible. And autonomous robots haven’t got anywhere near smart enough for the likely irregular terrain and g-forces. We have to send the rockets there slowly in order for them to have a chance of slowing down (conventional brakes don’t work), and the resultant long, one-way odyssey would make any suicidal human asteroidnauts embarking on it go nuts en route. Hence trained bonobos. I haven’t even got on to the subject of wiffle platinum, atmospheric dissipation on re-entry or the supply-demand effect.
Onwards and upwards (asteroidally speaking).
snap. but I’m 85. But he seems a nice enough chap.
Perhaps we could interest him in bonobos ( what are they )
I don’t agree with your number, I make it six and a bit.
as for supply-demand all UKIPers should be conversant.
t g spokes,
Please see my reply to Freddy above, they are lovely apes and highly intelligent. One lady in America has taught some of them to converse with her and they have a great time together, they are so humanlike, much more than Chimpanzee IMO.
Freddy, I told Aiden that he was after the wrong resource. There’s a helium isotope on the Moon’s surface and it is much more valuable than platinum — it may well be the key to successful fusion power. It’s worth thinking about exploration of Space, but I’m into SF so I would think that (Analog, I’ve sold to Analog! Lucifer Falling and Other Stories, sorry, I digress…) but it hardly looms large on the doorsteps. Google ‘Reaction Engines Ltd’, Alan Bond’s baby, and see the sort of technology that UKIP should be pushing.
While he added greatly to the entertainment value of the contest, his candidature, and others, pointed up the stupidity of our electoral procedure. Anyone with more money than sense could put him or herself forward: we ended up with an unwieldy list that made the choice confused and unpredictable. The other very noticeable fact was that several people had an overly-optimistic view of their ability to front a controversial party such as ours. The quality I’ll look for next time is wariness. And if a candidate can’t even shmooze the NEC then he or she is not going to go down well with everyone else.
Today the political reporter for Radio Suffolk rang me for a quote about Henry. I told her that if he has any integrity he will resign.
I’ve made the wrong choice twice, probably because I saw neither of my candidates speak — while others put in the miles, they chose not to appear. I won’t make the same mistake again.
Let’s be positive. This is an opportunity to start with a clean slate. While appreciating the work done by the NEC, I notice the above list has a paucity of what you might call front-liners, people who have made fools of themselves by trudging the streets in hopeless constituencies, who have been interviewed by rude presenters fancying themselves as the next Paxman, who have, in a word, paid their dues. We need people with properly-tuned political antennae — there’s only one Nigel, the rest of us have to tread carefully.
If we change leader again then it will be time to re-organise the NEC and the entire constitution. Let the NEC emerge from the regions, let the candidates be local and known. Then they’ll be trusted more readily. Have previous and present members done a good job? Quite possibly — I like to think so — but at the county level we just don’t know.
JF
Oh, yes, Nigel, some people eat sandwiches for lunch because they have better uses for their money than expensive meals — for example, I’m saving for a new gearbox for the MG.
Sandwiches, of course, can never be a Proper Bonobo-Hobby-Activity Lunch ?
JF,
I agree with everything you say, some of the leadership candidates were farcical, but that did not stop the NEC taking their £5,000.
Freddy,
I like Bonobos because it is a matriarcal species of ape (females rule) males are just the bozos (Trumpism alert here), but they are terribly promiscuous settling disputes with sex instead of violence, perhaps UKIP should take note.
Freddy,
Just realised Henry has already tried that with a chimp, has not worked has it? That is because he is a Bozo! not a bonobo.
Thanks Marie for the link, which I followed, resentfully registered and successfully viewed !
Yesterday David Allen had an article published on here where he joined in what turned out to be an online comments debate; which in the end left me feeling drained.
I believe there was no mention yesterday he (David Allen) was appearing today on the BBC, perhaps it was a last minute arrangement ?
On the Daily Politics show he stated he was following Mr Bolton’s “inclusivity agenda” and he had held its first meeting ‘last Friday’. Well I am sorry but its convenient timing of ‘last Friday’ amidst these troubles smacks of belated hurried support for Mr Bolton’s EGM defence as “change” leader in the Mr Bolton last stand versus the NEC and the so called swamp.
I shall not dwell on David Allen’s pettifogging input on the BBC, rather than to say that John Bickley correctly has David Allen’s measure.
Peter Whittle on the hand was straight down the line and I fully agreed with him. Mr Bolton should simply Go !
I saw a mention somewhere today about the Daily Politics interview and searched it out. Peter was excellent while David came across as a picky bureaucrat who’d found his niche in life, sorting out our systems, which he’s unwilling to give it up for something he seems to regard as no more than a storm in a teacup.
I often wonder if I ticked a box on my membership application confirming I didn’t wish to receive emails but we get by, and our creaking systems have seen us through the EU elections of 2014, the General Election of 2015 and that glorious referendum result.
Now, we’re facing what is arguably, the greatest and most important fight of our lives and everything seems to have been put on hold to fix the backroom stuff. While this has been happening, we’re sitting on the sidelines and can see the possibility of a meaningful Brexit slipping away. This is not the time to sort out the nuts and bolts, especially if, as seems to be the case, it’s done to the exclusion of all else, yet David seems unable to see this. Sod the systems I say, for now anyway!
Marie,
Up to a point you are right but if you look at other parties they have much better IT systems than us, and UKIP’s website is terrible, we do need to update in order to be an efficient political machine, but as you say it is not a priority at the moment.
I thought someone else was sorting it out but I cannot remember his name now, David strikes me as some sort of computer nerd who wants to dazzle us with his ‘techy’ brilliance. He kept on about it during the leadership contest and I got very bored then as I do now, but that does not mean it is not necessary at some point to implement it.
I agree Donald and I’ve long expressed exasperation with the useless ukip.org website, our pathetic computer system etc and I acknowledge they need sorting. However, for David to put forward Henry’s oversight of this work as almost the sole reason for retaining him as leader is ludicrous. He was elected as party leader, not office manager, or even CEO – I didn’t expect Nigel to sort out the back office and I don’t expect Bolton to either.
At present, the media is rife with speculation and rumour about what we can expect to come out of the present round of EU ‘negotiation’ but comment from Bolton comes there none. His regular media appearances are concerned only with the sleazy soap opera in which he has the starring role, to the exclusion of everything else.
The fundamental problem with UKIP.org is that months before a big election, someone on the leadership team decides the current one is “rubbish” and needs to change. Due to the short timescale, no requirements are produced or enforced, and no consideration is given as to whether similar sites will break as a side-effect, or browser compatibility etc.
In one case, sites like ukip.london.org needed to be converted to ukip.org/london etc. over the following month due to lack of planning – branches were NOT happy!
Try and schedule meaningful discussion for the NEC, and it ends up last on the agenda, and you’re being evicted crom the meeting room.
I await Chris Mendes’ latest iteration with great interest and heaps of goodwill as he’s unpaid ?
“This is not the time to sort out the nuts and bolts, especially if, as seems to be the case, it’s done to the exclusion of all else”
Yes, I agree, the IT systems should never have been the focus of the energy of UKIP. It should have been out there on the political stage arguing for UKIP policies and a proper path towards UK independence.
It was this Mr Bolton led hiatus of political and media activity which has been so frustrating over the past months.
Then when all this stuff breaks in the media and you want Mr Bolton off the media, he is suddenly all over it, deliberately making UKIP’s image worse. Why on Earth did he go on the TV to have a losing argument with Piers Morgan on non UKIP policy issues ?? Did they discuss Brexit ? Did they discuss border control ? Did they discuss the 50 to 100 billion being lobbed at the EU ? Did they discuss defence policy ? No, Mr Bolton targeted the NEC and us swamp creatures as his chosen battle ground.
Then this sudden hue and cry over the rule book and IT systems is a pathetic final straw. Good reform is constant incremental improvement.
Steve’s article reassures me that the 15 people are a good check and balance to the leadership executive. The NEC cannot be replaced by an IT system and wider member involvement except on the larger debates say for example policy change. But then, Mr Bolton has already established a large committee system and lead person for each policy area anyway. He wants more control over the NEC, but to what purpose ????? It is not as if the NEC doesn’t want UKIP leadership out there battling other political parties for UKIP causes, being inspirational and creating the positive atmosphere where people are joining the party in droves. This damaging, lame duck leadership, supported by distracting email systems David Allen, wanting to crawl onwards, in an attempt to destroy the NEC, under the banner of constitutional and IT reform, when it has the opportunity to gracefully call it a day is contemptible. [354]
I agree with everything you say Chris and I despair. Some have suggested Bolton is a ‘plant’ which he may or may not be, but he couldn’t damage UKIP more if he was.
Chris,
I am not so sure about that have you seen ‘For Britain’s’ web page? It is excellent, well laid out and very informative, we do need something like that in order to compete, also I like AMW’s daily video logs. She comes across very well keeping all her members up to date, as well as treating them like adults and involving them at all levels.
A lot could be learnt from this, the videos are not very long just enough to say hello and report any news, excellent IMO.
I saw your comment only after I’d posted a reply to DD and it seems we are thinking along the same lines, especially n relation to the soap opera and the media.
Readers who stay on or bookmark this page should not overlook the latest letters
http://www.ukipdaily.com/letters-editor-tuesday-23rd-january-2018-part-two/
“Now we find that he and Nigel intend to use this opportunity to remove the mechanism by which the members exercise control over their party (and the Leader).”
This encapsulates the dilemma. Time is short to step up and force a full-fat Brexit for those 17.4 million people who voted for it. The only way to achieve that is to become a credible electoral threat once more. Nigel and Arron know this, and also know that building a party from scratch can’t be done quickly enough. So they want to take over UKIP and supercharge it with money and charismatic leadership. The question is, will the membership stomach the autocratic approach which comes with the package.
Rather than all the cloak and dagger nonsense, using Bolton as the stalking horse, Nigel and Arron should just be upfront and come forward with a firm proposal. A refined version of the one Arron made a while back, which maintains a credible internal democracy for the membership to express their wishes through.
The membership are in no mood to accept a new constitution proposed by Bolton. They might, just might, vote for a reasonable and balanced proposal from their previously successful leader, if they feel he’s being straight-talking with them.
Come back on Saturday, we’ll let you know.
Roger,
I have said this all along, Bolton, Farage and Banks need to come clean and put some proposals on the table, and some members might like them, but this crafty approach of a takeover is not helping and will probably end with Bolton being sacked. What will they do then? Set up their own party I suspect, but as you say time is running out, just be honest and get on with it I say.
Who sets the venue for the EGM? It’s rumoured to be Derby. Bolton is thought to have greatest support in the East Midlands…
Best not be complacent.
With proxy voting, is location relevant?
Make no mistake – when the NEC gave its UNANIMOUS verdict on Sunday it was responding to members up and down the country.
As a county and branch chairman I know what the majority verdict was, how rapidly it changed in the course of one week of disastrous publicity seeking behaviour on Henry’s part and, like other chairmen, I forwarded the information to NEC members (Thank you UKIPD for contact details)
On Iain Dale’s LBC phone in I explained that far from being out of touch, the NEC were very much in touch. Shame you didn’t listen earlier Nigel and Diane. Margot nailed it IMHO
Many members are posting on here their thanks to the NEC for the unanimous vote. Seems to me this presents an excellent opportunity for NEC and members to build bridges.
Regards
I agree Brenda and I also thank the NEC for their incredible, unequivocal, no confidence slap down of Mr Bolton.
They listened to the membership.
Mrs. Merton,
Don’t forget the crisps!
Just watching Daily Politics. What is David Allen talking about … email systems – winning the EGM….??
Peter Whittle making a lot of sense and is clearly and quite rightly, p***ed off with the whole affair.
I’m afraid Team Bolton might believe that they’re in the Civil Service organising the paper clips and checking the inventory.
One very large donor said to Bolton before Christmas: I’m not interested in a business plan, I want to know how you’re going to increase our poll ratings and get UKIP back in the game.
IMO he’s done ‘nothing of substance’ since becoming leader
John, I remember a wonderful quote from Mike Tyson ” Everybody has a plan before I punch them in the face…..”
Mr. Bav,
May I have the pleasure of punching’our ‘enry’ in the mush!
John at the meeting in Tiveton on December 13th Bolton said, in answer to a question from a member, that he had secured the Party’s financial position with a large donor. Would this be the same person and to your knowledge is this true as I thought we were bankrupt.
MR. Bav,
Does even David himself know what he is talking about, let alone us?
Mrs. Merton,
I think you might be right there, and look how wonderful it all turned out>
My objection to committees is well known. They are a sloppy answer to everything.My experiences are as seen though a screen of one who forms and uses them. Only occasionally as a member. Usually disastrous.
Committees can be useful as as a means of coordination, as an advisary body, or as a discussion group/reward for services/spreading the blame.
No-one particularly the chairman, Should be allowed power except for that delegated seperately to him as an individual, other than the power to control the meeting. To do so is foolish.
My critisms of UKIP NEC are as follows.
1. Excessive secrecy. Lack of minutes.
2. Denial of facilities :- Messrs Crowther ,Oakden seem to have no difficulty sending out emails whereas no-one else appears to be allowed to..
3. Time wasting. Obvoice. The excuse of being part timers is a half truth.
4.General effectiveness in everything except PRESERVING THE CONSTITUTION/RULE BOOK. In whose name almost anything is allowed.
I could think of others but I’ld like to finish on a positive note.
The committees has through despite awesome pressure managed to keep the party clean in law, and proper thing minds.
.
I was getting tired. the last para.- It should be “throughout”… aand “thinking” not thing.
There is a critique to be made but allowance must be made for the lack of resources. Other parties, funded in millions of pounds, have sizeable back office and secretarial support. Ours does not.
John Bickely commented on Nigel’s article – a good and informative comment – correcting Nigel’s re-writing of history. And Gerard Batten tweeted some corrections to Nigel’s revisionism over Neil Hamilton. Now Steve has added to the corrections.
Nigel should be grateful to them for the measured way they are doing this. For me, using his radio show as a carefully orchestrated (it was!) propaganda tool was an abuse of his position and a far more robust response would be justified.
Nigel’s selfish agenda has led to NEC members getting unwarranted personal abuse. Their standing and reputation among certain sections of the membership, and among UKIP bashing trolls, has been unjustly diminished. It is defamation.
Do not underestimate the corrosive effect of Nigel’s nasty and spiteful attack on his own party. I engage on various blogs and forums and I am amazed at the number of people who believe the NEC is not `fit for purpose’. When asked why exactly, they are stuck and turn to attacking the questioner.
Nigel – I don’t believe this is solely Bolton’s own strategy – is opportunistically trying to turn the EGM into a Bolton v NEC contest with Bolton as his true successor in modernising the party, to continuing the (alleged) necessary good work he could not do. It’s about Nigel’s vanity, his reprehensible snobbery, and his desperate need to shore up his fading place in history. Some see this as a conspiracy, some sort of reverse take over by Nigel and Aaron banks. Maybe but I think the uglier side of Nigel’s ego adequately explains things.
The sooner the EGM is held – “within” 28 days does not mean wait 28 days – the better. It is for the NEC to appoint an interim leader. Batten is offering to guide the party as interim leader. The NEC should state that is offer is well received and so turn the EGM into Bolton v Batten. Bolton would lose that.
Bolton wants to drain the swamp and I write as a swamp dweller. I hope he finds that the swamp is teeming and that it’s inhabitants bite back.
Well said, Swampy! ?
Damn, you’ve rumbled me.
I am Swampicus !
Mr. Bav,
I too am Swampicus!
Mrs. Merton,
Who is J, is that his French lodger by any chance?
Henry’s resigned? ?
“About Steve Crowther (3 Articles)
Steve Crowther was the chairman of UKIP until 2016 and IS NOW THE INTERIM LEADER.” ???
Thanks for pointing out that we’ve not yet corrected that entry. Unfortunately, as you might have noticed, events have meant a rather hectic time for us editors here on UKIP Daily.
You do keep up a lot faster than ukip.org which still does not have a single correct version of the NEC available….
The Technical sub-committee is speed racing the Constitutional sub-committee ??♂️?♀️
Mrs. Merton,
Did you get this from Henry’s statement, no not possible it makes too much sense.
Yep. I’m one of the swamp critters – the ones which bite. You found me out.
Viv,
Yes, you too are Swampicus!
Here’s part of how the (then) proposed new constitution was described to the members on UKIP.ORG in Feb 2012:
“In our view – a view supported by the current Leader – a strong NEC enables a strong Leader to flourish. The NEC provides a powerful, well organised party for the Leader to lead; and works with him (or her) to deliver the best policies and political direction, which everyone can get behind.”
From memory I believe Diane James last night said something along the lines of how the current Constitution was not ‘fit for purpose’ because it was ‘ twenty years old or something ‘ ( that was the gist ).
My understanding is that the current Constitution is only a few years old and was recommended to the membership by………..Nigel ?
The current Constitution was drafted by Michael Greaves and me, and put to the members for adoption on 1 March 2012. Before Diane rocked up, I think. It was stated at the time that the only aspect of the Constitution that had not been reviewed was the composition of NEC, as it was felt that the NEC needed to focus on the rest of it, rather than getting bogged down in the matter of its own composition. It was said then, and has been since, that the matter remains unreformed, and in need of reform. It needs a period when the party can focus on, and afford, a full-member plebiscite to pass the new Constitution. We have tried to initiate the review two or three times in the past two years, but it has been derailed by other priorities (eg the referendum) or leadership teams disappearing. It is still very much front of mind. The NEC is actually very keen to have the debate, and ensure that the future composition is more, rather than less, democratic and representative.
I thought that was a particularly stupid comment from her as e.g. the US constitution has survived pretty well. And Nigel’s snobbishness, his comment on how the ‘NEC weren’t qualified to make big politicial decisions’ sounded just like a remoaner!
I seem to recall US courts still cite Magna Carta as precedent, on occasion ?
Graham,
Nigel has a habit of looking down his nose at lots of people, he is a terrible inverted snob IMO.
Thank you for that much needed authoritative input Mr Crowther.
Fully agree with your summation.
Dear Steve
Thank you thank you THANK YOU for at last posting a fair summary and sensible arguments in support of the NEC’s frankly inevitable decision to dismiss the mountebank which HB has proven himself to be. ( A slow motion crash of a freight train would make for less uncomfortable watching than his judgment~free shenanigans over the past three weeks.)
If only more members of the NEC ( and / or MEPs ) posted on here and entered into dialogue with us plebs / poor bloody infantry more often a lot of the misconceptions re the NEC which it now suits Nigel, bizarrely, to propagate, would not gain traction.
I write as someone who twice sought election to the NEC unsuccessfully so I have no particular axe to grind in its favour ~ but I have never considered that its members ( who are not themselves responsible for the mechanisms by which they have been elected ) had anything other than the best interests of the Party ( in all its Glory and Infelicitous Disfunctionality ! ) at heart.
What I fear is now happening is that Nigel, with his important platforms on LBC and in the Telegraph and other media, is attempting to ramp up this narrative that the upcoming EGM is a battle royale between Plucky Revolutionary being Thwarted and an Ancien Régime crying ‘Let them eat Cake!’.
Nigel’s casting of HB in some sort of analogous rôle to that of Jeremy Corbin has zero basis in reality [ would Nigel and Henry get a fees reduction, do you think, if they both sought assistance from the same Harley Street psychiatrist ? ] but I suppose that absent clear argument / setting out of the facts from persons such as yourself on the NEC there is some chance of its succeeding, such is Nigel’s status amongst those of us who love UKIP, and can never forget what Nigel achieved, however much he now seems determined to destroy even his own legacy.
I therefore urge you / the NEC to make crystal clear that you are yourselves in favour of a change to the procedures whereby NEC members are elected and that you will work for this necessary democratisation with the Interim Leader who will be appointed once HB’s dismissal is confirmed at the EGM.
You need to take out of the upcoming arguments / debate any suggestion that it is only IF HB is conformed in post as Leader that there will be reform of the Party’s governance, specifically as regards the NEC.
You might point out, for example, that HB has had four months since his election and he has yet to post anywhere his suggestions for reform of the Party’s constitution. If this is a cause dear to his heart why did he not publish his specific proposals during the election campaign, or at minimum within a week or two of his election in September ?
As to the risible suggestion that HB is a new Corbyn come to Politics ~well……whatever else you might think of Jeremy Corbyn he has been known for decades for the ideas / policies he espoused, against the then predominating Blairite dispensation.
In last summer’s election , and in the internal Labour elections he took his policy ideas around the country and argued vociferously and persuasively for them.
By contrast Henry Bolton is a policy free zone.
To take one , albeit extremely important, policy area : that of Mass Uncontrolled Immigration and its ruinous effects on the lives of especially the poor – HB’s policy appears to be ( insofar as you can coax him into standing up for anything , [ Ms J Marney’s efforts notwithstanding………ooh er, Mother ! ] ) more or less the same as that of the Tory Government.
STEVE please continue to write and publish along these lines as widely as possible.
Rhys Burriss
http://www.ukipdaily.com/essential-policies-new-leader-adopt/
Rhys – remember the 400-word-limit for comment posts, please!
😉
Sorry ! ( I’m naughty but you know you like it ! [ Ooh Er Mother ! 🙂 ] ) ~ sorry ~ too much binge watching of Alan Partridge’s Knowing Me Knowing Yule on Netflix……….
Rhys, sorry, the NEC has realised there needs to be constitutional reform, has set up a Constitutional Reform working group at least a year ago, but nothing came out of it. Was there any member involvement? Did the NEC members hold regional meetings to engage the members in the process and get their feedback? Do you remember even being told this was happening? Henry is certainly flawed, but perhaps he is a useful battering ram (certainly seems immune to pain!) and the battle lines are drawn up. The result of this EGM is absolutely not as straight-forward as it might seem, and 26 days is a long time in politics.
This is why I am requesting Steve ( who is both on the NEC and a recent Interim Leader who did the party credit in that post ) to make crystal clear in advance of the EGM that the NEC is itself in favour of reform to the voting mechanism whereby the NEC is elected.
They must take that issue clearly out of the debate at the EGM, otherwise Bolton will major on it ~ and what if he calls Nigel to speak in his support ?
Nigel is probably the country’s greatest orator and might well affect votes on the day, and especially if this business about the NEC is not shown up for the fantasy it is ( why did HB not present his constitutional reform propositions before now ? He has had four months to do so, if he was that bothered by the issue. )
See relevant comment from JB below…
And Steve Crowther above! ?
Rhys,
Someone needs to gag David Allen and Nigel, they are both too fond of their own voices.
Brilliant Steve! Everything you say is spot-on, and readers here would do well to heed it.
Can you also confirm that that it is practicalities of implementation, e.g. sending iut pins, and concerns about using a leadership as a testing ground, rather than the NEC which has delayed electronic voting (another of Nigel’s fatuous allegations)
Excellent reading Steve. I have never believed in the hysteria about the sinister NEC. While I am willing to accept it may need reform I think it has been used as a scapegoat to a great extent.
My experience in another party which was in a similar position to ukip in that expectations had become too high after some success and wilted after a sudden setback, was that people were blaming a couple of senior committees for everything. When a new crowd took over they left them intact despite having railed against them. When I questioned the new leader about it I got the reply “It’s no problem now our people are in”
I have to say though, I never had to deal with a character like Henry Bolton and hope he goes soon.
But I’m not exactly over the moon about the thought of Nigel returning as leader. I want to be a thinking, participating party member, not a flaming cheerleader.
Steve – well said. The facts straight from someone who is a real UKIPer. Henry is trying to use the NEC as a diversionary tactic because he thinks that this will resonate with many members. The simple truth is that Henry has brought this whole sorry saga on himself. He has broken promises, dissembled and shown poor judgement. He has picked a strange set of circumstances and timing to have his dust-up with the NEC.I think that he has had a chance and by his actions and behaviour demonstrated that he is not fit to be leader. His refusal to step aside is like a “Divine Right of Kings” moment. I hope the members vote for his dismissal to first and foremost limit the damage to UKIP. Henry staying on will result in many leaving the party.
This current crisis is down to Mr Bolton. The leader of a political party has to have high levels of self awareness, judgement, political nous, discretion and probity. They have to avoid honey traps and compromising situations that could undermine them and the party.
Last Sunday the NEC asked Mr Bolton that knowing what he knows now about Ms Marney would he have started a relationship with her? No he answered. That answer shows why he’s unfit to be leader. On the day he met her had he, or one of his aides spent 30 mins trawling Ms Marney’s social media then Mr Bolton would have realised how politically toxic she was and made a tactical retreat. Instead he dived straight in (leaving his wife and two young kids alone in a foreign country over Christmas, according to Mrs B) for a wannabe model, younger than his daughter.
IMO his actions (lack of judgement & political nous mainly) have brought the leader’s office and the party into disrepute. Almost 90% of the emails the party is receiving from members about him want him gone.
Nigel is a political hero of mine however his comments on his LBC show last night about the party’s NEC are utter tosh and lead me to believe he’s on manoeuvres.
It’s always been the case in UKIP that the leader, their appointed chairman and the staff they employ run the party day to day. The NEC meets once a month to often go through boring but necessary admin stuff. Nigel always did what he wanted. Almost all the time the NEC supported him. He claims the NEC blocked e-voting; no we didn’t – it’s been adopted as an option for internal elections as he wanted and it’s in the party rulebook. Nigel spent millions in the 2015 general election; the NEC had no say and the registered treasurer was ignored – it was totally Nigel’s show and we were almost bankrupted.
Nigel fell out with Carswell & Hamilton and wanted the NEC to do ‘something’ with them – kick them out of the party I think. The NEC doesn’t have the power to expel members without just cause – it’s called natural justice. In fact, looking back we protected Nigel from Carswell (as Steve has pointed out).
Nigel isn’t happy that Hamilton is a Welsh Assembly member however that’s not the NEC’s fault. The members of Wales wanted Neil as one of their candidates and Nigel stated publicly that he was happy with the democratic process put in place by the NEC that led to Hamilton being chosen. He can’t have it both ways.
Nigel denigrates UKIP’s NEC made up of lawyers, solicitors, chartered accountants, multi millionaire businessmen, NHS professionals and a retired senior exec of a multinational. He should be grateful that such a high calibre of people give up so much of their time, voluntarily to help the party.
Nigel backed Bolton for the leadership and now has egg on his face after the fiasco of the last two weeks. It now looks like he’s trying to protect him. I suspect he realises he’s a dead man walking, however maybe thinks he could be useful for clearing away any ‘obstructions’ so Team Nigel/Arron can takeover? I contacted Nigel last summer and asked him to come back as leader and run the party anyway he saw fit – why doesn’t he do just that rather than appearing to be giving Bolton a lifeline and ‘settling’ old scores?
Nigel’s continual banging on about the alleged iniquities of Neil Hamilton are bizarre.
I don’t know whether Nigel personally approved his application for membership.
What I do know is that in 2013 I attended a Regional UKIP Conference in the NorthEast. Nigel was billed as a speaker but from memory was unable at the last minute to attend for medical reasons ( to do with the plane crash ).
Neil Hamilton was already billed as a supporting speaker ~ which I cannot believe would have been permitted without Nigel’s agreement.
Neil gave a FANTASTIC speech.
Whilst always reasonable, the contents and delivery were hugely successful in enthusing the troops / plebs / poor bloody infantry. It was tub thumping in the best sense.
And ~oh, btw ~ it was 110 % loyal to Nigel.
Nigel personally recruited Neil and Christine Hamilton in (I think) 2003.
Well there you have it !
So they have been totally loyal members for fifteen years. ( I hope Neil keeps up his policy of not rising to Nigel’s bait. )
Something off topic, perhaps but it lightened my morning.
Doing some repair work at home and listening to my favourite radio station, Jazz.FM91 out of Toronto CA. The host played Ella singing Anything goes by Cole Porter and the lyrics include the following.
The world has gone mad today,
and good’s bad today, and black’s white today,
and day’s night today,
When most guys today that women prize today
are just silly gigolos.
For some reason I immediately thought of Henry Bolton, a gigolo!
In fairness, I understand that the purple comments on social media were private messages on Facebook which were exposed to the world through the auspices of some from another purplish oganisation, purportedly within UKIP.
I would like to ask what happened to the ‘Constitutional Reform’ committee under Michael Greaves. What recommendations did it come up with and at what stage of progress is it?
With Farage backing him, I don’t think you’ll be getting rid of Henry that easily……
It was meeting whilst I was on the NEC -Tomaž, of this larish, was a member. But there were always higher priorities, like general elections…
Well in the records where you are bade farewell from the NEC in January last year it was in existence. But nothing seems to have happened? And this is really what undermines the NECs defence. If you cannot reform from the inside, then eventually reform will be imposed upon you from the outside.
In honesty, compared to elections and bedding in a new leader and associated team, it wasn’t seen as the highest priority.
Graham, constitutional reform was underway with Paul Nuttall, then he fell. Before Christmas we agreed with Bolton to delay the NEC elections so we could discuss reform. So he’s making a mountain out of a molehill and desperately trying to distract members from the matter at hand.
JOHN
Would it not be apposite NOW, before the EGM, if the NEC specifically stated in terms which brook of no misunderstanding, that it ( the NEC ) is wholly in favour a reform to the voting system for electing the NEC ~whether that be on a Regional basis ( so the membership can attend Hustings and KNOW whom they are voting for ) or some other basis which achieves the same objective ?
My own suggestion would be for an NEC to be composed of One member elected from each of the Euro Regions.
That NEC should have power to either co~opt a limited number of members to itself chosen on the basis of skills / experience needed. Or to invite such persons to attend, even if without voting rights as such ( or a mix of both ? )
I accept this is not perfect ( because some Regions have more members than others ) but perfection is not for this world.
And I believe the current system has given us an NEC without a single rep. from the NorthEast or Yorkshire. HOW can that be right ?
The main improvement of Region based elections is it would provide an NEC in respect of whom all the membership would have one person with whom they could correspond and discuss Party issues, particularly prior to NEC taking specific decisions.
A crystal clear explanation of the situation and one that rings very true. Thank you, Steve. I listened to Bolton last night on LBC. It is quite pathetic the way he is so brazenly trying to divert peoples’ attention to the NEC when the whole situation is due to his self obsessed, sociopathic failings. My dog has far better judgement than he does. For god’s sake GO, man.
I’m afraid Henry Bolton is the sort of fellow who blames other people.
Spot on Sussex man
Diane James’s piece on the show was nauseating. Here’s someone who never even tried to engage with the NEC. Some allege that she was put up for the leadership (which she didn’t really want) by the main man after his other ‘puppet’ couldn’t follow the nomination rules. Of course James, like Woolfe, Bashir, Atkinson and now Arnott have left the party but hung onto their lucrative MEP salaries, allowances and perks. All UKIP MEP candidates agreed that if they left the party they’d resign their seats and allow them to go the next on the regional lists. Enough said.
John
Could not the lawyers on the NEC investigate this important issue of MEPs going back on their solemn promises to resign as MEPs if ever they left the Party ?
Did their signatures on this Pledge not amount to a contract enforceable in law ?
After all,to put it no higher, by virtue of not complying with their pledge they have denied the position, and its lucrative privileges, to the next person on the List.
They have also denied the persons who voted for them their right to be represented in the EuroParl by UKIP MEPs.
I would have thought that there are grounds for consideration for actions for breach of contract and possibly Misconduct in Public Office ?
How on earth can Nigel be allowing people like Diane James a free ride on his show and not bringing this behaviour to attention of the public ?
Her stating last night that she was thwarted at every turn by the NEC when she never even met with them once was just so childish ~ like a kid caught with cream cake all over his face saying ‘It wasn’t me ! ‘
Sorry, we DID have it checked out, and it was not realistically enforceable.
Dear Rhys,
The hold you have over elected reps is that you deselect them at the next elections. As there won’t be any more EU elections for the UK, allegedly they cannot be pressured into compliance. However, those that have not complied can be stopped from standing
in UK parliamentary elections.
I believe there is at least an argument for the appropriate civil court to consider that they are in breach of contract.
Their inclusion on the UKIP List was in part in exchange for their solemn promise to give up their lucrative MEPship if for whatever reason they left the Party.
Quite simply that was a contractual term of their acceptance as UKIP candidate.
If there are no relevant cases on the same or similar facts then basic law of contract may well be held to apply.
I believe it may well be possible to mount an argument in respect of Misconduct in Public Office as well ( breaking a solemn pledge etc.. ).
I am not saying either case would necessarily succeed, but in the absence of relevant case law which goes against me I would have thought it was worth bringing a trial case.
Diane James was the standby, the plan B. She submitted at around 11.40am on the last day. So there she was nonchalantly reading the papers and glanced up at the clock. Oops must go online quickly. Pull the other one. Once it became clear candidate A was in trouble her phone rang ….
“Agreed?”! Good Lord they’re politicians. Still, I expect the NEC can rewrite this agreement to everyone’s satisfaction.
I listened, aghast, to LBC last night too. Narcissists working in tandem to project blame. Feeding off the attentions of the media and public to supply the critical attention that satiates their deluded egos.
Be in no doubt, Bolton is enjoying this. He’s getting his narcissistic supply fix every day now. Every time a senior UKIP figure resigns, he sees it as a victory that props up the image he wishes to promulgate. Every time he’s interviewed, he gets that buzz. Bolton – to himself- is a ‘special’ man, a man of importance, gravitas and charm. To everyone else, he’s a charlatan, a ne’er do well and a fake. Narcissism is a dangerous personality disorder. Nothing stands in the way or deflects the need for a narcissist to get their fix. To stop them, their supply has to be cut off. For a start terminate any access he has to expenses. Then put him into Coventry. Simply refuse to deal with him or communicate with him.. Deny him , especially, the services of Gawain Towler, who is now constantly in the background at his many media appearances. Without the supply, Bolton will fold in a week. With it, he’ll break the party because he gets stronger the more his twisted personality is nourished by attention.
Please advise WHO is ‘ Gawain Towler ‘ ? [ Crazy name, a bit like ‘Tyler Durden’ in Fight Club 🙂 ] .
And WHO authorizes expenses to be paid ?
Surely there are rules which would have the words ‘reasonable and necessary in the performance of their duties ‘ or some such ?
I cannot see that paying for an expensive hotel room on the south coast ( perhaps because he is denied use of the marital flat ? ) is ‘reasonable’ or ‘necessary’. But perhaps he is paying for the hotels and Nat Lib Club meals out of his own income / savings ?
Could John Bickley please comment on the expenses issue ? I must assume he knows what the rules actually are ?
Gawain Towler is a journalist hired by UKIP. He’s well known and well respected. Quite popular/funny , he opens doors
Mr. Bav above all HE GETS IT! He’s a keeper! (in reference to Gawain of course.)
Henry owns a flat in the hotel, but may have to sell due to substantial service charge arrears. Hence his bleating about no salary ?
I think the leader should have a salary. But not Bolton.
So are you saying the flat in the hotel is the marital abode ?
The one he stated in October his W was on board with selling to help fund his UKIP Leadership activities ?
Know any more about the service charges ? ( these can often be disputed for good reason, to be fair. )
AND he KNEW about ‘no salary’ before he applied for the job.
But lets be honest ~did he or does he have any income from any source anyway ?
Wasn’t that why his W ( still breastfeeding their latest progeny ) took up the comparatively well paid posting at an international organization in Vienna ~ to provide a family income where he was not providing any ?
Mr Bav
The Leader should have a salary ONLY if he so enthuses the country with his / her Leadership that the Party’s coffers are overflowing with new and renewed membership subs !
Whilst the Party is running on empty we can’t afford a salary for him.
He knew the score when he applied.
I suspect he was on his uppers financially, entirely dependent on the W’s stipend from Vienna.
He maybe thought that the Leadership would bring a subvention from Party donors / media fees / whatever.
However his inarticulacy will ensure he gets nothing from the media.
Once he is out on his ear ( at the EGM ) he will be lucky to get a job selling the Big Issue ( no disrespect ).
He would never get a job as a talk show host like Nigel as all he can say is ‘We need to move on’ like an old 78 rpm record stuck in the groove 🙂
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/gawaintowler
I agree it is a good CV. ( Still a crazy name tho’ ! )
Am wondering : what does his job description state in terms of who he assists with media coverage ?
Is it the Leader ?
the Party more generally ?
the NEC ?
I am wondering if the NEC would be within its remit to instruct him to cease providing any such services to the current person in the Leadership post ?
I am guessing there is no specific provision so the NEC would be entitled to give such an instruction, off its own motion.
Indeed the NEC itself does need assistance getting its message across and countering the pro HB propaganda emerging from Nigel at LBC / Telegraph.
You’re right Mr Bav. He doesn’t care what damage he does. Good or bad attention it’s all about the fix.
It bears repetition : if HB considered that the biggest problem in UKIP is the NEC then how come he did not publish his specific proposals to remedy its defects either during the summer election period, or, at latest, within a week or so of getting elected ?
He could have set out his proposals on this site, on the UKIP official site, in Independence Magazine, or just in an article in the Telegraph ~or all of the above.
To my knowledge he has never done so.
Yet as a newly elected Leader he could surely have won a vote of the membership to change the Constitution ( as could Nigel in 2014, 2015, or 2016 ! )