To all members of the NEC:
I wrote yesterday to over 350 UKIP members [Ed: see the copy of the email below] whose email addresses are publicly available from UKIP websites; they are therefore predominantly branch officers from up and down the country. In my opinion they represent the beating heart of UKIP at grassroots level.
I asked them if they would like to see Gerard’s period as Interim Leader extended to six months (180 days) in order to give the party stability and space for healing after the turmoil of the past couple of months, and also to avoid the draining and divisive distraction of a leadership election during the run up to the May elections.
The answer so far has been overwhelmingly ‘Yes’, some even arguing for 12 months.
In view of this, I propose two alternatives for you to consider, both of which seem to be legal and sensible:
- To extend Gerard’s period of Interim Leader to six months (180 days) without involving the necessity of a leadership election, Gerard should be asked to resign at the end of each month of the first three month (90 day) period, whereupon the NEC would immediately reappoint him for the ensuing three months – a sort of rolling appointment. This would postpone firing the starting gun on a leadership election. At the end of the first three months (90 days), he would again resign for the last time and again be reappointed for three months (90 days). The leadership election could then take place at the end of this final three month (90 day) period (roughly early September).
- Alternatively and less attractively, we should go ahead with the leadership election in May immediately after the local elections but try to restrict the candidates to just Gerard by using the good offices of experienced party elder statesman and former party leader, Lord (Malcolm) Pearson of Rannoch. If Gerard agreed that, if elected as Leader in May, he would only stay until the end of the year and then resign, Lord Pearson and his office may be able to persuade those individuals who intend to stand to postpone their ambitions until a new a leadership election in, probably, early January for the good of the party. The leadership election in May would then be non-divisive, non-disruptive low-cost simple affair with the almost guaranteed outcome of Gerard continuing as leader until the end of December/early January.
I would be grateful if you would respond to the grassroots and consider these alternatives.
With best wishes, Alan Craig
Ed: this is the text of the email Alan Craig mentions in his letter to the NEC above. It was first published on Kipper Central :
Dear UKIP colleague,
The party has just been through two months of hell and is now in need of both stability and time for healing.
This week the leader of the UKIP group on the London Assembly, Peter Whittle, suggested on Twitter that it would be insane to go through another leadership contest with the May elections on the horizon, and proposed that the Interim Leader, Gerard Batten, should be appointed for an extended period of 6 months (180 days).
Some responded online with a heartfelt “Yes, let’s do it.”
Others said it is constitutionally impossible. Gerard has just 90 days. Full stop.
A few – not, it seems, friends of UKIP – said with glee that UKIP is dead and who cares?
Personally, I reckon that where there’s a will there’s a way. And where there’s goodwill, there’s a good way out of the current difficulties. So I’d be grateful for your views and suggestions about extending the Interim Leader’s term.
Please note: I do not represent Gerard, nor the NEC, nor Peter Whittle. I am just a normal UKIP member who, like most, is committed to seeing the party grow, thrive and stop in its tracks the Tory betrayal over Brexit.
I look forward to hearing from you.
With warm best wishes, Alan Craig
Leave a Reply
32 Comments on “TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE NEC”
If you have a leader he/she has to be able to lead. Gerard will get will get support from the rank and file but not I think from the NEC because the NEC wants to run the show which is why Nigel left, James left and Woolf was not allowed to stand
Sorry, Rubbish. Steven Woolfe screwed up his own nomination, and Diane refused to meet the NEC.
I agree with Rob McWhirter. Utter rubbish.
ABSOLUTELY
I also regard Twitter F/b etc with dislike. Twitter seems to be for a low attention span, and f/b has been prostituted out of sight.
However as regards your last para, having councillors is comfortable. It ennables ukip to not be forgotten by local media and public and provides a sort of background level to keep things from being too cosy if not actually corrupt.
Also I do like a recent councillors who espouse the claim that they were there to represent their constituents, first and UKIP second. In denial of the usual corrupt political stance.
Sorry, Roger, I would not object to addressing the rule book, but it’s the constitution, and only the members can do that.
Seconded.
We need to pull out all the stops and get moving.
The nannies are the NEC, they are UKIPs problem
The NEC, or leader, don’t have the authority to do that.
ABSOLUTELY
oops
ABSOLUTELY Roger
To Rob
The constitution etc are to help and guide. If a country is being invaded , its constitution is pointless. The NEC being democratically elected, and every member is a representative, I suppose has validity in an emergency, And should be able to rewrite the bloody thing. And if it’s so silly that there’s no way round. Dissolve it immediately and restart it without, or simpler and stop trying to be clever.
Sorry Rob I don’t half get myself into trouble. The clever persons refered to were writers of constitutions, rule books, Articles & Memoranda etc. Not your honoured self
Thanks, but I’ve seen too many legal challenges in my time.
If we do not act in accordance with the Constitution and the rule book we are well and truly finished.
The Conservatives seem to reduce any leadership contest to a two horse race for the wider membership by first washing the contenders through their inner voting system. Could UKIP have a similar system ?
Personally I would prefer to see Gerard Batten in post as interim leader for as long as possible, ie more than 3 months, but accept that may not be the best route for UKIP, electoral commission’s rules or otherwise.
I think the motives of any contenders against Gerard Batten leadership, should he choose to continue, be critically examined.
Mike: I think the local stuff is the building block of party support and membership. A family battling a Labour council over children climbing trees would welcome UKIP support, if offered and acted upon. It takes time. It takes local work. That’s the only way to build a party.
Though the AFD probably proves my comment wrong.
This proposal is undemocratic. How can UKIP expect to be taken seriously when criticising lack of EU democracy if they do this? If Gerard Batten is really the leader everyone wants as claimed then a quick and free election by the rules will settle it. Anything underhand will draw the attention of the Electoral Commission who could fine or even disband the party and prosecute those responsible. Even if they don’t this would destroy UKIP’s credibility before the electorate.
Sorry, Alan, but I’m certain that (1) doesn’t restart the clock on the 90 day rule. Have yiu asked a lawyer (there are plenty in the party)?
Plenty of barrack room lawyers for sure.
Too many chiefs and not enough indians that’s for sure.
Yes, that too, but aren`t we waiting for the new Chief of Chiefs to overtly take control and “initiate” like mad.
It`s well over a week now since his accession to the throne, in our circumstances, it`s no use having “apparent power”, it has to be made to “TELL”
Nethen Roger, you know as well as I do Gerard is on the case. Just have a bit of patience.
New chairman already in place ?