Originally Posted by michaelwilcox

This amazes me. He's well and truly damned if he does something and damned if he doesn't do anything by those who post on this forum. On one hand people will be criticising him for doing everything 'not allowing any talent to develop hence sustaining his control of the party' whilst on the other he is criticised as soon as someone else does something because he didn't do it first. As often said by the proponents of the inactivity criticisms - Nigel's job is not to do everything. Does Gordon Brown announce the budget these days? Or does he divert that out to Alistair Darling? Is David Cameron mayor of London or does he let Boris Johnson manage London to his own accord? The answers to them two very poor examples are both firm 'no's. Accepted, they will probably have at least some input into what goes on but they delegate the responsibilities to their supporters. That is what a leader does! The leader does not perform every activity within a campaign - do you expect him to go and deliver all the leaflets for each and every one of the 450 odd wards we fought in the recent local elections? It would be impossible!

Rather than wasting time by questioning what Nigel Farage is doing why don't you do something constructive and help out your local branch or something helpful in another way to our cause. I know it is hypocritical to be writing this in response to your comments as I am pretty much committing the same sin, but I can't help but feel that many of his critics are rather harsh given that not all of his work is in the public eye. For example the public meeting he did in Swindon, attendance at university debates and attending branch AGMs are some of the many things that I know he does which others in UKIP may not hear about. To think about what he does that we may not know of is quite frankly a staggering thought.

In regard to Tom Wise MEP, I think what he has done here is brilliant and it is a perfect example of what I can only wish would get out to the wider British public. It shows our common sense appeal, and that we don't just apply to the white British public but anybody who is proud to label themselves as British (or perhaps English if you are a member with a dislike for the Union/ idea of British identity). My concerns do lie though with what exactly he is referring to when he discusses the right of freedom for religious expression. My assumption is of course that it is something vaguely similar to the case where that airline hostess was banned by BA from wearing her crucifix necklace. More like this please!