Leadership battle is going to court

Anthony Butcher · 07-12-2004, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Ukip struggle may end in court

Robert Kilroy-Silk's attempt to seize control of the UK Independence Party may now end in court after party chiefs last night rejected calls for a leadership ballot.

This weekend, the former television chatshow host said he would be leader of Ukip by Christmas. The boast came after his supporters submitted a motion demanding an emergency general meeting, which they said was signed by 51 party constituency chairmen and associations.

But Ukip's national executive committee, meeting yesterday, dismissed the motion as invalid and effectively challenged the Kilroy-Silk camp to take them to court.

It looks like the claims that 51 branches supported the motion are true. However, it doesn't look like they followed the procedures laid down in the party constitution. I cannot understand this at all. It was always going to be invalid if they didn't present it properly.

mkpdavies · 07-12-2004, 03:01 AM

And so the first battle ends. If it's going to the courts, it isn't getting solved anytime soon, and that means no leadership change in time for the election.

So what is RKS going to do now, tough it out, wait for the leadership election proper, doing his best for UKIP in the meantime to pick up as much support possible?

Or does he quit the party, take an unknown amount of people with him, and probably not have much of an organised party to fight this election anyway?

Or is there another option that I have not thought of? The NEC, which was elected by the membership have spoken, what possible action could RKS do now to get a leadership election before the General election?

I think RKS has lost the battle, but what he does next is all important for who will win the war. If he stays then both sides will be looking to impress the membership in the run up to the general election. If he leaves, UKIP will be horribly damaged, and the new party will not have enough time to have much effect.

I hope he stays and does the most awsome job for UKIP, and that the leadership respond with an equal display. Then we will have something to vote for in the leadership election proper!

Anthony Butcher · 07-12-2004, 03:14 AM

I just thought of another possibility that I didn't send in my letter to Petrina Holdsworth. It might be feasible to organise a leadership election for the same time as the NEC elections. That would remove all of the postage costs, and problems with the timing, because it is already fixed.

That would give us an end date to focus on, and leave everyone, including RKS, to get on with fighting the general election properly.

I don't think that this is the end of the leadership bid at all. They must have known that the motion would be rejected, because they made no attempt to stick to the constitutional rules. The NEC had no choice but to declare it invalid. The rules on this issue are very clear.

I have sent a further letter:

Quote:

Dear Ms Holdsworth,

I have now thought of another way to minimise the damage of the leadership bid that I didn't include in my previous letter on this subject.

We have the NEC elections coming up anyway, so we could time a leadership election to run in parallel. That would mean that the ballot papers could be sent out together, removing the bulk of the cost of the election. It would also give us a fixed date to focus on, and preset timeframes to work to. This would free Nigel, Roger and Robert to fight the general election campaign in the mean time, instead of being distracted by this public spat.

I am aware that the NEC rightly rejected the submitted motion from RKS, but I am equally sure that this isn't the end of his bid to become leader. In fact, since they deliberately failed to follow the constitutional rules, I can only presume that they intended for the motion to be rejected.

Again, I am not intending to interfere, just offering some ideas to help it all run smoothly, and as cheaply as possible. If there is anything that I can do to help the party resolve this situation as quickly as possible, please do let me know.

Yours Sincerely,

Anthony Butcher

jp · 07-12-2004, 08:52 AM

I suppose another possibility is that whatever issues prevented the petition being accepted the first time could be fixed.

Do we know what they are?

eublues · 07-12-2004, 10:21 AM

Any deception or disinformation now from the top of UKIP, and I will call it a day. They can do their own leafletting!

Nigel Garage · 07-12-2004, 11:29 AM

Anthony Butcher, I'm sorry to say this, but your very sensible suggestions will be ignored, just like everyone else's.

The party leadership were given a chance to resolve this amicably, and last night they rejected it. Whatever happens now, the blame lies with their own contempt for the ordinary party members. The principal offender being Nigel Farage.

For what it's worth, here are the options as I see it -
1. A hearing takes place before Christmas at which the judge upholds the challenge. Leadership election in the New Year.
2. A hearing takes place in January, challenge upheld. Leadership election in late February.
3. The judge throws out the challenge. All branches have to have an EGM and pay £100 for the privilege of calling for a leadership election. The election takes place in March/April.

Either way the election will happen, but the leadership have now made it certain to be more prolonged, damaging and bitter. This is bad news for everyone.

Dave · 07-12-2004, 11:32 AM

In ABs letter he said;

"I am aware that the NEC rightly rejected the submitted motion from RKS, but I am equally sure that this isn't the end of his bid to become leader. In fact, since they deliberately failed to follow the constitutional rules, I can only presume that they intended for the motion to be rejected".

What a presumptious statement, how do you know it was "rightly Rejected", how do you know that "they deliberately failed to follow the constitutional rules"

Are you looking for a place at the heart of the Cabal, you complain when someone posts something with no back up, and now we see you toadying and being sycophantic, why not go round to Nigels and stick your tongue straight down the back of his trousers.

Regards
Dave

Carl Faulkner · 07-12-2004, 11:38 AM

...could it be that the intransigence shown by most UKIP MEPs is that they are in the comfort zone...MEP salaries for the next 5 years guaranteed.

Whats the big deal about there not being enough time for an election. This has been said now for two months. All it takes it for ballot forms to be printed, sent, ticked, sent back and then counted. What is so difficult about that?

As time goes on some UKIP MEPs are looking more and more pathetic.

Who was it who said the power is not in the hands of the voters but those who count the votes ? Let's add to that and those who hide behind the self-written rules avoiding a vote.

Nigel Garage · 07-12-2004, 11:40 AM

A bit harsh, Dave! But you're right that AB is too ready to assume the worst of RKS.

They didn't deliberately fail to follow the constitutional rules. They put forward the advice of a lawyer that the constitutional changes were invalid, and the reasons why. Then they showed that they had the means to force an election under the old rules or the invalid new ones, but to save time and bad feeling requested that the NEC call an election immediately.

As the Telegraph says, the leadership response was "take us to court". How helpful.

mkpdavies · 07-12-2004, 12:26 PM

Nigel, I think you have a lot more faith in our court system to get a speedy result than me. I have never seen a case get put in front of the courts and resolved within months, perhaps you know of a fasttrack method they could use?

I am also unsure how team RKS stands on a legal challenge now anyway. While I think it is pretty poor at the way this challenge has been rejected on technical issues, if the fully elected NEC decide to take party rules to the letter, I don't really see how a court would find against that?

Carl,I am not sure what the MEPs have to do with this decision, so I think it is a bit unfair to have a go at them on this issue. The NEC are the people who made this judgement, and they were fully elected by the membership.

Daves attack on Anthony was totaly out of order, and if you read through what Anthony has said on the whole issue, he has tried to be fair to both sides. He has never attacked RKS at all and has actualy come out on his side in wanting an election called. If he was interested in kissing ****, he wouldn't have started this forum, as he was asked to shut it down by the leadership.

This is the problem when you try and take the centre ground, the people on both sides shoot at you. Attacking someone because they do not 100% back your argument is pretty poor form, and you won't be doing the RKS camps cause any good by alienating those that are not sure which way to go.

07-12-2004, 03:01 AM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,843 Party: Libertarian Party	And so the first battle ends. If it's going to the courts, it isn't getting solved anytime soon, and that means no leadership change in time for the election. So what is RKS going to do now, tough it out, wait for the leadership election proper, doing his best for UKIP in the meantime to pick up as much support possible? Or does he quit the party, take an unknown amount of people with him, and probably not have much of an organised party to fight this election anyway? Or is there another option that I have not thought of? The NEC, which was elected by the membership have spoken, what possible action could RKS do now to get a leadership election before the General election? I think RKS has lost the battle, but what he does next is all important for who will win the war. If he stays then both sides will be looking to impress the membership in the run up to the general election. If he leaves, UKIP will be horribly damaged, and the new party will not have enough time to have much effect. I hope he stays and does the most awsome job for UKIP, and that the leadership respond with an equal display. Then we will have something to vote for in the leadership election proper! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

07-12-2004, 12:26 PM	#10 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,843 Party: Libertarian Party	Nigel, I think you have a lot more faith in our court system to get a speedy result than me. I have never seen a case get put in front of the courts and resolved within months, perhaps you know of a fasttrack method they could use? I am also unsure how team RKS stands on a legal challenge now anyway. While I think it is pretty poor at the way this challenge has been rejected on technical issues, if the fully elected NEC decide to take party rules to the letter, I don't really see how a court would find against that? Carl,I am not sure what the MEPs have to do with this decision, so I think it is a bit unfair to have a go at them on this issue. The NEC are the people who made this judgement, and they were fully elected by the membership. Daves attack on Anthony was totaly out of order, and if you read through what Anthony has said on the whole issue, he has tried to be fair to both sides. He has never attacked RKS at all and has actualy come out on his side in wanting an election called. If he was interested in kissing ****, he wouldn't have started this forum, as he was asked to shut it down by the leadership. This is the problem when you try and take the centre ground, the people on both sides shoot at you. Attacking someone because they do not 100% back your argument is pretty poor form, and you won't be doing the RKS camps cause any good by alienating those that are not sure which way to go. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-12-2004, 08:52 AM	#4 (permalink)
jp Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,000	I suppose another possibility is that whatever issues prevented the petition being accepted the first time could be fixed. Do we know what they are?

07-12-2004, 10:21 AM	#5 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,102	Any deception or disinformation now from the top of UKIP, and I will call it a day. They can do their own leafletting!

07-12-2004, 11:29 AM	#6 (permalink)
Nigel Garage Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ashford Posts: 557	Anthony Butcher, I'm sorry to say this, but your very sensible suggestions will be ignored, just like everyone else's. The party leadership were given a chance to resolve this amicably, and last night they rejected it. Whatever happens now, the blame lies with their own contempt for the ordinary party members. The principal offender being Nigel Farage. For what it's worth, here are the options as I see it - 1. A hearing takes place before Christmas at which the judge upholds the challenge. Leadership election in the New Year. 2. A hearing takes place in January, challenge upheld. Leadership election in late February. 3. The judge throws out the challenge. All branches have to have an EGM and pay £100 for the privilege of calling for a leadership election. The election takes place in March/April. Either way the election will happen, but the leadership have now made it certain to be more prolonged, damaging and bitter. This is bad news for everyone.

07-12-2004, 11:32 AM	#7 (permalink)
Dave Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 229	In ABs letter he said; "I am aware that the NEC rightly rejected the submitted motion from RKS, but I am equally sure that this isn't the end of his bid to become leader. In fact, since they deliberately failed to follow the constitutional rules, I can only presume that they intended for the motion to be rejected". What a presumptious statement, how do you know it was "rightly Rejected", how do you know that "they deliberately failed to follow the constitutional rules" Are you looking for a place at the heart of the Cabal, you complain when someone posts something with no back up, and now we see you toadying and being sycophantic, why not go round to Nigels and stick your tongue straight down the back of his trousers. Regards Dave

07-12-2004, 11:38 AM	#8 (permalink)
Carl Faulkner Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 352	...could it be that the intransigence shown by most UKIP MEPs is that they are in the comfort zone...MEP salaries for the next 5 years guaranteed. Whats the big deal about there not being enough time for an election. This has been said now for two months. All it takes it for ballot forms to be printed, sent, ticked, sent back and then counted. What is so difficult about that? As time goes on some UKIP MEPs are looking more and more pathetic. Who was it who said the power is not in the hands of the voters but those who count the votes ? Let's add to that and those who hide behind the self-written rules avoiding a vote.

07-12-2004, 11:40 AM	#9 (permalink)
Nigel Garage Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Ashford Posts: 557	A bit harsh, Dave! But you're right that AB is too ready to assume the worst of RKS. They didn't deliberately fail to follow the constitutional rules. They put forward the advice of a lawyer that the constitutional changes were invalid, and the reasons why. Then they showed that they had the means to force an election under the old rules or the invalid new ones, but to save time and bad feeling requested that the NEC call an election immediately. As the Telegraph says, the leadership response was "take us to court". How helpful.