Mark Croucher

OK, here goes.

First, the MA newsletter leaves the party open to a charge of contempt of court: there is an injunction which prevents publication of the legal arguments surrounding Ashley Mote's case, as has been discussed here previously.

Second, the by-election supporters club is an excellent idea, but run as a private club within a club, it leaves UKIP open to potential breaches of the PPERA. Also, I have been unable to find anyone in authority within the party who knows anything about it - a simple phone call ahead of the publication of the last Independence would have gained it official status, publicity in Independence, and a considerable sum of cash for Livingston, where it was desperately needed. It's all very well coming up with bright ideas, but to then not disseminate them would seem diametrically opposed to the objectives of an MA.

Third, the original MA leaflet made claims which it simply could not substantiate. The policy forums, in so far as ideas belong to anyone, was completely unconnected with the MA. The fact that MA members belong to it is incidental. SearchUKIP was authorised many months ago, as was YouthKIP.

Fourth, as several others have pointed out in this thread, MA's, like Reform UKIP before it, have a habit of creating havoc and chaos. Many of the arguments seem identical to those of Hockney and co, while the more intemperate MA members are clearly itching to create just that sort of scrap - if you doubt it, take a look at some of their comments.

Fifth, a political party is a members association by definition. An MA along the lines of those touted is effectively a party within a party, with alternative manifestos, fund-raising, membership lists etc.

Sixth, there is a concerted effort going on within the official UKIP structure to accelerate those with political ability INTO phpbb_more prominent positions: Anthony is one of the first beneficiaries of this. The whole MA thing is perilously close to de-railing this process, particularly Anthony's involvement so visibly and so soon after being given a high profile post. The leaflet caused a major row at senior level, and caused me considerable grief personally.

Seventh, it was my decision to withdraw the table from the MA at conference. While it might look like a huge conspiracy, in actual fact it was simply rather busy the week before conference, hence the timing. It was nothing to do with Nigel, although it is fair to say that he doesn't like the idea of the MA any more than I do. On the specific point, it is simply not possible to allow an unofficial group which uses UKIP's logo to hand out literature without the appearance of some form of official sanction, and this the MA conspicuously lacks: it has never even bothered to attempt to gain it. This was exactly how Hockney and his fellow band of troublemakers began.

There is always a route for good ideas within the party to be adopted, in some cases very rapidly. If you don't know where to go with them, then phone me, and, assuming you can convince me of the possibilities within the confines of existing resources, I will do everything I can to make them happen. My number is 0207-222-9365. If I think the idea sucks goats, then I'll either sit on it or, more likely, tell you so - I'm not noted for my subtlety. If it's good, I'll make it happen. Will the originator of the idea get credit for it? Maybe, maybe not, it depends; as long as the party and the country benefits, who cares? You'll note I've got this far without claiming credit for the policy forums, even though it was me who dreamt them up and made them happen, and me who insisted that Anthony was the man for the job. I don't say this because I want everyone to clap me on the back and say how wonderful (or more likely, not) I am, but simply to demonstrate that it doesn't matter who dreamt it up: it's not about gaining personal plaudits for heaven's sake, we're a political party, not a glee club.

There are currently a whole raft of good initiatives designed to modernise the party which have already been announced: policy forums, opportunity knocks, etc etc. There are many more which are in the preparation stage. I fully intend to push for an official by-election supporters club, and plug it in the next Independence. It will happen. The difference between the MA's and the official one is that the offical one will be advertised to 25,000 people, not 42.

While it may seem less daunting to float ideas within an MA, the party is open to them, and I've done my best to push these ideas more widely within UKIP. Independence has been opened up to the membership for precisely that purpose. If you've read it, you will have seen the new columns which will appear soon with precisely that in mind. Would anyone care to guess how many submissions I've had for the 'What UKIP needs is.....' column? 1. How about the policy discussion column, 'the case for'? 0. So where are they, guys? If we're brimming over with good ideas, and want to help the party, why not put pen to paper and try it the proper way through official channels?

So, yes, it was my responsibility that the MA had its table cancelled. And no, I don't like the idea of an MA. But contrary to what would appear popular belief, it is not a huge conspiracy by a mythical 'cabal'. It is because the MA appears to have been slung together in haste, it's poorly thought out, it hasn't even attempted to get it's either its best ideas or the MA as a whole officially sanctioned, it's left UKIP open to legal action, it's made claims which at best are unsubstantiated about it's own actions, and it is eerily reminiscent of past days. Reform UKIP was a mixture of decent, forward looking members and disgruntled troublemakers whose gripe was that the party had not recognised their personal brilliance. That they were brilliant is reflected in the blinding success they made of Vanitas.

You may not like the answer, but there it is.

Best regards,

Mark

mkpdavies

The fact you left it until the day itself to quosh it, thus wasting peoples' time, effort and money, is in my opinion, **** poor.

You owe Anthony an apology on that score alone.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Mark Croucher

Glad to see we've jumped straight to the substantive points.

In actual fact, I told Anthony that the stall was unlikely to be allowed a week before conference, even with modifications to the leaflet, because it was an unofficial group.

If time, effort and money was wasted, I apologise, but it was done so after being warned that it was unlikely to be allowed.

Rgds

Mark

mkpdavies

Well, if you told him that, then he only has himself to blame.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Nigel Garage

Mark Croucher wrote -

Where can one find details of that? I thought it prevented criticism of Mote's defence, rather than merely publishing his legal arguments?

Don't see how. Which section of the PPERA? What about UKIP Friends of Israel, isn't that a 'club within a club'?

Translation - have a habit of asking awkward questions

As above, what about Friends of Israel or Youthkip?

Translation - we thought we'd bought his silence, and he betrayed us!

But you just have... Oh.

Tom Wilde

Thank you Mark for taking the time to set out your objections to the Members Association so clearly and frankly. The only trouble with posts which contain so many substantive points ("And seventhly...") is that they take so long to reply to adequately. And yet that is what is needed - a substantive discussion on this matter.

As a sympathetic bystander, it looks to me as if the Members Association could be the best opportunity for UKIP for quite a while - an additional way to harness the surplus energy and ideas of a large number of members and responsibly turn them INTO phpbb_positive benefits for the party. I hope you'll seize that opportunity and work with the MA rather than try to discourage it.

In any party, there must be a balance between strong central control and encouraging initiative by the members. Too little central control, and the left hand will undermine what the right hand is doing. Too much central control, and you'll get dissattisfied members quietly drifting away, plus a certain rigidity and reluctance to try new things. I think this Members Association is clearly on the right side of the line, because of the highly responsible way in which it has been set up. However, plainly I could only hope to convince you of this by addressing your individual points - something I just don't have time to do now. I'm sure others willl, though!

Look at the Tories - 200,000 members. If they could have harnessed the efforts of all those members, they'd have won the last election by a landslide!
8)

Incidentally, I don't think the comparison with Reform UKIP holds up at all - fortunately! Just because that group sometimes made some similar criticisms to those made by some MA members, that doesn't mean it was the same kind of creature.

BTW, I just looked at the Members Association newsletter and couldn't see anything about any legal arguments concerning Mote. There was a mention of his case, but nothing to which any lawyer could conceivably object. But this is such a senstitive area, that of course anyone mentioing the case should err on the side of caution.

Mark Croucher

I'll snip all the bits that are demonstrations of ignorance, distortions of the truth and wilful troublemaking, and answer the rest.

Oh indeed.

Just remind me, what's your joke party called this week?

C_steam

Mark, to be fair I don't think that the cabal conspiracy view is 'popular belief'. (anyway, by definition a mythical body can't conspire! )

Nigel Garage

Just let me remind you of the forum rules -

Can you answer my questions about the injunction and the PPERA?

Mark Croucher

Thanks for your response Tom. Apologies for the length of the original, but sitting here waiting for the heating engineer to fix my boiler, I thought I'd answer everything on the thread apart from Daniel Moss.

I'm a bit pushed for time now to answer your answer, but I will try and do so later this evening.

On the subject of Ashley Mote, I can't really go INTO phpbb_detail on-list, but I will PM you later with the response. You will appreciate when you see it that I can not answer your question publicly without falling foul of the order.

Best regards,

Mark