UKIP seeks out Conservative voters with domestic agenda

Percentage · 19-01-2006, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petrina

"Getting the message out" is our most important job and we are failing to do that .This was the basis of my disagreement with the Deputy Leader.

Very nice to have you on the forum Petrina,i hope its not just a flying visit & that you can give some of your valuable experience to the Lechlade group at the ever increasing venue's!

What is your opinion on Dual Membership?Surely this sends out the most duplictious message to the British public & distrust of the messenger at a time when clarity & principle are highly sought by the electorate.

Surely UKIP can look beyond "gimmicks" unlike the lamented F4J or is its shelflife simply just an excercise as well?

John Page · 19-01-2006, 05:21 PM

Quote:

It really isn`t good enough.

Who holds MEPs to account if not the NEC?

It's not just lack of EU news. Look at the release about Regions over the name of Tom Wise.

Nothing about the Select Committee review of Regions that had been announced a few days earlier - and it hasn't even been updated. That's feeble. What is happening? Will UKIP get its submission in in time?

Petrina · 19-01-2006, 07:13 PM

Thank you for your kind welcome.I intend to put my penny-worth onto the Forum from time to time now that I am no longer Chairman.

You mention dual membership- in the early days of UKIP dual membership was clearly a sensible course to take as the party was not well known and it could ill afford to reject members on the basis that they belonged to another party.
Also I believe that we initially indicated that UKIP would not take up any seat which it won demonstrating that we were simply a pressure group and not a political party.

Now we are keen for office and keen to be seen as a fully fledged political party .We did in fact discuss this topic in the NEC and decided that in essence we could keep dual membership so long as our members were not members of other parties which we viewed as being incompatable with UKIP.The revamped draft constitution has this change in it.

We could ask the membership what its views are on this topic as it is not a clear cut issue -it would be interesting ot see the outcome of any such survey on this forum.

C_steam · 19-01-2006, 07:18 PM

we've discussed it - IIRC - at length before and the outcome was no dual membership. No half way houses, no lists saying one party is OK and another not.

You either support UKIP, or you support another party.

(Oh, and welcome!)

mkpdavies · 19-01-2006, 07:47 PM

Yes, I understand the original reasons for keeping it, but it is now clear that the old parties will never change. UKIP have to send a clear signal that it is the only alternative.

No to dual membership.

Petrina · 19-01-2006, 10:52 PM

Fair enough I wouldn`t argue with that point of view.

The discussion should really be academic as the " big three " I believe
demand that everyone is loyal only to them so none of their members should be UKIP.However we know that they are some -how many we know not.

Frankly I would find it difficult to trust anyone with ANY responsibility who was a member of another party.

Interestingly we do have some on the MEP`s staff who are so I am told card carrying Tories ,but that I suppose is a matter for them.

Percentage · 20-01-2006, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petrina

Interestingly we do have some on the MEP`s staff who are so I am told card carrying Tories ,but that I suppose is a matter for them.

I might beg to differ from you on that one,this forum has often been criticized by i suspect MEP's & other leaders for the fact that it is an "open" forum,where some of UKIP's weaknesses are laid bare for all to see etc..

One can only wonder what sensitive information some of these card carrying tories are privy to & what could be done with the info from a "rival" party!

It can get very murky in the world of Duplicity!

Better to have it all out in the open & get rid of dual membership NOW!

kernow · 20-01-2006, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Percentage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petrina

Interestingly we do have some on the MEP`s staff who are so I am told card carrying Tories ,but that I suppose is a matter for them.

I might beg to differ from you on that one,this forum has often been criticized by i suspect MEP's & other leaders for the fact that it is an "open" forum,where some of UKIP's weaknesses are laid bare for all to see etc..

One can only wonder what sensitive information some of these card carrying tories are privy to & what could be done with the info from a "rival" party!

It can get very murky in the world of Duplicity!

Better to have it all out in the open & get rid of dual membership NOW!

Agreed! No man can have two "Masters"

Petrina · 20-01-2006, 11:35 AM

A new NEC might like to look INTO phpbb_the question of guidelines for the future employment of staff .

When I was Chairman I had very little idea of who was employed by our MEP`s .I hope that the new Chairman/NEC will be shown a full list .After all we are meant to be on the same side!

Once we know who is out there and what their strengths and weaknesses are we can start moving forward together.I am sure that most of the MEP`s would happy to assist in this gathering of information.
The alternative is a pulling apart which could be fatal.

A little more transparency would be of great assistance .

Millennium3 · 20-01-2006, 11:36 AM

My greatest concern is that UKIP is, in actuality, a creation of a group of right wing Tories who desire a bolt hole if their party veers too far to the left. If a dozen Tory MP’s suddenly decided to join - it would be very hard for the ordinary members to have much say in what direction the Party took.

This would be even more difficult if there is a significant proportion of the existing members holding dual membership!

19-01-2006, 07:13 PM	#23 (permalink)
Petrina Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: sussex Posts: 1,037	Percentage`s remarks re Dual Membership Thank you for your kind welcome.I intend to put my penny-worth onto the Forum from time to time now that I am no longer Chairman. You mention dual membership- in the early days of UKIP dual membership was clearly a sensible course to take as the party was not well known and it could ill afford to reject members on the basis that they belonged to another party. Also I believe that we initially indicated that UKIP would not take up any seat which it won demonstrating that we were simply a pressure group and not a political party. Now we are keen for office and keen to be seen as a fully fledged political party .We did in fact discuss this topic in the NEC and decided that in essence we could keep dual membership so long as our members were not members of other parties which we viewed as being incompatable with UKIP.The revamped draft constitution has this change in it. We could ask the membership what its views are on this topic as it is not a clear cut issue -it would be interesting ot see the outcome of any such survey on this forum.

19-01-2006, 07:47 PM	#25 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,183 Party: Libertarian Party	Yes, I understand the original reasons for keeping it, but it is now clear that the old parties will never change. UKIP have to send a clear signal that it is the only alternative. No to dual membership. __________________ 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

19-01-2006, 07:18 PM	#24 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,803	we've discussed it - IIRC - at length before and the outcome was no dual membership. No half way houses, no lists saying one party is OK and another not. You either support UKIP, or you support another party. (Oh, and welcome!)

19-01-2006, 10:52 PM	#26 (permalink)
Petrina Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: sussex Posts: 1,037	Fair enough I wouldn`t argue with that point of view. The discussion should really be academic as the " big three " I believe demand that everyone is loyal only to them so none of their members should be UKIP.However we know that they are some -how many we know not. Frankly I would find it difficult to trust anyone with ANY responsibility who was a member of another party. Interestingly we do have some on the MEP`s staff who are so I am told card carrying Tories ,but that I suppose is a matter for them.

20-01-2006, 11:35 AM	#29 (permalink)
Petrina Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: sussex Posts: 1,037	A new NEC might like to look INTO phpbb_the question of guidelines for the future employment of staff . When I was Chairman I had very little idea of who was employed by our MEP`s .I hope that the new Chairman/NEC will be shown a full list .After all we are meant to be on the same side! Once we know who is out there and what their strengths and weaknesses are we can start moving forward together.I am sure that most of the MEP`s would happy to assist in this gathering of information. The alternative is a pulling apart which could be fatal. A little more transparency would be of great assistance .

20-01-2006, 11:36 AM	#30 (permalink)
Millennium3 Moderator Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Berkshire Posts: 4,615	My greatest concern is that UKIP is, in actuality, a creation of a group of right wing Tories who desire a bolt hole if their party veers too far to the left. If a dozen Tory MP’s suddenly decided to join - it would be very hard for the ordinary members to have much say in what direction the Party took. This would be even more difficult if there is a significant proportion of the existing members holding dual membership!