UKIP will take not legal action against Cameron

Mikeuk · 08-04-2006, 11:47 AM

Ukip drops its threat to sue in 'racists' row
By George Jones and Graeme Wilson
(Filed: 08/04/2006)

The UK Independence Party yesterday dropped its threat to take legal action against the Conservative Party over David Cameron's claim that its members were "closet racists".

The party said it could not sue the Tories for slander because it would have to prove damages - and the Tory leader's outburst had benefited Ukip.

Roger Knapman, the Ukip leader, said the attack by an "inexperienced and naive" Mr Cameron had resulted in a flood of calls of support, including many from Conservative Party members.

Sir Richard Body, a former Tory MP and now Ukip member, said the party had raised enough funds to launch a class action by its members against Mr Cameron.

But it was going to be impossible to prove damages because "on the contrary, Ukip has gained by this".

As a result of the row, Ukip has decided that it will contest every Conservative marginal seat at the next general election.

Some leading figures in the party had not wanted to put up candidates against Eurosceptic Tories. However, Mr Knapman said that while Mr Cameron was leader, they were no longer prepared to countenance any such deal with any Conservatives.

He claimed that Ukip's intervention at the last election cost the Tories 27 seats.

Ukip leaders called a hastily arranged press conference at Westminster to capitalise on the publicity they had received since Mr Cameron described the party as a "bunch of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists mostly" in a radio interview on Tuesday.

Francis Maude, the Tory chairman, yesterday defended Mr Cameron's refusal to apologise for the "racist" charge, even though Ukip has said that it accepts the "fruitcake and loonies" barbs as part of the normal "rough and tumble" of politics.

He told Radio 4's Today there were some people in the party who had "some pretty unsavoury connections with the far-Right".

"It is a bit of a party that just wants to turn the clock back, that doesn't like the fact that Britain is a multi-racial country, a multi-faith country, would like to return to a world where Britain is all-white and Europe didn't exist - well, that's not the real world," he said.

Asked later if he had overstepped the mark, Mr Maude insisted that his comments were perfectly fair. "They are not a bunch of people who are comfortable with a multi-cultural, multi-faith Britain," he said.

The row with Ukip is threatening to overshadow the Conservative Party's spring conference in Manchester, where Mr Cameron will today make his first major speech to the party faithful since becoming leader in December.

Although Mr Cameron had not intended to pick a fight with Ukip, the Tory leadership has decided to face down demands for an apology.

Privately, Tory officials concede that the party leader probably went too far by branding Ukip as racists after being caught off guard.

But they believe that he cannot now retreat from his position without being seen to have handed a public relations victory to Ukip. Tory officials hope that he can turn the row to his advantage by using it to demonstrate that the party is changing under his leadership and moving away from extreme policy stances on issues like Europe.

Ukip claimed that the attack had backfired because it had raised their profile in the run-up to next month's local elections and offended Euro-sceptic Tories who shared many of the party's objectives.

John Page · 08-04-2006, 01:12 PM

A reasonably elegant manoeuvre

Britannist · 08-04-2006, 01:29 PM

Quote from Mike UK's posting (of Telegraph article) above: Ukip claimed that the attack had backfired because it had raised their profile in the run-up to next month's local elections and offended Euro-sceptic Tories who shared many of the party's objectives.

My reply: I know of one Conservative voter who backs UKIP in EU Elections who is absolutely furious with what David Cameron has said and is now talking of boycotting the local elections next month and not voting Conservative as they normally do.

I notice that Labour and the Fiberal 'Democrats' are careful not to openly criticise the Green Party. Both Labour and the Fib Dims know that to vilify the Green Party is to verbally attack people whose support/votes they need in General Elections.

There is no benefit for the Conservative Party in 'having a go' at UKIP. In 2004, 1.2 million Conservative voters switched to UKIP - for the EU Election only. Known as the UKIP-Tories they are one of the most influential voting blocs in British politics and were responsible for electing (under the way list voting system seat allocations work) 8 of the 12 people originally returned as UKIP MEP's in 2004.

Mikeuk · 08-04-2006, 01:52 PM

I just received the following from John Gouriet who will be well known to many of you.

For some strange reason John welcomed the election of Cameron (his wife's cousin and a fellow old Etonian) This is what he says now.

Quote:

This was published in Telegraph today. If you agree, please
circulate ask everyone to write to DT in support. I think they are
getting the message, thanks mainly to Simon Heffer. We must hammer
home the need for the Tories to split and ditch their rotten apples
like Maude, May and Clarke and return to fundamental principles.

Rgds John G.

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Gouriet" <john.gouriet1@virgin.net>
To: "Letters Editor DailyTelegraph" <dtletters@telegraph.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 12:30 PM
Subject: TORY FISSION

Sir,

Francis Maude is correct in predicting the Tories may not win the
next election, but he fails to perceive the mote in his own eye. By
alienating their bedrock support and failing to oppose effectively,
when they have never had an easier target or more urgent need,
the 'modernisers' are marching their dwindling troops away from the
political battlefield instead of going all out to rout the most
corrupt and damaging government in living memory.

I would go further than Mr. Maude; the Tories will never win again
unless and until they rid themselves of the modernising cancer that
seems to permeate all their thinking. Only then can they offer
voters an honest, credible alternative to the present elected
dictatorship. For the time being few will buy their wares when
rotten apples are so clearly infecting their basket. Tory fission is
therefore the essential prerequisite for electoral success and the
sooner the better.

Yours faithfully,

John Gouriet
Bicknoller
Somerset TA4 4EG

Now John, remember, I TOLD YOU SO...

Percentage · 08-04-2006, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeuk

Now John, remember, I TOLD YOU SO...

I thought you never said "i told you so"! :? :wink:

Mikeuk · 08-04-2006, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Percentage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeuk

Now John, remember, I TOLD YOU SO...

I thought you never said "i told you so"! :? :wink:

Did I say that? :roll:

Sheila · 08-04-2006, 06:34 PM

Quote:

The party said it could not sue the Tories for slander because it would have to prove damages - and the Tory leader's outburst had benefited Ukip.

But surely they couldn't anyway - at least, it has always been my understanding that slander (or libel) was the defamation of the character of a specific individual.
.

Mikeuk · 08-04-2006, 07:06 PM

That's more or less right, but in libel it is not normally necessary to prove that the defamation has resulted in actual injury.

Sheila · 09-04-2006, 12:26 PM

There is a really useful summary of UK libel law on this website:

http://www.newsdesk-uk.com/law/libelcheck.shtml

From this, and some other research I have done, I still think that it would not have been possible for UKIP as an organisation to sue for libel, so threatening that they would, then saying that they had changed their minds, was pointless.

.

pentameter · 09-04-2006, 10:52 PM

It was a mistake to talk of suing as the chances of success were slim if any. There seem to be good reasons why political parties suing for libel isn't easy.

I thought they licked themselves out of it very nicely by saying that they couldn't sue because apart from suffering damage, they had gained by it.

08-04-2006, 11:47 AM	#1 (permalink)
Mikeuk Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Fareham Posts: 5,758 Party: Conservatives	UKIP will take not legal action against Cameron Ukip drops its threat to sue in 'racists' row By George Jones and Graeme Wilson (Filed: 08/04/2006) The UK Independence Party yesterday dropped its threat to take legal action against the Conservative Party over David Cameron's claim that its members were "closet racists". The party said it could not sue the Tories for slander because it would have to prove damages - and the Tory leader's outburst had benefited Ukip. Roger Knapman, the Ukip leader, said the attack by an "inexperienced and naive" Mr Cameron had resulted in a flood of calls of support, including many from Conservative Party members. Sir Richard Body, a former Tory MP and now Ukip member, said the party had raised enough funds to launch a class action by its members against Mr Cameron. But it was going to be impossible to prove damages because "on the contrary, Ukip has gained by this". As a result of the row, Ukip has decided that it will contest every Conservative marginal seat at the next general election. Some leading figures in the party had not wanted to put up candidates against Eurosceptic Tories. However, Mr Knapman said that while Mr Cameron was leader, they were no longer prepared to countenance any such deal with any Conservatives. He claimed that Ukip's intervention at the last election cost the Tories 27 seats. Ukip leaders called a hastily arranged press conference at Westminster to capitalise on the publicity they had received since Mr Cameron described the party as a "bunch of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists mostly" in a radio interview on Tuesday. Francis Maude, the Tory chairman, yesterday defended Mr Cameron's refusal to apologise for the "racist" charge, even though Ukip has said that it accepts the "fruitcake and loonies" barbs as part of the normal "rough and tumble" of politics. He told Radio 4's Today there were some people in the party who had "some pretty unsavoury connections with the far-Right". "It is a bit of a party that just wants to turn the clock back, that doesn't like the fact that Britain is a multi-racial country, a multi-faith country, would like to return to a world where Britain is all-white and Europe didn't exist - well, that's not the real world," he said. Asked later if he had overstepped the mark, Mr Maude insisted that his comments were perfectly fair. "They are not a bunch of people who are comfortable with a multi-cultural, multi-faith Britain," he said. The row with Ukip is threatening to overshadow the Conservative Party's spring conference in Manchester, where Mr Cameron will today make his first major speech to the party faithful since becoming leader in December. Although Mr Cameron had not intended to pick a fight with Ukip, the Tory leadership has decided to face down demands for an apology. Privately, Tory officials concede that the party leader probably went too far by branding Ukip as racists after being caught off guard. But they believe that he cannot now retreat from his position without being seen to have handed a public relations victory to Ukip. Tory officials hope that he can turn the row to his advantage by using it to demonstrate that the party is changing under his leadership and moving away from extreme policy stances on issues like Europe. Ukip claimed that the attack had backfired because it had raised their profile in the run-up to next month's local elections and offended Euro-sceptic Tories who shared many of the party's objectives.

08-04-2006, 01:29 PM	#3 (permalink)
Britannist Uber Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London Posts: 22,896	The UKIP Tories Quote from Mike UK's posting (of Telegraph article) above: Ukip claimed that the attack had backfired because it had raised their profile in the run-up to next month's local elections and offended Euro-sceptic Tories who shared many of the party's objectives. My reply: I know of one Conservative voter who backs UKIP in EU Elections who is absolutely furious with what David Cameron has said and is now talking of boycotting the local elections next month and not voting Conservative as they normally do. I notice that Labour and the Fiberal 'Democrats' are careful not to openly criticise the Green Party. Both Labour and the Fib Dims know that to vilify the Green Party is to verbally attack people whose support/votes they need in General Elections. There is no benefit for the Conservative Party in 'having a go' at UKIP. In 2004, 1.2 million Conservative voters switched to UKIP - for the EU Election only. Known as the UKIP-Tories they are one of the most influential voting blocs in British politics and were responsible for electing (under the way list voting system seat allocations work) 8 of the 12 people originally returned as UKIP MEP's in 2004.

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

08-04-2006, 01:12 PM	#2 (permalink)
John Page Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Welwyn Hatfield (Herts.) Posts: 1,878	A reasonably elegant manoeuvre

08-04-2006, 07:06 PM	#8 (permalink)
Mikeuk Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Fareham Posts: 5,758 Party: Conservatives	That's more or less right, but in libel it is not normally necessary to prove that the defamation has resulted in actual injury.

09-04-2006, 12:26 PM	#9 (permalink)
Sheila Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Reading Posts: 580	There is a really useful summary of UK libel law on this website: http://www.newsdesk-uk.com/law/libelcheck.shtml From this, and some other research I have done, I still think that it would not have been possible for UKIP as an organisation to sue for libel, so threatening that they would, then saying that they had changed their minds, was pointless. .

09-04-2006, 10:52 PM	#10 (permalink)
pentameter Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 310	It was a mistake to talk of suing as the chances of success were slim if any. There seem to be good reasons why political parties suing for libel isn't easy. I thought they licked themselves out of it very nicely by saying that they couldn't sue because apart from suffering damage, they had gained by it.