Questions from Frankfurt.

SponPlague · 13-07-2006, 05:47 PM

Hi. As I'm not in the UK at the moment, I can't make hustings, so have prepared a short list of key questions, which I'm posting tp Democracyforum and to the Ind-UK members only list.
I'll cross-post any interesting replies.

What concerns me is not whether candidates give the right answer, but that they have a position they are willing to defend. Here goes.

1. The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this?

2. Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships?

3. In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this?

4. Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)?

5. Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever?

6. How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh, http://www.ukip.20m.com/index1.htm home of MEP and UKIP Leader Jeffrey Titford?

I look forward to intersting answers; good luck to all.

Rob McWhirter :P

SponPlague · 14-07-2006, 07:23 PM

Thanks to DCB for being first to reply! :P

Dear Rob,

Greetings to you in Frankfurt - sorry there are no hustings there. Requested replies below. My website is: www.dcb2win.org for fuller information, and is running now. Did you do Richard's website for him by the way ?

Best wishes

David Campbell Bannerman

Quote:

Originally Posted by SponPlague

1. The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this?

As Chairman, I have initiated our Legal adviser on the NEC, Michael Zuckerman, to work with the Treasurer Bruce Lawson to seek incorporation of UKIP as a company limited by guarantee to address this point. This is already in hand, and reports on progress will be given to the NEC and to members. It does seem sensible that members of the NEC do not carry direct personal liability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SponPlague

2. Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships?

I have been involved with many membership organisations, including political groups and parties. It is easier and most cost effective to retain existing members, or bring back lapsed members, than to seek new members actively.

However, 'churning' is not enough. I firmly believe we can double our membership and more, by more efficient administration, better records, upgrading our database with much more useful information, better marketing, and by targeting events to appeal to different groups and to different ages.
So whilst retaining existing members is critical, it should not be at the expense of reaching out to and recruiting new members.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SponPlague

3. In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this?

There is an overlap between the Party Secretary role, which is laid down in the Constitution, and the General Secretary role, which does not actually have a Constitutional role, but which essentially runs the effective administration of the party.

Whilst it may seem straightforward to combine the two, the legal advice is that there are some important distinctions in the role, for example, it would be difficult for the General Secretary as an employee and non-elected NEC member to oversee the disciplining of members through the Disciplinary Committee, and if your Party Secretary is an employee you would have to go through months of expensive consultation should you fall out - as they have employment rights under the law which we as a responsible employer would respect.
I think Geoffrey Kingscott has been exceptionally devoted and hard working as General Secretary, and the Party should be extremely grateful for him shouldering such loads. But I think our structure isn't right, and we ask far too much of the one person in this position.

I would like Geoffrey to become Party Secretary once the time is right - which is presumably once he steps down as an employee and when the new Leader and new management plans are brought in - after mid-September. Douglas Denny, who has been loyal and dedicated, has graciously offered to step down once a legally satisfactory solution is found.

I would like to see 4 'Directors' established, volunteers or paid, as appropriate, who would focus on the Party's key areas of operation: Campaigns, Policy, Communications, Administration. These 4 Directors would have the clear responsibility for these areas, reporting to the Leader, Chairman, Party Secretary and NEC, and would be available to the membership to discuss proposals, develop ideas, do presentations and assist with the workload.

This would give the Party a better way of working, reduce the overloading of a few individuals, improve communications and involve far more of UKIP's talent in the running of the Party.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SponPlague

4. Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)?

Yes, if there is a good case for it.

5. Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever?[/quote]
Funds were not diverted to the latest election campaign - if you're talking the Bromley by-election. We are waiting to see the final figures for Bromley, but I understand many of those funds were raised from generous new donations by party supporters. from members and from our MEPs, and we did a great job raising such amounts.

Our funds are always under pressure from all the things we try to do as a party. The NEC has the decision on where finances go - and has collective responsibility for those decisions. Ringfencing could be dangerous if the party has urgent needs or opportunities arising requiring funds. The Government is always ringfencing funds - and what a mess that makes of our public services !

6. How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh, http://www.ukip.20m.com/index1.htm home of MEP and UKIP Leader Jeffrey Titford?[/quote]
Is this an offer to tender Rob ?! We have a highly cost effective website service at present, but we need more activity and material to put on the site.

I would like to see the website upgraded to suit a new brand - 'Independence' - which sits alongside the UKIP £ brand ( not replacing it ), and appeals to a wider audience with its style. I'd like to see the latest in technology - webcasts, interative tools etc ( you're an expert on this aren't you ? ) - used for effect.

I think we need to improve party communications through launching a new, internal forum for party members only, which can issue more information and have Q & A sessions like this with senior party members.

SponPlague · 17-07-2006, 07:18 PM

Dear Robert

Sorry you cannot make the hustings and I therefore answer the questions in the order that you have posed them:

1. Yes - I have raised the issue of finance, audit and transparency since being an NEC member. I am disappointed with the results received so far, but the new treasurer appears to be making some headway. We will know more soon.

2. It is a pointless exercise to obtain new members at one end and lose a similar or greater number at the other. Both retention and acquisition are essential. Retention generally is easier to achieve if one is focussed on this and we need to be, as we have been losing far too many members.

3. Yes without doubt. I would like to see Geoffrey Kingscott take over the joint role and will lobby to achieve this. This matter will no doubt be discussed at the next NEC.

4. Yes if this has occurred through neglect or deliberate action.

5. There is no doubt we need to raise more funds and set up a committee/group responsible to do this. I cannot comment on what may or may not have been diverted as I do not know the facts. However, it is imperative that budgets are drawn up and agreed in advance and this will avoid having to take these last minute decisions which all too often have proven disasterous or costly.

6. The Web and Internet/Video/IM/VOIP are where we should be focussing our communications. I am no expert here but many members are and I would call upon these to give appropriate advice. We all need to improve our websites (myself included) and therefore this whole area needs to be evaluated so that all branches and areas may benefit from a uniformed standard of high quality and functionality.

I hope I have answered your questions in full.

Regards

Richard Suchorzewski
Chairman UKIP Wales
NEC Member

SponPlague · 22-07-2006, 08:17 PM

Nigel has posted his replies, along with answers to other questions, on his campiagn website. The answers to my questions, are:

Q The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this?
A The possibility of UKIP being a Ltd. company needs to be looked at again. We could also transfer the responsibility to a finance committee.

Q Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships?
A Both are important, but we need to become a big Party.

Q In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this?
A Yes, there is an overlap. UKIP needs a General Secretary full time in head office and a lawyer as Party Secretary.

Q Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)?
A It depends, people can make genuine mistakes.

Q Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever?
A We now have a separate by-election account, and not before time!

Q How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh?
A UKIP's whole communications strategy needs a full review.

SponPlague · 22-07-2006, 08:24 PM

I have obtained David's email address, and put the questions to him. Responses will be posted ASAP...

SponPlague · 22-07-2006, 08:25 PM

I note that if elected, Nigel sees a lawyer in the role of Party Secretary... Anyone seen Petrina lately :twisted:

Christina · 22-07-2006, 09:51 PM

Hi Robert

A suggestion.

Care to repost Richard's answers but this time include the questions as the rest? It would make it easier to read, I'm having to scroll up after each one.

SponPlague · 25-07-2006, 06:22 PM

This from David Noakes:

1. The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine
for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address
this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this?

I believe party officers should be accountable.

2. Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is
more imporatant than new memberships?

Proper new leadership (as opposed to the group that has held UKIP back since its exception) that attacks the EU effectively, and directs our experienced membership in continuous ground campaigns, will keep our existing members, as they will then be an active part of a successful anti EU party. Both are important, but experience counts.

See http://eutruth.org.uk for the four ground campaigns.

3. In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates
see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do
they plan to address this?

I believe there should be only one Secretary. Geoffrey Kingscott is a man we cannot afford to lose.

4. Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been
complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be
presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into
disrepute)?

Yes I do.

5. Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to
help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure
adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition)
were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/
whatever?

We have very little idea as members where our money is going and even less control over it. Under these circumstances it is not acceptable.

6. How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is
their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage?
How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh,
http://www.ukip.20m.com/index1.htm home of MEP and UKIP Leader
Jeffrey Titford? [that's what their banner says!!!]

Too much hope is put into the Web and technology. Results from the Internet are often very poor. I've been in computers for 25 years, and I know their limitations.
Telling the truth about the EU dictatorship, countinuous ground campaigns by the members, and national campaigns by the leadership will get us out, not technology.

Once inside the EU you can "deal" with rogue websites. While we remain outside we still have free speech, and I believe in democracy above all else.

My criticism of that site on a quick glance is that its message is as weak as UKIP's has been for the last 13 years.

mkpdavies · 25-07-2006, 06:26 PM

The last question just blows away all credibility.

The internet is the single most important medium FOR ACTIVISTS. It also has a growing importance on the public at large. To say otherwise is just barmy, but I guess when I have done 25 years, I might start thinking the same.

SponPlague · 25-07-2006, 06:31 PM

Corrected for you, Christina...

Quote:

Originally Posted by SponPlague

Dear Robert

Sorry you cannot make the hustings and I therefore answer the questions in the order that you have posed them:

1. Should the NEC be liable for party debts?

Yes - I have raised the issue of finance, audit and transparency since being an NEC member. I am disappointed with the results received so far, but the new treasurer appears to be making some headway. We will know more soon.

2. Is keeping existing members more imortant than new ones?

It is a pointless exercise to obtain new members at one end and lose a similar or greater number at the other. Both retention and acquisition are essential. Retention generally is easier to achieve if one is focussed on this and we need to be, as we have been losing far too many members.

3. Is there overlap between general and party secretary roles?

Yes without doubt. I would like to see Geoffrey Kingscott take over the joint role and will lobby to achieve this. This matter will no doubt be discussed at the next NEC.

4. Should party officers face discipline committee for say late accounts?

Yes if this has occurred through neglect or deliberate action.

5. Should HQ/ Independence news be diverted to election camaigns?

There is no doubt we need to raise more funds and set up a committee/group responsible to do this. I cannot comment on what may or may not have been diverted as I do not know the facts. However, it is imperative that budgets are drawn up and agreed in advance and this will avoid having to take these last minute decisions which all too often have proven disasterous or costly.

6. What's your viw on the internet, ukip.org and rogue websites like Eastleigh?

The Web and Internet/Video/IM/VOIP are where we should be focussing our communications. I am no expert here but many members are and I would call upon these to give appropriate advice. We all need to improve our websites (myself included) and therefore this whole area needs to be evaluated so that all branches and areas may benefit from a uniformed standard of high quality and functionality.

I hope I have answered your questions in full.

Regards

Richard Suchorzewski
Chairman UKIP Wales
NEC Member

13-07-2006, 05:47 PM	#1 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	Questions from Frankfurt. Hi. As I'm not in the UK at the moment, I can't make hustings, so have prepared a short list of key questions, which I'm posting tp Democracyforum and to the Ind-UK members only list. I'll cross-post any interesting replies. What concerns me is not whether candidates give the right answer, but that they have a position they are willing to defend. Here goes. 1. The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this? 2. Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships? 3. In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this? 4. Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)? 5. Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever? 6. How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh, http://www.ukip.20m.com/index1.htm home of MEP and UKIP Leader Jeffrey Titford? I look forward to intersting answers; good luck to all. Rob McWhirter :P

25-07-2006, 06:26 PM	#9 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,183 Party: Libertarian Party	The last question just blows away all credibility. The internet is the single most important medium FOR ACTIVISTS. It also has a growing importance on the public at large. To say otherwise is just barmy, but I guess when I have done 25 years, I might start thinking the same. __________________ 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

17-07-2006, 07:18 PM	#3 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	Dear Robert Sorry you cannot make the hustings and I therefore answer the questions in the order that you have posed them: 1. Yes - I have raised the issue of finance, audit and transparency since being an NEC member. I am disappointed with the results received so far, but the new treasurer appears to be making some headway. We will know more soon. 2. It is a pointless exercise to obtain new members at one end and lose a similar or greater number at the other. Both retention and acquisition are essential. Retention generally is easier to achieve if one is focussed on this and we need to be, as we have been losing far too many members. 3. Yes without doubt. I would like to see Geoffrey Kingscott take over the joint role and will lobby to achieve this. This matter will no doubt be discussed at the next NEC. 4. Yes if this has occurred through neglect or deliberate action. 5. There is no doubt we need to raise more funds and set up a committee/group responsible to do this. I cannot comment on what may or may not have been diverted as I do not know the facts. However, it is imperative that budgets are drawn up and agreed in advance and this will avoid having to take these last minute decisions which all too often have proven disasterous or costly. 6. The Web and Internet/Video/IM/VOIP are where we should be focussing our communications. I am no expert here but many members are and I would call upon these to give appropriate advice. We all need to improve our websites (myself included) and therefore this whole area needs to be evaluated so that all branches and areas may benefit from a uniformed standard of high quality and functionality. I hope I have answered your questions in full. Regards Richard Suchorzewski Chairman UKIP Wales NEC Member

22-07-2006, 08:17 PM	#4 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	Nigel has posted his replies, along with answers to other questions, on his campiagn website. The answers to my questions, are: Q The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this? A The possibility of UKIP being a Ltd. company needs to be looked at again. We could also transfer the responsibility to a finance committee. Q Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships? A Both are important, but we need to become a big Party. Q In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this? A Yes, there is an overlap. UKIP needs a General Secretary full time in head office and a lawyer as Party Secretary. Q Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)? A It depends, people can make genuine mistakes. Q Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever? A We now have a separate by-election account, and not before time! Q How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh? A UKIP's whole communications strategy needs a full review.

22-07-2006, 08:24 PM	#5 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	I have obtained David's email address, and put the questions to him. Responses will be posted ASAP...

22-07-2006, 08:25 PM	#6 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	I note that if elected, Nigel sees a lawyer in the role of Party Secretary... Anyone seen Petrina lately :twisted:

22-07-2006, 09:51 PM	#7 (permalink)
Christina Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Eccleston, St Helens Posts: 1,529	Hi Robert A suggestion. Care to repost Richard's answers but this time include the questions as the rest? It would make it easier to read, I'm having to scroll up after each one.

25-07-2006, 06:22 PM	#8 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,178	This from David Noakes: 1. The NEC are currently accountable for any liabilities, e.g. fine for late delivery of accounts. Do the candidates plan to address this, or will they support someone else' s initiative to address this? I believe party officers should be accountable. 2. Do candidates agree that retaining existing members (churn) is more imporatant than new memberships? Proper new leadership (as opposed to the group that has held UKIP back since its exception) that attacks the EU effectively, and directs our experienced membership in continuous ground campaigns, will keep our existing members, as they will then be an active part of a successful anti EU party. Both are important, but experience counts. See http://eutruth.org.uk for the four ground campaigns. 3. In the light of Geoffrey Kingscott's resignation, do candidates see overlap between the general and party secretary roles, and how do they plan to address this? I believe there should be only one Secretary. Geoffrey Kingscott is a man we cannot afford to lose. 4. Do candidates believe that where the constitution has not been complied with, or legal regulations not met, people should be presented before the discipline committee (Bringing party into disrepute)? Yes I do. 5. Is it acceptable to divert funds for HQ, or Independence News, to help fund the latest electrion campaign? Would candidates ensure adequate funding (Gen Secretary's and Newsletter Ed's definition) were ringfenced, however inconvenient for Bromley/ local elections/ whatever? We have very little idea as members where our money is going and even less control over it. Under these circumstances it is not acceptable. 6. How do candidates see the party's website developing, and what is their viision for how technology can be harnessed to our advantage? How would they deal with rogue websites such as UKIP Eastleigh, http://www.ukip.20m.com/index1.htm home of MEP and UKIP Leader Jeffrey Titford? [that's what their banner says!!!] Too much hope is put into the Web and technology. Results from the Internet are often very poor. I've been in computers for 25 years, and I know their limitations. Telling the truth about the EU dictatorship, countinuous ground campaigns by the members, and national campaigns by the leadership will get us out, not technology. Once inside the EU you can "deal" with rogue websites. While we remain outside we still have free speech, and I believe in democracy above all else. My criticism of that site on a quick glance is that its message is as weak as UKIP's has been for the last 13 years.