Bluemerle

HOW THE BDI CAN HELP UKIP

PLEASE USE THIS TO WRITE TO UKIP MEMBERS LOCALLY

AND TO THE UKIP LEADERSHIP

BY RODNEY ATKINSON


It is, of course, a step in the right direction that UKIP concentrates it’s ammunition on the enemy and does not stand against proven sovereignty candidates. In fact it is effectively a requirement of the UKIP constitution (see below), and the commitment of giving immunity to sovereignty candidates was recently repeated at public meetings and broadcasts by Nigel Farage. We wholeheartedly support his strategy but the question is how, precisely, to differentiate between genuine sovereignty candidates and those who use the words to get elected and then betray the voters trust.


The argument is made by some that "it is easy to sign a piece of paper and then walk away". In the main it is and it is precisely to provide that opportunity for untrustworthy MPs that some organizations have been constituted! But the BDI is VERY different! (see the wording of the Declaration on the website www.bdicampaign.org ). The Declaration is powerful, meaningful and requires the signatories to put their career on the line by resigning their seat rather than NOT vote for sovereignty legislation. This strengthens the hand of MPs against their Party Machines that do indeed make it hard to pursue democratic principles within all three "major parties". That alone proves how valuable is the signature of such Parliamentarians on the BDI. Those organisations which make it easy for MPs to join them usually offer cover for the insincere (as the voting records of so many "eurosceptics" prove).


One of the reasons why many people joined UKIP was that they had often heard MPs and candidates make rip-roaring patriotic speeches – only to see them trot meekly through the division lobby later in favour of the next EU treaty. The Freedom Association’s "Better Off Out" leaves its signatories quite free to do just that because it contains no commitment to definite action.


The British Declaration of Independence (BDI), on the other hand, commits its signatories irrevocably to the definite action of laying down or supporting a specific sovereignty Bill to re-assert British independence against all comers (not just the EU). Some BOO signatories are signed up to BDI but others have refused. The sincerity of the non-signatories and their commitment to any effective action to regain national independence must be in some doubt. There are more BDI signatories than there are MPs signed up to BOO.


It took cross-party support to get the 1972 European Communities Act passed and it will take similar organisation to get our country back. UKIP MPs will need the help of sovereigntist MPs from other parties to achieve UKIP’s principal aim:


"The principal aim of the Party is that the United Kingdom ("UK") shall

again be governed by laws made to suit its own needs by its own Parliament,

which must be directly and solely accountable to the electorate of the UK"

(clause 2.1 UKIP constitution).


Nowhere among the principal aims in the UKIP Constitution is a UKIP Government - i.e. a UKIP majority in Parliament. If a majority can be achieved to restore sovereignty with UKIP help then UKIP's principal aim will be achieved. UKIP badly needs to get not only its own MPs into Westminster but to have reliable allies when they get there. There is no point in getting UKIP MPs into Parliament if in the process genuine sovereigntists have been eliminated by UKIP votes.


Given limited resources, it makes sense for UKIP to concentrate tactically on those seats held by avid eurofederalists on the one hand (Kenneth Clarek, John Gummer, Geoff Hoon, Denis MacShane, Charles Kennedy etc) and fake Sovereigntists on the other. The latter tend to milk the large sovereignty vote in their – usually Conservative - constituencies and then betray it. The BDI can expose them and UKIP can stand and take those votes.


With its highly specific, irrevocable and career risking commitments, the BDI is surely the only credible touchstone for deciding which candidates of the main parties are committed sovereigntists and so what seats NOT to fight. It makes more financial sense in allocating scarce resources and tactical sense in achieving UKIP’s main strategic aim (and very raison d’etre) than taking votes off declared BDI candidates and letting into Parliament out-and-out federalists.


At past general elections there has been a UKIP refusal to consider standing down followed by a last minute decision to do just that – but against a haphazardly selected number of major party candidates. The latter have included many untrustworthy individuals, often chosen on the basis of what they SAID they stood for but who then (at best) did nothing or even voted the other way when in Parliament.


UKIP’s use of the BDI will enable a long term strategy to be developed, selecting genuine political friends as allies in a future Parliament who are absolutely committed (as signatories to the BDI) to specific sovereignty legislation.


Obviously UKIP could only commit to not standing against DECLARED BDI candidates, and that will encourage those who have signed the BDI to openly declare themselves. Once candidates from the main parties campaign, in numbers, on the positive issue of Britain (not the negative issue of NO to the EU) democracy and sovereignty will really top the agenda.


British Declaration of Independence

6th October 2006