Has Gerard resigned?

Niall Warry · 06-12-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petrina

Hang on BA Ware ,let`s just review the facts ,they are not b......s.

The 2004 conference DEBATED the question of standing against eurosceptics of other parties,it was not a motion and therefore under the rules could not bind the party -FACT

It did however act as a brake on NF`s views ,in the GE we did stand against Eurosceptics although many in the party thought we should not -FACT

RKS made an excellent speech ,the mood of the conference was totally behind him on this point .NF and Mn were soundly beaten -FACT

This issue has been a running sore in UKIP .NF made it abundantly clear at the election that if elected he would not stand against BOO candidates and he won the election -FACT

If GB and others felt so strongly about this point then why didn`t GB put his head above the parapit on this and stand for the leadership instead of supporting a candidate who was so obviously in the pocket of NF and therefore unlikely to take him on on this matter?QUESTION

Well said Petrina I'm glad you are still around to explain things as they are and not as some UKIP members wish they were. IMO all this stuff about UKIP needing to be a party of the membership sounds like a whole load of LibDem claptrap. No political Party could EFFECTIVELY exist if it tried to only do things all the members wanted - POLITICAL FACT OF LIFE

B.A.Ware · 06-12-2006, 12:18 PM

Quote:

No political Party could EFFECTIVELY exist if it tried to only do things all the members wanted - POLITICAL FACT OF LIFE

Not all the members the majority thats what they call democracy.

Quote:

The 2004 conference DEBATED the question of standing against eurosceptics of other parties,it was not a motion and therefore under the rules could not bind the party -FACT

Who said otherwise my take on the situation was principally the membership wanted to stand where they could and not make exceptions for eurosceptics whether it was a motion or not i don't care its the principle of what the membership want.

Quote:

It did however act as a brake on NF`s views ,in the GE we did stand against Eurosceptics although many in the party thought we should not -FACT

How did you come to the conclusion that many in the party thought we should not.

SponPlague · 06-12-2006, 02:07 PM

To clarify: Gerard's name has now been removed from the NEC section on UKIP.ORG. (Cheers, Clive :P )

brian lee · 06-12-2006, 02:18 PM

Petrina seems to be arguing about semantics. Anything beginning, 'This conference resolves to fight the General Election... ', with proposers and seconders; with an opposition that is proposed and seconded; and including a vote of the members, could be called a debate or motion.
At the start of the "Debate," when the Chairman was introducing it, did he say, ' We are going to have a debate. At the end, you will be asked to vote on it. And by the way, however you vote the leadership will completely ignore it?"

The truth was that Nigel, etc. assumed that the Conference would be so enraptured by their eloquence that they would support it. In the end, they didn't, and we all know that Nigel will not tolerate opposition.

Skilful policy makers only ask people to vote on a proposition when they are certain the people will support them. Defeat, is in effect a vote of no confidence.

SponPlague · 06-12-2006, 04:17 PM

From UKIP.ORG:

Quote:

Gerard Batten MEP resigns from the NEC

06-12-2006

Gerard Batten MEP for London has announced his resignation from the UKIP National Executive Committee. Mr Batten did not give reasons for his resignation, saying that doing so would breach NEC confidentiality.

Chairman John Whittaker said he regreted Mr Batten's decision, but thanked him for his hard work and contributions he has made to the NEC over the years.

mkpdavies · 06-12-2006, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Gerard Batten MEP for London has announced his resignation from the UKIP National Executive Committee. Mr Batten did not give reasons for his resignation, saying that doing so would breach NEC confidentiality

.

Lame.

komerad · 06-12-2006, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C_steam

Those on the NEC who stand for the will of the membership can help ensure this party becomes the party it should be.
If it - truly - becomes the Nigel party then all it takes is one slip, one indescretion and the house of cards comes down - presupposing that the media don't already have all the ammo they need on nigel and aren't just waiting to fire the gun.

C_steam - If you take a look at the twelve Members of the NEC remaining (inc leader NF, as provided by the party website), how many would you say would" stand for the will of the membership"?
I won't hold my breath!
Re your second sentence, in conversation with an independant journalist friend of mine, he has no doubt that the media already have all the
ammo they need.
When they decide to open fire is any-body's guess, I was afraid it would be the Sunday of the Conference, but no.
As you say, If this party becomes a one man band, then the complete house of cards will come tumbling down.
NO person should be bigger than the PARTY!!

C_steam · 06-12-2006, 05:17 PM

Quote:

C_steam - If you take a look at the twelve Members of the NEC remaining (inc leader NF, as provided by the party website), how many would you say would" stand for the will of the membership"?
I won't hold my breath!

A couple. that's all.

Quote:

Re your second sentence, in conversation with an independant journalist friend of mine, he has no doubt that the media already have all the ammo they need.

Yes, I know this - but nice to have it confirmed - hence my (slightly tongue in cheek) comment.

prober · 06-12-2006, 06:26 PM

Del boy stands up for us. Who else ?

Hartlepool · 06-12-2006, 06:32 PM

Del boy is to be relied on that,s for sure.

He has nothing to prove and he is staying the course.

Really admirable. :wink:

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

06-12-2006, 02:07 PM	#33 (permalink)
SponPlague Uber Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Zurich Posts: 3,401	To clarify: Gerard's name has now been removed from the NEC section on UKIP.ORG. (Cheers, Clive :P )

06-12-2006, 02:18 PM	#34 (permalink)
brian lee Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: South Essex Posts: 618	Petrina seems to be arguing about semantics. Anything beginning, 'This conference resolves to fight the General Election... ', with proposers and seconders; with an opposition that is proposed and seconded; and including a vote of the members, could be called a debate or motion. At the start of the "Debate," when the Chairman was introducing it, did he say, ' We are going to have a debate. At the end, you will be asked to vote on it. And by the way, however you vote the leadership will completely ignore it?" The truth was that Nigel, etc. assumed that the Conference would be so enraptured by their eloquence that they would support it. In the end, they didn't, and we all know that Nigel will not tolerate opposition. Skilful policy makers only ask people to vote on a proposition when they are certain the people will support them. Defeat, is in effect a vote of no confidence.

06-12-2006, 06:26 PM	#39 (permalink)
prober Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 860	Del boy stands up for us. Who else ?

06-12-2006, 06:32 PM	#40 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Northern England Posts: 7,105 Party: Free England Party	Del boy is to be relied on that,s for sure. He has nothing to prove and he is staying the course. Really admirable. :wink: