brian lee

Interesting comments from devilskitchen. (I wish people wouldn't hide under pseudonyms).

Nevertheless they think they can run a Political Party.

How can branches, no matter how efficient they are affect a handful of people who never consult them or listen to them. They don't have any time for the NEC?

Not true. Those activists who are not subsided by the EU have put in a lot of time and money, and lost their deposits and are just treated as cannon fodder. Whether or not the branches are strong and effective depends on the willingness of the local membership to get involved. Hence people stand for Parliament and if they are lucky have as many as five helpers.

(The same person that has been stating that UKIP is a grass roots Party is the same one who claims that MEPs are not politicians).

Most of those who were persuaded to set up local websites did not have either sufficient information or skills to keep a website going. Instead of encouraging them the party should have set up a proper website with sections allocated for Branches, etc. Yes there has been criticism of the main website. Even the UKIP leadership hadn't a clue about the amount of input required. If the alleged £80k hadn't been squandered in Bromley perhaps UKIP would have been able to afford a better website, having first of all decided what value it would get from it and how to structure it.

Some of us did but the "very busy people" didn't notice.

eublues

There is obviously a need for UKIP to reform the way many things have been done, but these 'constructive proposals' haven't been presented very well so far in my opinion.

I have received a ragged email apparently from one of the three which mixes sensible enough thoughts with scattergun attacks on all and sundry.

I would have said, either work behind the scenes to try to influence key people in private, or produce some really polished proposals for general consideration, or stand for the NEC elections coming up soon.

C_steam

So if he posted as 'Neil Armstrong' this would make you happy?

C_steam

This has to be the worst bit of **** for a long time. Now, I'm not going to suggest that this has actually come from 'the top' but for someone - anyone - to suggest that the party is 'a shambles' but can only be cured by starting at the bottom, driven from the bottom is just so far out of line I'm going to have to go for a lie-down. are you suggesting to branches that if they sort themselves out, the party will magically unshambleise?

Yes, perhaps the party does need bottom up change but the point is that change has to be led, supported and promoted by the leadership.

brian lee

eublues wroteSome of us, but not 'brian leigh', that I am aware of, wasted thousands of hours trying to influence key people.
As for getting on to the NEC, has eublues not been taking any notice of what happens to people with sufficient intelligence and probity when they get onto the NEC?

eublues

If people of "probity" (oh dear!) have good plans for changes in UKIP they have an ideal chance to put these succintly to the members when standing for the NEC.

If they are elected they can argue for these changes within the NEC.

If at first they don't succeed in getting the changes they would like to see, or things don't change as quickly as they would like, they should stay in place and continue to seek to influence things in the directon they want in a calm way - not storm off.

prober

I agree with Brian Lee. The " closed top" consistently does not want bottom up reasoned suggestions on the way forward for party building and does not welcome or nuture such debate. The bottom up approach wont work because many branch activists are gone or are still shattered and disilussioned from 2005/2006 . Sometimes the "top" gives the impression it doesnt want strong branches, but instead just sufficient cannon fodder to be urged out at election time and then put back in the box. A glaring example is preparation for local elections... an obvious early essential precursor for this ( if UKIP is not going to continue to be humiliated as in the bye elections ) is a central plan for branch capability building and encouragement and to be kept in the loop to give them confidence that this time there is a coherant approach. Zilch.

Millennium3

This for me is a highly accurate statement of how things are.

I find it difficult to understand how anyone can argue that the leadership wishes for UKIP to be a successful political party in the normal sense of the word, their aim is for UKIP to continue to act as a Tory pressure group and to shift them to the right and to become anti EU.

This is not going to happen since they would loose more support from the left of the party than they would gain from the right. Also, it now seems as if the plan is to court the Lib/dems [who are very likely to become the power brokers after the next GE] - for this to happen the Tories must stay as they are or move further to the left.

Bluemerle

UKIP is a pressure group on the Tories, and a foil against the BNP.

Getting onto the NEC will not change anything, as has been proved in the past. Everything has to be approved by NF. He is in charge and what he says goes. He thinks that appearing in the media will herd enough people out of the Tory party, and into UKIP, to push Cameron to change his mind and become more EUsceptic.

Those Peers of the Realm who have signed up to UKIP will go back to the Conservative Party once they have what they want, namely a more EUsceptic Tory Party. They are lending their muscle, a bit like "Lend us your Vote", the very successful slogan for the EU Election in 2004.

eublues

I can't see that these peers, or Farage, or UKIP members generally are going to be satisfied with "a more EUsceptic Tory Party". They all know now (even if they entertained it in the past) that that would lead to no change.

The Tory party would have to commit to nothing less than getting the UK out of the EU to wipe-out UKIP supporters. EU withrawal is very unlikely to become Tory policy - the Tory party would fracture if that came anywhere near to happening.