Petrina

Here is a message sent by a number of area chairmen to John Whittaker.The content is full of common sense ,I wonder if JW will bother to reply ,he will be silly if he doesn`t because quite clearly if UKIP is to keep any semblance of propriety something on these lines must be done .
In any other party the senior members of the party /NEC would have had the leader in for a chat and simply said get an apology /sue or go !

Dear John

A news article, potentially very damaging to UKIP, appeared in The Sunday Times on 24 February making serious allegations about Nigel Farage. If true, these would probably have led to his resignation as Leader, and ended his future as an MEP, as the allegations were similar to those against the MP Derek Conway.

Luckily Nigel issued a strong denial after the story had been published and this has helped re-build confidence. Unfortunately there are still many people who read the original story, printed in 1.3 million copies, but have not seen the denial, which appears only on the UKIP website.

In order that we might support Nigel on this issue and defend the party from damage we feel it is essential that the defence is as strong as possible.

Given that Nigel has said "There is not a single grain of truth in the statement that I am employing my son using EU allowances or in any other capacity" then he clearly will be able to force the Sunday Times to print a full apology quickly and we will fully support him taking that action.

Speed is of the essence and so that we can immediately re-assure worried members and supporters we would request that Nigel keeps the Party fully briefed including on

* What action he is taking against The Sunday Times
* Whether he is suing and if so what stage this has reached and how long it will take
* Whether he has sought a printed retraction and apology
* If so when that is likely to appear

We note that on 10 February the Sunday Times carried a correction and apology about a similar story they had run a week earlier about Julian Brazier MP. We look forward to reading a correction and apology in the paper this weekend which will vindicate Nigel.

We are all keen that this matter be laid to rest as quickly as possible. We want to support Nigel in redeeming his reputation so that we can devote all the party's energies to our political campaigns.

Yours sincerely


John Pratt
Chairman, UKIP Wales.

Steve Povey
Chairman West Midlands Area.

Peter Baker
Chairman East Midlands Area.

Jeff Mager
Chairman South West Area.

Independent UKIP

I certainly agree with the thrust of that letter. Some mention of the PCC might have been helpful but that is just nit-picking on my part.

Anthony Butcher

Those people are no friends of Farage though. I think that the real thrust of that letter says "Unless you sue the Sunday Times we are going to assume that the article is true and use it to get your resignation as Leader, and end your future as an MEP".

Of course, they are actually just stating what I said previously too - a denial on the UKIP website isn't worth the paper it is printed on.

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

Independent UKIP

Do you actually know who one of the signers of that letter is? If so I am truly surprised at your description of the group but am content with it. That doesn't make me agree with you one iota unless corrected by one of those signers.

There should be no diversion of the issue which sadly your comments above appear to have been an attempt to make.

The issue is clear and Farage has to take action accordingly.

Anthony Butcher

I am not sure of your meaning here. Peter Baker and Steve Povey have both been very strong critics of Farage in the past. Jeff Mager I have met a couple of times, but I couldn't place his allegiance. There was a rumour that John Pratt had resigned, or threatened to resign, as Chairman of UKIP Wales not so long ago.

I was merely pointing out that the letter didn't strike me as a friendly request for action, but more as a set up in preparation for an attack on Farage if he doesn't take any action.

I agree

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

Barboo

With a week having passed since publication of the article and not even a correction, let alone an apology, having been printed this week it is starting to look as if the Sunday Times allegations were true. Nigel Farage has had ample time to write to the editor asking for a retraction, and to consult his lawyers if necessary, yet his blog entry for 1st March gives no indication of his having done either. If a letter has gone to the paper UKIP now needs to put this up on its website, with the reply when received. Farage's denial statement was fine as an immediate response, but if it is not followed by a formal request that untrue claims be corrected, it will look as if he is afraid to challenge the paper for fear of what evidence may be produced.

Truthwillout

The Welsh chairman is basically a loyalist and worked alongside Nigel on the Welsh elections. He was critical of some aspects of the strategy, and events proved him right, but that doesn't make him some sort of "dissident."

The SW Chairman, Jeff Mager, is very much a loyalist, strongly supported by Malcolm Wood, also a loyalist

So some unfair and inaccurate judgments are being made.

Having read the letter I am also surprised that people can twist it into a call for Nigel to resign. It doesn't even hint at that anywhere.

It seems quite reasonably to be pointing out that damaging allegations can only be laid to rest by resolute action. If the original claim is wrong, as we assume, then it should be possible to get an apology.

That would kill a nasty issue stone dead - so the authors of the letter are qutie right - and they are giving Nigel good advice. It is not therefore hostile to him. Why do people always want to assume that?

Anthony Butcher

Thanks for clarifying. As I explained, I couldn't place the 'loyalty' of those two, but Povey and Baker (both of whom I like) are both critics of Farage.

Perhaps I am just too cynical these days but I always now look at motivations when I see this kind of thing. However, to me, it reads just like those Grassroots letters and their ilk - "we trust the leader will prove his innocence etc" when really what they are saying "we aren't going to let you brush this one under the carpet by ignoring it".

Consider for a moment why it has been made public. What is the purpose of that if not to alert as many readers as possible to the fact that Farage hasn't yet taken any action and establishing the public mentality that the only appropriate action is legal and/or challenging the paper - i.e. ignoring it like the spanking article and the other previous allegations won't cut it this time.

Don't forget that ignoring bad news coverage is UKIP's tried and tested method. As far as I recall, the only time they have tackled a paper in recent memory is over the Polish workers, which they lost. All the other articles about spanking, Tom Wise, Regional Organisers etc have gone unchallenged in the long run. The standard tactic is to issue a denial and then forget the story. And it works... in terms of not costing money and keeping the leadership in place.

I am sure that other people must have noticed the tactic too, hence the public letter.

It may be different this time if the paper has royally screwed up and got its facts completely wrong, but I still reckon Farage will stick to form and nothing will happen unless the paper prints a follow up.

Anyway, I agree that the advice in the letter is sound. I also think that it is clever, having shown a previous example of a quick correction printed - hence if Farage doesn't do the same it is tantamount to admission of guilt. It has been over a week now, and no action (although the Bromley Times stated that he is meeting his lawyer(s) today, so perhaps we will see something in the next day or two).

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

Geoffrey Collier

INDEPENDENT UKIP: You are not nit-picking. The PCC would investigate this matter free of charge, and should an untrue allegation have been made, they will require a retraction on behalf of the complainant from the ST. There is no need to cite poverty on this occasion; it will be done free, gratis and for nothing. What can be the reason for not taking this action? I just cannot imagine.

Should the complainant not wish to involve the PCC, he can ask the police to look into the matter. Implicit in the allegation, is the accusation that public money was knowingly diverted for unlawful purposes. Again, free of charge.

Members should expect that defending the reputation of the Party will be paramount in this matter.

eublues

Nigel's 'blog':

UK Independence Party - The Curate's Egg

The Curate's Egg
Saturday, 01 March 2008

It was not a good start to the week. The Sunday Times ran an article making various allegations against me and the mobile rang incessantly on Saturday and Sunday. Their central claim was that I was using EU funds to employ my full-time student son Sam. My position was compared to that of the "disgraced" Derek Conway.

The paper claimed to have an impeccable source for this story, which means an inside job. Well, it is simply not true. I have never employed my son in any capacity whatsoever and I take a pretty dim view of my family being dragged into political articles with no justification at all. All not much fun.

Despite all this, I think that Monday was a very positive day. No other paper had picked up the story, which means that no one else believed it. The news story of the day was the Lib Dems' renewed call for a referendum on EU membership. This was a smokescreen for their ratting on their manifesto promise to support a referendum on the EU Treaty and it led to a debate with Charles Kennedy and myself on Radio 4. Charles was as charming as ever – he wants an EU debate about the big issues of peace and prosperity. This is the classic pro-EU tactic, as they know they simply do not have a case. I also went on the Jeremy Vine Show at lunchtime and did a 45- minute debate with Ed Davey and Tony Benn on 5Live. A very busy day.

Much of Tuesday was spent in grand surroundings. Lunch was in the House of Lords with the UKIP peers and a discussion about the tactics and the chances of a referendum amendment on the EU Treaty being passed. While there is a possibility of this happening, it is going to be a struggle. But our peers are in fighting form and looking forward to assisting our European election campaign of next year.

In the evening I was a guest at Peterhouse College Cambridge. What an amazing place. Dinner was held on long mahogany tables, grace was in Latin and the food and wines were superb. Memories of Porterhouse Blue came flooding back to me. This was followed by my talk and questions. By the time I arrived home there were only a few hours before going off to Brussels the next morning.

Despite how miserable things seemed on Sunday, it’s not all bad.