Geoffrey Collier

Bob FM: We are talking about two separate things. (1) Justification for capital movements between a UKIP Call Centre and a private limited compamy. Donated money was transferred to a private company, of which the Call Centre manager was the director. I have provided you with my source, Company House, gave you the registration number, and the amounts which A.E. Ltd agree was received by them between 2003-2005. What other facts do you want? Have you seen the evidence which justified those payments? In a democracy they call it accountability.

(2) Concerning the donations to other parties from various sources, why not contact the,
Electoral Commission.
. Trevelyan House,
Great Peter Street,
London. SW1P 2HW.

You appear certain that other political parties have been treated more favourably than UKIP, and you give various examples. Ask why decision were made, in respect of the Conservative, Labour and Lib-Dems, which to you seem unfair, compared to those decisions made in respect of UKIP. I have no doubt that they will be able to answer your questions. Is it not sufficient for a company to be registered in the United Kingdom? You say that it must actually be trading in the UK. I couldn't answer that question, I really do not know.


If, as you believe, their decisons were due to a collective malevolence, or by some highly placed individual, acting alone or in concert with others, to inflict harm on UKIP. You are perfectly at liberty to say those things. They will, however, be requesting evidence to support that allegation.

Bob FM

GC with respect, you ask whether the company needs to be trading, the answer was in a previous post with a comment from the EC. Going full circle however, it seems from my sources in Birmingham that HMG is considering relaxing the smoking ban to allow choice. The official version is that they now acknowledge how it is damaging the hospitality sector (absolutely true) but the more cynical may conclude that it is the Labour heartland areas that are being hit the most and with the '**** up' over the 10p, Labour are desperate to claw back ground.

mkpdavies

The only thing Labour are worried about, is the fact this has ****** off a lot of their core vote.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Geoffrey Collier

Bob FM: I await with interest the replies which you will receive from the E.C. concerning your allegations. The smoking ban and the 10p Income Tax rate will not even be foot notes in contemporary politics. Things don't work quite like that.

Bob FM

How wrong you are GC, there is now an International Group involving 10 countries who have formed an alliance and who intend to use every means to keep the smoking ban fraud in the public arena. That in my view with a potential of 20 million votes puts UKIP in a very strong position. The issue is in our law and order policy in case you haven't read it.

Geoffrey Collier

Is this international group comprised of EU countries? From whom do they get their revenue - the tobacco companies? Why not add snuff-takers and spittoon users to your
list of progressive social reforms?

The smoking ban, whether wise or foolish, was the will of Parliament. Change it if you can, but why not expend your energy on nobler causes? Those raised in a, 'smoking home' are more likely to smoke than those who are not. This results from, 'social conditioning' not freedom. Quite a different thing.

Bob FM

I was raised in a smoking home and have never smoked. As your so fond of saying, where is the proof of your statement. And before you post, what you will find is statements like , 'we believe', we estimate', 'it is our opinion', no fact, no science etc. As for the European group no they are not funded by BT, the only UK group who is, is FOREST and they for that reason were not invited to join the coalition. I believe the lives and livelihoods of 20 million UK residents is a worthy cause, as do the 'Party', so perhaps another reason your in the wrong one.
Coalition Members:
Freedom to Choose (UK)
Freedom to Choose (Scotland)
Forces International
Forces Italy
Forces Holland
Forces Germany
Dary (Denmark)
The Danish Smokers' Party
The Party Against Nannyism (Holland)
Smokers' Interest (Holland)
The Association of Dutch Coffee Shops
The Hungarian Association of Smokers' Societies

So far from being 'smoking groups', Freedom of Choice Groups, that's democracy GC, something you clearly do not believe in.

Geoffrey Collier

Bob FM: It is a fact that if you are raised in a criminal household, statistically you will be familiar with those activities and risk veering towards them. Yes, fortunately, there will always be the exception, and with stronger external peer-pressure and role models the numbers should increase. A child from an educated household, or skilled one, or unskilled one for that matter, is more likely to gravitate to parental mores than not. The middle-class, on average, live ten years longer than the Industrial working-class. That difference can be accounted for, almost entirely by cultural, environmental and geopathic differences between the two social classes.

When discussing freedom of choice, you would do well to examine what those choices are, and who determines them. I believe in democracy, but in our culture, democracy and freedom only exist under the law, and may that always be the case. Well funded pressure-groups always challenge democracy and freedom of that 'variety'. The countries who appear conspicuous on your list, are the same ones whose freedom to-day was imposed upon them in 1945, by the victorious powers. Their immature concepts of freedom and democracy, of the kind that you support, had led them uniformly to grief a decade or two earlier.

I think that you will find that many others will leave the party before me.

Bob FM

Someone a lot wiser than I said, something like. ',It is the duty of every citizen in a democracy to resist bad laws.' Laws are made by those elected to serve, they should reflect the will of the people, as I said before consistently 65% in the INS Household survey wanted choice in hospitality. You either support the will of the people, and the party you 'choose' to belong to or you leave. I would not be a member of a party that condoned the disregard of the wishes of 2/3rds of the population. The party is moving forward with sound policies in every area., quite why you are still a member other than clearly to denigrate the party at any opportunity, who knows.

Geoffrey Collier

Bob FM: In our Representative Parliamentary Democracy , supporting the will of the people has never been part of our system. Do you not recall what I wrote some time ago, and quoted line-by-line what Edmund Burke said about that? '

'Your representatives owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion'. Edmund Burke (Letter to his Constituents, Bristol 1774)

This is still accepted as the duty of a MP to this day. Time and time again, Parliament has passed legislation which was wholly unsupported by the electorate. Indeed, using your assumptions, our Parliamentary system would not work. We vote for representatives not delegates, as you appear to want.

Read your Constitutional histroy: Bagehot, A.V Dicey, L.S Amery, I. Jennings, Wade, Phillips, and a multitude of others. See its strengths and weaknesses; but most of all its adaptibility over the ages in both peace and war.

UKIP are not moving ahead, we are in a mess and have some pretty dreadful people in charge. That is what needs changing. The party, cause and membership are magnificent.
Sadly, though, we have at the top too many who are intellectually 'pond life' and morally bankrupt. That is what needs to be changed. If you don't like our Constitution, I think that it is you who needs a new home. I have reasonably good grasp of both our history and constitution; you have neither. I would rather that you stayed, for I don't abandon hope for others easily, as I am sure that you are basically a good chap!