UKIP Stabbed In The Back!

jambutty · 25-02-2007, 19:14

With 10 MEP’s the UKIP was beginning to become a little bit too popular in the UK for the government’s liking so an excuse was found to put the boot in and to all intents and purposes cripple them out of existence.

Rather than type it all out myself in my own words this is what is on the UKIP web site although I’ve re-arranged the paragraphs a bit: http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2886

Quote:

“The Electoral Commission has taken the decision to apply for forfeiture of donations to the value of £363,697 from the UK Independence Party, saying that these donations were impermissible because the donor, Mr Alan Bown, was not on the Electoral Register between December 2004 and January 2006.

He was, however, on the register at his Kent address before this period and has also been on the register since January 2006. He was unaware that his name had been removed from the list during 2005. Mr Bown has been giving money to UKIP throughout this time with all of his donations properly reported.

Dr Whittaker said, "Mr Bown was entitled to be on the electoral register throughout the period in question, and has been a permanent resident and taxpayer in the UK all his working life. I don’t believe the law was designed to catch out this sort of donor; it was intended to prevent UK political parties being funded from doubtful overseas sources.

The decision by the Electoral Commission to call for forfeiture of donations made to the UK Independence Party was described today as "wholly disproportionate."

UKIP Party Chairman John Whittaker said that the party is guilty of nothing more than "a simple clerical error which could have been easily rectified had it been known."

The UK Independence Party regrets this error. However, we point out that there was obviously no intent to breach or evade Section 54 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

Had Mr Bown realised that his name had been removed from the electoral register, he could have completed the relevant form and immediately rendered himself a permissible donor.

The decision by the Electoral Commission to confiscate this money based on nothing more than an honest mistake is astonishing.”

Or was it a sneaky way of trying to get rid of some opposition before it got too popular?

Make no mistake about it many people are sick to death with Labour, don’t see the Tories as a viable alternative, wouldn’t touch the Liberals with a barge pole so were considering the UKIP if only to cock a snook at the big two or not bother voting at all.

SPUGGIE J · 25-02-2007, 19:32

This could backfire if all those who donated to Labour (outside the current furore) had to go through this "procedure" were found with the same issue.
They dont like serious compitition in Downing Street.

WillowTheWhisp · 25-02-2007, 22:55

It's a bit odd that the guy was living, working and paying tax here and yet because he wasn't on the electoral roll for some reason he is being classed as non-resident for the year in question.

SPUGGIE J · 26-02-2007, 07:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It's a bit odd that the guy was living, working and paying tax here and yet because he wasn't on the electoral roll for some reason he is being classed as non-resident for the year in question.

Well if thats the case lets see if he gets a tax refund.

WillowTheWhisp · 26-02-2007, 08:00

Nice point Spuggie.

SPUGGIE J · 26-02-2007, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

Nice point Spuggie.

Well if he hasnt been a resident he shouldnt pay tax. Think its 13 weeks min per year before you start to pay.

WillowTheWhisp · 26-02-2007, 12:09

And if they insist on keeping the tax then he must have been a resident so the UKIP should be able to keep the money - has their barrister thought of this?

Mancie · 26-02-2007, 13:33

UKIP are about as popular as the SS..(smoking spies) will be. I cannot see why anyone would vote for a UKIP candidate to become a MEP when they openly say the will have nothing to do with the EU... its like handing someone 70k a year (wages) to do a job they clearly have no intensions of doing, UKIP are just a bunch of con men out for a nice little earner paid by us.

WillowTheWhisp · 26-02-2007, 13:59

That's all very well but it does sound a bit iffy the facts surrounding this donation.

Mancie · 26-02-2007, 14:09

The Electoral Commission.. that made this decision is an indepenent body answerable to Parliment.... So what are you trying to say jambutty? another conspiricy theory?

Wynonie Harris · 26-02-2007, 14:32

Surely, the popularity or otherwise of UKIP is irrelevant, Mance. The fact is, they are a legal political party and the point being made is that they have been treated heavyhandedly over a simple clerical error.

WillowTheWhisp · 26-02-2007, 14:35

They may well be an independant body but they don't seem to have any common sense. The rules are there to prevent funding from overseas and this quite clearly was not funding from overseas.

jambutty · 26-02-2007, 15:59

The best way to change the thinking of an organisation is from the inside Mancie. Protesting outside doesn’t make the grade.

I can see why many people voted for the UKIP in the EU Parliament to try and make a change to an organisation that the UKIP could belong to. Unless I have it wrong the UK cannot just up sticks and leave the EU, not legally anyway. Unlike the ex tory and labour gravy trainers the UKIP lot went in to fight for the UK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

The Electoral Commission.. that made this decision is an indepenent body answerable to Parliment.... So what are you trying to say jambutty? another conspiricy theory?

Blair is answerable to Parliament in theory yet the fact is that he dictates.

The same as the independent enquiry into Dr Kelly’s alleged suicide? Where those giving evidence were not even required to do so under oath and no jury. The choice of this form of enquiry was Blair’s. Not a great deal of independence there. He had a vested interest in that enquiry coming to the decision that it did. Then there is the Diana enquiry. ‘nuff said about that!

If you believe that independent enquiries are as independent as is made out then maybe you should look again.

andrewb · 26-02-2007, 22:10

They broke the electoral rules technically, so although yes it doesn't really matter, they did still break the rules.

If UKIP have any real hope of getting more MP's/MEP's then im sure they can raise or get a loan for 300k, it won't put them out of business and if Labour really are behind this (which I doubt VERY much) then they must have known 300k isn't going to close the party down, I mean the two main parties are 20+million and 30+million in debt, UKIP don't have any debt I dont think.

WillowTheWhisp · 26-02-2007, 22:14

Before this the UKIP were a couple of thousand in credit.