05-Apr-2011 - UKIP: Sinclaire v Agnew on pan-European parties
An Exchange of View at The Strasbourg Plenary on Tuesday So Agnew has been stupid enough to admit that as an MEP he - and his fellow EFD colleagues - are in it for the money, even if he does claim that it is to do 'God's work'. We had no idea that God had an Isle of Man bank account in the name of Nigel Farage!
In The So Called Debate In The EU Mock Parliament
He also made another gaffe. He went on record that 'we' do not accept the principle of European law. So that rules out Nigel's planned pan-European party from getting funding as you have to accept just that!
No what did Nigel say about Agnew?
“as thick as shit but he has money”.
Here is the exchange between Nikki Sinclaire and Stuart Agnew during Tuesday's EP debate on pan-EU parties. We also include some excellent comments by Barbara Booker of the British Democracy Forum.
Aggers had claimed that legislation would allow the EU to influence future UK referendums on the transfer of power, but that this would backfire as it would also allow us to fund a referendum on UK withdrawal.
Nikki intervened with:
Would my colleague Mr Agnew agree with me that a political party that would accept funding under this legislation, as a single European party, and which in particular would have to observe the EU's programme and activities and the founding principles of European law, and the development of European law at all levels regionally, nationally and at European level, em> would be a party which has lost its principles?
Would you agree with me, Mr Agnew?
I say to Ms Sinclaire that we will take what we can out of this because we use the devil's money to do God's work. That is what we do, and well you know it.
Will you accept the principle of European law though?
No, of course we do not. That is why we are here.
For the original comments by Agnew and Sinclaire: LINK
This is what Barabara Booker had to say:
As observance of the principles on which the EU is founded, including the rule of law, is an essential condition of receiving pan-EU party funding, and Stuart Agnew speaking on behalf of the EFD has now gone on record stating that "we" do not accept the principle of European law, this must surely rule out any party that EFD members join from receiving that funding? The rules are very strict and I should have thought any such EFD party would be challenged, or even refused funding outright, unless it dissociates itself unequivocally from Agnew's statement.
That should go down well with UKIP members - if the party agrees to go pan-European -hearing that they certainly do now accept the principle of European law!
Which led me to the comment:
I watched this exchange live in The EU mock parliament during this week's Strasbourg plenary.
Including what was a good speech against EU Funding of PEPPs by Independent ex UKipper Nikki Sinclaire - but her speech was put in the shade by one of Dan Hannan MEP's bravura performances.
Sadly Stuart Agnew's muddled speech representing The NFU, The EFD Group & presumably EUkip showed that trying to please 3 masters was clearly work for the devil!
That the poor old man lost the plot and quite clearly had a hissy fit did little to raise his profile - particularly when The EU's parliament chairman mistook him for Andrew Bronze MEP of The BNP.
Well I guess one extremist, racist, xenophobe is much the same as another, when feeding at the troughs on the gravy train and trying to milk the tax payer for yet more money to help The EU!!
To view the original article as posted CLICK HERE