09-Jun-2011 - UKIP Watcher Barbara BOOKER Has ANOTHER VERY VALID POINT
Originally Posted by Richard Allen a Branch chairman and long term member very supportive of the principles of UKIP rather than its corrupt practices and the MEPs who have clearly gone native said regarding PEPPs:
Barbara Booker a long term and well informed UKIP commentator makes the following observation:
Richard, you seem to have fallen into the common UKIP error of equating 'the party' with its MEPs. The question currently before members is simply whether UKIP as a whole should join a pan-EU party. Under the present constitution there's nothing to prevent Nigel Farage and others joining, even if the membership votes against the party going in. Members would have to get a constitutional amendment passed making membership of a PEP incompatible with UKIP membership if they wanted to stop MEPs joining, but until then I really don't think there's reasonable cause for complaint against anyone who decides to join as an individual. In the case of MEPs, of course, they could always be deselected at the next euros, though that's probably not likely to happen.Barbara Booker isn't strictly correc t I don't think as the question is should UKIP MEPs join a Pan EU Party thus distancing themselves from The Party AND creating their own personna - you will note they have thus given no undertaking to be bound by this silly referndum - it is just a whitewash excercise to do as they wish and the irrelevan EUnochs on The NEC will not and can not do a thing about it - little wonder the NEC often, nowadays, can not even form a quorum!
The real danger, I think, is in the fact that the vote is non-specific. Members are not being asked if they want UKIP to join a particular, named, PEP. They are being asked to grant blanket approval for going into just 'a' pan-European party. Once that approval is given, members will lose control over who with and what the party joins. The MEPs will be able to do whatever deals with whomever they want in Brussels, justified by the fact that the membership has agreed that UKIP should join 'a' PEP.
The NEC is guilty of a disgraceful dereliction of duty here. It should have tasked Nigel Farage as leader of the MEPs with drawing up a proper proposal for joining a specific PEP; researched the background of that party, its members and political aims; drawn up amendments to UKIP's constitution stating how and by whom the party would be represented on the governing body of the PEP, what limit there would be to UKIP's financial liabilities, and what the procedure would be for taking a decision to leave. Only then, having properly thought through the implications and decided that it would be in UKIP's interest, should the NEC have put the proposal to the membership for consideration.
We note Steve Allison's absence last Monday but as he pointed out UKIP styled decisions were released to the public regarding the apology to Nikki Sinclaire from the Party not only without consultation from the NEC nor even after they had been informed but prior to their meeting - what is the point in the NEC?
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62