The current version being debated by UKIP!


“Should the UK Independence Party's MEPs join a European Political Party and a European Political Foundation as defined under Regulation EC 2004/2003?”

Ballot papers due with Independence magazine scheduled for Monday 18-Jul-2011.
Return before Monday 15-Aug-2011
Count 16-Aug-2011

Returning Officer Steve Allison

Party Applications to form PEPPs 30-Sep-2011

CONSIDER AESOP The Lion & The Fox:

The EU was failing and was corrupt. So they pretended to be handing out money, which was just a ruse to make the greedy come to help progress their scam, but the strings attached were binding if hard to see.
The EUroRealists also came to see the offer, but didn't join a PEPP wishing to deal with The EU from outside its political clutches.
The EU asked the EUroRealists why they didn't come in as it was so lavishly rewarded and comfortable living on bribes.
The EUroRealists replied, 'Because we can see the tracks of those going in, but they are destroyed and there are no tracks showing they survived.'

Other people's lives are lessons in how we can avoid danger: it is easy to enter the house of a powerful man, but once you are inside, it may already be too late to get out.

Showing posts with label PEPPs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PEPPs. Show all posts

Tuesday, 12 July 2011

Tim Congdon on Pan-European Political Parties (PEPPs) - 12-Jul-2011

Tim Congdon on Pan-European Political Parties (PEPPs) - 12-Jul-2011

Hi,

I regret that the conversion from Excel to blogger is not wildly successful hence SOME of the figure work is a little difficult to puzzle out - If I trip over the data in a more understandable format I will post it here also!

More from Tim Congdon on Pan-European parties



Political parties at European level [meaning: pan-European parties] are funded from the general budget of the European Union. This budget may not be used for the funding of other political parties and in particular national political parties.” Repeat: the EU budget for pan-European political parties “may not be used for the funding of national political parties”. I quote from the official website of the EU (http://europa.eu/). My quotation is the official and definitive statement on the subject.

The UK Independence Party is undoubtedly a national political party. Indeed, its purpose is to restore in full the independence of the United Kingdom. As every member of UKIP deplores, this independence has been largely stolen from our country by a corrupt political elite collaborating with the EU’s bureaucracy. If UKIP is not a national political party as the EU understands that concept, I will eat my hat. So the EU’s budget for pan-European political parties is not to be used by national political parties, while UKIP is a national political party. It follows – logically, inescapably – that none of the EU’s money for pan-European political parties can be used by UKIP in the United Kingdom for UKIP’s own ends.

At this point you might say,Full stop, end of story. There is nothing more to say. Let’s move on to the vital, important work that UKIP must do to take Britain out of the EU.” And I would agree with you 100%. Nevertheless, the team pushing for UKIP’s association with a pan-European political party claim on their website that an extra £400,000 a year would come to “our party”. This claim – which is their only argument – is false. No money would become available to “us” in UKIP for the purposes of “our party”. Do not believe the “yes to PEPPs” side if that is what they say.

How much money has been approved for all expenditure on PEPPs?

The 2011 EU Budget has a section on the European Parliament's expenditure and within that there is an allocation for 'political parties at the European level' (i.e., PEPPs)
The figures are, 17.4m. euros for the PEPPs as such, and 11.4m. euros for the Foundations.

This 28.8m. euros is divided up, according to a key in EP regulations.

But surely, you might protest, the “yes” side cannot be indulging in total fantasy. I have over the last few days carried out some homework on various EU and European Parliament websites, and am confident that I know how the “yes” team have derived their numbers.

The full story is quite complicated. You need an Excel file (which is available from me at
timcongdon@btinternet.com and is also attached with this e-mail) to appreciate the detail of the calculations, but I can give the main points here. Remember that any sums arising from UKIP’s association with a pan-European political party come out of the EU Budget. That is why their expenditure is subject to European Parliament rules.

The promotion of pan-European political parties is seen by Eurocrats as part of the larger process of European integration. Indeed, so keen are the Eurocrats to expand pan-European political activity that they are hugely increasing the amounts spent. In 2009 the EU’s expenditure in this area was just under 17 million euros, whereas in 2011 the budget allocation has leapt to 28.8 million euros. The cynical and wasteful increase of almost 70 per cent in a mere two years is an insult to our taxpayers. It has occurred while our own government has had sharply to cut expenditure.

How does the key work?

EU regulations say
'The available budget for the political parties is distributed annually as follows: 15% is distributed in equal shares among the parties which have obtained a positive decision and 85% is distributed in proportion to the number of elected members.'

Box shows sums available and basis of apportionment.

Based on no. of PEPPs
Based on no. of MEPs

Total PEPPs, m. of euros 2.61 14.79 17.4
Foundations, m. euros 1.71 9.69 11.4

So, for example, of the 11.4m. Euros for the Foundations (i.e., think tanks), 1.71m. Is distributed according to the number of PEPPs which have 'obtained a positive decision' (meaning they have complied with EU criteria which a PEPP must meet). If there were 15 PEPPs, each Foundation associated with a PEPP would receive (1.7m. divided by 15) euros, or 113,300 euros out of this particular box.

The 28.8 million euros has two destinations. First, in Germany think-tanks or “foundations” affiliated to political parties have long been subsidized by the state. 11.4 million euros out of the 28.4 million is to finance the establishment of such “foundations” at the pan-European level. I estimate that the grant to the UKIP-related foundation due to our MEPs’ adhesion to the pan-European party would be about £170,000.

Secondly, the balance of 17.4 million euros is to be added to MEPs allowances. I believe – and I am sure most members of UKIP also believe – that MEPs’ allowances are too high already. At any rate, any MEP who joins a pan-European political party would see his or her allowances topped up by over £20,000. Let me underline once again that the resulting expenditure would be for the purposes of the pan-European party as regulated by the European Parliament, not for UKIP in the United Kingdom.

What would 'the European Alliance' receive by becoming a PEPP?

I am assuming that UKIP has 11 MEPs and that it belongs to 'the European Alliance', which has met the EU's criteria for being 'a political party at the European level'. I am also assuming that the European Alliance has 32 MEPs as members.
The following box shows how much the European Alliance would receive.

Receipts from being one of 11 Europarties Receipts from having 32 out of 736 MEPs i.e., 1/11 of amounts in box above (2.61, 1.71) i.e., 32/736 of amounts in box above (14.79, 9.69)

PEPP's money, euros 237,000 643,000

Money for a Foundation, in euros 155,000 421,000

So the total amount for the European Alliance (i.e., for its MEPs and its Foundation) would be about 1.45m. euros, which - at the present exchange rate - is roughly £1.3m. This is why the 'yes' side say that - by joining a PEPP - UKIP would stop 'our enemies' receiving £1.3m.

So the figure of “£400,000 for us in UKIP” on the “yes” website is explained, more or less. If all MEPs join “the European Alliance” or whatever, a new think-tank – perhaps located in Brussels – would be given a grant of about £170,000 and MEPs would receive altogether another £230,000 or so in extra expenses allowances. Do you approve of these uses of money in the name of the political party to which you belong? Is the 28.8 million euros budget to be seen as an excellent use of resources or the squandering of taxpayers’ money by a loathsome Euro- elite?

UKIP’s (or – in fact – UKIP’s MEPs’) acceptance of this sort of bribe from our enemies would be a shocking and deplorable betrayal. The “yes” side may say that the Conservatives, Labour and the LibDems have already participated in “political parties at the European level” and taken the money. They might ask, “why should UKIP be any different?”. The answer – I would hope – is that the UK Independence Party stands for principle and conviction, and is therefore opposed to politicians’ boondoggles. Politicians in the Conservative, Labour and LibDem parties are tacky and selfish, and we shouldn’t and won’t copy them. Let Conservative, Labour and LibDem MEPs join the other pigs at the trough. UKIP must not take money from a set of institutions that we detest.

Let me reiterate that no extra money would be directed to UKIP headquarters, any of UKIP’s branches or UKIP regional accounts. MEPs would indeed have (yet more) on their allowances, but could spend it only for purposes approved by the European Parliament. And do I need to say that the European Parliament’s officials loathe what UKIP stands for?

Vote No to the pan-European party idea in the forthcoming ballot.

Professor Tim Congdon CBE
12th July, 2011

Receipts for UKIP's MEPs as members of a PEPP

The PEPP's MEPs would receive 880,000 euros (237,000 + 643,000), to be spent on
for purposes regulated by the European Parliament.

The Foundation would receive 576,000 euros (155,000 + 421,000).

UKIP's MEPs would receive 11/32 of the 880,000 euros, which is 303,000 euros.

The Foundation would receive - as a result of the 11 UKIP MEPs' membership of the PEPP - a sum equal to 11/32 of 576,000 euros, or 198,000 euros.

The total sum received by the MEPs for PEPP activities and by the Foundation as a result of UKIP's participation in the PEPP would be 501,000 euros, which - at an exchange rate of 1.15 - is £436,000. 

 
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62
of: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com  
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com  
General Stuff: http://gl-w.blogspot.com  
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com  
TWITTER: Greg_LW
 

 Please Be Sure To .Follow Greg_LW on Twitter. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 

To Spread The Facts World Wide

&
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, 2 July 2011

ALDE Group Shows UKIP pro PEPP Betray Britain

ALDE Group Shows UKIP pro PEPP Betray Britain

Hi,

there are those in UKIP who would sell out their grandmother for far less than 30 pieces of silver!

The barbarity of EU PEPPs can be shown relatively well with a brief look at the pond life gathered in The ALDE Group - probably joined together so that hey could buy a printer with EU cash used to bribe them as UKIP's pro PEPP campaigners - liars and cheats like Mick McGough, Stuart Agnew and their ilk would have you believe is a benefit!

This may give you pause for thought as although there may be some filth like Graham Watson who would endorse this one would hope few other British MEPs would:

The 85 strong Anti British EU ALDE Group include 14 British + Irish MEPs 

Including members of The British Government Coallition Parties!

Here is the slime leading them - a duplicitous and oleagenous little runt from that runt of countries Belgium, which harbours such discord (and of course institutionalised paedophelia) that it can not even form a government - no wonder its failures congregate in The EU having destroyed their own little Country they now seek damage on a larger stage:


Offices:
BRU: PHS 55C011 Fax:49566
+32 (0)2 28 49566
Tel:45566
+32 (0)2 28 45566
STR: LOW T06028 Fax:79566
+32 (0)2 28 49566
Tel:75566
+33 (0)3 88 1 75566

For the Full
THE LIST OF SHAME:
Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G309 Fax:49782
+32 (0)2 28 49782
Tel:45782
+32 (0)2 28 45782
STR: WIC M02035 Fax:79782
+32 (0)2 28 49782
Tel:75782
+33 (0)3 88 1 75782

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G218 Fax:49632
+32 (0)2 28 49632
Tel:45632
+32 (0)2 28 45632
STR: WIC M02006 Fax:79632
+32 (0)2 28 49632
Tel:75632
+33 (0)3 88 1 75632

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G201 Fax:49221
+32 (0)2 28 49221
Tel:45221
+32 (0)2 28 45221
STR: WIC M02029 Fax:79221
+32 (0)2 28 49221
Tel:75221
+33 (0)3 88 1 75221

Offices:
BRU: ASP 04F365 Fax:49751
+32 (0)2 28 49751
Tel:45751
+32 (0)2 28 45751
STR: LOW T06038 Fax:79751
+32 (0)2 28 49751
Tel:75751
+33 (0)3 88 1 75751

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G169 Fax:49353
+32 (0)2 28 49353
Tel:45353
+32 (0)2 28 45353
STR: WIC M02005 Fax:79353
+32 (0)2 28 49353
Tel:75353
+33 (0)3 88 1 75353

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G346 Fax:49998
+32 (0)2 28 49998
Tel:45998
+32 (0)2 28 45998
STR: WIC M02010 Fax:79998
+32 (0)2 28 49998
Tel:75998
+33 (0)3 88 1 75998

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G305 Fax:49591
+32 (0)2 28 49591
Tel:45591
+32 (0)2 28 45591
STR: WIC M02036 Fax:79591
+32 (0)2 28 49591
Tel:75591
+33 (0)3 88 1 75591

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G246 Fax:49561
+32 (0)2 28 49561
Tel:45561
+32 (0)2 28 45561
STR: WIC M02004 Fax:79561
+32 (0)2 28 49561
Tel:75561
+33 (0)3 88 1 75561

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G253 Fax:49797
+32 (0)2 28 49797
Tel:45797
+32 (0)2 28 45797
STR: WIC M02068 Fax:79797
+32 (0)2 28 49797
Tel:75797
+33 (0)3 88 1 75797

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G165 Fax:49104
+32 (0)2 28 49104
Tel:45104
+32 (0)2 28 45104
STR: WIC M02009 Fax:79104
+32 (0)2 28 49104
Tel:75104
+33 (0)3 88 1 75104

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G258 Fax:49521
+32 (0)2 28 49521
Tel:45521
+32 (0)2 28 45521
STR: WIC M02003 Fax:79521
+32 (0)2 28 49521
Tel:75521
+33 (0)3 88 1 75521

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G210 Fax:49628
+32 (0)2 28 49628
Tel:45628
+32 (0)2 28 45628
STR: WIC M02008 Fax:79628
+32 (0)2 28 49628
Tel:75628
+33 (0)3 88 1 75628

Offices:
BRU: ASP 13G130 Fax:49959
+32 (0)2 28 49959
Tel:45959
+32 (0)2 28 45959
STR: LOW T12027 Fax:79959
+32 (0)2 28 49959
Tel:75959
+33 (0)3 88 1 75959

Offices:
BRU: ASP 10G102 Fax:49201
+32 (0)2 28 49201
Tel:45201
+32 (0)2 28 45201
STR: LOW T12047 Fax:79201
+32 (0)2 28 49201
Tel:75201
+33 (0)3 88 1 75201

Offices:
BRU: ASP 09G205 Fax:49626
+32 (0)2 28 49626
Tel:45626
+32 (0)2 28 45626
STR: WIC M02106 Fax:79626
+32 (0)2 28 49626
Tel:75626
+33 (0)3 88 1 75626


Why are we funding this anti British Greek Jerk?

Offices:
BRU: ASP 08E218 Fax:49284
+32 (0)2 28 49284
Tel:45284
+32 (0)2 28 45284
STR: LOW T09041 Fax:79284
+32 (0)2 28 49284
Tel:75284
+33 (0)3 88 1 75284


Clearly these are part of the scum that form OUR-ENEMY-WITHIN

Clearly betraying these United Kingdoms

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62
of: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com  
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.Blogspot.com  
General Stuff: http://gl-w.blogspot.com  
Health Blog.: http://GregLW.blogspot.com  
TWITTER: Greg_LW
 
 Please Be Sure To 
.Follow Greg_LW on Twitter
Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 

To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Enhanced by Zemanta

01-Jul-2011 - Prostituting UKIP for a Printer!!

 01-Jul-2011 - Prostituting UKIP for a Printer!!

Hi,

it was quite funny to see one of the UKIP Parasites funded by The Party exposing the odious bean counter and serial liar Mick McGOUGH's best selling line as a 'red Herring' - Now we all know McGough's ethics stink and his understanding of duty and probity are more than a little 'Fishy' but to have a Farage appointee point out the man is a fool amuses me.


What little Jonathan Arnott forgets to remind people is that the lies Mick McGough deliberately told on his squalid little video showed how willing he was to lie and be emotive when bereft of facts to support him.


This is in keeping with McGough as he has a track record of lies and setting out to deceive his coleagues and UKIP members which has been proven.


He has the gutter manners, temperament and ethics of the very worst of Essex stereotypes! Judging by his actions in other areas I believe we can safely believe that he would lie and conive to sell his grandmother if he could gain from it.
Jonathan Arnott
Administrator
General
*****
Offline Offline

Position in UKIP: General Secretary
UKIP Branch: Sheffield
Full Name: Jonathan Arnott
Posts: 2615

« Reply #42 on: July 01, 2011, 06:55:26 PM » Reply with quote

The printer is a BAD example for the YES campaign to use because it's a complete red herring.

Our MEPs get about 4,000 euros a month office allowance each, which can be spent on things like risographs anyway.

The North West region has two risographs but no PEP; there's no shortage of money available for MEPs to buy office equipment.  A few other regions have a risograph, and probably paid for by EU money through the office allowance.

The YES campaign should focus on things that we can't/aren't doing without it.



 . .
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
 
 INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance
&
Work With THE MIDNIGHT GROUP to
Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:
(IF You Have No INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance Candidate) .
to Reclaim YOUR Future 
&
GET YOUR COUNTRY BACK
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62
of: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< Also:
General Stuff: http://gl-w.blogspot.com  
TWITTER: Greg_LW

 Please Be Sure To 
.Follow Greg_LW on Twitter
Re-TWEET my Twitterings
& Publicise My Blogs 

To Spread The Facts World Wide
of
&
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, 9 June 2011

09-Jun-2011 - UKIP Watcher Barbara BOOKER Has ANOTHER VERY VALID POINT

09-Jun-2011 - UKIP Watcher Barbara BOOKER Has ANOTHER VERY VALID POINT 


Quote 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:
If a number of MEPs go in against the wishes of the membership then all bets are off. There would be a full scale split in the party and a number of MEPs would certainly not follow Farage and co into a PEP.
 
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.

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.
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!

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
#08 Middle Street, Chepstow, NP16 5ET, Monmouthshire, United Kingdoms.
tel: 01291 - 62 65 62