Archive for November, 2009

His exercise regime consists of taking his pointers to look for grouse in the heather, crawling through peat bogs with his rifle in search of stags and fishing for trout in his pools. He hasn’t heard of Twitter and he has “the bless-ed Maxine” to send his e-mails. “I prefer plus fours to pinstripes,” he says. “Unlike David Cameron, I am not going to give up stalking nor am I going to resign from White’s.”

Read the full article here.

UKIP’s new leader today reiterated the Party’s position when it comes to electoral deals. Malcolm Pearson said, “Of course we will do deals. If we could get a written guarantee of a referendum on our relationship with a post-Lisbon European Union, then it would the right thing to do."

The UK Independence Party has often said that if such a question could be put to the British people it would be the party’s duty to work to that end. He went on, “Now I am leader, that position does not change."
 
“What is clear is that UKIP is not going to disband, and would not disband until our country’s independence was secured. We might have stood back in this one election to work to that end. In this way we are like the vast majority of the people of Britain. We do not trust the political class any more than they do,” he said.
 
"We are always ready to put our country before our party. The Tories cannot now complain that we will be damaging them in the general election. We offered a way out for them which they declined. Now we will be fighting for every vote, against them, Labour and all comers. UKIP have a distinctive voice, a voice shared in the main by the people of our country”.
 
Nigel Farage, the former Party leader pointed out, “Our offer to work with anyone who is prepared to offer the people a choice on their future is well known. I talked about it before the European elections in June, I have discussed it at our National Executive, I talked about it during our Conference.

"It may be hard for the media and the political elite to understand but we mean what we say. We want a referendum on our future as an independent nation. That desire, the desire to return democracy to this land, supersedes tribal loyalty to this or any party."
 
Hear the podcast of Lord Pearson on the Today program at 7.33am at this link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8383000/8383950.stm

Lord Pearson of Rannoch has been announced as the new leader of UKIP following the results of the Party members' ballot.

With 48% of the vote, Lord Pearson was a clear winner from London UKIP MEP Gerard Batten, followed by the two West Midlands MEPs Nikki Sinclaire and Mike Nattrass and Party returning officer Alan Wood.

The result was announced to a packed press room at Cooper's Hall in the City of London yesterday.

In accepting his appointment, Lord Pearson spoke of his plans for the future of UKIP, including a restructure of the party organisation, the establishment of a fundraising committee and the appointment of a chief executive.

He also gave a broad policy outline on issues such as health, education and direct democracy which will widen UKIP's appeal in the upcoming General Election.

But he warned of the challenges that lay ahead, saying the party needed members and money to provide the energy needed to achieve its goals.

For a long time, it has been clear that there is a major discrepancy between the will of the people and the views of our elected politicians, writes UKIP General Secretary Jonathan Arnott,

On matters of national importance, the public often genuinely have no say whatsoever in their own future – even at a General Election.

Whether it is war in Iraq and Afghanistan (decided by our elected politicians during the term of a Parliament) or key moral issues (such as euthanasia, capital punishment or animal rights), a large chunk of the decisions taken by our Parliament in Westminster have no mandate from the British people. 

UKIP are known for holding elected MPs to account over their broken pledges of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; now we must stand for allowing the British people a  basic say on important matters which concern them.

Only by allowing the public to force a binding referendum on any issue that matters to them (through a set number of registered voters petitioning to demand one) can we ensure that Parliament becomes truly accountable.

The usual argument against this ‘Direct Democracy’ is to denigrate the intelligence of the British people, arguing that the public do not ‘fully understand’ the issues involved and that kneejerk legislation is inevitable.

Rubbish! The Dangerous Dogs Act and the handgun ban prove that Parliament is itself quite capable of such a kneejerk reaction; the time taken to hold a proper, balanced referendum campaign would in fact be the perfect antidote. Nor are MPs experts in every field.

Another argument often raised is the cost, yet this is not an issue in Switzerland or most US states.  Referenda could be held at the same time as Council elections, giving the public more incentive to vote and increasing turnout. The extra cost would be tiny but the benefit to the principle of democracy would be priceless.

If UKIP is a party of democracy when we oppose the European Union and its anti-democratic nature, then we must also be a party of democracy in our domestic affairs.

Parliament should now exist to take emergency executive decisions, represent their constituents, and to deal with the day-to-day legislation required for running the country. 

Centuries ago, democracy had to be representative for a reason.  When it took days to travel from one end of the country to another, a referendum could not exist. But there is no point in trying to justify such an outdated system in a modern society.

It is surely time for the UKIP to drag UK democracy kicking and screaming into the 21st Century!

UKIP Leader Nigel Farage was this morning reprimanded by European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek for his questions relating to the appointment of Baroness Ashton as the EU's High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.

Buzek insisted that Mr Farage 'restrain his language and refrain from making unacceptable comments in the chamber'.
 
Mr Farage was questioning whether Ashton was a suitable candidate for the post because of her past associations with the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), given that she will be in charge of the external security of the European Union. He had asked specifically whether Baroness Ashton had accepted cash on behalf of CND from the 'enemies of western capitalism and democracy'.
 
Speaking after the 'debate' in the parliament's Strasbourg chamber, he said: "To attempt to silence an elected representative from asking pertinent questions about the past of the EU's foreign minister is censorship, plain and simple. Her past actions have a direct bearing on her suitability for her new role."
 
"To be reprimanded for carrying out my duty to my constituents by the parliament's President is scandalous. Is this the price Europe will pay for the deeply undemocratic imposition of the Lisbon Treaty?"