Mr Nuttall, Mr Denny & Mr West

junius · 03-10-2008, 03:53 PM

From yet another GLW email:

For the attention of the Party Chairman Copy to the NEC

Dear Paul,

I am still waiting for your response both to my complaint regarding the Suffolk Coastal meeting and the treatment of Eric Edmond and myself at the last NEC meeting.

I also require confirmation that UKIP will supply me with all the documentation as requested by me under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act. Although my original letter was written to Whittaker the onus is now on you as the new
chairman to supply me with that data.

Yours sincerely,

John West

Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:53:18 +0000>

Dear John

Contrary to rumour, Eric Edmond was not dismissed from the NEC, hence he has put forward a number of suggestions for next month's agenda. I will seek legal advice regarding your position and Section 7 of the Data Protection Act.

Cheers

Paul

Date: Thursday, 25 September, 2008, 11:29 AM

For the attention of the Party Chairman Copied to the NEC

Dear Paul,

1. Eric Edmond has confirmed to me that he was removed from the NEC. The NEC and the leadership now seem to specialise in revisionist history.

2. There is no need to seek legal advice regarding the Data Protection Act. As a holder of data it is the duty of UKIP’s Data Protection Officer, or in default the Party Secretary, to be conversant with the law. Ignorance is no defence under law.

3. If you want to remove an elected branch officer you call an EGM and give all branch members 21 days notice of this meeting. This defence, I understand, was used by Peter Reeve in Fenland when they decided to deselect him.

I want this matter fully investigated. Ron Whitmore and Peter Reeve have brought the party into disrepute by ignoring the party rules. Unfortunately, the leadership of UKIP does seem to make a habit of ignoring these rules and ambushing members at meetings. Del Young faced a similar kangaroo court.

4. Nigel Farage needs to be reminded that even he has to abide by the Party Constitution. Perhaps you can have a word with him about this.

As I have already pointed out to you there are only eleven elected members on the NEC. There should be twelve elected members. Nigel Farage is NOT the twelfth elected member as he now sits on the NEC as the Party Leader.

The new Constitution clearly states that MEPs cannot be elected NEC members. Farage was elected under the old constitution; under the new, MEPs may not hold an elected place. However, I am sure that a dishonest spin can be trumped up in order to deny the members their elected representative.

Yours sincerely,

John West

Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:33:24 +0000

Dear John

Sorry it has taken a while to get back to you but I have been away this week so I haven't dealt with complaints. But hear goes:

1. Eric Edmond was not dismissed by the NEC.

2. I will speak to the party secretary - I am not an expert in Data Protection.

3. I will look into this for you and get back.

4. The NEC decided that there was no position available last time. I won't go over old ground and explain why - I am sure you have heard the reasons, but the question is this: was Nigel Farage elected to the NEC? The simple answer is yes. Hence he is an elected member. As far as I see, there is another problem in that even if the twelth member argument held any credence, the NEC is not bound by the Constitution to implement the 'ladder system.'

I am gutted it has all come to this. There really was no need for it. We are meant to be playing for the same side and working towards the same end - getting our great country out of the EU.

Paul

Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:00:51 +0100

For the attention of the Party Chairman Copied to the NEC

Dear Paul,

Thank you for endeavouring to address the points raised in my email.

1. I believe I am correct in saying that when Mr Edmond was dismissed from the NEC you were in the room. Having known Eric for sometime and having had the matter confirmed by a third party, who was present, I am saddened that you are prepared to collude with those who are trying to conceal the inappropriate behaviour of both the NEC and the previous chairman.

2. I would suggest that you seek competent legal advice as the Party Secretary has already made it clear he is not competent to deal with this matter. I also note that Ms Oxley would seem to be openly publishing her legal opinions and authority on this matter even if her opinions are ill-informed and ignorant. You will be aware that this is a matter of criminality investigated by both the Information Commissioners Office (Case Number RFA0208845) and the Police (Case Number OF/08/427). It is not my responsibility to advise you but may I suggest you find specialist competent lawyers.

3. There is little to look into. You are aware that you only have one choice of decision if you act within the terms of the party constitution. The Suffolk Coastal motion was an unlawful ,unconstitutional, kangaroo court rigged by Ron Whitmore and Peter Reeve. Your only decision is as to when and how you bring about disciplinary proceedings against them for bringing the party into disrepute.

4. I do not accept your misrepresentation of the constitution. It is clear that UKIP is bound by its CURRENT constitution and not an earlier version. I am saddened that you are prepared to collude with the previous chairman in this dishonest act. By doing so you seek to justify the morally reprehensible abuse of democracy as well as ignoring the wishes of the 2307 members who voted for me.

I note that you are ‘gutted’ by what has happened. Your fishing analogy is very appropriate. I have often heard it said that UKIP is like a fish rotting from the head down. Unless we remove the rotten head the hopes and wishes of the British people and the aspirations of the members will come to nothing. I applaud those brave men and women in UKIP who are prepared to take risks and expose the corruption and dishonesty at the heart of UKIP. Eric Edmond, Del Young, David Abbott, Geoffrey Kingscott, Len Baynes, Geoffrey Collier, Peter Cole, Gary Cartwright and UKIPTRUTH are to be commended for having the courage to stand-up for truth and justice. Without them UKIP will certainly collapse. Rather than shoot the messenger you would do well to listen to them and heed their warnings.

Paul, It has come to this due to the incompetence, corruption and dishonesty of many on the NEC. It has come to this because we have a leader who refuses to listen to the concerns of the members and acts like a tinpot Mussolini. It has come to this thanks to a series of scandals involving UKIP MEPs and party officials. It has come to this because those who should bring the leader to account lack the courage and integrity to do so.

I suggest you study all those emails in circulation exposing the corruption in UKIP. I, like many others, await with some horror the next revelation from GLW, UKIPTRUTH and others. Currently, UKIP is to quote Jack Straw ‘unfit for purpose’. We have already lost 1 in 3 of our MEPs. UKIP will never win the trust of the British people while we allow this corruption to continue. It is your duty to put the interests of the members first and fight for decency, openness and honesty within UKIP. Unless you do so UKIP will quickly become irrelevant in the eyes of both the members and the public.

Paul, it is up to you.

Yours sincerely,

John West

Chairman UKIP Ipswich & East Suffolk

Secretary UKIP Suffolk Coastal

Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:04:26 +0100

Dear Mr. West,

With you past efforts at making ridiculous complaints to the police about the Deputy Leader; and your other ridiculous whinging about various issues which carry little or no substance; I consider you to be a thoroughly irresponsible person, and certainly one who should not be in UKIP at all as you are clearly a vexatious litigant and give me the impression you are slightly unhinged.

This commment from you alone proves it:-

Paul, It has come to this due to the incompetence, corruption and dishonesty of many on the NEC. It has come to this because we have a leader who refuses to listen to the concerns of the members and acts like a tinpot Mussolini. It has come to this thanks to a series of scandals involving UKIP MEPs and party officials.

I have asked you not to send me any more of your garbage. One more unsolicited e-mail from you with further nonsensical content and you go on my spam listing.

Douglas Denny.

Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:40:40 +0100

Dear Mr Denny,

Your personal opinions speaks volumes for your integrity and morality. You have already stated in a previous email that you would ignore all further emails from me. May I remind you that is not a matter of choice for you as to whether you carry out your duties or not. You have a duty to listen to the members and represent their interests . That is what you were elected to do, assuming your election was legitimate.

You have already lied in your claim that I was already on your spam list. This is a bit rich coming from the most irresponsible member of the NEC to post on the internet. Your dishonest postings and petty vendettas on the British Democracy Forum (previously known as the UKIP Forum) have brought the party into disrepute on a regular basis.

I am sure that I will not be alone in being interested to note your confirmation that Mr Bannerman is under investigation by the British Police. Can you supply further details for the members? Is it for fraud and dishonesty or for breach of terms of employment by the EU? I am sure that many in UKIP will be relieved to hear that Mr Bannerman can no longer stand as an MEP candidate, sit on the NEC or continue as Deputy Leader. Incidentally, has anyone ever seen documentary evidence that confirms his claim to be the great-nephew of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman?

Denny, you seem to be unhappy with the efforts being made by the membership to clean-up UKIP and distance it from its track record of corruption and internal incompetence. If this is the case may I suggest you resign now.

Yours sincerely,

John West

Chairman UKIP Ipswich & East Suffolk

Secretary UKIP Suffolk Coastal

eublues · 03-10-2008, 05:35 PM

I am interested in seeing UKIP run more professionally but John West does that cause no credit by the manner of his communications.

Millennium3 · 03-10-2008, 05:38 PM

JW does sound as if he means business and is determined to succeed - the job to be done needs someone who will see it through.

eublues · 03-10-2008, 05:53 PM

If he was going to be effective he would concentrate on getting his facts straight (eg on what the Constitution actually says about the NEC) and stick to the point of his argument rather than go off into rants and personal attacks.

Jeff · 03-10-2008, 05:55 PM

I support John West,and any others who also support him.

g hall · 03-10-2008, 06:03 PM

I have met John West and he has my full support I hope he is successful in cleaning the Aegean stables I could even renew my membership then but I think it is a lost cause I'm sure the old Tory Brigade will give NF and his friends the reward they so richly deserve for stifling debate

Jeff · 03-10-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eublues

If he was going to be effective he would concentrate on getting his facts straight (eg on what the Constitution actually says about the NEC) and stick to the point of his argument rather than go off into rants and personal attacks.

eublues,If this is your advice to all those who back John West,then can I respectfully suggest that you are backing a losing team,and,that you also refrain from being a Farage yes-person and try your best to propel UKIP forward by concentrating on expelling one Nigel Farage,the EuroReformist and his sycophantic hangers-on from our party.

Farage has siezed UKIP from the Membership,the Membership therefore has a right to go forth and sieze it back for themselves.

You want to have a fight over this issue,then,so be it,then you must realise that we have a war on, from now on.

Nothing is barred,you will lose out big time,after all,what can Farage and his cabal say about the former UKIP stalwarts who supported him?

He most certainly cant say that they are liars or fools,can he?

Millennium3 · 03-10-2008, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eublues

I am interested in seeing UKIP run more professionally but John West does that cause no credit by the manner of his communications.

Unfortunately, fire must be met with fire - NF & co are unpleasant individuals.

Jeff · 03-10-2008, 08:17 PM

eublues,you must realise that the way John West presents things is exactly the same way that the membership of UKIP want things to be presented,in other words he and the membership want honesty and that means clarity in all things.

You may wish to settle for less than that,if so,then this is a matter for your own personal conscience.

I believe that 98% of UKIP Membership want honesty within the party,the other 2% may not,for reasons that are only clear and obvious to themselves.

Independent UKIP · 03-10-2008, 11:05 PM

For the record I fully agree with eublues on this. I used to think John West was a good guy within UKIP. No longer.

What I would like to know is why Mr West copies this correspondence to the entire NEC in the full knowledge that it by whatever source will be provided to GLW and if so chosen by GLW made public. He says, "I, like many others, await with some horror the next revelation from GLW...". Not so much horror that in this chronic leaking environment he makes any attempt to make his correspondence confidential by severly restricting the mailing list.

03-10-2008, 03:53 PM	#1 (permalink)
junius Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 159	Mr Nuttall, Mr Denny & Mr West From yet another GLW email: For the attention of the Party Chairman Copy to the NEC Dear Paul, I am still waiting for your response both to my complaint regarding the Suffolk Coastal meeting and the treatment of Eric Edmond and myself at the last NEC meeting. I also require confirmation that UKIP will supply me with all the documentation as requested by me under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act. Although my original letter was written to Whittaker the onus is now on you as the new chairman to supply me with that data. Yours sincerely, John West Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:53:18 +0000> Dear John Contrary to rumour, Eric Edmond was not dismissed from the NEC, hence he has put forward a number of suggestions for next month's agenda. I will seek legal advice regarding your position and Section 7 of the Data Protection Act. Cheers Paul Date: Thursday, 25 September, 2008, 11:29 AM For the attention of the Party Chairman Copied to the NEC Dear Paul, 1. Eric Edmond has confirmed to me that he was removed from the NEC. The NEC and the leadership now seem to specialise in revisionist history. 2. There is no need to seek legal advice regarding the Data Protection Act. As a holder of data it is the duty of UKIP’s Data Protection Officer, or in default the Party Secretary, to be conversant with the law. Ignorance is no defence under law. 3. If you want to remove an elected branch officer you call an EGM and give all branch members 21 days notice of this meeting. This defence, I understand, was used by Peter Reeve in Fenland when they decided to deselect him. I want this matter fully investigated. Ron Whitmore and Peter Reeve have brought the party into disrepute by ignoring the party rules. Unfortunately, the leadership of UKIP does seem to make a habit of ignoring these rules and ambushing members at meetings. Del Young faced a similar kangaroo court. 4. Nigel Farage needs to be reminded that even he has to abide by the Party Constitution. Perhaps you can have a word with him about this. As I have already pointed out to you there are only eleven elected members on the NEC. There should be twelve elected members. Nigel Farage is NOT the twelfth elected member as he now sits on the NEC as the Party Leader. The new Constitution clearly states that MEPs cannot be elected NEC members. Farage was elected under the old constitution; under the new, MEPs may not hold an elected place. However, I am sure that a dishonest spin can be trumped up in order to deny the members their elected representative. Yours sincerely, John West Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:33:24 +0000 Dear John Sorry it has taken a while to get back to you but I have been away this week so I haven't dealt with complaints. But hear goes: 1. Eric Edmond was not dismissed by the NEC. 2. I will speak to the party secretary - I am not an expert in Data Protection. 3. I will look into this for you and get back. 4. The NEC decided that there was no position available last time. I won't go over old ground and explain why - I am sure you have heard the reasons, but the question is this: was Nigel Farage elected to the NEC? The simple answer is yes. Hence he is an elected member. As far as I see, there is another problem in that even if the twelth member argument held any credence, the NEC is not bound by the Constitution to implement the 'ladder system.' I am gutted it has all come to this. There really was no need for it. We are meant to be playing for the same side and working towards the same end - getting our great country out of the EU. Paul Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:00:51 +0100 For the attention of the Party Chairman Copied to the NEC Dear Paul, Thank you for endeavouring to address the points raised in my email. 1. I believe I am correct in saying that when Mr Edmond was dismissed from the NEC you were in the room. Having known Eric for sometime and having had the matter confirmed by a third party, who was present, I am saddened that you are prepared to collude with those who are trying to conceal the inappropriate behaviour of both the NEC and the previous chairman. 2. I would suggest that you seek competent legal advice as the Party Secretary has already made it clear he is not competent to deal with this matter. I also note that Ms Oxley would seem to be openly publishing her legal opinions and authority on this matter even if her opinions are ill-informed and ignorant. You will be aware that this is a matter of criminality investigated by both the Information Commissioners Office (Case Number RFA0208845) and the Police (Case Number OF/08/427). It is not my responsibility to advise you but may I suggest you find specialist competent lawyers. 3. There is little to look into. You are aware that you only have one choice of decision if you act within the terms of the party constitution. The Suffolk Coastal motion was an unlawful ,unconstitutional, kangaroo court rigged by Ron Whitmore and Peter Reeve. Your only decision is as to when and how you bring about disciplinary proceedings against them for bringing the party into disrepute. 4. I do not accept your misrepresentation of the constitution. It is clear that UKIP is bound by its CURRENT constitution and not an earlier version. I am saddened that you are prepared to collude with the previous chairman in this dishonest act. By doing so you seek to justify the morally reprehensible abuse of democracy as well as ignoring the wishes of the 2307 members who voted for me. I note that you are ‘gutted’ by what has happened. Your fishing analogy is very appropriate. I have often heard it said that UKIP is like a fish rotting from the head down. Unless we remove the rotten head the hopes and wishes of the British people and the aspirations of the members will come to nothing. I applaud those brave men and women in UKIP who are prepared to take risks and expose the corruption and dishonesty at the heart of UKIP. Eric Edmond, Del Young, David Abbott, Geoffrey Kingscott, Len Baynes, Geoffrey Collier, Peter Cole, Gary Cartwright and UKIPTRUTH are to be commended for having the courage to stand-up for truth and justice. Without them UKIP will certainly collapse. Rather than shoot the messenger you would do well to listen to them and heed their warnings. Paul, It has come to this due to the incompetence, corruption and dishonesty of many on the NEC. It has come to this because we have a leader who refuses to listen to the concerns of the members and acts like a tinpot Mussolini. It has come to this thanks to a series of scandals involving UKIP MEPs and party officials. It has come to this because those who should bring the leader to account lack the courage and integrity to do so. I suggest you study all those emails in circulation exposing the corruption in UKIP. I, like many others, await with some horror the next revelation from GLW, UKIPTRUTH and others. Currently, UKIP is to quote Jack Straw ‘unfit for purpose’. We have already lost 1 in 3 of our MEPs. UKIP will never win the trust of the British people while we allow this corruption to continue. It is your duty to put the interests of the members first and fight for decency, openness and honesty within UKIP. Unless you do so UKIP will quickly become irrelevant in the eyes of both the members and the public. Paul, it is up to you. Yours sincerely, John West Chairman UKIP Ipswich & East Suffolk Secretary UKIP Suffolk Coastal Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:04:26 +0100 Dear Mr. West, With you past efforts at making ridiculous complaints to the police about the Deputy Leader; and your other ridiculous whinging about various issues which carry little or no substance; I consider you to be a thoroughly irresponsible person, and certainly one who should not be in UKIP at all as you are clearly a vexatious litigant and give me the impression you are slightly unhinged. This commment from you alone proves it:- Paul, It has come to this due to the incompetence, corruption and dishonesty of many on the NEC. It has come to this because we have a leader who refuses to listen to the concerns of the members and acts like a tinpot Mussolini. It has come to this thanks to a series of scandals involving UKIP MEPs and party officials. I have asked you not to send me any more of your garbage. One more unsolicited e-mail from you with further nonsensical content and you go on my spam listing. Douglas Denny. Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:40:40 +0100 Dear Mr Denny, Your personal opinions speaks volumes for your integrity and morality. You have already stated in a previous email that you would ignore all further emails from me. May I remind you that is not a matter of choice for you as to whether you carry out your duties or not. You have a duty to listen to the members and represent their interests . That is what you were elected to do, assuming your election was legitimate. You have already lied in your claim that I was already on your spam list. This is a bit rich coming from the most irresponsible member of the NEC to post on the internet. Your dishonest postings and petty vendettas on the British Democracy Forum (previously known as the UKIP Forum) have brought the party into disrepute on a regular basis. I am sure that I will not be alone in being interested to note your confirmation that Mr Bannerman is under investigation by the British Police. Can you supply further details for the members? Is it for fraud and dishonesty or for breach of terms of employment by the EU? I am sure that many in UKIP will be relieved to hear that Mr Bannerman can no longer stand as an MEP candidate, sit on the NEC or continue as Deputy Leader. Incidentally, has anyone ever seen documentary evidence that confirms his claim to be the great-nephew of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman? Denny, you seem to be unhappy with the efforts being made by the membership to clean-up UKIP and distance it from its track record of corruption and internal incompetence. If this is the case may I suggest you resign now. Yours sincerely, John West Chairman UKIP Ipswich & East Suffolk Secretary UKIP Suffolk Coastal

03-10-2008, 05:55 PM	#5 (permalink)
Jeff Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 371 Party: Free England Party	I support John West,and any others who also support him. __________________ We are all English if we wish to be.

03-10-2008, 06:03 PM	#6 (permalink)
g hall Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: erewhon Posts: 5,522	I have met John West and he has my full support I hope he is successful in cleaning the Aegean stables I could even renew my membership then but I think it is a lost cause I'm sure the old Tory Brigade will give NF and his friends the reward they so richly deserve for stifling debate __________________ "That government is best which governs least." "This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries". "To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful." Remember TANSTAAFL and TANJ

03-10-2008, 08:17 PM	#9 (permalink)
Jeff Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 371 Party: Free England Party	eublues,you must realise that the way John West presents things is exactly the same way that the membership of UKIP want things to be presented,in other words he and the membership want honesty and that means clarity in all things. You may wish to settle for less than that,if so,then this is a matter for your own personal conscience. I believe that 98% of UKIP Membership want honesty within the party,the other 2% may not,for reasons that are only clear and obvious to themselves. __________________ We are all English if we wish to be.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-10-2008, 05:35 PM	#2 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,100	I am interested in seeing UKIP run more professionally but John West does that cause no credit by the manner of his communications.

03-10-2008, 05:38 PM	#3 (permalink)
Millennium3 Moderator Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Berkshire Posts: 4,499	JW does sound as if he means business and is determined to succeed - the job to be done needs someone who will see it through.

03-10-2008, 05:53 PM	#4 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,100	If he was going to be effective he would concentrate on getting his facts straight (eg on what the Constitution actually says about the NEC) and stick to the point of his argument rather than go off into rants and personal attacks.

03-10-2008, 11:05 PM	#10 (permalink)
Independent UKIP Uber Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 2,403	For the record I fully agree with eublues on this. I used to think John West was a good guy within UKIP. No longer. What I would like to know is why Mr West copies this correspondence to the entire NEC in the full knowledge that it by whatever source will be provided to GLW and if so chosen by GLW made public. He says, "I, like many others, await with some horror the next revelation from GLW...". Not so much horror that in this chronic leaking environment he makes any attempt to make his correspondence confidential by severly restricting the mailing list.