Former UKIP Candidate and current BNP Candidate Adam Champneys seems to be the bankroll for the BNP. Why would UKIP take such an interest?
Who really pulls the financial strings at the BNP?
Dr Alan Sked, UKIP’s founder leader, 1993-97 has said: “They [UKIP] are racist and have been infected by the far right”
(The People, 6 June 2004).
Nigel Farage (UKIP MEP since 1999, leader of the UKIP group of MEPs in the European Parliament since 2004; former UKIP Chairman, 1998-2000 and cofounder UKIP) told former UKIP leader Dr Alan Sked “We will never win the nigger vote. The nig-nogs will never vote for us”, according to Dr Sked.
(The Mail on Sunday, 6 June 2004).
Dr Alan Sked (founder leader of UKIP, 1993-97) has told us that when it comes to immigration policy, “UKIP is even less liberal than the BNP. Certainly, there is a symbiosis between elements of the parties”
(The Sunday Telegraph, 30 May 2004).
In 2000, the European Parliament ordered UKIP to repay £11,500 of expenses. The party had diverted surplus travel expenses to fund the failed court cases of the ‘metric martyrs’, market traders who were taken to court for refusing to display metric measurements alongside imperial ones when selling their wares. Nigel Farage MEP has since repeated UKIP’s intention to use parliamentary expenses “to further the objectives of UKIP back in Britain”.
(Guardian, 24 June 2004).
In the first Quarter of 2009, the BNP declared £21,132.00 in four cash Donations. £9,060, £5,000 and £1,000 from former UKIP Adam Champneys. £6,072 from Shiela Butler. There were an additional £4,010 of disallowed donations. (Electoral Commission Quarterly Returns)
Which all comes fairly close to the latest BNP magic number of £20,000. Much bandied about in "Les Barnes Writs". The amount of cash is, arguably, not huge given the potential for expense claims in politics. That amount of money would, for a minor party, represent a significant amount of finance. A large amount of money, all arising from Mister Champneys suggests that he pulls the strings. Not only that Griffin is his poodle but that without Champneys, financial disgrace and failure await Nick Griffin.
The UKIP makes no secret about claiming excessive expenses. Nigel Farage being alleged, by the BNP, to have taken two million pounds in expenses. The BNP Website quotes the BBC 2 Daily Politics Show. Mr Macshane was defending his own expenses claims and said," “I was with Nigel Farage of UKIP yesterday afternoon debating and he said quite cheerfully - you know what Nigel is like - I have got two million pounds in expenses from the European Parliament,” During a debate about Europe at the Foreign Press Association - which was discreetly taped by the hosts - Farage was asked by former Europe minister Denis MacShane what he had received in non-salary expenses and allowances since becoming an MEP in 1999. This is the source of the two million in expenses.
"A close friend of Mr Farage says the Ukip leader uses his expenses to fund the party, but does not abuse them personally. "I know he has remortgaged his house – that's how short of money he is," said the friend."
(Telegraph 26 May 2009)
Makes you wonder What the UKIP spend their expenses on and why have the BNP and UKIP fallen out so comprehensively. Maybe its a battle of bonehead databases: UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP has poured scorn on BNP complaints about its membership lists being made public.
Mr Farage has stated that The BNP used parts of the UKIP database which they managed to obtain to contact UKIP members directly. There is an outstanding complaint with the Information Commissioners Office - as that would be an offence.
Perhaps the BNP-UKIP friction is nervousness on the part of the Leaders: Farage insisted, at the Foreign Press Association, that he had not "pocketed" the expenses money but had used the "very large sum of European taxpayers' money" to help promote UKIPs message that the UK should get out of the EU. Farage is unapologetic, being "entirely happy that the money had been used for the best of causes."
That said, there are some sour words on the UKIP website. "It says it all about the BNP that so many of those on their database seem to be worried about being revealed as members. Who would join a party where membership is a social and professional embarrassment? How ironic is it that the BNP leaders are bleating about their position under the Human Rights Act, something they claim they want to abolish."
So where is ther real power struggle in the BNP? Who is actually selling out the rank and file membership? Not just the databases.
Nigel Farage MEP has admits meeting Dr Mark Deavin (the BNP’s then head of research who had briefly infiltrated UKIP as Research Director and NEC member to pass on information about its work to the BNP until being expelled from UKIP in May 1997) over lunch on 17 June 1997 at the latter’s request, to discuss his defection from UKIP to the BNP.
(The Times, 5 June 1999)
Andrew Edwards (former Chairman, UKIP Bath branch, 2002-2003) was expelled from UKIP on 5 February 2004 for allegedly passing information to the BNP. He denies this and has since campaigned to expose links between UKIP and the BNP. He has stated: “In collaboration with other UKIP members and ex-members, [I
have] uncovered information which we believe suggests a pact between the BNP and UKIP. The BNP has now admitted that there was indeed, an unofficial pact between them and UKIP”.
(Bath Chronicle, 14 February 2004).
John Brayshaw was exposed on 5 February 2004 as being simultaneously Chairman of UKIP’s Vale of York branch (since October 2003) and BNP National Treasurer (since 2000). According to Andrew Edwards, he was also UKIP-BNP “pact liaison officer for the north”. UKIP denied that they knew of his BNP links despite the fact that he stood as a BNP parliamentary candidate in Bradford North at the 2001 general election. Brayshaw was eventually expelled from UKIP in 2004 when his
BNP membership became public knowledge.
(Bath Chronicle, 14 February 2004).
It is easy to quote mine. These are all events some time ago. But, significantly, they all point to the UKIP being instrumental in the BNP "rise". The BNP is the undeniable fallout from the National Front, Combat 18 and all the other petty fascist organisations of the last century. The UKIP portrays itself as the reasonable "eurosceptical" party. Yet, it seems former members are happy to bankroll the BNP. Why would that be? Given the political Heritage of right wing Conservatives, the Monday Club and so on there is no need to go far. The intellectual groundwork for the UKIP was laid down in the 1980s and 1990s when there was much talk of the Militant Tendency and "parties within parties". Maybe the idea struck fertile ground: have a tame fascist party dancing for the real fascists.
Farage was photographed in June 1997 chatting to the BNP’s Tony ‘The Bomber’ Lecomber (who has served two prison sentences: he was jailed for three years in 1985 for possession of explosives, and for three years in 1991 for stabbing a Jewish schoolteacher).
(Guardian, 13 October 1999).
Could it be the threat is not just from the BNP.
The two parties will hardly be going head to head in the coming election. Ukip is fielding 567 candidates in the council elections on June 4, the BNP 457. The BNP has no UKIP challenge in 80 per cent of the seats it is contesting. The Ukip has no BNP challenge in 85 per cent of the seats it is contesting. This could be a coincidence - the Monster Raving Loonie Party appears to be avoiding Labour. But, like the sniff of expenses, there is more to the story. Farage has offered to resign if UKIP gets less than ten seats. As former UKIP Members appear to be bankrolling the Griffin Pension Plan - could it be that the UKIP is finding a new home? Or, could it be one of the more successful business ventures by Mister Griffin: get UKIP to buy the farm.
The distribution of seats where UKIP and BNP do not compete would seem to be those where they have no hope of winning anything. Tokens to differentiate their brand images: blazers and boots. The pattern would also maximise the chance of the BNP being voted for in constituencies where UKIP fields nobody. The fantasy behind the apparent collusion seem to suggest that the BNP and UKIP see themselves replacing Labour and the Tories. With access to Two million in expenses, there really is no telling how much damage to the country mister Griffin could do.
Dr Alan Sked, UKIP’s founder leader, 1993-97 has said: “They [UKIP] are racist and have been infected by the far right”
(The People, 6 June 2004).
Nigel Farage (UKIP MEP since 1999, leader of the UKIP group of MEPs in the European Parliament since 2004; former UKIP Chairman, 1998-2000 and cofounder UKIP) told former UKIP leader Dr Alan Sked “We will never win the nigger vote. The nig-nogs will never vote for us”, according to Dr Sked.
(The Mail on Sunday, 6 June 2004).
Dr Alan Sked (founder leader of UKIP, 1993-97) has told us that when it comes to immigration policy, “UKIP is even less liberal than the BNP. Certainly, there is a symbiosis between elements of the parties”
(The Sunday Telegraph, 30 May 2004).
In 2000, the European Parliament ordered UKIP to repay £11,500 of expenses. The party had diverted surplus travel expenses to fund the failed court cases of the ‘metric martyrs’, market traders who were taken to court for refusing to display metric measurements alongside imperial ones when selling their wares. Nigel Farage MEP has since repeated UKIP’s intention to use parliamentary expenses “to further the objectives of UKIP back in Britain”.
(Guardian, 24 June 2004).
In the first Quarter of 2009, the BNP declared £21,132.00 in four cash Donations. £9,060, £5,000 and £1,000 from former UKIP Adam Champneys. £6,072 from Shiela Butler. There were an additional £4,010 of disallowed donations. (Electoral Commission Quarterly Returns)
Which all comes fairly close to the latest BNP magic number of £20,000. Much bandied about in "Les Barnes Writs". The amount of cash is, arguably, not huge given the potential for expense claims in politics. That amount of money would, for a minor party, represent a significant amount of finance. A large amount of money, all arising from Mister Champneys suggests that he pulls the strings. Not only that Griffin is his poodle but that without Champneys, financial disgrace and failure await Nick Griffin.
The UKIP makes no secret about claiming excessive expenses. Nigel Farage being alleged, by the BNP, to have taken two million pounds in expenses. The BNP Website quotes the BBC 2 Daily Politics Show. Mr Macshane was defending his own expenses claims and said," “I was with Nigel Farage of UKIP yesterday afternoon debating and he said quite cheerfully - you know what Nigel is like - I have got two million pounds in expenses from the European Parliament,” During a debate about Europe at the Foreign Press Association - which was discreetly taped by the hosts - Farage was asked by former Europe minister Denis MacShane what he had received in non-salary expenses and allowances since becoming an MEP in 1999. This is the source of the two million in expenses.
"A close friend of Mr Farage says the Ukip leader uses his expenses to fund the party, but does not abuse them personally. "I know he has remortgaged his house – that's how short of money he is," said the friend."
(Telegraph 26 May 2009)
Makes you wonder What the UKIP spend their expenses on and why have the BNP and UKIP fallen out so comprehensively. Maybe its a battle of bonehead databases: UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP has poured scorn on BNP complaints about its membership lists being made public.
Mr Farage has stated that The BNP used parts of the UKIP database which they managed to obtain to contact UKIP members directly. There is an outstanding complaint with the Information Commissioners Office - as that would be an offence.
Perhaps the BNP-UKIP friction is nervousness on the part of the Leaders: Farage insisted, at the Foreign Press Association, that he had not "pocketed" the expenses money but had used the "very large sum of European taxpayers' money" to help promote UKIPs message that the UK should get out of the EU. Farage is unapologetic, being "entirely happy that the money had been used for the best of causes."
That said, there are some sour words on the UKIP website. "It says it all about the BNP that so many of those on their database seem to be worried about being revealed as members. Who would join a party where membership is a social and professional embarrassment? How ironic is it that the BNP leaders are bleating about their position under the Human Rights Act, something they claim they want to abolish."
So where is ther real power struggle in the BNP? Who is actually selling out the rank and file membership? Not just the databases.
Nigel Farage MEP has admits meeting Dr Mark Deavin (the BNP’s then head of research who had briefly infiltrated UKIP as Research Director and NEC member to pass on information about its work to the BNP until being expelled from UKIP in May 1997) over lunch on 17 June 1997 at the latter’s request, to discuss his defection from UKIP to the BNP.
(The Times, 5 June 1999)
Andrew Edwards (former Chairman, UKIP Bath branch, 2002-2003) was expelled from UKIP on 5 February 2004 for allegedly passing information to the BNP. He denies this and has since campaigned to expose links between UKIP and the BNP. He has stated: “In collaboration with other UKIP members and ex-members, [I
have] uncovered information which we believe suggests a pact between the BNP and UKIP. The BNP has now admitted that there was indeed, an unofficial pact between them and UKIP”.
(Bath Chronicle, 14 February 2004).
John Brayshaw was exposed on 5 February 2004 as being simultaneously Chairman of UKIP’s Vale of York branch (since October 2003) and BNP National Treasurer (since 2000). According to Andrew Edwards, he was also UKIP-BNP “pact liaison officer for the north”. UKIP denied that they knew of his BNP links despite the fact that he stood as a BNP parliamentary candidate in Bradford North at the 2001 general election. Brayshaw was eventually expelled from UKIP in 2004 when his
BNP membership became public knowledge.
(Bath Chronicle, 14 February 2004).
It is easy to quote mine. These are all events some time ago. But, significantly, they all point to the UKIP being instrumental in the BNP "rise". The BNP is the undeniable fallout from the National Front, Combat 18 and all the other petty fascist organisations of the last century. The UKIP portrays itself as the reasonable "eurosceptical" party. Yet, it seems former members are happy to bankroll the BNP. Why would that be? Given the political Heritage of right wing Conservatives, the Monday Club and so on there is no need to go far. The intellectual groundwork for the UKIP was laid down in the 1980s and 1990s when there was much talk of the Militant Tendency and "parties within parties". Maybe the idea struck fertile ground: have a tame fascist party dancing for the real fascists.
Farage was photographed in June 1997 chatting to the BNP’s Tony ‘The Bomber’ Lecomber (who has served two prison sentences: he was jailed for three years in 1985 for possession of explosives, and for three years in 1991 for stabbing a Jewish schoolteacher).
(Guardian, 13 October 1999).
Could it be the threat is not just from the BNP.
The two parties will hardly be going head to head in the coming election. Ukip is fielding 567 candidates in the council elections on June 4, the BNP 457. The BNP has no UKIP challenge in 80 per cent of the seats it is contesting. The Ukip has no BNP challenge in 85 per cent of the seats it is contesting. This could be a coincidence - the Monster Raving Loonie Party appears to be avoiding Labour. But, like the sniff of expenses, there is more to the story. Farage has offered to resign if UKIP gets less than ten seats. As former UKIP Members appear to be bankrolling the Griffin Pension Plan - could it be that the UKIP is finding a new home? Or, could it be one of the more successful business ventures by Mister Griffin: get UKIP to buy the farm.
The distribution of seats where UKIP and BNP do not compete would seem to be those where they have no hope of winning anything. Tokens to differentiate their brand images: blazers and boots. The pattern would also maximise the chance of the BNP being voted for in constituencies where UKIP fields nobody. The fantasy behind the apparent collusion seem to suggest that the BNP and UKIP see themselves replacing Labour and the Tories. With access to Two million in expenses, there really is no telling how much damage to the country mister Griffin could do.
Comments
Hide the following 7 comments
Inadequately-researched tittle-tattle.
28.05.2009 12:09
Incidentally, the ideological link between the two parties is non-existent, as anyone who'd done any research ought to know. Try reading their respective manifestos. UKIP is a libertarian free market party. The BNP is an authoritarian command economy party.
The BNP's ideological links are much closer to other parties. Their economic policy is similar to the Socialist Workers' Party, for example. The BNP calls for nationalisation of all major industries. It calls for works councils to sit on company boards. It calls for big rises to the minimum wage and pension, and a return of the link between pensions and earnings. It wants very large tax rises on the highest earners. These are not the policies of a 'right-wing' party, they are the policies of a socialist, left-wing party.
UKIP, on the other hand, has a flat tax policy and explicitly outlines its low-tax, small-business policies in its manifesto on its website.
The BNP manifesto's racist elements are not reflected in UKIP's stance on immigration. The BNP wishes to 'voluntarily repatriate' non-white people living in Britain, or whose families have lived in Britain post-1948. UKIP makes no such pledge and explicitly outlines in its constitution that it is a non-racist, non-sectarian party. It has five non-white MEP candidates standing in the 2009 election.
In fact, the only thing that might link the two parties is that they both want to leave the EU. But you could use that to link BNP to No2EU, which is Bob Crow's far-left party which also wants to leave the EU.
Russell Long
e-mail:
Soddball@hotmail.com
Baron von Lotsov
28.05.2009 16:49
The UKIP is the party best positioned to get back the power the EU stole from us when in the 1970s they lied and told us it was merely a free-trade agreement. If you think you can pull this crime off you are very much mistaken. The UKIP is the voice of opposition to this and will do well in the forthcoming elections. OK it’s not the party for the unwashed, but I gather a lot of you don't vote anyway.
Baron von Lotsov
Baron is a troll
28.05.2009 21:07
Its pretty easy to google your alias, fool.
"Why not post the little $hits a comment like I have? If you want free fireworks then that is the thing to do!"
Nice comment, shows all the right wing braindeads are just trying to provoke a reaction.
(A)ntifa
Provoking reactions
28.05.2009 22:23
The Far Right always troll Indymedia - because it is where they discover the truth about their own parties. One wonders if the Baron is the same Troll as turns up on NO2ID? Pushing the Interests of Resigned Tories? Coding away (60,000 lines and counting) to track illuminati at every turn. Or working out charities are all run by communists.
If Baron Lotsov was, in any way, serious there would not be the scent of troll wherever he goes. Much less the scent of UKIP activism and David Davis and such. Far more interesting is that, had he simply ignored the article it would have disappeared in about forty eight hours.
Either the UKIP-BNP are scraping the barrel for publicity or there is more to their relationship than meets the untrained eye. Probably an eye in a pyramid. Gazing lovingly at the subtroll.
Nick Griffins Accountant
pot kettle etc
28.05.2009 22:59
except for the far left having been funded and supported by Moscow through the british communist party for over 40 years.
only that fell apart (we all hope) when it all fell apart and communism was found to be utterly flawed when applied to humans
get over it
history buff
The best You can come up with
29.05.2009 01:10
The UKIP has risen to 17 per cent in the polls. Farage's astonishing admission threatens to burst that bubble.
Farage employs his own wife as his paid parliamentary assistant. he has tried to limit the damage by saying that MEPs were "very expensive". What gross hypocrisy. He has long insisted that the EU is too expensive. His party has campaigned on a platform of endemic European corruption. "We should not be paying 40 millions pounds a day to an organisation whose accounts have not been signed off for 14 years in a row," mister Farage has said.
Maybe we should not sign off two million in expenses.
Farage insisted that he had not "pocketed" the money but had instead used the "very large sum of European taxpayers' money" to subvert the EU and hasten Britain's exit from the union. Two of the original 16 UKIP MEPs have been charged with fraud. Tom Wise, who has since left the party, and his researcher Lindsay Jenkins are both face prison for alleged abuse of their expenses. Another former MEP, Ashley Mote, 73, was given an nine-month suspended prison sentence two years ago for falsely claiming benefits of more than £65,000.
As an accountant, all I might ask is: where did all that moeny go.
Farage let his expenses claim slip during a debate at the Foreign Press Association in London. He was asked by former Europe minister Denis MacShane what he had received in non-salary expenses and allowances since becoming an MEP.
All new MEPs elected in June will get a Europe-wide flat salary of 91,984 euros. Sitting members will come under pressure to agree to the same deal. The rules on expenses have also been tightened sharply. Worries remain over enforcement. Officials conduct spot-checks rather than systematic vetting of every claim. UKIP MEPs votes against increased transparency and declaration of expenses.
It is not trivial. It is a matter that affects people now. It is not difficult to consider why.
Is it legal to use expenses to finance your own party? Or to finance another party. Such things are not up for debate. The accounting rules are actually quite clear that monies are disbursed as expenses. Financing the party - or even financing the BNP - might well be an expense. It should be clearly declared as such.
Perhaps Stormfornt is full of gossip because of UKIP or despite UKIP. The truth would seem to veer towards UKIP being rather less innocent than the leadership would like to suggest. it is gossip, but it just a bit of fun.
John Petley, ex UKIP researcher: "It really is now too much to expect the party to be turned round. Even removing Farage as leader will not solve it. His cronies hold all the positions of power, and there isn’t the time to winkle them all out. Sadly, for all the undoubted good UKIP has achieved, it is time for it to be dismembered. The wound is too deep. The poison has spread too widely. In 2004, UKIP had a great chance to advance the argument for British withdrawal from the EU. With the right approach, the argument could have been won irrevocably by now."
Richard North, ex UKIP Chief Researcher, writing of Farage: “He cannot tolerate anyone in the party who he feels is or might be in a position to challenge him. He prefers to surround himself with incompetents and deadbeats. Anyone who emerges who might show an independent streak, he ruthlessly eliminates, to ensure that they cannot be seen as competition.”
The problem for the left (or indeed the centre) is not that quotes are old but that there is so much - and so many - to be quoted. The quotations form 2004 and 1999 are not there because they are all that there is: they are there because of te consistent history of behaviour. The BNP like to wash UKIP laundry in public. Which begs the question: where do the BNP get their ammunition from?
Nick Griffins Accountant
Ho Ho HO!
20.06.2009 17:13
Do you believe in fairies?
What a pile of absolute rubbish ?
Albert