UKIP CRISIS OPINION: Don’t Leave, Fight!

You may also like...

17 Responses

  1. Barrie greatorex says:

    No mention of those despicable members who betrayed the Party by giving,selling information detrimental and demeaning to the leader.are we to be cuckold by them in the future.

    • Darrell Goodliffe says:

      Mr Bolton’s version of events is contested and I am disinclined to trust him as far as I could throw him right now. Having said that, this article is aimed at those who are leaving because of Henry and that is the majority.

  2. MIKE MAUNDER says:

    I have not left UKIP, but I will not renew my membership. For that to change, Mr. Bolton needs to be thrown out of his leadership. Simple as that. – No sacking, no membership from me !

  3. Rob McWhirter says:

    The blunt reality is that most of the nec are directors of UKIP Ltd.

    This means they, the directors, have specific legal obligations, including ensuring the party is solvent and can meet any invoices presented.

    So unless someone can demonstrate to them, in advance, that funding is in place for an EGM at a suitable venue, followed by a ballot of the while party (To elect a new leader or nec), my expectation is that they will discharge their legal obligations and vote down an EGM.

    • forthurst says:

      What are you suggesting , Rob? That the NEC passes a motion of no confidence and then leaves HB hanging in the air or that they will not pass such a motion in order to avoid the financial consequences according to the present Rules of Procedure? The NEC needs to start moving very quickly indeed to ensure that the Rules of Procedure are compatible with UKIP’s current financial status.

      • Rob McWhirter says:

        I am suggesting that if the directors voted for an EGM and associated ballot, knowing the monies aren’t there, and incurred costs on that basis, and failed to recoup them via candidacy fees etc., then they would be liable for the debt, and would bear that in mind when voting…

        • J.L.Kay says:

          Dear forthurst
          I have read the Rules of Procedure. If no-one vetted Henry Bolton , then can any clown stand for the leadership? Obviously the answer is yes, considering the last few self-important nonentities.

  4. J.L.Kay says:

    Dear Darrell Goodliffe
    I am sure that your comments are well meant and probably sum up the feelings of many party members regarding Henry Bolton. a dishonest and morally reprehensible individual. However, I must say that UKIP’s woes are not solely down to him. For a long time, and especially after the departure of Nigel Farage as leader (without whom the UK would not have achieved Brexit), ordinary, hard-working members across the country have been let down by preening, dishonest incompetent leadership and a dysfunctional party management structure.

    Henry Bolton is just the latest car crash. Who vetted him in the first place and was due diligence used when looking into his back ground? I have to question the nature of an organisation which allows discredited former politicians and wannabee non-entities ( no names mentioned) to gain positions of power within the party structure.

    Please could someone put this once-promising political party out of its misery. It is no more, it has shuffled off this mortal core, it is deceased, it is bleedin’ dead!

    Suffice it to say, UKIP is almost if not actually, bankrupt anyway and will probably cease to exist by this time next year, if not sooner.

    Those who continue to support UKIP in its present form are living in a fool’s paradise. What ever you thought UKIP was going to be able to achieve, it ain’t going to happen.

    Sorry to point out the bleedin’ obvious.

    KInd regards

    • Darrell Goodliffe says:

      Hi J L Kay,

      Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I totally agree that Mr Bolton is very much a symptom of a wider disease and that simply changing leader wont cure it. Please read the below for some suggestions for root and branch reform:

      Kind Regards,


    • forthurst says:

      “Who vetted him in the first place and was due diligence used when looking into his back ground?” Nobody is required to vet candidates for UKIP’s most important position. Try reading the Rules of Procedure.

    • Graham says:

      I understand the limit of the vetting was that Nigel met him on the Eurostar, they shared a love of custard-coloured trousers, and there you have it Nigel was his political referee and that’s about all the vetting you need. Seriously, INCREDIBLY irresponsible for Nigel to put his name next to Bolton as Nigel’s indirect endorsement is what got him elected, and it begs the question if Nigel was trying to sink UKIP and all his erstwhile enemies before going off with Banks to start their new party.

  5. alecto says:

    Thats all very well but Bolton needs to be sacked! I’m not renewing my membership until he goes. I’m sick of it. Just when we needed UKIP most – they implode! Sort it!

  6. Serena Lonton says:

    Another great piece from Darrell. I have just sent this around my members and branch committee, also begging the members not to leave. We have a very loyal and dedicated committee who, at least until the result of tomorrow is known, will stick to the task, and I think they will afterwards too.

  7. Paul Cram says:

    While Mr Bolton’s behaviour has been deplorable, the people responsible for making this public rather than dealing with it in house should be expelled, truly selfish people with their own agenda.

  8. Ian Gilmour says:

    Yes I agree, Bolton must go and crucially, the membership fees must be restructured to allow affordable membership to all British citizens who support UKIP.
    The standard fee at £35.00 could remain for those who can afford it , but there must be a reduced fee for people on a low income, and a separate supporter’s fee with limited voting rights. This is what Labour did to great success in massively increasing their membership and support. If UKIP does not do similar then they are finished. This is not only my opinion, but others I know and have spoken to about this matter.

  9. J.L.Kay says:

    Dear Paul Cram
    Don’t you think Mr Bolton’s shenanigans should have been made public? Sure, his private life is his own and we shouldn’t rush to make moral judgements. But if someone misrepresents himself as something he isn’t and deliberately misleads those he hopes will vote for him, then he shouldn’t remain in office. It is the deliberate deception of party members and potential party members that is the point here. I don’t believe in sweeping things under the carpet for the sake of convenience.

    As far as due diligence is concerned, that’s a necessary requisite for choosing anyone who puts themselves forward for public office, especially the leadership of a political party. We are not (at present anyway) a banana republic, although Jeremy Corbyn and his Momentum associates would like us to become one.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *