Anna Raccoon has very kindly allowed me to post this article on her blog.
The correct forum for this report is, of course, the Libertarian Party website, however that route is not currently available to me as the site administration has been hacked and taken over by an unelected party member. I am thus unable to post there. I could have tried to post the report as a comment on the current thread, however, it also appears that comment moderation has been enabled on the blog and there is no guarantee that it would have survived moderation.
Also, publishing my minority report here feels right somehow- as if there might be a certain symmetry in attempting to end this affair where it started, a few short weeks ago. (Though I am neither arrogant nor naïve enough to believe that this will be the final word).
I have been a member of the Libertarian Party since it began in 2008 and, in common with many other members, became increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress of the party. It seemed to me that many of the problems were rooted in poor communication – both from the leadership to members, between party members and to the wider public. There was no forum to debate party matters or more general libertarian issues and, in November 2010 at the AGM I allowed my name to go forward as Communications Director with the mandate to revamp the website with an integrated blog section. As suspected, I found I was pushing at an open door.
Progress on the new website was slow but, with the help of two fellow members and working in whatever spare time we could find, we finally got there and the new site was launched in March of this year. The result was less than perfect, but a structure was put in place to improve and refine it over the next six months.
I had never really intended taking a key role in the leadership of the party (the NCC seemed barely to be functioning and I don’t really care for politics) however Anna’s revelations regarding the character of our party leader, Andrew Withers, galvanised the NCC into action and I had no option but to be involved.
Sadly, my experience has been to discover, once again, that human beings are generally weak and deficient when pragmatism collides with principle.
The first issue on the table was to decide if the allegations needed to be addressed at all and the Chairman, Nic Coombe, who I had met only once, seemed to take a good deal of persuasion on this but, eventually, he spoke to Andrew Withers and asked him to stand aside while the matters were investigated. This happened and an announcement was posted on the website.
There was a subsequent flurry of email communication and it became clear that the chairman was in favour of a fairly limited frame of reference for the enquiry- if Anna’s allegations could only be brushed off and rubbished, the world could be returned to order, and he could get back to planting his runner beans.
This view was supported by John Watson (Treasurer) who had been appointed by Withers as his replacement and by Liam Hillman (North East Region) who I have never met but, from the tone of his emails, seems to be a particularly unpleasant individual. He was all too keen to take on the role of enforcer for this group. Simon Fawthrop (Membership Secretary) also later joined the “whitewash tendency” and supported publication of the very limited report written by Nic Coombe.
I took the view, from the start, that a cover up was wrong.
For one thing, given the strength of feeling expressed in support of Anna following her appalling experiences with Libertarian Party members, I did not see how members and supporters could ever be happy with a report based on such a limited remit.
Secondly, if Withers really was as portrayed, we needed to know this and take the appropriate action.
Finally, any sort of cover up was very wrong in principle. That is what politicians would try to do to protect their party but we were Libertarians, committed to openness and transparency.
Surely, we were better than that?
The key to the whole thing seemed to me to be whether, when acting as Treasurer, Andrew Withers had mishandled party funds. This should have beeen fairly easy to establish – the new Treasurer could look at the bank accounts and the source documents on which the 2010 accounts were based and tell us what he found. Surely Withers would be desperate to get this information into the public domain and clear his name?
But he didn’t. And he hasn’t.
Instead he has done what anyone would do in a situation where dodgy behaviour was in danger of being exposed – he has followed a path of delay and obfuscation and, as far as I am aware, nobody, including John Watson, has yet seen the bank statements or detailed accounts. I have challenged Andrew Withers directly to download the bank statements from the internet account and attach them to an email to NCC members but he refuses to do so.
However, despite his attempts at concealment, some facts have come to light during the course of the investigation.
In particular, Andrew Withers has had to admit to drawing “expenses”. To my knowledge, no other party officer or member has ever done so and the issue is not addressed in the constitution but, without sight of the accounts, it is impossible to know the extent or purpose of the drawings.
But we have some clues.
Screenshots of the only bank statements he has so far passed on (to prove his version of the loan affair) show that, in the 8 days visible, he made 9 separate withdrawals of cash and money transfers to his personal account totalling £335. I also understand that there are at least £840 of miscellaneous expenses relating to the first quarter of the current year as yet unaccounted for.
Yet, as I write this, he remains in sole and absolute control of the party bank accounts.
Incidentally, two of the transfers marked A P Withers are described as “Election Expenses” and party members might be interested to ask why LPUK funds appear to have been used to fight an uncontested parish council election on an “Independent” platform.
But until someone can wrest control of the levers of power from him and conduct a proper investigation, the evidence required to prove whether or not Andrew Withers is a thief cannot be accessed.
However if, as I believe it will, it transpires that he is guilty, he will have demonstrated to the world that he is one of the most despicable human beings imaginable. Not only will he have betrayed the trust of all those who have given freely of their time and money in pursuit of a vision of freedom, he will have betrayed the notion of freedom itself.
The behaviour of some of the NCC members in this matter has also been shameful.
These people have had differing motivations but they are nevertheless accountable for their words and actions. Whether they have acted out of personal loyalty, weakness, malevolence, indifference or ambition is irrelevant, their conduct does not match their alleged commitment to libertarian principles.
Threatening, bullying, abusing, concealing, censoring etc is not appropriate behaviour and, in case anyone thinks I may be giving a partial account here, the email threads are a matter of record and could be put into the public domain.
In fairness, there are others, unnamed, both within the NCC and elsewhere who have understood what was happening and resisted the cover up. My friends in the North West region have been prominent in trying to explain to our leadership why a whitewash report was unacceptable and particular credit goes to Malcolm Saunders for his logical and forensic pursuit of the truth. He is correct that it is a great disinfectant.
It has been difficult to keep track of those alighting the sinking ship but, as I write, Nic Coombe, John Watson, and Simon Fawthrop have all resigned. Withers and Hillman apparently carry on and there will no doubt be more distraction tactics employed before this is over.
So, is the Libertarian Party inevitably finished?
I fear so, but, apparently, Max has a vision for the future and he should be given an opportunity to articulate it. From what I have heard so far, it sounds like more central control rather than less.
So if anyone out there is still interested, I do think having a political party gives libertarianism some advantages and, if Anna would allow me, I’d like to contribute another article here explaining what lessons we should be learning and how it could work better.
In the meantime, we have a party that has no leaders and no money.
What could be more liberating than that?
Ken Ferguson
Communications Director,
Libertarian Party
Ken is an occasional guest author here at Anna Raccoon Arms.
{ 63 comments }
Thank you for a proper report Ken. Although you did not have cooperation, you have produced something much more worthwhile than the official report.
I am an easy going person and I tend to think that people are well intentioned. Unfortunately I am not young so I have encountered a lot of different types.
When Andrew Withers sneered at my ‘vast donation’ to the LPUK at the same time as he was refusing to say how much he had taken from the Party and what he had done with it, I knew that I was dealing with one of the less pleasant and straightforward people.
The Anna Raccoon blog described an unsavoury character who behaved as a parasite, over inflated the importance of what he was doing, and said things which could not be trusted. I didn’t place reliance on the blog because I didn’t know AR and there could be another side to the story.
The problem is that although AW protested that people were condemning him without asking him if it was true, people WERE asking him and he was coming up with nothing. When the Treasurer resigned and it was clear that there was no intention to examine or publish the accounts I offered to do the job. My offer was only to do the job temporarily, but it was subject to it being done constitutionally and I offered to bear the costs of analysing the accounts myself. NCC members had repeatedly been saying don’t just talk, do something. The instant reaction to me offering to do something was for Nic Coome and AW was to say ‘in that case I’m off’. Despite what they said, they stayed in post and refused to allow my offer of help.
AW ‘stood down’ as leader on 15th April 2011 to allow an enquiry to be carried out. NC was to be the acting leader and he would also carry out the enquiry. Neither AW nor NC notified the Electoral Commission of the change of officers within the required 14 days. AW continued to act as leader while telling the members that he wasn’t. He was even taking part in NCC meetings considering the report into his own behaviour.
When you have responsibility for other people’s money, very high standards are necessary. It has become clear that AW has no standards. He lies and conceals to cover what he is doing. John Watson was appointed LPUK Treasurer on 27th November 2010. Even at 17th May 2011 AW had still not relinquished control of essential financial records for him to do that job. Since JW has been treasurer, AW has received LPUK money. Was that authorised by JW or did AW just take it? The Treasurer has legal responsibilities. JW has resigned now, but as the last treasurer registered with the Electoral Commission he has responsibility for Party finances for 2011.
The LPUK cannot function now. That is a shame for all the libertarians who genuinely want and work for a freer and better society. However, we owe a debt of gratitude to Anna Raccoon for lifting the lid on the atrocious behaviour of Andrew Withers. Withers and a tiny handful of supporters or apologists, have prevented the LPUK from being a proper political party.
What we must have now is complete exposure of everything that has happened and a new start with new people.
” IN THE EIGHT DAYS VISIBLE he made 9 separate withdrawals of cash and money transfers to his personal account totalling £335″
Sounds uncomonly like someone is using the party bank account to fund his day to day living costs ! So, thats 15 K – 20 K per annum. How many party members were there and what are the subs ?
When ‘ some mad bint in France’, wrote the original expose, from memory , the story was that withers was living at his girl friends and effectively unemployed. I think you either write the whole thing off as a very bad experience, or you call plod in.
Yep, those are the choices.
Sounds more like the Labour Party than anything Libertarian.
All organisations, from religious groups to political parties, set off with genuine intentions. They all inevitably succumb to a cadre of poisonous self serving individuals.
Maybe it is best the Libertarian Party remains dead.
Very enlightening and interesting post, thank you
“have challenged Andrew Withers directly to download the bank statements from the internet account and attach them to an email to NCC members but he refuses to do so.”
And so my demand “for someone to have some kind of a look, review, peek, glance” at the books under 7.8 is not possible. Excuses about the data-protection rules and the “cost” (hah!) of sending the material by email are actually irrelvant. And people wonder why I go on like the Duracell bunny on this topic.
Well done on the above Ken, you’re facing down a very litigious individual. Bravo.
Simon
Litigious individuals are seldom a worry Simon. I once went very near the line in omething I said about an article in The Guardian and the writer’s commercial relationships. In response to the threats of law suits if I did not withdraw and apologisde I said in effect, “Come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough” by telling the e-mailer I would look forward to hearing from the writer’s lawyers.
As he did not even have the balls to identify himself when threatening me he was never going to sue. Pity that. I would have enjoyed jerking him around til legal fees bankrupted him.
“dodgy behaviour” = complaint to the cops?
Surely the governing committee have the authority to go to the bank and get a copy of the accounts, or call in the regulators to do so, if accounts have been moved or are not transparent? Making accusations and inferrences will just lead you round in circles.
I seem to remember that when AW took up the position someone in government (was it Cable?) tried to block his appointment. At the time it semed like gross government inteferrence now it seems, without prejudging, that maybe everyone should have trusted the government – I never thought I would ever say that!
Speaking as a Conservative Party member I should point out that you and Anna are good and decent people … in the wrong party!
Why not join the Conservative Party? We are for personal freedom (balanced by responsibility), equality, openness and limited state intervention.
We have abolished lots of quangoes and also forced councils and other public bodies to publish details of all their expenditures over £500. It is Labour and other parties who have sometimes resisted this.
I have no comment to make on the goings on in your party, but you seem like conservatives with a small ‘c’ perhaps put off by negative propaganda about us. Why not make it a big ‘C’?
With that in mind I thought this article was of relevance. http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2011/03/hilary-benn-backs-nottingham-councils-refusal-to-publish-spending.html
Speaking as a former Tory party member & donor, sadly, I can think of a number of reasons why not !
However, failure to do more than cosmetically tinker with the quangocracy would be a starting point ! Instead of having a plan ready to immediately dismiss openly labour supporting individuals like suzy leather, who take hundreds of thousands of pounds of tax payers money in fees and expenses per year, they ditherered and are now paying the price.
As the clique running the party and their advisors move further from the grass roots membership, vainly chasing some mythical floating centerist voter, so the falling membership of the Tory party will continue and the number voting for them through gritted teeth will also decline.
“Why not join the Conservative Party? ”
Because in the same way that this blog entry shows that the Libertarian Party is not Libertarian, the Conservative Party is no longer conservative. You should be called the Social Democratic Party. And the Labour Party is not socialist anymore so that ought to be scrapped as a non-entity as well. Next thing I know is UKIP will stop supporting the notion of withdrawal from the EU and there’ll be no party with principles left to vote for.
“Why not join the Conservative Party? We are for personal freedom (balanced by responsibility), equality, openness and limited state intervention…”
This is one of the most wildly optimistic (little bit of euphemism there) things I’ve seen in ages. Even for Tory loyalists, such as those who haunt ConHome to which you link, to anyone remotely of a libertarian disposition, to anyone who spent years voting Tory but came to realise the utter futility of that Party in terms of preserving liberty, your suggestion is not merely improbable but insulting. The Tories represent “limited State intervention”? Pull the other one: even under Thatcher, State spending as a proportion of GDP fell only by a very few percentage points from something like 43% to 39%; currently it’s somewhere north of 50%, and under a Tory-led coalition State spending last year increased by 5.1% and continues to increase by billions…You should be in sales – double glazing or used cars come to mind. The Conservative Party are quislings, lying to the public about “cuts”, conning their traditional supporters, selling England down the river to the EU.
Dunno about Ken or Anna but:
I support electoral reform
I am a republican
I am not a nationalist
I don’t support the NHS
I am opposed to Tory immigration quotas.
I don’t support the military action in Libya or the Afghan war.
I am opposed to all overseas development aid let alone creating a law to enforce 0.7% of GDP being given to keep dictators in power.
I could go on for ages.
I would obviously be at home in the Conservative Party.
Ho ho ho.
How do you square being libertarian with opposition to immigration quotas? Libertarian policies would be immediately subverted if one allowed in all and sundry who flocked here to take advantage of our libertarian society; and I’m a nationalist too, since I revere and respect Englishness – I detest those who would wish to swamp our culture beneath a wave of aliens.
Just appeared on the LPUK site from Nic Coome that although he told me and others that he had resigned from the NCC and as a Party member he has just closed the Party down with the Electoral Commission.
Very interesting state of affairs.
Into whose custody will the Party accounts and all records now be placed?
Fawthrop is blocking that. Bravo to him.
Silly question, but if the members conducting the inquiry had such faith in their leader why did they all suddenly abandon ship?. I must admit to finding this whole situation disturbing. The internet knows that I am prone to throwing a shit fit and attacking Anna Raccoon as and when my mood sees fit but that is blog to blog.
From what I have read so far, it would appear that Anna Raccoon raised some valid concerns, regarding Andrew Withers, LPUK,
LPUK respomded MummyLongLegs style (long on vocals short on facts).
Regardless of my spats with Anna *waves* LPUK was the party I stuck my pin in. Right up until the minute I realised that Andrew Withers was a cunt.
My opinion of him has nothing to do with French cheese, perverted mental pals or Mandelson. It has to do with the fact that as an elected leader of a political party he took the piss out of the Libertarian Members by taking their membership fees as his own pocket money. As it stands there is no proof that Withers stole that money, there is no proof at all, because Withers won’t cough up the accounts, and those gifted the chance to catch the fucker out quit.
In short LPUK is fucked. And so it should be.
Any political party that claims the be Libertarian but settles for a fucking whitewash when the shit comes down deserves nothing more than to disappear up it’s own arse.
As you were.
Mummy x
An excellent summation. And nice to see you back, if only briefly
+1
“If your party’s gross income or total expenditure was less than £25,000 in the last financial year then you must submit quarterly reports, an annual
statement of accounts and campaign expenditure reports for the financial year in which you deregister. ”
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/electoral_commission_pdf_file/0016/13534/form-rp9.pdf
I couldn’t hold my tongue any longer –
http://tinyurl.com/6dr3j2w
I guess Nic Coome shutting down the party without approval from any of the members says it all really.
Mummy x.
A sad day for the political party LPUK, but a good day for Libertarians.
If there is genuine suspicion of fraud, isn’t it time to formally involve the Police?
Billy Blofeld
Unfortunately the returns that the Treasurer must make to the Electoral Commission are not detailed enough and they are not required to be audited.
However, it will be interesting how John Watson, the last registered Treasurer, will be able to make a return when Andrew Withers has never given him all the information he needs.
So is there a reason why this hasnt been reported to the police?
Is it not a criminal matter (fraud, theft?). As an outsider to all this, the fact this hasnt been reported seems a little strange (unless it is a civil matter, then I understand what a waste of time that would be).
@ Conservative guy *We have abolished lots of quangoes *
Yes, but you didnt abolish their functions, meaning you actually achieved zilch. You havent really done anything in terms of abolishing labours mess of bad laws, regs, etc, other than the token scrapping of ID cards.
And that’s exactly what I expeted of the modern cons, and why I didnt vote for them any more than I would vote for labour or libs.
I have to say that Gildas’ advice seems to be the best, sever all connection with these people (not aimed at the author of the topic!). Attempts to get the return of money owed will just lead to a lot of frustrating battles and dirty tactics from those owing the money, and there’s no guarantee that the funds are still available. Some good has come out of it, the publicity means that others won’t become victims.
On a lighter note, I remember my grandmother telling me that during her lifetime the risk was from rogues trying to con people on the doorstep. Her remedy was an ornate Edwardian policeman’s helmet (from her uncle) on the hat-rack near the front door. “Sorry, wrong house” was often heard after opening the door…
Quick clarification, I remember Anna saying that any money recovered wouldn’t go to her personally.I’d still weigh up the hassle of trying to get redress against the wish to see justice done, but I’d make a crap lawyer or justice enforcer.
No, Livewire, you are correct – my debt was personal and certainly not the responsibility of the party.
My as well throw my two cents into the conversation as an ex-member
http://outspokenrabbit.blogspot.com/2011/05/why-word-libertarians-and-parties-dont.html
I’ve picked up the ‘stalking’ claim with the Town Clerk in Clevedon and it will be fascinating to see if she replies. As Anna says, her broomstick must be in good working order!!
Credit to Ken for stading up and being counted and as a member of the North West branch he refers to, we have a glimmer of getting somewhere on this as long as Malcolm is around. Now the party has been disbanded it’s a case of what the different factions within it want to do next.
As I say on my blog, the key lesson from all this has to be creating an instinctively liberal identity so people like Withers cannot feel at home in such a party in the future. Sympatyhy to all those who lost substantial amounts of money.
Daz
What ever became of The Libertarian Alliance, http://www.libertarian.co.uk? the last news post was June 2010.
I met Nic at the Rally against Debt – he seemed on the ball and willing & able to sort out LPUK’s problems. I hope so.
But for now, I’ve cancelled my Standing Order payment, certainly until AW is no longer associated with the group.
Nic Coome was present? I’m not convinced. You may have met Max.
The Libertarian Alliance is alive and well. See http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/ for recent updates.
If I were a policeman (And as the moniker suggests, I’m not!), detailed to investigate the possible theft of a small political party’s funds, I’d ask the following questions;
1) From where did the party obtain it’s funds, and for what purposes did it use them? Where are the membership records, the records of their subs payments, the party accounts and receipts to support the expenditures shown on the accounts?
2) Who has access to the party’s funds, and what are the mechanisms by which financial matters are controlled?
3) Did the subscription-paying members obtain the benefits they were promised?
As others have said, it would seem that there is reason to suspect that one or more persons may have used party funds for improper purposes; further investigation would seem necessary.
I make these comments as a disinterested (old sense of the word) bystander; I am not and have never been a member of any political party.
Golden Circle donors were supposed to be donating to a fund reserved for full-time staff salaries and expenses related to the permanent office. I rather suspect my own £25 donation went on custard creams instead.
Are there any other Golden Circle donors I wonder? The target for that project was £3000pcm.
I bet it was……
P.S. I may be unduly suspicious, but shutting the party down, without first consulting the membership, looks a little odd; almost as if some people are trying to walk away from a situation and deny any responsibility.
Malcolm Saunders and others should perhaps ask Plod’s advice in the very near future.
“…….. shutting the party down …….almost as if some people are trying to walk away from a situation and ……..”
Hope no-one asks what’s happened to residual funds?
Perhaps a series of informal meetings to discuss the possibility of a new libertarian party evolving away from corruption and fraud would be appropriate?
Well, speaking for myself.
*If* it is a crime to steal party funds (rather than a civil matter).
I wouldnt touch any party that had any of the old people involved, if they didnt report it to the police, why would you not report a crime (the ole, what are you trying to hide rubbish)?
I will making response to some of these half truths in the next few days.
And the other ‘half truths’? Will you be moving quickly on?
grabs *popcorn*
Hey, that was my popcorn…..
Anna is stalking Withers is she? Right.
It’s not Anna he needs to worry about turning up at his doorstep right now….
If I call Withers an idiot in public will he have me arrested for revealing state secrets?
Yes, thanks Ken. It’s a huge disappointment, but the dog was obviously very ill and needed putting down. No doubt there will be some who will refuse to accept this, but that’s their choice.
Thanks to Anna too, it couldn’t have been easy to take this particular pooch to the vet, but it was the kindest thing to do. Some will hate you for it. The more well balanced among us understand entirely why you did it.
Ken thank you for posting on here.
I started off readng Chris Mounsey’s excellent kitchen blog and the links from there led me to a lot of blogs including this one and through out I began to develop an understanding of where I stood politically after much searching and it was Libertarian, I eventually joined the party and renewed my subscription this year before Anna’s blogpost.
I have to say that the information that comes down to party members from the “inner circle” is non existent and other than the request to renew my membership in January followed up by another email I think in February the only other communication I have had is the recent email from Nic about the investigation into Anna’s accusations.
Due to work commitments I have been unable to get as involved in the party as I would have liked however after all this business, I am not sure what the way forward should be.
I believe all current members should have the parties accounts emailed to them for examination and discussion, there are many of us who have have the ability to do this and would be happy to look at them we then need to find a way forward that draws a line under the past and moves us forward in a more positive way.
Can we arrange a get together for those of us who want to still campaign and push for a libertarian future? It would need to be somewhere central so that as many people as possible can get there and we need to have plenty of notice so that we can get time of from our employers.
Reading the comments on this blog was the first that I heard that certain parties had tried to de-register the party, this is wrong and should only be done with the permission of the majority of party members, I support Simon in his delaying tactics nad am happy to supporty Max if he has the right ideas going forwardm however I do not know what these ideas are so can not comment at the moment.
The sooner we start from scratch the bettter, I will help how ever I can to ensure we come out of this stronger and more focussed.
It reminds me of a corruption investigation. A couple of main players steal frequently, they ensnare a few others by including them in the occasional theft. Thus when the investigation occurs everyone is involved in the cover up and the truth is lost while they all try to block investigation and paperwork disappears.
As an outsider with no involvement with the Libertarian Party my instinct points squarely at the actions post allegation. These are not the moves of innocent people trying to clear their names nor clarify a position.
These are the actions of thieving wankers trying to muddy the waters and stop anyone PROVING they are the thieving wankers everyone suspects and their actions indicate they are.
I propose all of those involved immediately apply for posts with the Labour Party/Trade Union as you are obviously well suited for the post.
Why not aim higher? The EU never have to worry about getting their accounts seen to…
The party doesn’t have to die. That’s just silly. It needs a complete renewal, though. This should be done at the SGM that’s soon to be held. Everything can be put on the table then. Max’s preliminary plan for a change in the party structure (which I’ve seen) are one of the things that will be put forward, for example. The ideas for the website are good too.
If you’d been with the LPUK group at the Rally Against Debt, you would have seen how friendly, dedicated and enthusiastic we all were for the party and very much willing to see a genuine change as it moves forward. I sortof accused TNL of being involved in one great big circle jerk, I was half joking, but it really is turning into that. Can we all take a step back and try to do what is best for the party already? No player is bigger than the club (love the sporting metaphor)
In short, show the spirit that was present when we met up at the Rally.
What about all the money lost by the various donors over the years?
This is like watching a car-crash in slow motion.
I have immense respect for Anna, for speaking out.
Also a lot of sympathy for those who are trying to rescue something from the wreckage. But I think you’ll have to start from scratch. This is a real mess.
Correct.
Oh dear. Oddly, as an occasional contributor to Anna’s site, I am not a Libertarian as such. I am not even sure I am that political. I just like free spirited people. Is a Libertarian Party a contradiction in terms? Maybe. I think it is sad but maybe inevitable that matters should turn out this way
There was never a proper party in the first place, just a bunch of chancers trying to make a name for themselves. Unfortunately a lot of genuine people were sucked in.
Saul
perhaps we can rid the party of the channcers and see if we can get it roght this time. where do you start though?
An online accounts system for all too see, names redacted perhaps, minutes of NCC meetings sent to all members I would be willing to type and post. I am sure there aremnany transferle skills in thr partythat would be a lot more positive in the way it has been run so far.
I hav Slype so perhaps regualar on line conferene callsforthose times when we can not arraaange or get to a meeting,
@AJ the party accepts blog posts at lpukblog@gmail.com, and they are generally posted fatser if accompanied with a square cropped image t0 illustrate it.
Guthrum the mighty Viking warrior king worked his drycraeft and whooomf!
Your watch has vanished and the Party’s over.
Can I thank the LPUK NCC for booting me out now. I did donate a reasonable amount of money and did have a standing order set up at one point. I cancelled this because I wasn’t seeing evidence of it being put to use. The next contribution I made, was to pay to get a decent leaflet designed with collaboration of the members. That never got used.
I’m not bitter though. I took a gamble on a bunch of people I never really knew, because that was a better proposition to the LibLabCon. The reason I got booted out of course, was due to the fact I got impatient and decided to help UKIP too in my area, as they actually had presence here.
Because of that, I actually am not convinced that my money was stolen. People who steal, don’t tend to help the victim lock their house.
Just my opinion of course, but to all the people who want to fight for freedom still, I say you keep it up, using whatever vehicle you think is best. I’ve chose UKIP, because I realise I have to work with others to try and pull our society back in the direction I want it to go. If you feel you can achieve more as a lone wolf, or in other parties; then I say go for it!
The party I belong too doesn’t define me. I am happy to work with anyone who is fighting for more freedom in this country, even if it isn’t the same amount as I would like!
Very much my own position, though I haven’t got around to joining UKIP yet. Especially given the absurd, squalid corruption detailed here, spending much time with the LPUK appears to be time wasted; UKIP might have a chance of actually getting somewhere. There are few things that would be more gratifying than for UKIP to give a few Lib/Lab/Con MPs a bloody nose, and their sneering media collaborators too.
@Matt Andrew has now attempted to knock the house down, so I’ve little cause for restraint in dawdling along thoughtfully towards my own conclusion.
I’ve never been a member of a political party and possibly never will be, but through one reason or another have affiliated myself with the libertarian party and have seen the recent events unfold. It would seem that the hard work of so many has been marred by a few individuals surrounded by the cunt on high AW. I first thought something was up when Cable and Mandelson had issues with AW and at first I though maybe he is the one to lead the LPUK as he’s handling some ‘big dogs’ in the political world but then I wondered why names such as those would bother with all the ‘real’ work they had to do.
After AR’s blogpost which was passionately written came out I realised that there was probably only one side to this story…sadly (although there has been no evidence because AW won’t release the figures) I was right. Now the LPUK appears to be in disarray, and after the release of the improved website it seems to be for nothing.
Plans for the future provided the party carries on:-
Max, Ken and Malcolm take over as a joint party Head with Max concentrating on ideals, Ken for Communications, media etc and Max to keep everyone in check which he has done superfluously so far. I’d see a new treasurer who had to submit all the party accounts every month with names blocked out whatever to get around DPA.
I think this would lead to a strong backbone of the party to maybe lead for 2 years and then once they had done everything they could in that time to help promote the party and gain some ground in forgetting Coon-gate, then members would elect then who they wanted to see in each position.
Another idea would be to lose the name and start up under a different name as a political focus group rather than a party, much like Liberty under Chakrabati, who have helped the debate on many major issues and campaigned for change. Although a bit more anarchic; The 1984 stunt and more in that vein.
Either way I think for the moment scrap fees for members for two years and use the free resources available. the blog, skype conference calls, and meetings within the smaller factions until members feel they can trust you again.
{ 2 trackbacks }