Sunday, 18 April 2010

#961* - UKIP Falls Foul of The Law Again - Those Who Hold The Courts In Contempt ......

#961* - UKIP Falls Foul of The Law Again - Those Who Hold The Courts In Contempt ......

Clean EUkip up NOW & make UKIP electable!

The corruption of some of EUkip’s leadership, their anti UKIP claque & the NEC is what gives the remaining 10% a bad name!

UKIP Falls Foul of The Law Again - Those Who Hold The Courts In Contempt Do NOT Make Sound Civil Servants or Elected Politicians In Office!
Now in flagrant contempt of British Courts, having acted as agent for UKIP, now with their aid defaults on his debts and with UKIP shelters behind the skirts of EUropa bringing UKIP into disrepute, whilst UKIP fails to act with integrity or honourably.

We note also the lies of Andrew Smith & Nigel Farage in their dealings with the Courts who found them guilty of deliberate breech of electoral law and ordered forfeiture of illegal donations which in contempt of British law they took no steps to legitimise on 67 occasions leading to a Guilty verdict and a debt estimated by Nigel Farage at £3/4 Million.

On the facts presented by The Sunday Times and The Electoral Commission one is forced to question whether Malcolm Lord Pearson the titular leader of UKIP is a fool by nature, a fool by nurture or merely an arrogant pompous ass who does not believe that the law pertains to people like him - None of the above is a pleasant conclusion to reach when this weak, duplicitous and dithering man stirs the political pot with the silver spoon he inherited, in disregard for honour, the law or integrity.

Electoral Commission may investigate donation

UKIP leader Lord Pearson is facing further questions over a controversial £80,000 donation given to his party by an unincorporated association which he also runs.

Pearson admitted this month that the money came from Patrick Barbour, a former Tory donor, who gave £100,000 to the UKIP boss’s unincorporated association Global Britain.

Pearson told The Sunday Times that although Barbour had not attached strings to his donation to Global Britain, he had made it clear he would be “happy” if most of it went to UKIP. In May last year, weeks after Barbour’s donation, Pearson then passed on £80,000 of the money to UKIP just in time for the Euro elections.

Electoral law states that donations to political parties of more than £7,500 must be declared and cannot be made anonymously. If “middle men” agents are involved they must tell the parties who the original donor is so that his or her name is declared to, and published by, the Electoral Commission.

Two weeks ago Pearson was caught offering an undercover Sunday Times reporter the use of Global Britain to channel a £25,000 anonymous ‘donation’ to UKIP. He also admitted that last year he had kept an £80,000 donation anonymous when they “passed on £80,000 from one person” with “no problems”.

When confronted he insisted that he had informed the Electoral Commission that the donation had actually come from a single “bona fide” person and the Commission had “cleared” it. He revealed Barbour’s identity, saying he had understood he had previously wanted to keep his identity secret. Barbour said he had left it up to Global Britain as to how the money was used.
However, the Commission last week denied having been told that the money did not originate from Global Britain. It has now placed the £80,000 donation under review and may launch a full investigation.

An Electoral Commission spokeswoman said: “UKIP told us that the donation came from Global Britain and if they had said that was an attempt to hide a donor we would have said that is against the rules. We registered it as from Global Britain because that’s where we were told it came from.”

“It is up to the parties to investigate what the source is of donations and pass on the information to us and it is their responsibility to ensure that it is not an attempt to hide a donor.”

At the same time that Pearson offered to channel a £25,000 donation using Global Britain, Stuart Agnew, a UKIP MEP, also told an undercover reporter a number of ways to avoid having a donor’s name disclosed to the Electoral Commission.

He said the real donor could make loans, or gifts, to another person who could then pass on the money in their name instead.
Agnew also told the undercover reporter that he was part paying the salary of an assistant — Peter Reeve, who is also a UKIP regional organiser — through his taxpayer-funded assistants’ allowance even though the work he did for him was “virtually none”.

This, Agnew said, was “strictly illegal” since EU funds should not be used for party political work. Reeve later said Agnew had got it wrong and he only worked for UKIP “in his spare time”.

Diana Wallis, a Lib Dem MEP who is a vice president of the European parliament, has written to the EU president calling for an inquiry into Agnew’s admission.

 Greg Lance-Watkins wrote:

It does seem unwise to keep insulting journalists and even those that votED for UKIP in the past. There is little justification for voting into governance those who flout the Courts and Common Law of Britain and use the skirts of EUropa as a shelter from their liabilities.
I would suggest Mr. Talbot reads the law before he opines upon it as overly complicated as it is it is clear that The £80K & the £100K Pearson laundered to anonymity was against electoral law.
Ignorance of the law is a poor pleading from a law maker in the House of Lords & MEPs who make some 80% of British law!
Regards, Greg L-W.
A UKIP supporter who abhors their slide to the gutter and contempt for law and justice!
Joseph Walsh wrote:
Mr Talbot, are you sure about the change in rules?

I have Google'd anc checked but find no mention, or sanction for funds being handled this way.

It does seem highly dodgy that the EC announced to the global media an investigation into BNP accounts from two years ago, and now this "investigation" into UKIP.

Perhaps you are right, the media or Government are gerry mandering the campaign, but as i stated, i can find no evidence to support the UKIP actions.

Can we trust any of the main parties?

April 18, 2010 10:50 AM BST on

Vernon Talbot wrote:
It seems Foggo has been duped this time by his old colleague GLW. If he had bothered to check his facts, he would have found out that ElComm changed the rules AFTER this incident took place - so at the time, it was perfectly legal. I am sure his editor will be speaking to him - and I am sure the Times legal team will also want a word. I am surprised that his editor actually allowed him to run with this story. It seems to me that Foggo is on a 'personal' mission against UKIP.....maybe it is because their campaign is making cut-through to the electorate which is getting right up his nose. Drop it Foggo and vote UKIP on May 6th
April 18, 2010 10:23 AM BST on

To view the original article in The Times CLICK HERE

INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance


Reclaim YOUR Future

Write Upon Your Ballot Paper at EVERY election:

IF You Have No INDEPENDENT Leave-the-EU Alliance Candidate

to Reclaim YOUR Future

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...