Open letter on the Ind Dem group
To All South West Members
My fellow SW MEP Roger Knapman has asked you to vote on whether or not he should leave the Ind Dem group, enclosing a "summary of the arguments". Many of you have commented that this seemed to give only the negative side of a complex subject and asked whether they could be given the positive side. This I do below.
First, though, a personal remark if I may. I have always tried to give my loyal support to each of UKIP’s leaders since I joined the party in 1996. Notably I gave Roger my full backing over his stand against Kilroy-Silk’s brazen attempt to take over the leadership and was more than happy with the way he ran the party. Equally, I am extremely happy with the way that Nigel Farage is running the party and, in particular, with his leadership of the UKIP MEPs whilst we are in Brussels and Strasbourg. His knowledge of the workings of the European Parliamentary system is extensive.
Now to the actual issues raised:
To start, I believe that it would be almost impossible to operate in the E.P. without being a member of a group. Our staff in Brussels - researchers and assistants - are employed by the group and work as a team. Without them we would have no voting lists prepared - and heaven help us if we inadvertently vote the wrong way! Research for articles that we submit to the British press is done for us by these staff members, as well as many other mundane chores.
Another advantage of group membership, with Nigel as "co-president", is the right for UKIP to claim speaking time, when we supply virtually the only opposing voice within the Parliament (observed by the world’s press) on every subject that crops up. A sublime example, that I recall with some pleasure, was the occasion when it enabled Nigel to confront Tony Blair after the UK’s six-month presidency, causing Blair - for the only time that I can remember - to completely lose his temper. No-one else dared to confront him as Nigel did - and all of UKIP’s MEPs were there (occupying the whole of the front row - much to Blair’s dismay) to witness the event. That is far from being an isolated example, facilitated solely because of our group membership. That is a lot better than our usual 60 or 90 second time allowance, as individuals. We are in a battle for the hearts and minds of people and it would be tragic to sacrifice such opportunities.
Next is the question of finance. A group does have access to funding in excess of an individual MEP. Although operated under strict conditions, this was how the recent "Remote Control" DVD and, in the past, several newspaper campaigns were financed. This however is a minor point compared to the issue of how MEPs' resources are used. Already MEPs have control of substantial office expenses, but the research budgets are pooled for our joint benefit. Apart from economies of scale, there is also the question of transparency. Would it be in the interests of UKIP for individual MEPs to spend this as they saw fit and would that give rise to criticism as to how they spent the considerable sums involved? Apart from Roger, the UKIP MEPs are quite happy for UKIP to benefit as a party. Would it be a good thing for us all to do our own thing or might this risk bad publicity?
Next, how are UKIP perceived on the Continent? I can assure you that nobody in the European Parliament has any doubts at all about UKIP’s position - demanding Britain's withdrawal from the EU. We make it abundantly clear every time we speak. No UKIP MEP has ever suggested that we should settle for reforming the EU.
Do we have an alternative to the Ind Dem group? We would not want to sit in the non-aligned group along with Mussolini and Le Pen and candidly we are unlikely to ever find enough "outers" to form a group, so we have to work with people who take a different view to us on that issue. On the great issue of the day, the EU constitution, all but one of us - Blokland - are totally opposed to it. Using the strength of our combined numbers we were able to play our part in the French referendum. Now we are doing the same in Ireland, the only country being given a chance to have their say on the treaty.
What about concentrating efforts in UK as opposed to the E.P.? Let's look at this factually. My time at the parliament is limited to 24 nights per year in Strasbourg and about 18 nights in Brussels. The rest of the time I attend meetings in UK, whenever and wherever I am invited, diary permitting. By attending the E.P. on those few occasions I receive a full salary and expenses, from which UKIP benefits enormously. I believe we have got the balance right. We were elected to go to the E.P. by 2.67 million voters "to get Britain out of the EU". So we went to Brussels and took up our seats. Also, by attending those very boring committee meetings, we get information that is unavailable elsewhere and ammunition to present to those numerous UK meetings that we attend.
There are many other functions that we perform, not least in organising demos within the parliamentary chamber itself, which really upsets the Eurocrats! I personally think that the UKIP MEPs do a damned good job, under great stress, and trust Nigel to lead us forward successfully, as Roger did during his term of office. I also think that we are much more effective as part of a group, and at the same time counter the usual accusations of being isolationist little Englanders.
Graham Booth MEP

Open letter to Poole councillors
Sir,
To those Councillors who knew of and approved the plan to use Stasi tactics to spy on residents, I have this to say; who the hell do you think you are?
What sort of people do you think the British are and do you seriously imagine that we will put up with this sort of police state?
To those Councillors who knew of and disapproved of this plan, but failed to stop it being put into effect; why did you not blow the whistle before now and get it stopped?
To those Councillors who did not know of this plan until it had been put into effect and hit the headlines; well now you do, and we must expect you to condemn what has been done.
I trust that you and the local media will make damn sure that the electors of Poole know the councillors responsible and fire them from public office!
Idris Francis

Take a hike?
Sir,
I was both astonished and disgusted to read of the planned 36% pay rise for Bournemouth Borough Council Cabinet members. All any councillor should receive is an attendance allowance to cover loss of earnings plus any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. Apparently one Cabinet member will receive around £36,000 per annum. Very few council employees earn anywhere near this, and council tax payers, (many of whom cannot afford it), are facing a 4.9% hike. This is grossly unfair and should be stopped!
Conservative councillors are no less wasteful of public money than the Liberal Democrats or Labour, especially when it comes to spending it on themselves!
Yours faithfully,
Philip Glover
UKIP PPC for Bournemouth West

Open letter to the leader of the Liberal Democrats
Mr Nick Clegg MP, 85 Nethergreen Road, Sheffield, S11 7EH
Dear Mr Clegg,
You probably recall, when Brown assumed office, that he said he was going to restore trust and respond to the people. We all sighed with relief that the days of lies and spin were over.
Then the next day Brown told the country that the new Reform Treaty was not the same as the rejected Constitution, and he would not allow a referendum. All trust in him vanished under this gross deceit; he was exposed as a blatant liar.
I see you have learned from his mistake and can repeat it perfectly: except that your attempt to deceive is a bit more shifty.
Shame on you and all who sail under you.
Yours sincerely
Rollo Reid, UKIP Prospective Parliamentary candidate for Christchurch

Binding conventions
What binds together the peoples of the Anglosphere is of course a shared language and history, but also, crucially, shared values such as a unique attachment to individual freedom and the concept of limited State power.
These are expressed in actual legal safeguards against arbitrary imprisonment and wrongful convictions, which in turn underpin our essential political freedom.
Habeas Corpus and Trial by Independent Jury are enjoyed ONLY in the English-speaking nations of the world. This fact is not well-known.
In continental Europe everyone's freedom rests in the lap of unaccountable career judiciaries, who decide verdicts and can order imprisonments lasting many months on no evidence. The continental systems follow the pattern laid down 200 years ago by Napoleon with his codes.
Comparative criminal procedure is alas not studied in any university in Britain, so few are aware of the radical differences between our system and theirs.
Few in Britain are also aware of the existence of the EU Commission's plan to set up a single criminal code for all Europe, called Corpus Juris, which will scrap our unique legal safeguards and impose an alien system on us.
Mr O'Sullivan wonders why the British are lukewarm about the Anglo-sphere, well the reason is surely because our politicians are wedded to the EU project, and as Britain is absorbed into a different system by the EU, we will in fact be removed from the Anglo-sphere.
The new Treaty signed in Lisbon will transfer competence on Justice & Home Affairs to Brussels, and so will enable the EU to station the Eurogendarmerie - its very own multi-national riot-police battalions - on our soil. They are already established and training in Vicenza, Italy, and can be viewed on their own official website, www.eurogendfor.eu . When asked in the Commons on 11th December by Bob Spink MP, our Foreign Secretary Mr Miliband refused to give an assurance that the Eurogendarmerie will never be allowed to enter the UK, and he confirmed that it could indeed enter, with just the consent of the government of the day (Hansard, col 188). What he did not say is that once they have entered, they will not obey any order by the British authorities to leave, for the only authority they acknowledge is the supreme authority in Brussels.
This is why the new Treaty will make the whole EU project irreversible, and it is why the new treaty must, absolutely must, be stopped.
Torquil Dick-Erikson, Rome, Italy

Open letter to Daniel Hannan
Dear Dan
I fully intended to be there, but had to deal with something urgently. Yes, I know this rally was urgent, but read on. If the country saw Cameron pull out of the EPP, there would have been many more people there. Good faith and all that! He is a poor leader, who, for all his posturing about a referendum has not fooled me, or people like me. He did not turn up to the Pro Referendum Rally because HE DOES NOT WANT US TO WIN IT. None of his closest allies bothered either - except to con us - again. The public would have known if he had been there. Cameron is representing the situation so far with the EU as a fait accompli, except for the well covered claims of 'so far and no further'. Didn't believe him before he became leader, and I don't believe him now. If he wanted to help make a real impact, Cameron would have 'hauled ass' there and ensured the media came too.
It's because the British people do not believe his message about the EU! He may be winning the polls again, but we all know he never intended to pull out of the EPP. I knew that and I wasn't even an MP. Now he will be able to hold his hands up after a swift bit of manipulation and proclaim that none of this was his fault! So, you feel alone Dan? We all do when there is no one to lead us out. Some people may indeed say, why come out and shout? Shout at whom? Cameron, Brown etc,. Aren't they supposed to be the leaders of our main parties? Wasn't Cameron, of all people the one who should have been on the platform? No. He was probably off somewhere dreaming up more ecofreakery and laughing at all the people who are working to keep this country free - whether we could attend or not. You all backed the wrong horse when you stayed in Cameron's' team, Dan. No offence.
Sincere wishes
Mandy Worrall

Why you should vote
Dear Sirs,
I am very proud to announce that I have been selected as the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate on behalf of the United Kingdom Independence Party in the Tiverton and Honiton Constituency in the event of a general election.
My reasons for standing are numerous and can be summarised as follows:
Two golden rules of our constitution are that parliament cannot bind its successors or subject itself to a higher authority. What this means is that one parliament cannot dictate to a subsequent parliament that it is not permitted to change laws it has passed and, parliament must not hand control of the laws it passes to another party. These principles ensure our growth, our democracy and our very freedom. Need I say more concerning our membership of a megalomaniac, corrupt and bureaucratic super state called the EU?
In my own international dealings, working as a lawyer in International Tax Planning, I have seen the EU slowly chipping away at our international finance industry by imposing stringent regulatory requirements, tax harmonisation and eroding confidentiality. Two thirds of the World’s money is offshore, most controlled by British banks (this nations biggest single earner is the City), do you begin to feel suspicious that the EU mandarins would like a share of our finance industry?
I also like the idea that we control our own foreign policy, immigration, taxation, and employment laws and do not have to deal with a flood of directives, which often amount to pure drivel. This is about to get worse, it is becoming increasingly accepted that the EU Treaty is a re-hash of the EU Constitution with many words and phrases simply called by another name. It will definitely increase the EU’s powers to control us, is a potential disaster for this country and our current Prime Minister does not seem to wish to allow us to debate the issue.
It would be very good for our cause if everyone in this country woke up in the morning and realised “Today 17.5% of most of what I spend will be paid to a third party who may give me a little back, or may give a bit to others, and for the privilege of this I will also lose the right to choose”. This is in effect what the EU does, V.A.T. is paid to the EU and the EU is our ultimate authority with their laws being superior to our national laws.
If the 40% of you who do not vote, probably due to a sense of disillusionment concerning the way this country was run and lack of real choice, came out and exercised your right to vote, you would be assured of some real changes in this country. I believe UKIP is the new way forward for our nation.
Yours faithfully,
Paul Kenny
P.P.C. UKIP Tiverton and Honiton Constituency

Taxpayers get more bungs for their buck
Sir,
Caught between a northern rock and a very hard place the taxpayers are now expected to provide surety to cover bad business decisions by the banks as well as bribe local councils to the tune of half a billion pounds and override local democracy to cram in more houses in line with New Labour’s agenda.
Labour have their own style of Mugabe-nomics and will be lining their pockets for the second time via ‘modernisation’ of the unions, and to keep the payroll vote onside have engineered a public pension’s time-bomb just waiting to go off.
Keeping the E.U. sweet now costs every man woman and child over £843 net per year and the Olympics looks like it will be on the never never for a very long time.
Any need to ask where the buck will stop for all of this?
Rod Trelease,
Chairman UKIP Bournemouth West

Media Coverage - Don't mention the UKIP!
Dear Reader,
Yesterday I published my latest update, How Much Does the EU Cost Britain? This was through the Bruges Group as last year their help gained coverage in the national press. If you have seen today’s press you will have seen that the report gained some coverage in the Daily Mail, the Telegraph and the Sun. But there was no mention of me as the author or UKIP. It was just presented as research by the Bruges Group. My new figure of £1,000 per minute for every person in the UK was even quoted in the leader column of the Mail. This proves beyond any reasonable doubt that there is an embargo on mentioning anything positive about UKIP in the national press. They have used UKIP supplied stories and material on many occasions without mentioning where it came from. I really wonder what we have to do to get coverage. My report is the result of months of research and I have spent the whole summer working on this and writing policy documents, and although the press are happy to use the figures they won’t give us credit for the work. We do not have a free or fair press and our members need to realise what we are up against. Please be aware of that when the MEPs are slagged-off on the internet.
Regards,
Gerard Batten, UKIP MEP London

Blofeld Brown and the Quango
Sir,
I've just been to a meeting at County Hall in Exeter. It was spellbinding. You should have come. We were watching the unelected South West Regional Assembly: faceless, grey paper-pushers, arrogant yet complacent. The UK Independence Party has fought them for years. But at this meeting, something was different. The delegates were shocked. Stunned. "Why?" I hear you ask. I'll tell you. One day earlier Gordon Brown had poured a pot of cold tea all over their bonfire, announcing that expensive quangoes like the regional assembly would be abolished. And now the delegates were panicking. Headless chicken time. Like ferrets in a sack, they turned on each other. "Where is the Minister for the South West?" they demanded. "Why isn't he here?" But of newly promoted Ben Bradshaw, there was no sign. Bigger fish to fry. Another delegate briefly cheered them up: "The Government cannot just shut down this assembly." At this point in London, Gordon Brown pressed a button and the Exeter delegate's chair dropped him into a tank of barracuda in the cellar. There was brief splashing, then into the silence a dour voice intoned: "I'm Prime Minister laddie. Wi a mandate. Which is more than this chamber o'hot air has ever had! The lot of ye are history!" A third perspiring delegate, loosening his collar, mentioned finance: "We in the Communities Parish Organisation demand that our original financial investment appears separately in the accounts of the SWRA". Translated this means: "How much of our cash is trapped inside this crock of wotsit, and how do we get it out before the fat lady sings?" Graham Booth UKIP MEP used his allotted three minutes on the platform to wish the SWRA a happy retirement, eliciting good-natured laughter and a round of applause from the public gallery. He also reminded each member of the assembly that in all probability they will be incurring personal liability for the £1m debt that would otherwise be paid by taxpayers. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Requiest in pace, oh SWRA, but you will not be missed.
Yours
David Challice

Re: Will the Lib-Dems sell out the Union?
Sir
Your Scottish Editor today (Daily Telegraph 5/4/2007), misses the underlying agenda by Blair and Brown which was set by John Major in 1992, when the Maastricht Treaty committed British Governments to delivering the project for regionalisation of the UK. The EU effectively depends on the regional structure to deliver it’s policy for Social and Economic Cohesion – the principal institutional pillar – via elected regional bodies.
Blair and Brown enthusiastically took up the baton in 1997 and immediately moved to “devolve” Scotland, Wales, NI and London – the “easy” bits- leaving the remaining 8 English regions to the talents of John Prescott, and we all know what happened to his “dream”.
The move for independence for Scotland is an ideal “Trojan Horse” to move the project forward, diverting attention and buying time whilst the failed English system of unelected regional assemblies is “morphed” into elected Unitary Authorities – these are already being branded as Unitary Authorities of the Cities and Regions.
Scottish “independence” is a oxymoronic chimera whilst Scotland is but a Region of the EU, and Alex Salmond needs to be challenged ruthlessly and continuously on that issue. He should be asked if he would be happy to see Holyrood as a mere regional debating chamber within the EU, as Kenneth Clarke famously declared he would be as regards Westminster.
Yours faithfully
Graham Booth MEP

Monnet’s quote is a total fabrication?
Sir,
I’m impressed that Richard Corbett has the time to monitor my website and to research the derivation of some of the material thereon, and am happy to be able to respond to his accusation that I, Tess Nash and UKIP fabricate quotations – nothing could be further from the truth.
The quotation referred to is:
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” 30/4/1952. I and many others, have accepted the veracity of this reference, but Richard Corbett has quite rightly drawn our attention to the fact that apparently, Monnet did not use these precise words in 1952, and for that mistake, I apologise and will ensure that the reference is not used again by UKIP.
However, the essence of the claimed quotation remains unaltered, the basis for which is the extensive treatment by Adrian Hilton of the loss of sovereignty involved in the pursuit of the Federal State of “Europe” by the founding fathers of the EU, including Monnet in the 1950s, in his book "The Principality and Power of Europe” published originally in 1997.
In this, Hilton records on page 84 (2nd edition):
“He (Monnet) believed in the Catholic vision that Europe should become a federal superstate, into which all ancient nations would be fused. “Fused” is the word he used in a communication dated 30/4/1952, and is wholly consistent with the language of EU treaties. For this to be achieved without the peoples of Europe realising what was happening, the plan was to be accomplished in successive steps. Each was to be disguised as having an economic purpose, but all, taken together, would inevitably lead to federation.”
The quotation that I and many others have used, is essentially identical in meaning and intent to the quotation above, and taken together with so many other references from that time – see below – I maintain that the modus operandi of the EU was to deliver a government by bureaucracy at the expense of member states sovereignty, before the people realised what was happening, especially in the UK.
Hilton continues to record Monnet’s description of the development of the project thus:
“After Europe’s coal and steel production were pooled, Europe’s atomic programmes were to be co-ordinated. Then would follow the CAP and the Common Market, the single currency and so on. Monnet related all of this to Heath on 6th May 1970. He said: “I told Heath how we had proceeded from the start, step by step, and how in this way we had gradually created the Common Market and today’s Europe, and that I was convinced we should proceed in the same manner.” “
The French Foreign Minister Claude Cheysson and later an EU Commissioner also later recorded: “The Europe of Maastricht could only have been created in the absence of democracy.”
There are literally hundreds of similar, referenced quotations testifying to the facts as reported by UKIP and many other independent people, and for Richard Corbett to pick on this one by Monnet is clearly an attempt at diversionary tactics. He would do far better to admit the horrible truth about the EU project which his current leader clearly understood, when he said in his election leaflet back in 1983: “We will negotiate withdrawal from the EEC which has drained our national resources and destroyed our jobs.”
And that was well before our daily, current contribution to the EU had risen to the £41 million per day (Govt Red Book) and he (Blair) relinquished last year a further £7 billion of our rebate without getting anything in return. UKIP certainly are not liars, as your readers can judge from the above, whilst all 3 of the major parties are definitely hypocrites who have betrayed our Sovereign country – a far greater crime than that laid at my door by Mr Corbett. The entire structure and development of the EU was deliberately un-democratic and designed to progress in a clandestine manner, and although it may well appeal to his socialist instincts, Mr Corbett should address that fundamental issue and face the truth. I would be happy to debate this issue with him at any suitable location – perhaps the Western Morning News could make suitable arrangements?
Yours faithfully
Graham Booth MEP

An open letter to the Sunday Telegraph
Dear Sir,
For the third consecutive Sunday you have carried a hatchet job on the UK Independence Party. These have consisted mainly of re-hashed old news, speculation and comments from a few disaffected members who have failed to get their own way or long term trouble-makers who clearly only joined the Party in order to disrupt it.
These articles clearly show how scared you, your Tory friends and the Establishment in general are of the increasing influence of UKIP (which you insist on misprinting as Ukip). They are a prime example of the old adage; 'If you can't counter the arguments, attack the advocates'.
Yes, we are rather amateurish in some ways. However, this is seen as an attraction by many people who are sick and tired of the slick professionalism of the old parties.
The simple fact is that the majority of the electorate who wish to leave the European Union have but one choice; the UK Independence Party.
Yours sincerely,
Mike Smith, Chairman, City of Gloucester Branch, UK Independence Party.

Local democracy is a fig leaf
Dear Sir,
Re: The Hampshire Court planning decision. "The police do not want this and the councillors do not want it but the planning inspector comes in from out of town and decides that this is what the town will get."
Once again, residents and their elected representatives are over-ridden by a planning decision of the South West Regional Assembly which decides, by way of its Regional Spatial Strategy, how our towns develop.
Regional Assemblies are not accountable to any tax-paying voters and, as is now blindingly obvious, Councillors have no power or influence over such decisions.
Anyone who doubts this should go to the Bournemouth Council offices and ask for a copy of the South East Dorset Strategy or visit the website via: http://tinyurl.com/2o3xmt
I Quote: Under new planning legislation (Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004), the statutory development plan upon which planning decisions are made consists of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) and the Local Development Framework (LDF)
The three main political parties deny that all this has anything to do with the European Union and yet the Council of European Municipalities and Regions website contradicts this stance:
.”The Council of European Municipalities and Regions reaffirms its strong support for an ambitious, pan-European cohesion and regional policy for the period 2007-2013, and for the proposed architecture for the future as set out by the European Commission in July 2004.”
Can there really be any question now that we are ultimately governed from Brussels and by the EU.
We would be better off out – let's govern ourselves once more.
Sincerely
Avril King

Green belt turning brown
Sir,
Is it any wonder that our Green Belt land is under threat? Since the European Union opened the borders of its member states to allow the free movement of people, it was no surprise to see hundreds of thousands of East Europeans heading for "soft touch" Britain.
I was one of the only three British MEPs (out of 78) who voted against enlargement. We now have 8,000 Poles living in Torbay, and our local paper is providing a weekly Polish column to make them feel at home. We do not need immigrants to fill our job vacancies - we have over 1.5 million of our own unemployed people here in Britain.
If our "high tax plus compensating benefits" system is discouraging people from working, we must change the system. It won't take immigrants long to spot the deliberate mistake and jump on to this "benefit culture" bandwagon themselves. At a public meeting, arranged by Torbay Council to explain why "urban extension" into our Green Belt land was necessary, extreme hostility was shown by the very large audience.
After explaining why unlimited EU immigration was the root cause of the problem, I asked the question: "If Torbay Council fails to satisfy the Government's (i.e. the EU's) target figures for housing, will the unelected South West Regional Assembly, which was given statutory planning powers in 2004, overrule you?" The chairman's simple reply was: "Yes."
Graham Booth MEP, UKIP, South West

Index linked?
Sir,
When Gordon Brown gave the Bank of England its independence, he also changed the inflation index to the one used by the EU.
Both these measures were to establish convergence with the EU and the euro, which, alert readers may remember, was a fairly strong prospect at the time.
Having dumped the euro, he should now also dump the EU inflation index and restore one that accurately reflects the real facts of the British economy.
Graham Booth MEP (UKIP), Brussels

Going Postal.
Sir,
Nobody benefits from a postal strike but the dispute at Royal Mail Sowton is an ongoing part of the destruction of our postal system by the European Union.
The Post Office was that rare thing, a nationalised industry that actually made money. And yes, it was a monopoly and all the better for it.
A letter posted in London, addressed to elsewhere in London, subsidised a letter posted in Penzance going to JohnO'Groats. The system worked well and acted as part of the social glue that held the country together - along with the network of sub-post offices in towns and villages across the land.
But then along came Brussels and demanded the "liberalisation" of postal services.
This has resulted in private firms such as TNT cherry picking the most profitable parts, such as city deliveries, and leaving the poor old Royal Mail with the scrag end.
How can it possibly deliver a letter from Redruth to Stornaway for 22p and still make a profit? It can't, of course. And it is entirely due to the EU telling us how to run our postal service. The EU wrecks everything it touches.
The Labour Government has done its bit, of course. Pensions and TV licences have been taken away from the sub-post offices which are closing throughout the country. And there are now proposals from Brussels that VAT will be charged on post, making it 17.5 per cent more expensive. VAT was a present to us from Brussels when we joined in the 1970s, so we shouldn't be too surprised.
As for the Exeter postmen, the UK Independence Party is 100 per cent behind their attempt to maintain a first-class postal system and we wish them well in their endeavours.
But they are fighting not just Royal Mail bosses, who are themselves on the rack, but also Brussels and the Labour Government.
Perhaps next time we have a General Election, all those postal workers will remember that simple fact and start supporting political parties that really do care about Her Majesty's Post Office and the creation of a professional and dedicated postal team; not one composed of students and agency workers, many of whom couldn't give a stuff whether the mail gets delivered or not.
David Challice

We cannot give in to demands for Sharia laws.
Sir,
When Dr Syed Aziz Pasha asked the Government for Muslim bank holidays and Islamic laws, Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly should have sent him away with a flea in his ear ("The Muslim leader who says: We must have our own Sharia laws and holidays", August 15). Muslim terrorists are inspired by a vision to impose a form of fundamentalist Islamic totalitarianism on Britain. A line must be drawn in the sand and we must tell British Muslims that they are welcome if they adapt to our Western, liberal and democratic ways, but we will not adapt to theirs. There is a fundamental clash of world views and we in Britain and the West must protect our way of life and never compromise.
Gerard Batten, MEP for London (UKIP)

Talking the talk - Lost in translation.
Sir,
I completely agree with Ruth Kelly that we must have a 'debate' on the 'key issue' of political jargon. Is this 'fit for purpose' or does it suffer from 'institutionalised bias'. A 'task force' should be set up and 'stakeholders' should be 'consulted' on 'best practise' . There should be 'beacons of excellence' setting the 'agenda' for 'sustainability' and by tackling the 'root cause' we can prevent word 'abuse' and 'deliver' on target' . In order to 'diversify' our vocabulary we must 'invest' in plain speaking and 'collaboration' is needed on speech 'inclusive partnerships' to provide a 'public service' for the 'most vulnerable' in the political 'community'.
Or alternatively, we could simply teach them the mother tongue. (Should that be a 'non-gender biased vocal learning directive'?)
R. Trelease

The Assemblies decide where the new immigrants go. (First published in the Telegraph).
Sir - Our unelected EU South-West Regional Assembly, based more than 100 miles away, dictates that the Christchurch, Bournemouth and Poole conurbation must have at least another 28,800 houses built within its boundaries by 2026. No mention of any plans for a major reinforcement of the overstressed water, sewage or road networks to cope. No plans for the provision of hospitals, schools, or social services. Most importantly: no plans for a secure electricity supply, without which nothing functions. All local residents can look forward to is ever-higher rates, poorer yet dearer services, and an overcrowded future where traditional expectations have to compete with immigration. It must stop.
John Riddington, Broadstone, Dorset

Bloo thinking on Europe that just won't go away
Dear Bill & Ann
This letter is as hard for me to write as must have been your decision to resign from the party, and the various roles you both undertook with such energy, enthusiasm & skill. What concerns me most about your resignations are the underlying reasons behind it. As I see things, there are 6 irrefutable facts to be considered:
1) The EU exists as a legal entity with all the socio-political-economic facts and implications enshrined within its (legal) framework. The EU will not go away.
2) Globalisation of economic/political activity is here to stay and is rapidly increasing as evidenced by the advances of the Indian sub-continent and China. Here I am referring to invention, innovations and trading not just the provision of cheap labour to bring down the production cost of International Corporations looming largely on the same horizon is Russian Federation, which, I can assure you, will become a major player within 5 to 7 years, hence (witness already its global impact with processed meals and natural resources). Globalisation is rapidly increasing, it too will not go away.
3) For the UK to maintain and possibly increase its political sphere of influence and its trading capability it is absolutely essential that we, as a nation, are actively involved in and committed to a group of similarly minded nations e.g. the EU. This necessity will increase and not go away.
4) Casting around European/Russian/Near Eastern nations, the UK has very few options to create strong, new alliances ( in whatever form), with the possible exception of the Russian Federation. These options will diminish with time as other (Near/Middle Eastern) blocks are formed. This is an unfolding dynamic that will not go away.
5) The UK cannot afford the gestation time, probably 15 to 20 years to develop new alliances that will have the collective political and economic clout of the EU. In that time the UK's influence and economic strength will wither and die. Another fact that will not go away.
6) Your disillusion with David Cameron, is in my opinion somewhat premature as he (Cameron) has hardly been in the job as leader for any time at all, and his influence with Conservative MEPs has yet to be properly shown. To this latter end, bringing William Hague on his side is no bad thing, as he (Hague) has a first class mind and is politically astute; but his task is fraught with difficulties as Conservative MEPs rally to many (25) different flags and Conservative can be writ large or small depending on national, party political influences and interpretation. These interpretations will appear again and again in different guises, they will never go away. Set against the preceding points, I fail to understand the rationale behind your decision. We are collectively involved in wrestling with major issues that will affect many nations, and hundreds of millions of people's daily lives, let alone their aspirations for the future. It is within this context that I find your spat with Cameron and the MEPs very sad, self destructive and of total inconsequence when set against the bigger picture. You two are too intelligent, to politically savvy to allow your loyalties to be so violently swayed by such insignificant issues. The constituency, the association, the county badly need your contribution at every level, so I urge you to reflect upon your decision, and take suitable steps to place yourselves within the broader perspective. Notwithstanding the preceding contents of this letter, I want you to know that Jackie & I place immense value on your love and friendship, and that even if we must appear on opposite ends of the political spectrum, the quality of friendship will grow, not diminish.
Vive la difference.
John

A pound of flesh. (Published in the Western Morning News.)
Sir,
A market trader in Devon is now facing a fine of up to £5,000 for selling a pound of onions to an agent provocateur from the trading standards office. His 'crime' was that he weighed them out on non-metric scales and sold 1lb at a cost of 46p. Normally he would have these handy to comply with EU law but on this particular day he was away and his sons looked after the stall. Not one real customer had ever asked for metric scales to be used, but this did not stop him being summoned to the local police station and told that, under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, the interview would be recorded and he could face prosecution.
The local television has now picked up on this up and there has been an enormous outcry. We would warn market traders in the Greater Bournemouth area to be on their guard against council apparatchiks with a lot of time and council taxpayers money to burn looking to catch them out. In a few years time the EU will have had it's way yet again as all imperial scales will be completely banned.
Selling onions can bring tears to your eyes but not in the way market trader Alan Elias has found out. Isn't it time we governed ourselves?
R. Trelease.

Hannan takes the biscuit.
Sir,
Dan Hannan seems to be saying (Telegraph Opinion, 1/5/06) that, since David Cameron has said that his political hero is Garibaldi, and that since Garibaldi was a staunch supporter of the rights of national self-determination, we can assume that Cameron is just as staunch, and that therefore by "colossal" implication, as he puts it, Britain's national independence from the EU would be safe in his hands, were he to become the next Prime Minister.
Garibaldi's support for the principle of national self-determination is subject to question. He welded together - by force of arms - populations in the Italian peninsula with really rather different traditions and outlooks, especially those of North and South. Many in Italy today say that, as a matter of fact, what he created was an over-arching and artificial state, called Italy, with a weak sense of national identity, where separatist thrusts from some of its component parts are still today alive and strong.
It might have been more helpful if Dan Hannan, as a well-known Euro-sceptic Tory, had expressed an opinion on Cameron's recent statements that he was certainly not going to take Britain out of the EU, and that any Tory MP who joined the Better Off Out group would see his chances of reaching the front bench blighted, as well as his deplorable and insulting jibes at UKIP, the only Party that really does stand up for British independence, simply and clearly, without needing to call on any controversial figure from nineteenth century Italian history.
And by the way, when are the Tory MEPs actually going to withdraw from the hyper-federalist European People's Party, as Cameron had promised?
Yours faithfully,
Torquil Dick-Erikson, Rome, Italy

Open Letter to Cameron.
Dear Mr Cameron,
I was thunderstruck to hear the Today programme report on your LBC statement that the UK Independence Party were Racist. How can you square this with Del Young being elected to their NEC? It is true that detractors have tried to link UKIP with BNP but, as Mandy Rice Davis so rightly said, "They would, wouldn't they?" but for you to make these slurs is unfortunate to put it mildly. The serious issue for our party is to grasp the disgust, despair and utter revulsion of the way the Maastricht Treaty was rammed through Parliament by the whips using every dirty trick in their infamous "Black Book", totally disregarding the democratic right of the Danes to reject this "Treaty too far". As a result our party lost 4,000,000 votes and suffered the most crushing defeat for 100 years in 1997. Of those ex-Conservative voters who did not sit on their hands the others joined UKIP. In subsequent General Elections we have lost another 1,000,000 votes. This disaster was masked at the last general election by Mr Blair losing 4,000,000 of his voters. Taking this into account if we had only managed to recover half of our lost votes we would be in government. If we are serious about regaining power we must regain those votes lost to UKIP and those who no longer vote. So, far from alienating UKIP we should see them as our closest allies. This shouldn't be difficult as their leader and Chairman are an ex-Conservative MP and candidate, and the bulk of membership are would be Conservative voters, if only they believed the Conservative party stood for self-government by directly elected representatives. To win back 5,000,000 votes and recruit more is both simple and difficult. Simple because it only requires the humble admission that our party made a fundamental error of judgment over the Maastricht Bill and difficult because no politician will ever admit his judgment was at fault. Here you have one huge advantage in that you are not tainted by the stench of Maastricht. You can make this cathartic apology and so cut the rope that hangs this Albatross around our party's neck. Do you want to be the next Prime Minister or don't you. It is in your hands. Bill & Ann Woodhouse, Branch Chairman and Secretary of two wards,
North Dorset Conservative Association.

EU Payments. (Sent in response to a letter in the North Devon Gazette).

Sir - (Harvey Thane's letter (Yours Sincerely, last week) regarding the cost to British taxpayers of our membership of the European Union of £5 billion per year is almost correct if you regard our NET annual cash payments to the EU as the total cost - which it isn't.
The true cost of our annual cash contribution is nearer his £11 billion figure, as the various grants individual organisations receive back from the EU have to be for projects approved by the EU which are often not what our own elected Government would choose to spend the money on and also have to be paid for by the recipient in the form of matched funding.
The actual net figure according to H M Treasury Budget Statement of March 16, 2005 is £4.3 billion (net), but is now due to increase by almost 40 per cent to over £6 billion per year (£115 million every week) thanks to Tony Blair giving up part of the British rebate last December.
There is no need for UKIP to make these figures up as Mr Thane likes to suggest, as the truth is far more astounding. Is it any wonder, as we learned in last week's Budget, that the British now pay more in various taxes to both central and local government than at any time in our history? While our hospitals shut wards and lay off staff, our roads go un-repaired and our pensioners get a 2.7 per cent rise to help them pay for a 25 per cent rise in fuel costs, the EU shovels our money into new eastern European countries to enable them to build roads, subways, bridges and hospitals!
Could Mr Thane please tell us what benefits Britain has ever got from EU membership that are not available to almost 90 other countries across the world from a simple trading agreement of the type we were told we were signing up to with the Common Market 33 years ago? And isn't it ironic that it has just been reported that last year Britain did more trade outside the EU than within it?
As for Mr Thane's accusation of UKIP xenophobia, he may be unaware that UKIP's 10 MEPs have formed a 35-strong group in the European Parliament with like-minded MEPs from 10 other European nations. He really should check his facts before launching into inflammatory language in print. Mr Thane also appears to regard the continuing fraud in the EU is acceptable. It is the only organisation that I have ever come across which, on three separate occasions, has responded to the exposing of corruption by its own auditors by sacking the auditors.
David L Johnson, Appledore.

Dear Sir,

A quotation from Ruddigore (first performed 1887):
"Ye supple M.P.s who go down on your knees, your precious identity sinking.
And vote black and white as your leaders indite, (Which saves you the trouble of thinking).
For your country's good fame, her repute, or her shame, you don't care the snuff of a candle - But you're paid for your game when you're told that your name will be graced by a baronet's handle..."
No reference to anyone we know in Bournemouth, is there? Of course not! Nor anyone anywhere else in the country...(Name withheld by request)

Sad but true
Sir
The stories in the papers are sad but true. The Telegraph picked it up from yesterday's Sun but a more accurate version is in the Daily Mail who did take the trouble to check out the facts. It will also featured on ITV West Country news. I attach a briefing note, lengthy but factual. All our local MP's and MEP's are aware but seem to be up against a brick wall and helpless to change it. We have had several meetings with Ministers at Westminster and still no further forward. I was contacted by the European Commission yesterday about this, I understand a few feathers have been ruffled over this at Brussels and indeed in Downing Street. Not before time, I might add as the consultation over the introduction of this was at best appalling and at worst non-existent. We were clearly told this measure was designed for Long distance truckers not local bus services but the legislation managed to get written in such away that buses were sucked in, and many areas of the UK are now losing their vital rural local bus services because we as bus operators are having the rug pulled from under us and are unable to get round the law to operate them any more. My understanding is that certain other member states are just ignoring it because its so farcical but of course good old UK sets the enforcement agencies on us to make sure we are complying! It turns Government's pro-public transport policy completely on its head, something that the Minister was worried about when we met him before Christmas....
Mark Howarth
Western Greyhound

The 'other' amendment
Sir
Unremarked by the media, the final Commons division on March 5th related to a proposed New Clause 9 - an amendment to protect the legal supremacy of Parliament.
Shockingly, only 48 MPs could be bothered to vote for this amendment, while 380 voted against it.
Although those 380 MPs swore the Oath of Allegiance before they took their seats, they have now shown that their primary loyalty is not to this country and its people, but to the EU.
Yours faithfully
Dr D R Cooper

Jobs for British workers?
During the time our MP Denis MacShane was the Minister for Europe, he rammed it down our throats how beneficial it would be for us to get further into the EU. He agreed with Gordon Brown that we did not need a referendum on signing the latest treaty against a vast majority demanding public consultation.
I now read that this man is telling employers in Rotherham to give jobs to local people first before migrants, even though this is against EU law. For Denis MacShane to promote British jobs for British workers with his track record is the worst case of political hypocrisy even for New Labour I have ever heard.
Mrs Marlene Guest

Brown on the euro
Sir - The draft EU treaty contains a commitment by all signatories to the currency of the EU being the euro. But when I asked Gordon Brown whether Britain would thus be given a referendum, the PM denied that this goal would apply to the UK, although I cited the relevant articles in the treaty. What does the Prime Minister know that the rest of us don't? With qualified majority voting becoming the mechanism for decision-making, and the European Court of Justice defending the "ever closer union" objective, what chance would the pound have when "colleagues" decide that we must join the euro?
Graham Booth UKIP MEP, Paignton, Devon

Dear Sir,
Anyone who is stupid or gullible enough to listen to the ravings of Mr Blair, will know that recently, he has promised a reduction in Government legislation and red tape. For those that did listen, be prepared, once again, for a dose of the truth - something which appears to be a stranger to our prime minister. During Mr Blair's six-month term of being president of the EU, 4183 new rules and regulations have been added to the statute book. This is the highest number of new rules ever to be added in one presidential period of office. So, once again, Mr Blair says one thing but then does another - but this should not surprise you, after all why change the habit of a lifetime? Malcolm Bouchier, Park Row, Louth.

Sir,
Gordon Browns' luck is quickly running out as the true extent of New Labours 'third way' with the British economy, reveals itself to be no more than the 'Old Labour' way done with smoke and mirrors. Not only is our manufacturing base shrinking further but there are signs that the services sector is following suit. This is at a time when public sector jobs are on the rise, with their attractive pensions to boot coupled with massive personal and national debt. As China and India are steaming ahead Gordon Brown plays the fiddle. Labour are loathe to give up any form of control whether it be social or economic.
The UK Independence Party at their recent annual party in London voted overwhelmingly to support Flat tax, which was in their 2005 manifesto. It's an idea whose time has come, and unlike the timid Tories, they are not afraid of radical solutions when they are desperately needed. This is not 'The Economy Stupid', more like the Stupid Economy.
Yours Faithfully,
R. Trelease

(Originally published in the local press)

Dear Sir,
My jaw dropped in amazement when Tony Blair claimed he had always been a passionate European. Only 20 years ago he was advocating withdrawal because the "EC drained our resources and caused unemployment". Which indeed it does. I listened to his speech with great interest because if you closed your eyes the content was pure Nigel Farage (UKIP MEP). UKIP has been saying pretty much the same sort of thing for years. The EU is out of date, statist, backward-looking, anti-competition and wasteful. Blair left out corrupt, but then he would, wouldn't he? The only flaw in this brilliantly delivered monologue was in the conclusion. He, along with the Conservative Party, thinks it is redeemable; that it can be reformed – like the wife who marries a drunken philanderer in the hope she can reform him. Only tears lie ahead. We have had 30 years of this nonsense, common agricultural and fisheries policy, fraud, African levels of growth. Nearly all the serious city economic pundits know we need to get out. No doubt in 20 years Tony Blair will start his speech with "I have always been a passionate fox-hunter" before being led gently away to a leafy home for the bewildered.

Godfrey Bloom, Member of the European Parliament, Main Street, Wressle, Selby