Create your badge
Saturday, 31 July 2010
Thursday, 29 July 2010
More false promises = more leadership betrayal
"Regulatory Action
"The following two parties failed to submit their accounts to the Commission.
"The British National Party
"Christian Party “Proclaiming Christ’s Lordship”
"The British National Party’s Regional Accounting Unit also failed to submit their accounts to the Commission.
"The SDLP Assembly Group accounting unit submitted accounts before the deadline, but failed to include an auditor’s report for their accounts as required by law; accordingly their accounts are considered to be late and are still outstanding.
"For late submission of their statements of accounts the parties will be fined a minimum of £500 and the accounting units will be fined a minimum £100. This figure will increase if the accounts are more than three months late."
The foregoing was published on the Electoral Commission's web site today, Thursday, 29 July 2010.
It means that yet again the British National Party, under the "leadership" of Mr Nick Griffin, has been made an object of public scorn. It means that the party donors' hard-earned money is yet again to be fruitlessly squandered to pay fines levied by the Electoral Commission, an independent regulatory authority.
But it means more than this. It means that the following promises by Mr Dave Hannam to finally get his act together are demonstrably untrue.
This is what Mr Hannam wrote in an article published on the BNP web site, http://www.bnp.org.uk/, on Tuesday, 27 July 2010, entitled "Treasury Report: High Turnover, Increased Financial Control and Regionalised Finances":-
"With these historical problems in mind, I took the decision to begin a fast implementation of new measures and controls. It has taken nearly a whole financial quarter to complete, but we are now in a position whereby we can ensure:
* Bookkeeping is maintained on a daily basis;
* All financial reports are available on a daily basis thus providing our fundraising consultant with fast and vital information;
* More in-depth quarterly reports are provided to the Advisory Council;
* All major expenditure is now strictly regulated; and
* All legally-required Statement of Accounts are submitted on time."
Evidently all legally-required statements of accounts are still not being submitted on time, are they Mr Hannam?
Furthermore, if the party employed a full-time national treasurer, who was being paid as such, I pose the question: why was book-keeping not already being maintained on a daily basis? Had no one thought that it might be a good idea for the full-time, salaried, national treasurer of the BNP do some work on the party's books on a daily basis, before Mr Hannam had his brainwave?
I note that the BNP's dubious 2008 accounts, the ones the independent auditors looked askance at, and that the Electoral Commission are currently investigating, are still not displayed prominently on the party web site. I challenge Messrs Griffin, Dowson, Kemp, and Hannam to publish them prominently there. Let our members see the figures, and the chairman's and auditors' reports; and when the 2009 accounts are eventually submitted to the Electoral Commission, publish them prominently on the party web site as well. Surely the members deserve at least this much openness from the leadership, do we not?
"The following two parties failed to submit their accounts to the Commission.
"The British National Party
"Christian Party “Proclaiming Christ’s Lordship”
"The British National Party’s Regional Accounting Unit also failed to submit their accounts to the Commission.
"The SDLP Assembly Group accounting unit submitted accounts before the deadline, but failed to include an auditor’s report for their accounts as required by law; accordingly their accounts are considered to be late and are still outstanding.
"For late submission of their statements of accounts the parties will be fined a minimum of £500 and the accounting units will be fined a minimum £100. This figure will increase if the accounts are more than three months late."
The foregoing was published on the Electoral Commission's web site today, Thursday, 29 July 2010.
It means that yet again the British National Party, under the "leadership" of Mr Nick Griffin, has been made an object of public scorn. It means that the party donors' hard-earned money is yet again to be fruitlessly squandered to pay fines levied by the Electoral Commission, an independent regulatory authority.
But it means more than this. It means that the following promises by Mr Dave Hannam to finally get his act together are demonstrably untrue.
This is what Mr Hannam wrote in an article published on the BNP web site, http://www.bnp.org.uk/, on Tuesday, 27 July 2010, entitled "Treasury Report: High Turnover, Increased Financial Control and Regionalised Finances":-
"With these historical problems in mind, I took the decision to begin a fast implementation of new measures and controls. It has taken nearly a whole financial quarter to complete, but we are now in a position whereby we can ensure:
* Bookkeeping is maintained on a daily basis;
* All financial reports are available on a daily basis thus providing our fundraising consultant with fast and vital information;
* More in-depth quarterly reports are provided to the Advisory Council;
* All major expenditure is now strictly regulated; and
* All legally-required Statement of Accounts are submitted on time."
Evidently all legally-required statements of accounts are still not being submitted on time, are they Mr Hannam?
Furthermore, if the party employed a full-time national treasurer, who was being paid as such, I pose the question: why was book-keeping not already being maintained on a daily basis? Had no one thought that it might be a good idea for the full-time, salaried, national treasurer of the BNP do some work on the party's books on a daily basis, before Mr Hannam had his brainwave?
I note that the BNP's dubious 2008 accounts, the ones the independent auditors looked askance at, and that the Electoral Commission are currently investigating, are still not displayed prominently on the party web site. I challenge Messrs Griffin, Dowson, Kemp, and Hannam to publish them prominently there. Let our members see the figures, and the chairman's and auditors' reports; and when the 2009 accounts are eventually submitted to the Electoral Commission, publish them prominently on the party web site as well. Surely the members deserve at least this much openness from the leadership, do we not?
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
"We'll do better in future...honest"
"This also means we reject the attacks on the party's finances from outsiders, and deliberately placed insiders who have a job to try and cause as much disruption as possible.
"We are entering a period of unprecedented financial control and we will not allow anyone to steer us off-course."
The foregoing disgraceful attempt by Mr Hannam, the BNP's nominal treasurer, in an e-mail newsletter, to equate legitimate internal criticism and dissent, and a constitutional leadership challenge by BNP members, with 'sleepers', 'plants', and 'moles', whose 'job' it is "...to try and cause [sic] as much disruption as possible" is on a par with Mr Griffin's own recent reference to "time-wasting elections". Both show in just what contempt Griffin and his self-seeking hirelings hold the decent, honest, hard-working, and self-sacrificing ordinary members, and donors, of this party.
Not only is the intelligence of the latter insulted by this pernicious attempt to equate the exercise of the democratic right to call the leadership to an accounting for their stewardship of the party through an election, with imaginary subversion by unidentified internal enemies (the worn-out "Searchlight mole/MI5 agent" ploy), but also by the suggestion that the promises to do better in future would have been made at all had it not been for Eddy Butler's challenge, and the detailed exposure on his blog, http://www.eddybutler.blogspot.com/, of the corruption and incompetence that have been, and are, endemic in the party's leadership under Griffin.
Hannam's remarks are an admission that things have been very seriously wrong in the "treasury department", an admission which has only been extracted from him under the stress of a leadership election. Yet he has the gall to imply criticism of those courageous, and selfless, enough to mount, and support, such a challenge (in the full knowledge that they were likely to be unjustly victimized as a result) for causing "disruption". Given the corruption and incompetence of the Griffin "leadership" what need would the Establishment have for lowly-placed moles, plants or sleepers - when Griffin is doing their work of crippling, and destroying the BNP for them?
Griffin's subversion of the leadership nomination process through his invention of unconstitutional 'rules' designed to make impossible the already very difficult task of obtaining sufficient nominations by any of his would-be challengers, as well as the corrupt suspension of Eddy Butler's key supporters in the south east, including his campaign co-ordinator, Peter Phillips, and Dr Andrew Emerson, the author of this blog, are straight out of the North Korean Handbook on the Conduct of Democratic Elections - one of the world's shortest books. No doubt it has pride of place in Mr Griffin's private library.
Mr Griffin is a disgrace to all decent BNP members, and should hang his head in shame.
"We are entering a period of unprecedented financial control and we will not allow anyone to steer us off-course."
The foregoing disgraceful attempt by Mr Hannam, the BNP's nominal treasurer, in an e-mail newsletter, to equate legitimate internal criticism and dissent, and a constitutional leadership challenge by BNP members, with 'sleepers', 'plants', and 'moles', whose 'job' it is "...to try and cause [sic] as much disruption as possible" is on a par with Mr Griffin's own recent reference to "time-wasting elections". Both show in just what contempt Griffin and his self-seeking hirelings hold the decent, honest, hard-working, and self-sacrificing ordinary members, and donors, of this party.
Not only is the intelligence of the latter insulted by this pernicious attempt to equate the exercise of the democratic right to call the leadership to an accounting for their stewardship of the party through an election, with imaginary subversion by unidentified internal enemies (the worn-out "Searchlight mole/MI5 agent" ploy), but also by the suggestion that the promises to do better in future would have been made at all had it not been for Eddy Butler's challenge, and the detailed exposure on his blog, http://www.eddybutler.blogspot.com/, of the corruption and incompetence that have been, and are, endemic in the party's leadership under Griffin.
Hannam's remarks are an admission that things have been very seriously wrong in the "treasury department", an admission which has only been extracted from him under the stress of a leadership election. Yet he has the gall to imply criticism of those courageous, and selfless, enough to mount, and support, such a challenge (in the full knowledge that they were likely to be unjustly victimized as a result) for causing "disruption". Given the corruption and incompetence of the Griffin "leadership" what need would the Establishment have for lowly-placed moles, plants or sleepers - when Griffin is doing their work of crippling, and destroying the BNP for them?
Griffin's subversion of the leadership nomination process through his invention of unconstitutional 'rules' designed to make impossible the already very difficult task of obtaining sufficient nominations by any of his would-be challengers, as well as the corrupt suspension of Eddy Butler's key supporters in the south east, including his campaign co-ordinator, Peter Phillips, and Dr Andrew Emerson, the author of this blog, are straight out of the North Korean Handbook on the Conduct of Democratic Elections - one of the world's shortest books. No doubt it has pride of place in Mr Griffin's private library.
Mr Griffin is a disgrace to all decent BNP members, and should hang his head in shame.
Monday, 26 July 2010
Act now to save the party!
The time for talking is over.
The time for action has arrived.
Under Griffin's appalling regime (one can hardly call it leadership) the BNP is sinking fast. The party is losing the light as Griffin's chickens come home to roost. The party cannot meet its debts, morale is at rock bottom, as are the few election results (few, because no BNP candidate = no BNP result). Meanwhile the debts keep mounting, as does the desperation of Griffin's underlings, at the tsunami of support for Eddy Butler's campaign for renewal and reform.
To do nothing is a 'cop out'. To save the BNP: sign and return Eddy's own white nomination form, to him, well before the 10 August deadline; and also sign, witness, and return the unconstitutional yellow nomination form, making clear your choice of Eddy as nominee, to Andrew Brons MEP, the scrutineer.
There are only two real choices: Eddy Butler, and a future for our party; OR any other candidate, including Griffin, and imminent financial collapse.
The time for action has arrived.
Under Griffin's appalling regime (one can hardly call it leadership) the BNP is sinking fast. The party is losing the light as Griffin's chickens come home to roost. The party cannot meet its debts, morale is at rock bottom, as are the few election results (few, because no BNP candidate = no BNP result). Meanwhile the debts keep mounting, as does the desperation of Griffin's underlings, at the tsunami of support for Eddy Butler's campaign for renewal and reform.
To do nothing is a 'cop out'. To save the BNP: sign and return Eddy's own white nomination form, to him, well before the 10 August deadline; and also sign, witness, and return the unconstitutional yellow nomination form, making clear your choice of Eddy as nominee, to Andrew Brons MEP, the scrutineer.
There are only two real choices: Eddy Butler, and a future for our party; OR any other candidate, including Griffin, and imminent financial collapse.
Saturday, 24 July 2010
Four Candidates Declare for 2010 BNP Leadership Challenge
Four Candidates Declare for 2010 BNP Leadership Challenge
Why does the yellow nomination form only name one of the candidates, namely Mr Griffin, who does not need any nominations, rather than all three of the other candidates who do?
This unfairly favours Mr Griffin, the incumbent, and is clearly both unconstitutional and unlawful.
Why does the yellow nomination form only name one of the candidates, namely Mr Griffin, who does not need any nominations, rather than all three of the other candidates who do?
This unfairly favours Mr Griffin, the incumbent, and is clearly both unconstitutional and unlawful.
Friday, 23 July 2010
All dressed up and nowhere to go
Mr Griffin's exclusion from the queen's garden party seemed to come as a great surprise to him.
It shouldn't have. You see, the Establishment watches our party very closely; and while I don't imagine that the queen reads Eddy's blog herself, (although she may - it's a good read), I do not doubt that her private secretary is kept informed of matters of domestic political interest of which the queen should be aware.
It will have been noticed that Mr Griffin was making great political capital out of his forthcoming garden party attendance. It will have been smiled at contemptuously, for the simple reason that IT HADN'T HAPPENED YET.
When is Mr Griffin ever going to learn not to count his chickens before they are hatched? When is he going to stop being so cocksure, and display some becoming humility, not to say common sense?
The Greeks have a good word for what ails Mr Griffin: HUBRIS. Perhaps Mr Griffin just doesn't get it but I believe most other people would. It's known as tempting fate.
It shouldn't have. You see, the Establishment watches our party very closely; and while I don't imagine that the queen reads Eddy's blog herself, (although she may - it's a good read), I do not doubt that her private secretary is kept informed of matters of domestic political interest of which the queen should be aware.
It will have been noticed that Mr Griffin was making great political capital out of his forthcoming garden party attendance. It will have been smiled at contemptuously, for the simple reason that IT HADN'T HAPPENED YET.
When is Mr Griffin ever going to learn not to count his chickens before they are hatched? When is he going to stop being so cocksure, and display some becoming humility, not to say common sense?
The Greeks have a good word for what ails Mr Griffin: HUBRIS. Perhaps Mr Griffin just doesn't get it but I believe most other people would. It's known as tempting fate.
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
Wake up and smell the Java
Many BNP members may be surprised to learn that there is a leadership challenge. Although this is common knowledge amongst the party's activists, some Griffinite organizers are desperately trying to keep their local members in the dark about the latest party news.
I know of several units, many of whose members are not aware of the problems within the party, and whose organizer is still Griffinite. Unfortunately, many elderly members still have very limited access to the internet, through which they could find more democratic sources of information.
If you know of any fellow BNP members who are not yet aware of the party's leadership election, or its imminent financial insolvency, it is your duty to inform them. I also entreat you to download a hard copy of Eddy Butler's nomination form, and obtain as many signatures as possible of 24 month+ members, or alternatively, simply sign it yourself, and return it to the Waltham Cross PO box, as stated on the form, ensuring that it arrives well before 10 August deadline.
Signing this form does not mean that you will necessarily vote for Eddy, it merely states that you endorse the constitutional right of Eddy Butler to stand for election.
The yellow, "official", nomination form ( yellow was a very appropriate choice of colour) which Griffin has produced is grossly unfair to all of his challengers, but should nevertheless be completed, witnessed, and returned to Andrew Brons MEP, the scrutineer of the nominations.
Eddy calls on all BNP members who wish to nominate him to complete BOTH his own white nomination form, AS WELL AS the "official" yellow form which the party head office is sending out by post.
Under the corrupt and incompetent leadership of Griffin, the arch-factionalist and party-splitter, the result of the BNP leadership election's nomination process looks set to be the subject of yet another costly legal dispute, (it will have to join the queue), but then, strangely, in view of the desperate financial state of the party, which could result in its being wound up, this seems to be what Griffin wants. No doubt the man has his reasons - but he's keeping them to himself.
I know of several units, many of whose members are not aware of the problems within the party, and whose organizer is still Griffinite. Unfortunately, many elderly members still have very limited access to the internet, through which they could find more democratic sources of information.
If you know of any fellow BNP members who are not yet aware of the party's leadership election, or its imminent financial insolvency, it is your duty to inform them. I also entreat you to download a hard copy of Eddy Butler's nomination form, and obtain as many signatures as possible of 24 month+ members, or alternatively, simply sign it yourself, and return it to the Waltham Cross PO box, as stated on the form, ensuring that it arrives well before 10 August deadline.
Signing this form does not mean that you will necessarily vote for Eddy, it merely states that you endorse the constitutional right of Eddy Butler to stand for election.
The yellow, "official", nomination form ( yellow was a very appropriate choice of colour) which Griffin has produced is grossly unfair to all of his challengers, but should nevertheless be completed, witnessed, and returned to Andrew Brons MEP, the scrutineer of the nominations.
Eddy calls on all BNP members who wish to nominate him to complete BOTH his own white nomination form, AS WELL AS the "official" yellow form which the party head office is sending out by post.
Under the corrupt and incompetent leadership of Griffin, the arch-factionalist and party-splitter, the result of the BNP leadership election's nomination process looks set to be the subject of yet another costly legal dispute, (it will have to join the queue), but then, strangely, in view of the desperate financial state of the party, which could result in its being wound up, this seems to be what Griffin wants. No doubt the man has his reasons - but he's keeping them to himself.
Monday, 19 July 2010
Eddy Butler's key supporters suspended today
Architect Peter Phillips, Eddy Butler's campaign co-ordinator, and Dr Andrew Emerson, writer and speaker in Eddy's campaign, were today suspended by the party's South East regional organizer. No explanation was provided, nor were any details of any alleged 'offences' given.
Dr Emerson has appealed against his arbitrary and unjust suspension, as has Peter Phillips against his.
This is a scandalous attempt by a corrupt and incompetent leadership to intimidate Eddy's key supporters into silence, in breach of the constitution of the party, (in particular its code of conduct), in the desperate hope that by attacking free speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association, British National Party members can be kept in the dark about the worsening financial state of the party, the looming crisis facing it, and the destruction of its morale through rule by 'court favourites', such as Messrs Dowson and Harrington, who are not even members of the BNP.
Well, this desperate strategy, intended to subvert the party's democratic process of a leadership election (whereby the members may call the leadership to account for its temporary stewardship of the party) will fail if every member sees it as their duty to acquaint themselves with the issues by visiting Eddy's blogspot http://www.eddybutler.blogspot.com/, and web site, and if possible, attending one of Eddy's campaign meetings, which are being held the length and breadth of the country over the next three weeks.
We fight on, and we dare all, so that a great land and a great nation may live again in splendour.
Dr Emerson has appealed against his arbitrary and unjust suspension, as has Peter Phillips against his.
This is a scandalous attempt by a corrupt and incompetent leadership to intimidate Eddy's key supporters into silence, in breach of the constitution of the party, (in particular its code of conduct), in the desperate hope that by attacking free speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association, British National Party members can be kept in the dark about the worsening financial state of the party, the looming crisis facing it, and the destruction of its morale through rule by 'court favourites', such as Messrs Dowson and Harrington, who are not even members of the BNP.
Well, this desperate strategy, intended to subvert the party's democratic process of a leadership election (whereby the members may call the leadership to account for its temporary stewardship of the party) will fail if every member sees it as their duty to acquaint themselves with the issues by visiting Eddy's blogspot http://www.eddybutler.blogspot.com/, and web site, and if possible, attending one of Eddy's campaign meetings, which are being held the length and breadth of the country over the next three weeks.
We fight on, and we dare all, so that a great land and a great nation may live again in splendour.
Friday, 16 July 2010
Griffin is only economical with the truth
"Q: Are the fees justified?
"A:There has been a lot of hype and downright lies about the fees paid to the Midas Consultancy (Richard Edmond's farcical statement being a recent example) and there is a need to put these fees in perspective. Firstly, in reality the Midas involvement with the BNP doesn't cost us a penny because Midas only takes a fee from funds that we would never have seen anyway without the fundraising techniques and methods of the Midas Consultancy. Secondly, in exchange for fees of £165,000 over two years, Midas has generated a fundraising income for the BNP of 2.3 million - and saved us over £156,000 through their procurement techniques and expertise. Not a bad deal by any yardstick! Let us also remember that Midas came on board with a one off goodwill appeal for us that netted the party £136,000 in December 2007 and January 2008. How many people have ever done that for us before? The Midas fees, originally 7.5% of funds raised, were later capped at a flat fee which equated to less than the percentage, and this fee is significantly less than the industry average for such a service."
The foregoing extract from the latest "Chairman's Update" e-mail newsletter contains not only errors of fact, eg, Richard Edmonds' surname is not Edmond, but also fallacious logic. Moreover, that gentleman is not in the habit of telling lies, nor is he given to hyperbole, unlike Mr Griffin. Wherein is Richard Edmonds' statement factually incorrect? Mr Griffin does not say. Odd, you may well think, that he fails to substantiate his disgraceful allegation of "...hype and downright lies..." against his colleague on the party's Advisory Council - the highly respected veteran nationalist, and BNP activist, Mr Richard Edmonds.
According to Mr Griffin (I am assuming that he wrote it, rather than Mr Dowson, since it is above his facsimile signature) the services of Midas Consultancy cost the party nothing, because the income it is responsible for generating exceeds the size of the fee it takes. This is a piece of flawed logic that most five- year-olds would have no trouble nailing in ten seconds flat. It ignores the most basic economic concept of "opportunity cost", ie, the notional cost of doing one thing rather than another when it is not possible to do both at the same time. Thus, the BNP could have been self-sufficient (I seem to recall that we recommend this for the national economy) and "upped its game", to use Griffinspeak, by using the talents of its own members to revamp its fundraising operations (perhaps with some short-term consultancy input,) and then "rolled out" the new operation over the last two years, cutting out the middleman, and saving both the party, as a corporate entity, and its members, an absolute fortune. Instead of which the party, while unable to meet its staff wages' bill for last month (yes - we're that hard up) has no doubt made Mr Dowson a very wealthy man.
Mr Griffin claims that Midas' fees are "...£165,000 over two years..." Shouldn't that be £162,000 each year - in other words: £324,000 over two years? The latter figure is exactly what Richard Edmonds states that Mr Dowson told him he received in fees.
As for the initial "freebie" offered by Midas in December 2007: surely Mr Griffin has heard of the saying "a sprat to catch a mackerel". Yes, Mr Griffin, you swallowed the line but it was the BNP that got hooked.
"A:There has been a lot of hype and downright lies about the fees paid to the Midas Consultancy (Richard Edmond's farcical statement being a recent example) and there is a need to put these fees in perspective. Firstly, in reality the Midas involvement with the BNP doesn't cost us a penny because Midas only takes a fee from funds that we would never have seen anyway without the fundraising techniques and methods of the Midas Consultancy. Secondly, in exchange for fees of £165,000 over two years, Midas has generated a fundraising income for the BNP of 2.3 million - and saved us over £156,000 through their procurement techniques and expertise. Not a bad deal by any yardstick! Let us also remember that Midas came on board with a one off goodwill appeal for us that netted the party £136,000 in December 2007 and January 2008. How many people have ever done that for us before? The Midas fees, originally 7.5% of funds raised, were later capped at a flat fee which equated to less than the percentage, and this fee is significantly less than the industry average for such a service."
The foregoing extract from the latest "Chairman's Update" e-mail newsletter contains not only errors of fact, eg, Richard Edmonds' surname is not Edmond, but also fallacious logic. Moreover, that gentleman is not in the habit of telling lies, nor is he given to hyperbole, unlike Mr Griffin. Wherein is Richard Edmonds' statement factually incorrect? Mr Griffin does not say. Odd, you may well think, that he fails to substantiate his disgraceful allegation of "...hype and downright lies..." against his colleague on the party's Advisory Council - the highly respected veteran nationalist, and BNP activist, Mr Richard Edmonds.
According to Mr Griffin (I am assuming that he wrote it, rather than Mr Dowson, since it is above his facsimile signature) the services of Midas Consultancy cost the party nothing, because the income it is responsible for generating exceeds the size of the fee it takes. This is a piece of flawed logic that most five- year-olds would have no trouble nailing in ten seconds flat. It ignores the most basic economic concept of "opportunity cost", ie, the notional cost of doing one thing rather than another when it is not possible to do both at the same time. Thus, the BNP could have been self-sufficient (I seem to recall that we recommend this for the national economy) and "upped its game", to use Griffinspeak, by using the talents of its own members to revamp its fundraising operations (perhaps with some short-term consultancy input,) and then "rolled out" the new operation over the last two years, cutting out the middleman, and saving both the party, as a corporate entity, and its members, an absolute fortune. Instead of which the party, while unable to meet its staff wages' bill for last month (yes - we're that hard up) has no doubt made Mr Dowson a very wealthy man.
Mr Griffin claims that Midas' fees are "...£165,000 over two years..." Shouldn't that be £162,000 each year - in other words: £324,000 over two years? The latter figure is exactly what Richard Edmonds states that Mr Dowson told him he received in fees.
As for the initial "freebie" offered by Midas in December 2007: surely Mr Griffin has heard of the saying "a sprat to catch a mackerel". Yes, Mr Griffin, you swallowed the line but it was the BNP that got hooked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
