Where are they now? No 284 – Essex Man.
Sky – the go to news service for reliable news… As excitable Sky journalists rush to tell us of ‘UKIPs first MP’, Douglas Carswell, I thought I’d take a look at the ‘forgotten man’ – who really was UKIPs first MP, for a brief period. Bob Spink.
Funny how nobody wants to mention him today.
Back in 2008, a grateful Nigel Farage welcomed Dr Bob Spink into his open arms after he crossed the floor in the House of Commons. UKIP were delighted – their first defection.
Dr Spink was the Conservative MP for Castle Point in Essex, another of the string of semi-abandoned seaside towns on the Essex coast inhabited by retired electricians and plumbers who had made it their life’s work to save up for the ultimate working class retirement home – only to find themselves abandoned by the politicians and metro-man media. Those rows of seaside villas and semi derelict fairgrounds, once the height of aspiration, had become a hot bed of disaffection with ‘the way life was going’ – and now harboured a disillusioned electorate attracted to the UKIP siren call of ‘nobody cares about us’.
There is some confusion as to whether Bob Spink ever truly became a ‘UKIP’ man – true he was issued with a party membership card, but there are claims that he neglected to pay the accompanying membership fees, therefore was never contractually a member.
UKIP spokesman Tim Worstall said Dr Spink was still on the books. “He has been issued a membership card, but he’s never actually paid for membership. He’s still on our books as a member.”
Let’s hope somebody has remembered to tap Douglas Carswell up for his membership fee, and not just sent him a membership card.
The Conservatives objected to him sitting as a UKIP MP on the grounds that there was no ‘UKIP party whip’ – rather ironical considering that he had ignored the Conservative Party whip for years, and would probably have done the same had there been a UKIP whip.
As I say, I don’t take a party whip I just do what is right and I don’t give a damn about party hacks tearing their hair out. I could be wrong on any issue of course, but I am totally open and honest and my own man. There are a number of UKIP policies I would not support and I hope that goes for all your readers. Anyone who blindly follows a set of politicians without question needs their head examined.
The Conservative Party were disgruntled over the manner of his leaving, and issued a press release making dark claims about an affair with the wife of the local Conservative Party chairman – this harked back to an earlier claim (2005) made in the Mail on Sunday in respect of which Bob Spink had already received substantial damages. Second time round, The Times, the Sun, the Evening Standard and the Daily Telegraph all repeated the allegation.
After switching sides Mr Spink received undisclosed damages – he now says it was £47,500 – from five national newspapers and the Conservative party over false allegations of an affair with a female former councillor. The councillor also received compensation from the Tory party.
It all helped to repay the £2,051.38 he had over-claimed on his expenses, if not his UKIP membership fee. Incidentally it was Douglas Carswell who tabled the Early Day Motion that so annoyed Michael Martin, then Speaker of the House: “That this House has no confidence in Mr Speaker and calls for him to step down; notes that Mr Speaker has failed to provide leadership in matters relating to Honourable Members’ expenses…” The expenses were later published – and Douglas Carswell had to cough up £2,159.00 – slightly more than Bob Spink…
Bob Spink was down but not out – until he lost his seat altogether in the 2010 Election. He went on to form the ‘Independent Save Our Green Belt party‘. A worthy cause indeed.
Dr Spink said: “Green belt is an issue very close to my heart and I know it’s important to many residents”.
Green Belt certainly was an issue close to his heart – and remembering that he was not a man ‘to take the party whip’ – not even when he had formed the party and was effectively whipping himself…
It will come as no surprise to find that the ‘Independent Save Our Green Belt party’ was not altogether successful in the Canvey Island area – indeed, 18 acres of Green Belt has been in the cross hairs of the Redrow building consortium for some time as a suitable site on which to build 156 new homes on.
Spink has renounced his ‘green’ credentials and instead has been acting as a consultant to developer Redrow to advise on a planning application to build 250 new homes on Green Belt land in his former constituency. To make matters worse, Spink’s home is located in the centre of the proposed development and together with a consortium of residents has been offered a sum considerably in excess of the market value of his home by Redrow should the application prove successful.
A brief four weeks ago, Bob Spink was happily announcing that he had rejoined UKIP. Nigel Farage had this to say of Bob:
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said: “I am delighted to welcome the hard-working and deeply principled Bob Spink as UKIP’s first Member of Parliament”.
Well, that is what he said in 2008 – he hasn’t mentioned that Bob Spink has rejoined the party.
Anybody checked if he’s paid his membership fee this time round? I would ask him, but his Twitter feed is padlocked…
UKIP are pretending they’ve never heard of him.
We have our first UKIP MP. To further paraphrase Margaret Thatcher’s words after the Falklands War:
“Just rejoice at that news and congratulate our force of activists.”
The last word goes to Bob:
Bob Spink, former Member of the UK Parliament, said:
“I’m not a politician. I’m not up for election anymore so I can speak honestly.” (BBC Radio 4 interview, September 6, 2014)
- Dioclese
October 10, 2014 at 12:01 pm -
A week is a long time in politics. 6 years is an eternity…
- Moor Larkin
October 10, 2014 at 12:32 pm -
The last word is always the punch line………
- Clarissa
October 10, 2014 at 12:50 pm -
As someone who lived in the borough of Castle Point from birth until 2004 and whose parents were members of the local Conservative Association (mum was branch secretary for many years) until recently, I don’t recognise the portrait of the area the landlady paints.
Firstly, there is no town of Castle Point. The constituency takes its name from two points within the area (Hadleigh Castle and Canvey Point) and contains the major settlements of South Benfleet, Canvey Island, Hadleigh, and Thundersley. The borough is a London commuter suburb, not a retirement home, with over 3.5m people (figures from the Office of Rail Regulation) going through the local station in 2013 alone. Most of those will be from Benfleet and Canvey since those in Hadleigh are closer to Leigh-on-Sea station. To put that figure in perspective, it is the 124th busiest station in a list of 2,535.
A quick potted history of Bob Spink as MP: He replaced the long serving Bernard Braine in 1992 (Bernard having been MP since 1955). He was ousted in 1997 in Blair’s first landslide before returning in 2001. I can’t recall all of the ins-and-outs of it now (and I suspect I didn’t hear all of it) but the relationship between Spink and the constituency party eventually broke down completely (after several years of acrimony) and he was slapped down in the HoC for raising the matter during the Budget debate in 2008. He subsequently quit the Tories and was booted out by the local electorate in 2010 for a piece of lobby fodder.
I met Spink a few times (first in 1991 at an Association BBQ as a spotty faced 12 year-old) and as I grew older my opinion of him hardened each time. He was, to me, not a nice piece of work.
As for the Independent Save Our Green Belt party, it is hardly a surprise that it didn’t do well on Canvey. The Canvey Island Independent Party have held almost all the seats on the Island since they have come up for election following the party’s formation in 2004. The cynical view is that they are (or were when they started) the local Labour party rebranding themselves in order to get elected. However the Labour party held the Castle Point council from 1995 (gain 31 seats that year and almost wiping out the local Tories – a sign of things to come) until 2003.
- JuliaM
October 10, 2014 at 1:34 pm -
As someone who works here, I concur with everything MG says!
- Jacqui Thornton
October 10, 2014 at 9:50 pm -
Small world, I also live in Castle Point and am currently spearheading the neighbours fighting the development of 178 houses on the Green Belt woodland, paddocks and network bridleways that our Bob is promoting.
Spink upset a large portion of the community when he submitted these plans as it transpired that the negotiations with those neighbours comprising ‘The Consortium’, had been ongoing, (unknown to us), at the same time he was canvassing our votes for his ‘Save the Green Belt Party’ and Spink was the one putting it all together. I run the Friends of Bowers Road Facebook Group and Bob lives just a few doors away. The FB group highlights the entire history of the dispute between Spink and his one time constituents regarding this matter, complete with press releases, documents and residents comments, some bitter, some angry and some very informative.
With regard to UKIP’s involvement, after spotting Spink on ITV in Clacton being promoted as ‘UKIP’s first MP, I searched and found he had just opened a Twitter account and was being promoted by the leader of our local UKIP. Knowing UKIP’s lowly footsoldiers had supported our cause, I felt compelled to respond.
https://twitter.com/GrahamSayer2/status/504941942854418432
Others waded in, someone tweeted a request whether he stood by UKIP’s stance on not developing on Green Belt land.. it got quite heated and Spink responded that he had requested that Council did NOT remove his land from the Green Belt…. BINGO! Just what we needed. He was either lying to UKIP to rekindle his political career, OR actually wanted to keep his land as Green Belt? Of course, we knew the Council was not not forcing his hand, we knew he was in line for handsome payoff for selling his land to Redrow, and we also knew he could remove his application any time, so I tweeted as much.
Spink then blocked his twitter account, but not before his tweet had been seen and reported by many. Almost instantly, our local UKIP parliamentary Candidate made contact… eager to ‘dispel the rumours’. He didn’t seem to know the history of our fight with Spink or believe my assertions about Spink being responsible for submitting his land for development and said we had no proof. I wrote to the council and asked them: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/47978776/CRRA%20residents%20letter%20to%20steve%20rogers%20sept%2014%20spinks%20pdf.pdf
A couple of days later,the council responded and Steve Rogers confirmed:
“Thank you for your letter dated 27th September 2014, regarding the inclusion of the land known as “King John Wood” in the Draft New Local Plan for Castle Point. I confirm that this site was originally suggested to the Council in July 2011 by a consortium of land owners (represented by Dr R Spink), as appropriate for release from the Green Belt and suitable for residential development…
… Any land owner may withdraw their interest in promoting development on their land
at any time.”Now to take this to our local UKIP representative who was busy tweeting my unwillingness to meet him for coffee and doughnuts??? Unfortunately, once I had the letter of proof to show him, he cancelled our appointment claiming he no longer wanted to meet me as I was politically biased and would not be having anything to do with the Facebook group, and claimed that neither did the leader of the Canvey Island Ind Party. He is still in contact with me and still posts info for the residents in the FB group.
Bob is a slippery character, and seems desperate to be Mr Important. Just how far he will be able to worm his way up the UKIP ladder remains to be seen. Although a hot potato in Castle Point, Southend seems to have welcomed him with open arms.
- Jacqui Thornton
October 10, 2014 at 9:53 pm -
**That is the Canvey Independent Party who are still involved with us, not UKIP
- Jacqui Thornton
- Jacqui Thornton
- JuliaM
- Engineer
October 10, 2014 at 2:59 pm -
Well, it may not be quite as politically seismic as somebody dropping Tom Watson and Eric Pickles from a great height into the House of Commons chamber, but it does make things politically ‘interesting’. Almost anything could happen at the 2015 general election – a minority Conservative or Labour government scrabbling for support from a motley bunch of Kippers, Greens, surviving Lib Dems and assorted Nats. If anybody thinks politics is too roudy now, wait ’till next year!
We now have the slightly unlikely prospect of Prime Minister Cameron standing at the dispatch box knowing that one of Farage’s henchmen is clutching his political balls. We also have the even more unlikely prospect (and I apologise in advance for this mental image) of Prime Minister Miliband standing at the dispatch box knowing that one of Farage’s henchmen is clutching his Balls….
- Engineer
October 10, 2014 at 3:00 pm -
Roudy? Rowdy, even. Sack the poof-reader, I say!
- Oi you
October 10, 2014 at 4:19 pm -
What lovely imagery, Mr Engineer. Brought tears to my eyes!
- Oi you
- Cascadian
October 10, 2014 at 8:33 pm -
Who would want the job of clutching Yvette’s Balls?
I can visualize Ed Balls will NOT be an MP come May, when UKIP can erase majorities like they did in Heywood, his position is very precarious. For that reason alone UKIP should stick with the very clever mantra-Vote conservative, get labour!
Ed Balls majority 2010=1121 votes.
Lots of very worried leaders and MP’s after last night, good to see Liebour in absolute panic mode after running on benefits of the NHS in Heywood and very nearly losing it all. Also good to to see the ever dim camoron repeating the vote UKIP get Ed mantra as it has now been successfully co-opted by UKIP, and it should be repeated often-vote conservative, get Milliband.
- Mudplugger
October 10, 2014 at 8:57 pm -
On C4 News tonight, the increasingly-bumbling Ken Clarke said that the 2015 general election fight would be “between David Cameron and David Miliband” – a Freudian slip, or not ?
It may be coincidental timing that the said Miliband Senior has just started showing up on our screens again, currently under the convenient guise of ebola and his International Rescue role (but without the puppet-strings showing) – spooky that.
On the same C4 item, elfin Yvette, the vaccuous future party leaderine, simply motor-mouthed her auto-drivel as ever, in a futile attempt to drag the topic away from Labour’s dismal showing under Miliband Minor.
We live in interesting political times.- Engineer
October 10, 2014 at 9:54 pm -
I wonder how the elfin Yvette will react to having one of Farage’s henchmen clutching her Balls?
- Engineer
- Frankie
October 10, 2014 at 9:59 pm -
‘…I can visualize Ed Balls will NOT be an MP come May.’
We can only hope…I have no idea whether UKIP is a ‘flash in the pan’, or an expression of the widespread frustration with the present political system. If nothing else it has the Conservatives and Labour worried, as they were over the vote on Scottish independence – so that is okay in my book.
Will they ever amount to more than a ‘… Bunch Of Fruitcakes, Loonies And Closet Racists?’ (per David Cameron) – well, I think time will tell. Who is to say that other political parties did not have a difficult birth and one or two hiccups early on in their proceedings. It is difficult to predict the outcome of the General Election, but if UKIP does nothing more than galvanise the electorate into using their precious vote to express their views then their presence in the melting pot of politics is welcomed. It enrages me that relatively so few bother to get off their idle backsides once every five years or so and pop down to their polling station. Look at what the Scots managed to do (for, admittedly a different prospect). I would welcome the system of a mandatory vote, as in Australia – even if it is a spoiled ballot paper.
One has to feel for the Liberal Democrats in some respects. If it is true that they chose to go in with the Conservatives to save the country then they have probably made the ultimate sacrifice and are perhaps destined to a decade or more in the political boonies. That broken promise on tuition fees has ruthlessly bitten them where it hurts.
I had entirely forgotten about Dr. Bob Spink… as, clearly had most people, but not our sharp witted landlady!
- Cascadian
October 10, 2014 at 11:27 pm -
UKIP is a protest party, where people can register there distaste of the other parties, there seems to be much to protest about-deficit, NHS, taxes, immigration, Rotherham (and many other cities throughout UK). If UKIP keep on message they should have an easy time of it.
This happened in Canada in the 1990’s with the Reform party, eventually through a lot of false starts and some necessary dilution of their aims they became the government under the Conservative banner, they have governed extremely well, have reduced our deficit to manageable proportions and have dealt with some of the more egregious bureaucratic idiocies, they are far from perfect.
Voters dissatisfaction can be registered very bluntly, if I remember correctly the Progressive Conservatives in Canada were reduced from 300 or so seats to 2 in the space of one election cycle
I see no reason to be sorry for liebour, conmen or dumblibs they have ruined the country over seventy years, time for some new thinking even if it is a little rough around the edges.
- Frankie
October 11, 2014 at 12:51 am -
Hmmm… I had never considered the vote in the terms you ascribe (i.e. in terms of a vote for the NHS) but that makes me even more perplexed at the basic lack of interest in expressing one’s opinion that seems so prevalent amongst the electorate. Given that the NHS (or the principle thereof) is, to my mind a shining example, one sufficiently well known internationally that a tribute to it formed part of the opening ceremony of the London Olympics, it is a sad fact that you point out the relative apathy exant.
Maybe I am just not thinking widely enough. Can it be that I, like tens of thousands of other voters have just helped to maintain the status quo, supported one, or other, of the mainstream parties; helped to keep them in power under which ever particular brand wins every few years, when what I should really be doing is helping to give them the major boot up the jaxie that I privately think all politicians truly deserve! Is it the truth that a party that challenges much of what I have taken to be the norm is the ice bucket of reality that I and others truly need? I have relatives in Canada and all that you say regarding the Reform party is arguably correct – not perfect, but, not lacking either.
There is a lot I need to think about prior to to my next visit to the ballot box…
- Cascadian
October 11, 2014 at 6:29 am -
My comment about the vote at Heywood was a bit of mischief-making because liebour framed the vote as “almost” a referendum of the NHS. But let us face facts, NHS is not “world-class” for the pensioners that have paid into it for a lifetime, it probably is “world-class” for health tourists arriving at your door having paid nothing into the system and demanding expensive treatment. Overall it is a barely adequate service poorly managed and run mainly for the benefit of health professionals and union workers.
I do believe my comment about liebour support holds, they (and indeed the conmen) have lost the faith of many pensioners and workers who have witnessed the decline of UK.
Apparently France has come to a major crossroads as they announced today they can no longer operate on deficit spending as they have for the past forty years, perhaps the same thinking could happen in the UK (doubt it).
- Cascadian
- Frankie
- Cascadian
- Mudplugger
- Engineer
- Don Cox
October 10, 2014 at 4:01 pm -
“a minority Conservative or Labour government scrabbling for support from a motley bunch of Kippers, Greens, surviving Lib Dems and assorted Nats.”
This is pretty much how the Israeli parliament (Knesset) works. It gives the extremists too much power, as they can always threaten to bring down the government.
- Edgar
October 10, 2014 at 9:44 pm -
But, here in the UK, the ‘mainstream’ parties are the extremists.
- Engineer
October 10, 2014 at 9:55 pm -
Well – extremely ‘samey’, perhaps.
- Engineer
- Edgar
- ukipcp
October 11, 2014 at 10:56 pm -
Jacqui Thornton says “Spink was being promoted by the leader of our local UKIP”
This is untrue. Jacqui was called immediately she made a concern and told in no uncertain terms he was not a member of Castle Point UKIP. She refused to accept this and publically continued to suggest he was actively involved whilst knowing he was not.
Jacqui then said that she took “this to our local UKIP representative who was busy tweeting my unwillingness to meet him for coffee and doughnuts??? Unfortunately, once I had the letter of proof to show him, he cancelled our appointment claiming he no longer wanted to meet me”
This also is untrue .A request had been sent to Jacqui over many months to meet but she never returned any calls .Finally after repeated calls to meet with her and members of her group to discuss she decided to still suggest on her site an unwillingness from UKIP to meet and the appointment was not cancelled once a letter of proof was shown. All of this is a fabrication.
It is no wonder then we could not engage with her personally due to her willful distortion of the facts and clear political bias.
To add to this she also made it very clear that at present she favoured the Conservative administration and far from being a non-political group she had become the cheerleader for them which resulted in many anti UKIP posts.
We wanted to engage her and her concerns but due to Jacqui’s strong feelings against UKIP decided she would not listen to what we have to say.
It is a shame that by her actions she moved the facebook page away from neutrality and by doing so alienated people that have spent many months trying to meet and discuss matters .We would love the opportunity to meet and have coffee and doughnuts with any other members of her Group should they so wish ,however so protective is she of this Facebook page I understand she failed to pass on this request to other members.Indeed I see no mention of the request on her site.It is a shame as by acting as a barrier she is preventing discussion with other members who may wish to meet us and do not share her anti UKIP sentiments
- Jacqui Thornton
October 12, 2014 at 11:43 pm -
Oh Dear, so sorry Anna that I seem to be responsible for triggering potential bar brawling in your fine establishment. I am only interested in saving my little bit of greenery…honest!
I doubt local political infighting is of much concern to your patrons, but I also know that when something does spark their interest, they have a thirst for evidence to back up claims. As such, should anyone be interested, I would like say this. I am not protective of the Facebook Group, far from it; it is open and always has been. Anyone who cares to can scroll back through all the posts, linked documents, comments, see who made them and get a chronological perspective. They can then draw their own conclusions on any political bias and judge the accuracy of the comments made about me above.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/129476140532865/379736858840124/?notif_t=group_comment
For the record, I have only ever spoken to UKIP’s Jamie Huntsman, our Castle Point UKIP Parliamentary Representative four times on the telephone, but have met him once. His email response to me after the first call on May 1st this year states:
“Hi Jacqui nice chatting see you Tuesday we all hope to be there. Jamie”
It refers to the Council Meeting on 6th May where Spink’s planning Application to develop his GB land was being heard and we were speaking in opposition. It throws doubt on his later Twitter comment where he claims he had never, ever spoken to me about Spink. However, in his defence, I do genuinely believe that he was sincere in his belief when he tweeted it, but had just not made the connections and joined up the dots.My second telephone conversation with him was on 12th September when he telephoned and assured me Spink was not a member of Castle Point UKIP, but that he was a member next door in Southend, a point which I DID report in the FB Group. He then told me there were two sides to every story and asked if we had evidence of Spink’s involvement in the development. He followed this up with an email:
“Thanks for chatting ,look forward to meeting your Group when its convenient for you all.”
The third telephone conversations with him occurred on Wed 1st October. I had the ‘evidence’ he required in the form of a letter from Castle Point Council confirming Spink instigated the development proposal. I informed the FB group members of this which can be seen on the Group page. I then offered to meet Jamie on Friday 3rd October via a tweet. He called just after lunch to arrange the details. During that call I again invited him to look and participate in the discussions on the FB Group, to familiarise himself with the cause, the details and residents views but he was still reluctant. I posted a comment to that effect which can also be seen on the Group FB page, adding that I would try again to persuade him when we met that Friday.
At around 6pm I received my fourth and final call from Jamie, cancelling the meeting and saying he no longer wanted anything to do with me or the group claiming that I was politically biased against UKIP. He began to relate what I was to say to the members of the FB Group, however, I asked that he email me his reasons in order that he would be quoted verbatim and I could not be accused of putting any spin on it, to which he agreed. No email was ever received.
My relationship with UKIP seems to have only broken down since 12th September and revolves entirely around the involvement of Spink and my voicing of my disapproval. Citing political bias as the basis of their reasons for that breakdown seems nonsense given our history of UKIP support and the fact that local councillors from various parties, including UKIP seem to have been actively participating in group discussions on local Green Belt and Planning issues and engaging on there with their electorate. It is a shame as on Green Belt issues, we did seem to be on the same page.
If Spink is anywhere near Castle Point in a political capacity it will undoubtedly have an effect on the locals. His actions are at odds with what our UKIP representatives had previously told us was their policy on Green Belt development. It certainly must be an embarrassment for Castle Point UKIP, especially as there is now the confirmation from Castle Point Council that he seems to have forgotten to tell them that it was in fact him who submitted the GB land for development.
I am at a loss as to why they seem so protective of his wider involvement with their party, passing it off as not their responsibility and not acknowledging his local track record which is bound to be detrimental to them. This last week UKIP supporters were joining and spamming the Group with non Green Belt/Planning UKIP related posts. I am trying to deal with as patiently as possible, but I do have to wonder over their motives, we are just a Save our Green Belt campaign after all? We will naturally lean wherever suits the purpose of the Green Belt Campaign and will of course continue to work with those UKIP supporters still on the FB Group who are championing our cause.
Spink is a slippery character and given his track record he won’t be happy until he has re-established some status for himself. This time it seems that status will be back in UKIP. James Moyies (UKIP Southend) has just proposed him for their NEC and some local UKIP hopeful may very soon find themselves put out to pasture if favour of Bandwagon Bob. As someone said earlier, a week is a long time in politics.
Hopefully order will now be resumed in the Raccoon Arms and I will now slope back to the snug and sip quietly on my Guinness…
- ukipcp
October 13, 2014 at 12:01 am -
The facts are simple we tried to engage with you and you misrepresented and misquoted us . You declined repeated offers to meet and have now posted many falsehoods here again.
It has become very clear you are no longer an apolitical Group and by your own admission favour the Tory position.
You have a deep rooted grievance with Bob Spink and will not accept what you have been personally told that he is not a member of our branch instead you continually use it as a stick to beat us with.
We would have liked to work with you but every time we have tried you have dismissed us.It is in the interests of your Group that you work with all Parties but by your actions alone you have made it clear we would never get a fair even handed hearing.
It has been reported to us that members of your Group are unhappy with the direction you have taken and are shocked you have taken the position you have.
- Jacqui Thornton
October 13, 2014 at 2:07 am -
The facts are simple, I have detailed them above and have backed them up with the chronological evidence that I have available. Any falsehoods you feel I am promoting, I suggest you please do the same.
No, I did not decline repeated offers to meet, unless you count a barrage of tweets all on the one day. Attempts to meet with me were between 12th September and 1st Oct, during which time I obtained the evidence requested to prove Bobs involvement and it was me who tweeted Jamie and offered to meet him 1pm on Friday 3rd.
The group is not a political one. It will however naturally follow whoever it is felt is helping achieve the objective, namely Saving our Green Belt. Personally, I don’t care who that is and welcome all people from any party to join in with constructive comments and action. I will say it once more, it has always been a politically unbiased group, but it is the local Tory Group and this Governments new Planning Policies that have come in for one hell of a bashing, more than any other party on there. UKIP had received no negative comments at all until this raised its head with Spink. However, since the elections in May, member of the new cross party Council Administration have been actively offering help for potentially saving our site. There are no promises, but they are talking to residents in the Group, as is CIIP and one of our UKIP Councillors. By definition, the more active a particular councillor may be on the Group, the more it could seem biased toward their party, but that is why I encourage all party participation, to balance it out. You are right, and I state it often, it is in the interest of the group and our cause to work with all parties. The persistent spamming of non related postings and political infighting that the Group is now suffering (Something that has only started since September), serve no purpose on the Group wall, to the Group or to the cause.
I am curious where you think I have admitted favouring the Tory Administration? Maybe you could back your claim up with the evidence.
Yes, we have a grievance with Bob. As neighbours we supported him when he stood for the ‘Save Our Green Belt’ Party, only to find out that at the same time he had negotiated with other neighbours and had developed the consortium to develop a housing estate on the GREEN BELT woodland, Bridleways, paddocks and scrub of which his land was a part. For him to then align himself with a party that claims to support saving the Green Belt whilst he is still pursuing this development seems a slight conflict of interest. The residents in support of the Campaign will continue to question anything associated with Bob Spink for as long as their Green Belt is under threat, and if he associates himself with UKIP, telling them he does NOT want the Council to allow development of his land, of course they are going to question UKIP as to their position.
However, as stated in my post above, the fact he is not a member of your branch WAS accepted and posted to members in the Group.
For you to claim that members of the Group have reported to you they are not happy with me and the direction I have taken the group has no substance without any back up. If members are unhappy with the direction the group is taking, they are free to express those feelings on the Group wall, contact me privately or leave. The Group is its members, but its strength is in cooperation and participation.
Now, Anna is a well respected blogger and her site is not the place for silly, small time personal squabbles. It is doing a disservice to her to conduct one here. I don’t know who you are , but if you really feel the need to continue your personal attacks on me, can I suggest we remove ourselves from this establishment and request that you either email me, or PM me via the Group. Your colleagues have my email address.
One again, my apologies Anna.
- ukipcp
October 13, 2014 at 9:56 am -
For you to say UKIP members were joining and started spamming the Group is wholy untrue as you well know. Long standing members of your own Group so upset by your political bias and UKIP bashing felt they should have their say. You went so far as to remove some of their posts.You were also contacted over a long period of time to meet until you eventually very reluctantly agreed .You seem to prefer hiding behind social media than meeting in person.Having arranged this meet you immediately went on your facebook page and inferred UKIP did not want to engage with you which was the opposite of what happened.It was felt then that you were intent on misrepresenting our views.
You say Bob Spink is slippery,by your actions and the way you have not been even handed along with your distorted version of events suggest the same could be said about you.
- Moor Larkin
October 13, 2014 at 10:12 am -
Maggie would have said, “Slippery when wet”………
- Jacqui Thornton
October 13, 2014 at 1:18 pm -
This is getting tiresome.
The spamming of the group can be seen. The influx of new membership and who they are can be seen. Who is posting what comment can be seen. Happy for anyone, including long standing members to have their say about the way the group is handling what is was set up to do, i.e. saving this area of Green Belt, which so far nobody has. Only two posts have been hidden or deleted, both from an Edd Lorkin, both had nothing to do with the aims of the group and that was explained to Mr Lorkins.
If the link works, you should be able to view one here:https://www.facebook.com/groups/129476140532865/382504578563352/?notif_t=group_comment_reply
I have also kept screen shots of his posts and the comments made should anyone wish to see them and judge for themselves whether they were relevant to the purpose of the group, and if I was fair in my explanation to the person posting why they were being hidden. I suggest maybe that anyone who feels their post is in danger of being removed by me does the same, at least then you will have some proof of your accusations.
(As a gesture of goodwill, I did offer Mr Lorkins a donation for the charity that the UKIP representative was promoting, Diabetas UK, but he declined saying it was too late. I did say raffles could be run at any time and other forms of sponsorship from my company could be offered. He replied he may take me up on it.)
Again, I have not been contacted over a long period of time, only where specified in my previous post. You don’t seem to be offering anything to back up these claims… when was I contacted, how and by whom?
Having ‘arranged this meet’, I immediately went on Facebook… and informed them that I was meeting with Jamie Huntsman! Good God man, the posts are still there for all to see!
To end, I would like to ask, what do you think of the Post made last Friday in the Group by Cllr Dave Blackwell of the Canvey Island Independent Party, alerting members to a new submission to the council for a development on Green Belt Land in Hart Road?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=934748296539294&set=gm.380976488716161&type=1&theater
It shows the Group doing what it was set up to do. Cllr. Blackwell, (CIIP), Cllr. Sharp (Con), Cllr Paul Varker (UKIP), myself and numerous residents all managed to converse, inform and share information with each other to assess the site, its impact and what potential action could be taken. No political squabbling, no point scoring and no moaning about bias. Just a practical example of putting the good of the community as a whole before politics, an action of working together that instils a just a little bit of confidence in our politicians.
- Moor Larkin
- ukipcp
- Jacqui Thornton
- ukipcp
- Jacqui Thornton
- Cloudberry
October 11, 2014 at 11:32 pm -
How long did ukipcp have to play around with their name/e-mail to get a purple swastika logo?
- ukipcp
October 11, 2014 at 11:46 pm -
As you well know,users do not choose any logo.I suggest it says more about your nature and prejudices that you try and make something appear false.I hope this is not another site dedicated to cheap political point scoring
- right-writes
October 14, 2014 at 11:20 am -
I briefly scanned the comments, but may have missed it…
I cannot accept that UKIP are denying the existence of Dr. Bob Spink….
Because he made a speech at the recent conference in September 2014 in Doncaster:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04jyp15/ukip-conference-2014-27092014
Starts at around 41:50.
- Jacqui Thornton
October 17, 2014 at 5:19 pm -
It seems a week is a long time in Politics.
- Ted Pugh
March 25, 2015 at 1:50 pm - ukipcp
October 13, 2014 at 12:44 pm -
You will no doubt be pleased to hear I will not comment further .There are two sides to every story and I have put mine.I will now leave my computer,there is a big wonderful world out there. Have a lovely day
{ 48 comments… read them below or add one }