The EU an Evil Union

These United Kingdoms are now, largely against the will of the informed peoples and by the betrayal of our own Politicians and Snivil Cervants a satellite state of the Greater European Empire, broken into emasculated Regions under a Common Purpose, ruled by a corrupt post democratic unelected Dictator Committee of a supra National supreme government in Brussels. We owe this undemocratic malign self serving foreign and very allien government neither loyalty nor obedience. It is not lawfully our government. It is theirs. It is our enemy and part of the greater enemy The New World Order.

Tuesday, 9 November 2010

UKIP: Ms Bonici, Farage and the Pan-European Alliance

UKIP: Ms Bonici, Farage and the Pan-European Alliance

Sharon Ellul Bonici, front woman for Nigel Farage's new pan-European political party, and Maltese Marxist candidate in last year's Euro-elections, has urged the EU to accept a Libyan proposal on immigration, and has voiced her support for the EU's "FRONTEX" border management project based in Warsaw.

She said in a statement that the EU should be able to spare a billion euros towards effectively solving the problem.

Ms. Ellul Bonici welcomed Libya's proposal for a $1 billion in EU aid in exchange for collaboration to stem illegal immigration.

"Some people are saying this is blackmail on Libya's part, but I don't see it that way. Combating illegal immigration is costly. The EU should take this opportunity and make sure it paves the way towards a readmission agreement with Libya," Ms. Ellul Bonici added.

"Then it should strengthen Frontex in order to patrol the EU border and deal with the whole process itself - from asylum applications to readmission and reallocation...íf it takes another billion towards solving this problem it would be a billion well spent" she concluded.

Now we might argue that such political naiveté is a charming little cameo of an island on which compulsory schooling is a relatively new concept. However it is not something that we in the UK might welcome, and in particular the centre-right membership of UKIP might wonder why a UKIP MEP is employing a person who subscribes to such left-wing views. It is the case that UKIP's resident clown, Godfrey Bloom, who left the financial services industry in disgrace after attracting a whopping great fine for his company, is indeed employing Ms. Ellul Bonici as the nominal secretary of Nigel Farage's latest money-spinning pan-European initiative. Of course, this is not a decision that Bloom would have reached on his own - he is Farage's ho, and he does as he is told.

Also see: LINK & LINK
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, 3 November 2010

So The New BONICI Construct 'Alliance For Freedom' is pro EU Membership as Reformists!

So The New BONICI Construct 'Alliance For Freedom' is pro EU Membership as Reformists!


may I take the lioberty of pointing out just how glibly Sharon Ellul - BONICI uses the term EUroRealist!

Mrs. ELLUL is clearly, from her own comments, pro EU membership and NOT a withdrawalist - it is interesting to note that Godfrey Bloom as a UKIP MEP was elected on the claims that he was a withdrawalist and wished to represent the views of those who wished to leave.

Now I note Godfrey Bloom is no longer interested in leaving The EU but supports Mrs. Sharon Ellul - BONICI who has said:

On the EU referendum
Five years ago, the people were faced with an option: either to join the EU, or not to join. For my part I argued that we should not join, because membership would be detrimental to Malta. As for the referendum, I always wanted to respect that vote...
MaltaToday, February 2009
On withdrawing from the EU
I personally disagree: in fact I think it would be political suicide. The damage to our international reputation would be irreversible. We would project the image of an unreliable nation that can’t make up its own mind. This in turn would diminish our standing in international fora... which would negatively affect foreign investment... and ultimately, the citizens would suffer.”
MaltaToday, February 2009
Enhanced by Zemanta

Can or should I say Will Ms. BONICI be able to answer a few Questions posed by BARBOO

Can or should I say Will Ms. BONICI be able to answer a few Questions posed by BARBOO
perhaps Ms. Bonici would care to assist Barboo with some answers to the questions below - if Ms. Bonici would care to mail me at or phone me on 01291 - 62 65 62 to provide some clarification I will be only too happy to publish her response, to broadcast her reply to a wider audience.
Here are a few questions from Barboo:
Those who promote joining a pan-European party as a means of acquiring large amounts of EU funding are careful to avoid mentioning the cost attached to membership of such a party before this funding can be accessed. What will the membership fee amount to, and how will it be calculated? As a percentage of UKIP members' existing party subscriptions? As an extra sum levied on members? Or by some other formula?
Certainly there will have to be some contribution from UKIP if it decides to join the European Alliance. EU regulations stipulate that a maximum 85% of an EU-party's budget can be provided by EU funding, but the remaining 15% must be contributed by the party itself from other sources. Those sources are not allowed to include donations from EP political groups or donations above 12,000 euros from any individual supporter, so, depending on how much EU funding the European Alliance qualifies for, a further sum will have to be provided by the national parties which make up the Alliance.
How much of this sum will have to be contributed by UKIP depends on whether it is divided equally between the constituent parties. That seems unlikely, as it would be disproportionate for an organisation such as Germany's tiny Stroppy Citizens' Party (BiW) to have to pay as much as a party with thousands of members and several MEPs. As the Alliance member with the largest number of MEPs UKIP could reasonably expect to have to contribute the lion's share of a minimum 15% of the Alliance's total budget.
'Minimum' because EU regulations allow the constituent parties to provide up to 40% of their EU party budget, thus enabling parties that qualify for only a relatively small amount of funding to supply from their own resources the rest of what they need to operate on an EU-wide scale. The European Alliance would get an equal share with other EU parties of 15% of the total EU funding pot, and a share of the remaining 85% in proportion to the number of MEPs it has, so as one of the smaller parties it is likely that it would have to contribute nearer 40% of its budget itself. How much of that would be required from UKIP?
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, 30 October 2010

Notes on the huge downside to UKIP joining a pan EUropean party

Notes on the huge downside to UKIP joining a pan EUropean party

On the day Cameron returns from Brussels having agreed to a de facto EU Treasury crying triumph I have saved the UK £400mn although we still have to pay an extra £400 mn I reproduce below Tim Congdon's notes on UKIP's similar triumph bought by Bloom for a similar huge strategic give away.

Bloom and his boss Farage are quite happy to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage as it says in the Bible!

The funding of pan-European political parties

The following notes have been sent to me by Mr. Richard Teather, senior lecturer in tax law at Bournemouth University, to whom I am most grateful.

1) Pan-European political parties (or “Europarties”) are meant to be funded "from the general budget of the European Union", although funds are actually administered by the European Parliament.

2) Europarties are alliances of national political parties.  Although theoretically individuals could join a Europarty directly, they generally do not.

3) Europarties overlap with, but are different from, the "groups" within the European Parliament. (Thus, before 1999 the Conservative Party was not a member of the European People's Party as a Europarty, but it was a member of the EPP Group within the European Parliament.)

4) The party must meet various conditions to be approved as a “Europarty”, the main ones being:
  a) it must have political representation (at MEP, MP or regional assembly level) in at least a quarter of EU Member States [i.e., in seven states];
  b) it must "observe, in particular in its programme and in its activities, the principles on which the European Union is founded, namely the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law"; and
  c) it must "have participated in elections to the European Parliament, or have expressed the intention to do so".

5) Funding of 10.6 million euros per year* is available and to be shared between all the recognised Europarties.  Some funding (1.6 million euros) goes equally to each recognised Europarty, but the remaining 9 million euros is divided up according to the number of MEPs each Europarty has.  It is therefore very valuable for a Europarty to have MEP members. At a rough calculation, each MEP member must be worth almost 15,000 euros p.a. to the Europarty. (* The number relates to 2008 and is probably much higher in 2011.)

6) Restrictions are imposed on what a Europarty can do with its funds. In particular funds can only be used for pan-European campaigns, not for "direct or indirect funding of national political parties or candidates", and funds cannot be used "to finance referenda campaigns". 

7) Additional funding of 5 million euros (again, the figure relates to 2008) for European “foundations” where “foundations” are think-tanks linked to each Europarty.

8) A Europarty based on the current EFD group (which has 32 members) would get funding of almost 600,000 euros p.a. plus funding of around 250,000 euros for an associated "foundation". 

These notes make sense given what I have heard elsewhere about the funding of pan-European political parties, but raise further questions. In fact, the whole subject is puzzling.

On the face of it, the EFD group would pick up a little under one million euros a year if all its constituent parties – including the UK Independence Party – decided to form a Europarty. 
Frankly, this is chickenfeed relative to
i.         the larger issues raised by the UK’s membership of the European Union and
ii.       the sums of money routinely discussed in British political fund-raising.
I am astonished that anyone involved in the leadership of UKIP could want to convert the party into a Europarty for such a trivial amount.

True enough, the basis of allocation between the notional Europarties is such as to encourage “groups” to convert themselves into “Europarties”. The European Union imposes a limit on the total that can be spent on Europarties. In other words, the trough has only a finite amount of swill inside it. If one group in the European Parliament does not convert itself into a Europarty (such as the proposed “European Alliance”), the amount of swill available for the other groups (i.e., those which do convert themselves) is higher than would otherwise be the case. Hence, the two sentences in the Bonici e-mail, “The European Alliance will help parties dissiminate [sic – she meant ‘disseminate’] information by using European funds available to us, and if we don't apply the other Parties/Alliances such as the PES, EPP, Greens etc... will have the money which is allocated to us to share between them. Basically it is like giving ammunition to your enemy for free.”

Nevertheless, it remains unclear to me what advantage UKIP would get from belonging to a Europarty such as the proposed “European Alliance”. The 600,000 euros (plus or minus 250,000 euros) could not be used for a specifically British political purpose in this country, but must instead be part of a pan-European political programme of some sort. Since the UK Independence Party is the only significant political force in the European Parliament committed to its nation’s withdrawal from the EU, how could such a pan-European political programme be to UKIP’s benefit?

Interestingly, Europarty money cannot be used for the purposes of promoting referendums. Indeed, this seems to be specifically identified as an unacceptable destination of Europarty money. 
There is an obvious - indeed hilarious – discrepancy between item 6 in Richard Teather’s notes above, and item 4, with its assertion that the EU “is founded” on “the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law". Democracy? Oh, yes, the EU is founded on the principle of democracy, until Europe’s peoples vote against further European integration. When any of Europe’s peoples vote that way, the EU and its related “political class” ignores their democratic verdicts. Remember how the EU’s politicians and bureaucrats overrode referendum results in Ireland, France, the Netherlands, etc.

Since any money arising from Europarty status cannot be used to promote UKIP in the UK, I cannot see any purpose in seeking Europarty status. My view is that UKIP should have nothing to do with Europarties.

28th October, 2010
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, 29 October 2010

British Democracy Forum PLAYING CATCH-UP ON UKIP NEWS! 29-Oct-2010

Trusted Member Barboo is doing well

Join Date
Mar 2007

Default European Alliance for Freedom

GLW has a posted a memo from Tim Congdon re the creation of a new pan-European party to be called 'European Alliance for Freedom', and UKIP's possible involvement in this project. Included in the memo is an e-mail from a Sharon Ellul Bonici stating that the European Alliance hopes to become strong in the 2014 Euro-elections, and that MEPs can join either as a Party or as individuals. Godfrey Bloom is listed among those who have confirmed their intention of doing so.

UKIP MEPs sought election on an unequivocal platform of withdrawal from the EU. It is what party members and supporters worked for, contributed funds for, and what the electorate voted for. 'Campaign policies Euro elections 2009', posted to UKIP's website on 8 May 2009, stated: "The UK Independence Party believes that the UK should withdraw from the European Union". 'Campaign letter from UKIP Leader Nigel Farage MEP', posted 11 May 2009, began: "The UK Independence Party is the only moderate, democratic party to advocate Britain's withdrawal from the European Union", and continued: "On June 4, please lend us your vote. Say No to European Union and help UKIP ensure that the future of our nation is decided by those of us who live here. There can surely no longer be any question that Britain would be better off out".

Withdrawal from the EU was and still is UKIP's policy and principle aim, and its MEPs have no mandate from the party or the electorate to sit in the European parliament and speak, vote on or represent anything else.

UKIP MEPs' alliance with those of other, non-withdrawalist, parties in their EP group has always been contentious, but the nature of EP groupings is a loose one whereby the parliament's rules assume (but do not require proof of) political affinity between group members, unless they state otherwise. In addition, the EFD's political platform is vague and allows its different delegations the freedom to vote as they see fit, a freedom which is taken full advantage of with other EFD members frequently voting in favour of motions on which UKIP's MEPs abstain or vote against.

This will not apply to members of a pan-EU party, and those who join the European Alliance will not simply be 'assumed' to have political affinity. In order to be approved as a political party and granted EP funding they will have to agree common objectives and draw up a political programme to work to, which they will have to submit with their funding application. Any change to that programme must be notified to the parliament or the funding will be suspended.

None of the parties or individuals named in the Bonici e-mail, other than Godfrey Bloom, are withdrawalists. They are reformists who wish to remain in the EU and whose political programme will reflect that intention. Even the name adopted by the new party makes no reference to independence or anything else that might suggest withdrawal. Indeed, a European Alliance for Freedom does no more than echo the EU's own description of itself as 'an area of freedom, security and justice'. Any UKIP MEPs joining this party will in effect have crossed the floor to pursue political objectives for which they have no mandate.

They cannot in these circumstances continue to be regarded as UKIP MEPs, and for the party to keep faith with its members and its electorate it will have to expel any MEP who joins the European Alliance for Freedom.
To view the original on what was The UKIP Forum now risibly called The British Democracy Forum CLICK HERE
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, 27 October 2010



Could even the UK Independence Party be bribed in this way? Of course not, you might say. Well, unfortunately it's a little more complicated. The last few weeks have seen rumours that a new pan-European political party would be formed, with the UK Independence Party (or at any rate UKIP MEPs) being invited to join. I have been hoping that these rumours were untrue. But an e-mail has been sent to UKIP MEPs by a lady called Sharon Bonici and, if I have read it correctly, it is a clear-cut invitation to participate in the development of a pan-European political party. I understand that it has been sent to UKIP MEPs. Indeed, the e-mail says that Mr. Godfrey Bloom has "confirmed" that he does wish to participate in the new pan-European political party, to be known as "the European Alliance". 

I stand open to correction (and would in fact like to be wrong), but my interpretation of the Bonici e-mail is that extra money will be made available to the MEPs of national parties - not necessarily to their salaries, of course - who decide to belong to the European Alliance. Perhaps Ms. Bonici - to whom I suppose this e-mail will be forwarded - might like to repudiate that suggestion, if it is untrue.

For myself, I would like to reiterate what I have said throughout the 2010 election campaign for the leadership of the UK Independence Party, that
1. I do not want to be a MEP,
2. I intend to finance from my own resources (up to £100,000 a year) a London-based office which is to concentrate on the organization of UKIP political campaigning in the UK, and
3. The centre of gravity of the UK Independence Party must be in the UK.
At the Torquay party conference in September I supported the motion, proposed by Steph McWilliam, that the party membership must be consuulted on the question of UKIP's involvement in a pan-European political party. As is well-known in party circles, Nigel Farage opposed the motion. The motion was in fact carried overwhelmingly. In my view, the party membership must be consulted on a possible development of this kind, which is basic to the purpose and definition of the UK Independence Party, and even in fact to its very name.

Gerard Batten MEP has sent me an e-mail to say that he will respect and abide by the Torquay conference motion.

I hope that all three other candidates in the current leadership election will confirm that they will abide by the Torquay conference vote on this subject and, more generally, will respect the principle of party democracy.

Memo on an e-mail from Sharon Bonici to interested individuals (including UKIP MEPs) about a new pan-European party, to be called “the European Alliance I have highlighted key passages of the e-mail in red. Note that the e-mail refers to:

1. The proposed new party, to be called “the European Alliance”, without clarifying whether – for example – existing Eurosceptic parties, such as the UK Independence Party, are to keep their present names in future elections.

2. The alleged urgency of making a decision about participation in such a pan-European party. (To whom and what are the “paper work” to be handed in? The question is basic.)

3. “European funds” being made “available to us”. (From whom are such funds coming? The European Parliament? Assume that the funds come from the European Parliament. Then – in the event that UKIP MEPs were to participate in “the European Alliance” – their activities would be funded by the European Parliament, an institution avowedly central to the project of European integration.)

4. The possibility of the “consent” of party members, the meaning of which is (to me at least) unclear, but may intended as a fig-leaf to pacify those UKIP members who at the 2010 Torquay party conference voted overwhelmingly that the issue of pan-European parties must be decided by the party membership.

5. Godfrey Bloom, as already confirming his wish to participate in the European Alliance project. (Mr. Bloom is said to be “EFD”, not “UKIP”. EFD stands, of course, for “Europe of Freedom and Democracy”, the existing pan-European grouping to which a majority of UKIP MEPs are attached.)

6. A closing line, in which the European Parliament is acknowledged as having the power “to approve the new Alliance”. This is – almost certainly – the power to approve the Alliance, meaning the power to approve the Alliance in order to establish the Alliance’s eligibility for various monies from the European Parliament because it meets certain criteria of pan-European-ness. 

These notes prepared by Tim Congdon on 27th October, 2010.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

Sharon Ellul BONICI Announces UKIP's Inclusion - Members @ 26-Oct-2010

From: European Alliance For Freedom []
26 October 2010 12:57
To: xxxxxxx
Subject: European Alliance For Freedom
Dear xxxxxxxxxxx,

 We are currently setting up
a new European Alliance and most members I spoke to who are joining or joined would really like to see you on board. I would like to set up a meeting with you to discuss and hope to get your interest in being part of this new poject. I will be in parliament today Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday this week and would appreciate if we can meet up at your convenience. We need to hand in all the paper work and signautres by the end of the week, so this is a bit urgent.

Alliance will serve to build campaigns across Europe to promote various causes; For example one of the first campaings we can engage ourselves in is to generate 1 million signatures to be able to instigate a pan wide European referendum on Turkey. The idea is to use the million signature clause according to the Lisbon Treaty.

We can build a multilingual website for people to sign up and advertise it in every member state. This will automatically gives us a huge database of Eurosceptics and people across
Europe with the same ideology. In time we need to campaign again on another issue we can engage these people on various campaigns and keep the Commission on their toes.

We will print research publication in various languages.

The Alliance will help parties dissiminate information by using European funds available to us, and if we don't apply the other Parties/Alliances such as the PES, EPP, Greens etc... will have the money which is allocated to us to share between them. Basically it is like giving ammunition to your enemy for free.

Alliance can finance various campaigns in your country if you are members with billboards, TV adverts,newspaper adverts,leaflets etc...or any other campaigns you decide you want to do in your country.

The Alliance will not get involved politically in any country without the consent of its members.

You can join as a Party or as individual members of the European Parliament. We would like to have you as our Danish representitives on board and our aim is to have representation in every European country including those that are not EU members such as
Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. We also hope that in the next European Elections we can become a strong voice in the European Parliament in 2014

So far we have the following confirmed -

1.Godfrey Bloom MEP - UK (UK- EFD)

2.Sweden Democrats - Sweden 20 MP's in the national parliament

3.BIW - Germany - 1 member in the regional parliament

4.Frank Van Hecke MEP- Belgium
   Philip Claeys MEP

5. Paksas Rolandas MEP (EFD)
    Imbraras Juozas MEP
 Still to confirm or be confirmed -

6. PVV - Nederlands

7.Provero Fiorello MEP - (Italy -EFD)
8.Paska Jaroslav  MEP- (Slovakia -EFD)

9.Fiorello Provera MEP -(Italy -EFD)
We do have other parties and members who are interested but at the moment we would like to take it step by step until we apply and everything is set with like minded people.

I thank you for your time and attention, should you wish for more info do not hesitiate to contact me by email or on
Mobile: xxxxxxxxxx.

Hope to receive a positive reply and to have you on board this new venture.

Attached please find a copy of the statute and an application form. For the moment everything is provisional and subject to change in the first congress
if we are approved by parliament as a new Alliance.

Best Regards,
Sharon Ellul Bonici
Enhanced by Zemanta