The Electoral Commission is to appeal the ruling that UKIP should only pay back £18,481 of the £367,697 donations it recieved in good faith that later turned out to be unacceptable.

The largest part of the contested amount is a donation from Alan Brown, a retired bookmaker, who was taken off the electoral register without his knowledge for a 12 month period.  Another smaller part of the money is a donation was from a company in the Isle of Man which is considered to be a foreign donation under electoral law.

The Electoral Commission said “As it is the first time that the law on forfeiture of impermissible donations has been tested in court, we believe it is important to clarify the law in this area.”  The reason why it has never been tested before is because they didn’t take the Lib Dems or Tories to court over their recent illegal donations which were both far more substantial and taken in much more dubious circumstances but instead decided to pick on UKIP in what can only be a deliberate attempt to bankrupt the party.

The rules on accepting foreign donations were designed to stop parties from accepting large amounts of money from overseas and were brought in as a result of allegations of bribery and corruption against the “big three”, not UKIP or any of the other small parties.

The High Court has found partially in favour of UKIP and against the Electoral Commission in UKIP’s appeal against the Electoral Commission’s ruling that it should hand over a £367k donation to the Treasury.

The donation was given by Alan Brown, a millionaire bookmaker, but fell foul of rules designed to catch foreigners buying political patronage because Mr Brown had failed to put himself on the electoral register for the year the donation was made in.  Both Alan Brown and UKIP maintain that it was an oversight and that Mr Brown was still resident and paying taxes in the UK.

UKIP appealed the decision to take the donation off them for the Gordon Brown slush fund on the basis that the punishment didn’t fit the “crime”.  The Illiberal Dimwits were also guilty of taking a donation that fell foul of the same rules, albeit in far more dubious circumstances, but the Electoral Commission barely batted an eyelid over it.

A couple of the commenters on Mr Dale’s blog have suggested that the High Court decision is all part of a British government plot to keep UKIP in the black so they can continue taking votes of the Tories.  Most entertaining but UKIP really don’t need the benevolence of No Mandate Brown and his rump cabinet – they had a pledge from a supporter to repay the donation, pay any fine and cover costs if necessary so they were in no danger of going under.

The fact that the Electoral Commission decided to make an example of UKIP shows that the establishment is seeing UKIP as a threat.  The European Federation is the biggest threat this country has faced for a long time and the top three parties are all collaborating to hand over our country to their masters on the continent.  The Tory membership is opposed to our continued subjection to Federal Europe but the party leadership is another matter.  Blind loyalty to the party means that grassroots Tories will continue to allow the treacherous Tory leadership to sell the country up the river over the channel.

The Conswervative Party has a Welsh manifesto for the Welsh Assembly elections in May.  It also has a Scottish manifesto for the Scottish Parliament elections.  The same goes for the Liebour Party and the Lib Dums.

There is one national party that has an English manifesto – UKIP.

The Electoral Commission, sock-puppet of the Labour government, has intimated that it may force UKIP to forfeit £363,697 in donations from Alan Brown, a former bookmaker and the main donor for the party.

Alan Brown, apparently unbeknown to himself or UKIP, was not on the electoral register during December 2004 and January 2006.  He was permanently resident in the country as he has been all his life but because he made a donation during that fourteen month period it is classed as taken a donation from an overseas resident – an offence under the Political Parties and Referendums Act 2000.

If the Electoral Commission insists the money has to be forefeited the money will be passed to the Crown.  UKIP Chairman, John Whittaker, says that it could bankrupt the party which is not cash or asset rich but doesn’t have any debts unlike the Conservatives who are selling their headquarters to pay bills or Labour who are unable to service their debts or pay wages on time and are technically insolvent.

The Lib Dems received a large donation from an overseas resident who made the donation through a company which has never been proven to operate in the UK.  Donations by overseas residents are permitted as long as it is made through a company that operates in the UK – this is how Labour got away with receiveing their £2m donation from Lakshmi Mittal who lives in India but whose company operates in the UK.  The Lib Dems, however, were not forced to repay the donation which would have bankrupted them even though there is still no evidence that the company through which the donation was made has ever traded in the UK.

If UKIP is forced to forfeit this donation then it at least proves one thing – the British government is seriously concerned about losing out to UKIP in the coming elections and will do anything it can to try and take them out of the running.  Yes, the donations were technically illegal but the circumstances surrounding them are dubious and it is pretty clear that there was no intentional illegality.  It’s hardly on a par with cash for peerages is it?

The UK Independence Party is considering changing its name to the Independence Party.

This can only be a good thing for UKIP – the UK is in its death throes with Scottish independence imminent and support for the union at an all time low and only going to get lower if we end up with a Prime Minister elected in Scotland.

A number of people have said to me that they would ditch their current party (mainly Tories) and and switch alleigence to UKIP if only they would change their name to the Independence Party.

The name change is being supported by Nigel Farage, the party leader and many high-ranking UKIPers.

The following just dropped into my inbox from a senior UKIPer:

I’ve criticised UKIP in the past for basically being a single issue party of amateurs.  However, two things have changed since the last time I heckled UKIP – I have become a staunch EU-sceptic and I have been to the UKIP party conference today.

UKIP are still effectively a single-issue party.  Their main objective is – and probably always will be – leaving the EU.  This is all well and good but what do they do if they get into power and leave the EU?  What are their policies on education, health, law and order, etc.?

UKIP have just announced a new policy on taxation.  They propose a £9k tax-free allowance and a flat 33% tax rate.  I doubt the sums add up anyway but this is dangerously similar to the Lib Dems policy of hammering high earners with high taxes and that has been one of the main barriers to Lib Dem support in England where, by rights, they should be mopping up middle-England Labour supporters who have become disaffected with Chairman Bliar.

So, they now have two policies which isn’t really a lot for a serious political party although to be fair that’s two more than David Cameron currently has. 😉

Going to the conference today actually quite impressed me.  I went to meet Jim Kelly, their regions expert, to talk about the West Midlands NO! campaign and see what UKIP were planning to do about opposing the regions.  The Tory MP’s I have heard from so far have all said they oppose the regions but basically, “what can we do unless we’re in power?” which is a bit disappointing coming from Her Majesty’s Opposition.  I found out some very useful information about the regions and Jim Kelly certainly knew his subject inside out.  When I asked him what UKIP were doing about the regions he umm’d and aah’d a bit and said “to be honest, not enough” and then called over Mike Natrass, the UKIP MEP for the West Midlands.

The two of them had a chat and decided that it was about time they did something about the regions, nominated someone to come up with some policies (in his absence, poor bloke :o)) and that was it, the decision was made – UKIP are going to start properly opposing regional government.  It was this willingness to listen to a member of the public, someone they knew nothing about and then make a decision there and then without going through endless spin doctors and PR groups that impressed me.  That and the fact that they were quite happy to admit that they weren’t giving enough attention to an issue instead of trying to blag me or fob me off.

I suppose there are two opinions that could be drawn from this and I think both are probably valid to some extent.  The one way to look at it could be that UKIP are a dynamic party that is keen to change and adapt to be relevant and shuns spin doctors and PR guru’s so that decisions can be made quickly and efficiently.  Alternatively, it could be that individuals are going off and doing their own thing and that the party suffers from weak leadership and discipline and are so devoid of policies that they will take anything on as long as it’s broadly relevant.  I think it’s more the former than the latter but without being on the inside, it’s impossible to tell.

Anyway, I’ve come away with a greatly improved opinion of UKIP.  Whether they can make that jump from single-issue campaign group to serious political party remains to be seen but if they can replicate the action I saw in two hours today for other issues then who knows, they could cause an upset at the next general election.  They don’t have delusions of grandeur – they know their weaknesses and they admit them.  There was also a distinct lack of security around the place, quite a contrast to the vanity of the Labour and Conservative conferences where nobody was allowed near the building without having police checks and being searched – I just walked in through the front doors and nobody batted an eyelid.  I didn’t even have a ticket!

Mike Natrass also invited Mrs Sane and I to go to Strasbourg next year courtesy of the European Federation.  When I told Mr Sane I was gobsmacked when she said she’d go rather than her usual response to anything I mention that is remotely political which is generally along the lines of “God, you’re always talking about politics; talk about something else”.  Maybe I’m wearing her resistance down at last.

I still don’t like party politics but if I were to nail my colours to the mast I think they would be yellow and purple.  A few weeks ago I would have plumped for the Tories but the more I think about Cameron and the things he says, the more I see the Conservatives turning into a New Labour clone and I don’t like where they’re going.  Labour re-invented itself in 1997 and the Tories are trying to do the same thing but that’s not what the Conservative Party is about – it’s about tradition, respecting our culture and heritage and not re-inventing itself endlessly to appear to be all things to all men.  I don’t like it.  The big problem with UKIP for me is that they oppose an English Parliament as the solution to the West Lothian Question believing it to playing into the EU’s hands by breaking up the UK.  Still, who knows what the future will bring – they have a new leader that nobody knows much about, perhaps their policy will change?