UKIP: a history of cranks and oddballs

Donna Edmunds, a UKIP councillor and candidate in the European elections, has said that businesses should be able to refuse services to women and gay people. She isn't the first UKIP candidate to court controversy.

Fresh controversy has been sparked after Donna Edmunds, a UKIP councillor in Lewes and a candidate for the party in the European elections, said that businesses should be able to refuse services to women and gay people (she now says she regrets the comments).

Edmunds expressed this opinion in response to a question on whether she supported David Silvester, the UKIP councillor for Henley-on-Thames who claimed that the recent storms and floods were caused by the government’s introduction of gay marriage.

These are just the latest in a long line of gaffes by UKIP candidates and representatives.

Here are some previous examples:

  • Geoffrey Clarke, a candidate in council elections in Kent, was suspended by the party in December 2012 after calling for an NHS review to look into whether foetuses with Down’s syndrome and spina bifida should be compulsorily aborted.
  • Eric Kitson, a UKIP councillor on Worcestershire County Council, resigned in May last year after it was discovered that he had been posting racist and anti-Muslim cartoons on Facebook.
  • Anna-Marie Crampton, a candidate in council elections in East Sussex, was suspended by the party after making anti-Semitic comments in April last year, in which she claimed that the Jews deliberately organised the Second World War and sacrificed their own people in the Holocaust.

There are also the claims which have been made about the party’s leader Nigel Farage. As the party’s conference started in September last year, an alleged incident was brought to light from 1981 (when Farage was a member of the cadet force at his school, Dulwich College) in which he and others are supposed to have marched around a Sussex village singing Hitler Youth songs.

Channel 4 News also uncovered a letter from around this time, in which a teacher at Dulwich College claimed that Farage held “publicly professed racist and neo-fascist views” and expressed concern that he had been made a prefect.

Considering the phenomenon of the ‘rogue’ UKIP member is seemingly never ending, perhaps the cranks and oddballs are less the exception, but rather the rule.

Like this article? Sign up to Left Foot Forward's weekday email for the latest progressive news and comment - and support campaigning journalism by making a donation today.

87 Responses to “UKIP: a history of cranks and oddballs”

  1. Thomas F. Lopez

    Well to me the tories are just another branch of the LibLabCon. They’re all protected by the media to some extent.

    You’ve regularly attacked me personally. This is not only pathetic, anyone reading our comments can see that one side uses facts and the other has to play dirty to keep up.

    I am OK with political satire, so long as it is not taxpayer funded. This tour had such money wasted on it. You can’t just say something didn’t happen because you don’t like it.

  2. Frankie D.

    And whose arse did you pull that from? The fact that the comedians have never recieved any funding from the Arts Council seems to have slipped past the best and brightest of ukip…

    “I’ve never refused any funding whatsoever. But the Arts Council aren’t in any way involved with our show.”

  3. Frankie D.

    And yet you’re taking the tory smear and running with it…

    It’s just that there really must be something a bit wrong with you if you can’t see that trying to shut down someone elses free speech in the name of free speech is just idiotic, especially coming days after your great leader said people shouldn’t try to censor comedians.
    No, I said something didn’t happen, because it didn’t happen. The duo have said they’ve never received any money from the Arts Council and the only one who has said otherwise is your second in command, without ever bothering to try and back that claim up.

  4. Thomas F. Lopez

    Jonny and the Baptists are not paid directly by the Arts Council. However, their venues of course are, and need taxpayer support. The Stop UKIP Tour is therefore subsidized by the taxpayer. Venues funded by the taxpayer should never allow political propaganda.

  5. Thomas F. Lopez

    OK I replied to this in the other comment, can we just keep it to one comment section since we’re pretty much having the same debate in each place.

  6. Frankie D.

    Bollocks. You’re admitting that your deputy leader is talking rubbish when he claims that their tour is “taxpayer funded”.

  7. Frankie D.

    Ok, we’ll go back to your original comment that you’re happy to pay people to not do anything for you. Do you have a history of being in abusive relationships? Is that where this comes from?

  8. Thomas F. Lopez

    They DO do something for me: promote my party. Do you have a history of losing political debates? Because I’m thinking so.

  9. Thomas F. Lopez

    Did you even read my comment?

  10. Frankie D.

    Yes, and it was bollocks. The fact that some of the venues might have recieved funding doesn’t mean that the comedy duo are taxpayer funded. Do you think they should be banned from using “Taxpayer funded” roads as well?

    At the same time, are you going to claim that UKIP have never spoken or held meetings anywhere that has recieved taxpayer funding? After all, if you actually believe that “Venues funded by the taxpayer should never allow political propaganda.” that would include UKIP as well.

  11. Frankie D.

    Again, how do they promote your party if they hardly ever show up to work?

    On the rare occation when they do actually show up, they vote to make the lives of their voters more difficult. See

  12. Thomas F. Lopez

    You can promote UKIP from home. I try my best to.

    “This is a backwards step because imposing a single charger stifles innovation, curbs research, and may impose extra costs on the consumer. The alternative and better action is to encourage diversity, competition and greater development.”

  13. Thomas F. Lopez

    Oh please stop being so deliberately difficult. You know what I’m talking about. I have no problem if UKIP, Labour, the Conservatives or even fringe parties like the Lib Dems use taxpayer funded roads, or meet in taxpayer funded places. But for a ‘comedy tour’ that is political propaganda is going to perform in venues that are funded by the taxpayer, when there are a wealth or more talented and interesting people and shows that could go on instead, I think that is wrong. It is funded by the Arts Council. The Stop UKIP Tour is not art it is propaganda, timed to coincide with the Euro Election campaign. It’s as pathetic and transparent as the Daily Mail and Telegraph’s smear campaigns against UKIP.

  14. Frankie D.

    It isn’t funded by the Arts Council. You’ve already admitted that, so stop lying.

    You really are scared you two guys and a guitar, aren’t you? That’s pathetic. I thought you were supposed to be a political party, rather than a bunch of cowardly bullies.

    “the Daily Mail and Telegraph’s smear campaigns against UKIP.” If it wasn’t for all the coverage you’ve gotten from them, UKIP would barely exist. UKIP was propped up by the right wing media as a way to push the tories further to the right, and now you’re cutting into the tory vote, you’re being discarded, as was always the plan.

  15. Frankie D.

    I would hope you don’t try to make a living off of the taxpayers for what you do at home. By not showing up to do their jobs, ukip shows just how little they care about voters and show how much of a joke their party is.

    Even you’ve got to see that that quote is utter rubbish. No company is competing on chargers and if everyone only needed one charger for any phone, then they could be sold without one, saving money for the consumer.

  16. Thomas F. Lopez

    OK, I don’t know how much more simple I can make it. If you don’t understand what I wrote, then maybe you shouldn’t be debating? I’m not scared, just cautious, the left have won the emotional argument, thus people argue by shouting “racist” these days and anyone non-leftist is constantly on the back foot thanks to the false words put into our mouths by propagandists like Jonny and the Baptists. It’s hard to argue with facts when someone is shouting abuse, but the British people are waking up.

    Whatever, if we go, the Tories become liberal again. Pretty stupid plan. But no, we need to stop talking about UKIP splitting the Tory vote. The Tories are finished. We need to start talking about the Tories splitting the UKIP vote.

  17. Thomas F. Lopez

    So long as they promote UKIP, that’s what matters.

    Well phone chargers are outside my political knowledge, and right now I’m too tired to look into it. Point is, I support UKIP on the issues that really matter to this country.

  18. Frankie D.

    Do they receive money from the taxpayer? You’ve admitted that they don’t. Therefore they are not in any way “taxpayer funded”.

    Maybe if UKIP didn’t keep promoting racists, then possibly they wouldn’t have to deal with being called out on it so often.

    The tories haven’t been in any way liberal for decades. “Tories are finished. We need to start talking about the Tories splitting the UKIP vote.” And we see again how seriously deluded you are. Are you sure it’s not a medical problem? UKIP haven’t got a single MP, and yet you think you’re doing better than the tories? True, they’re going to be out of power for the next generation or so, but ukip will be out of power for a hell of a lot longer.

  19. Frankie D.

    Not them doing their jobs, then? How pathetic.

    Do you not own a mobile phone? Why did you back a quote about them if you didn’t know if it was valid or not? Which issues that really matter to the country have the ukip MEPs been voting on lately then?

  20. Thomas F. Lopez

    They are taxpayer subsidized.

    Promoting racists? I thought that was Labour’s job?

    Well UKIP are rapidly rising, and I believe they represent more than 70% of the British people. Sadly the media’s mud slinging has stuck. Until now…

  21. Thomas F. Lopez

    Their job is promoting UKIP and giving people the facts on the EU.

    No I do not own a mobile phone. Do not joke because it’s true. I live on Dartmoor where there’s rarely reception.

    I gave their reason. Do you honestly think it’s fair that:
    1) We’re in a political and fiscal union we never voted to join?
    2) I should think it’s OK that whenever I bring this up, people say “Oh we have MEPs to represent us” as if this makes the lack of democracy in the EU all OK? UKIP may win the Euro elections, many will vote UKIP because its position on the EU is clear, not because they care about voting histories. A UKIP victory should make it perfectly clear, well more perfectly clear than it is already: We want out!

  22. Frankie D.

    No, their job is to vote. If they wanted to promote UKIP, they should get a job as a party activist.

  23. Frankie D.

    I repeat, do they receive money from the taxpayer? No, you’ve admitted that they don’t. You never actually said if you think they should be banned from using taxpayer funded roads. So much for ukip being a libertarian party…

    ” I believe they represent more than 70% of the British people.” What on earth are you basing that on? If that was true, why haven’t they got a single mp or managed to poll much above 10%? What mud slinging are you talking about? What stories have the media told about ukip that haven’t been true?

  24. Thomas F. Lopez

    Look, I made my argument and it’s clear you don’t like it but I am too tired to keep repeating myself. They are subsidized by the taxpayer. Anyone in the country should be allowed to use taxpayer funded roads.

    Call it an educated guess. UKIP’s polling is at this level because:
    1) It is a new party and some people take time to switch sides, but eventually will.
    2) The media and LibLabCon’s constant pathetic mud-slinging, and the fact that up until recently people believed that bullsh*t.

    OK: “What mud slinging are you talking about?” I don’t know why I’m even bothering debating with you.

    As for the second question, maybe start with the fact the media keep on referring to UKIP as “far right” which isn’t true at all.

  25. Thomas F. Lopez

    They do what WE the UKIP supporters want them to do. If their voters aren’t happy then they’ll vote them out in 2014. I wonder if that will happen…

  26. Frankie D.

    No, they’re supposed to be doing their jobs, not working on the party campaign. No wonder they keep getting investigated for the misuse of their funds.

  27. Frankie D.

    They recieve no funding from the Art Council, they are not taxpayer funded. It’s quite simple.

    UKIP have been around for 20 years. Why have they still not got a single mp?

    So you can’t come up with any mud slinging? Why do you say they aren’t far right? Granted, it’s a bit hard to tell what they are supposed to be when they tear up their policies or redact them days later. What was Nige’s excuse for saying ukip supported gay mariage then changing his mind? Didn’t he blame it on an intern?

  28. Thomas F. Lopez

    The Arts Council is funded by the government (taxpayer) and the National Lottery. If they have funded the venues for the Stop UKIP tour, then Jonny and the Baptists are taxpayer subsidized. If the venues are charging Jonny and co the normal commercial rate for hiring the venues, then no problem. But if the venues are provided for free or at a reduced rate then somebody (the taxpayer) is subsidizing a partisan political point of view. So Frankie over to you, do you know if Jonny and the Baptists are paying the full comercial rate for hiring venues, or are they being subsidised at the taxpayer’s expense?

  29. Frankie D.

    Jonny and the Baptists recieve no funding from the Arts Council. They are not taxpayer funded.

    Which of their venues receive Arts Council funding? Who else uses those venues? How much do they charge? Shouldn’t you already know all these things if you’ve been complaining about the funding? Or have ukip just been spouting off and trying to shit stir without any information, as usual?

    Still no answer on the lack of MPs or evidence of mud slinging? How about the lack of policies?

  30. Thomas F. Lopez

    Shouldn’t you already know those things if you claim over and over that they aren’t funded by the taxpayer? If they do not pay the full commercial rate for venues than they are indeed taxpayer funded.

    These questions are so obvious, I can’t believe I have to explaining things.

    MPs: In 2010 people had faith the Conservatives would actually be conservative. A lot has changed since then. Also we may well get no MPs in 2015, but polls that don’t even prompt UKIP give us 11% and more. This is more than the Lib Dems so it is clear we are the third major party in terms of support, it’s just organizing that support. This is to be expected for a new party in British politics.

    Mud Slinging: OK, here’s a good example of mud slinging by a total hypocrite that took me all of 20 seconds to find:

  31. Frankie D.

    No, you made the original claim, that they are tax payer funded, so you have to prove it. Jonny and the Baptists say they have received no funding from the Arts Council. Do you have anything to prove this wrong? You’ve just admitted that UKIP have no idea what they’re talking about, yet again.

    ” it’s just organizing that support” which UKIP is spectaularly shit at. You can’t even organize party policy. You might be polling more than the lib dems, but that’s just because the lib dems are shit.

    Where’s the mud slinging in that article? UKIP are a party full of racist, sexist idiots, as your leadership and representatives keep proving.

  32. Thomas F. Lopez

    Calm down, dear. Their venues are almost certainly subsidized by they Arts Council. “Jonny and the Baptists say they have received no funding from the Arts Council.” But they’re not sure if their venue (which is a large part of the performance cost) is paid for by the taxpayer.

    I don’t even know what to say to your second paragraph.

    Boring old name-calling. The fact you can look at that article and see no mud-slinging says it all really.

  33. Frankie D.

    ” almost certainly” ? So you’re admitting that UKIP have no idea if any of their venues receive Arts Council funding and have once again gone off half cocked and fact free?

  34. Thomas F. Lopez

    Well by looking at the way these things are paid for I would say they are taxpayer subsidized, I personally don’t have a list of costs, weather or not UKIP do I don’t know. I’m genuinely interested how you can accuse UKIP’s leadership of racism while giving Diane Abbott a free pass.

  35. Frankie D.

    So, again, you have no idea that they are in any way taxpayer funded, but you’re happy to shout a lie to shut down someone you don’t like?

    I can accuse UKIP of being moronic racists, because that’s what they are. Lets not forget that Nigel has been quoted by the founder of UKIP as saying “We will never get the nigger vote. The nig nogs will never vote for us”, not to mention Bloom and bongobongo land, the gays causing flooding, the number of times ukip members shit themselves over islam or sharia law, as if they’re one step away from knuckle dragging EDL members, terrified that baked beans and bread are halal.

  36. Thomas F. Lopez

    So, again, why give Abbott a free pass?

    I’ve already said, if J & TB are not taxpayer funded, I don’t mind them. You really are a special case, accusing me of not knowing what I’m talking about, then typing this rubbish, half of which is hearsay and the other half isn’t accurate.

    So let’s begin- someone who has an axe to grind with Farage told some lies to make him look bad? Big deal. You could tell me he said that and have the same credibility. Next, an old man used an old-fashioned phrase that’s only mildly offensive and not a spec on what Abbott has said. I hope you’ve saved the best examples of racism till last because this is too easy. Gays causing floods? Wasn’t that said by someone who was dismissed from the party, and said equally stupid things in the past but nobody cared because he was a member of the LibLabCon? Explain how opposing Sharia in the UK is racist please? UKIP is not anti-Islamic, one of our chief members is a Muslim. The EDL has some knuckle draggers for sure, but if these are your best arguments about UKIP being racist, you’re making them look intelligent mate.

  37. Frankie D.

    Who said I’ve given her a free pass? Are you saying you’re happy for ukip to be a nest of racist, sexist thickos, as long as there are also occational bad people in other parties?

    ” if J & TB are not taxpayer funded, I don’t mind them.” Shouldn’t Paul Nuttall, of the ukips, have found this out one way or the other before he started campaigning against Jonny and the Baptists?

    If the creator of ukip thinks you’re all a bunch of nutters, there might be something to it. Has Nige ever denied saying it?

    An old man? One of the leading figures in ukip, at the time. “bongobongo land” is not mildly offensive, it’s out and out racist. What about calling women sluts? What is it that attracts racists, sexists and homophobes to ukip? You never did answer why Nige said he was for gay marriage recently then blamed that on an intern. Too many homophobes threatening to quit the party?

    “Explain how opposing Sharia in the UK is racist please?” Because it’s not the law that scares you, it’s the fact that it’s done by people who are largely not white. How often has ukip campaigned against Halakha law in this country? Not to mention that you’re shitting yourself over something that will never happen.

    “The EDL has some knuckle draggers for sure” No, the EDL has nothing but knuckle draggers. That’s who they are, thick, racist thugs. If you’re happy to support them with ukip, then you’re just showing your party for the scum you are.

Leave a Reply