All articles submitted under this logo are written by current members of Ukip or, in some instances, by ex members. To prevent their detection and expulsion or blacklisting, they have had to keep their identities confidential. And the message is reaching people. In its first three months our Exposing UKIP page has reached upwards of 40,000 unique users.
A remarkable article in the Mail describes the Ukip leader’s mountainous and wasteful security facilities for bodyguards: http://dailym.ai/24gE4El
A firm used to protect international celebrities has been employed by Nigel Farage at a cost of up to £15,000 per meeting.
A speaking engagement in Ulster, which attracted merely 300 people, cost the taxpayer £10,000. Another event, at the Emmanuel Hall in Westminster, cost the taxpayer £15,000.
A total of five meetings produced a total security bill of £58,000, all billed to Farage’s EFDD Group in the EU Parliament, which attracts millions in public funding. Most of Farage’s meetings took place without attracting any protesters. The meeting in Westminster attracted merely 15 demonstrators.
In itself, the absence of opposition to Farage’s appearances testifies that the Ukip leader is no threat whatsoever to the establishment’s long term designs for the UK.
When the now almost defunct BNP was on the boil, ten years ago, hundreds of demonstrators regularly turned up to protest outside its private meetings. Attendees were usually provided with details of the venue, in secret, and there were forwarding points to redirect them. There was no question of the BNP employing public funds to hire prestigious security firms.
One of the tasks of Farage’s security team is, according to the Mail, to arrange advance ‘refreshments’, which doubtless refers to alcohol.
In a recent article, here, a bogus assassination attempt on Farage was described. Farage’s media team had clearly expected the story, earlier this year, to attract sympathy for their media junkie. After some scrutiny the pathetic tale backfired and invited scorn.
The Mail article also produced a clip of EU Parliamentary Liberal leader, Guy Verhofstadt, criticising Farage in Parliament for wasting public money and for his failure to attend his Committees over a three year period. Mr Verhofstadt accused Farage of ‘cheating his own citizens’.
Mr Farage used to employ his wife on his payroll. After the Parliament’s ban on such practices, Farage colleague, Ray Finch MEP, quickly employed Kirstin Farage – doubtless winning brownie points from his boss.
Many will ask why Farage’s EFDD Group in the EU Parliament should spend such a vast amount protecting Farage. The answer is that the Ukip leader has an enormous ego, believes in his self-importance and – according to many – has delusions of grandeur.
The more important question is why so much is spent stroking the ego of Farage when it could better be spent on campaigning to remove us from the EU.
A serious situation now arises both for Farage and his MEPs. If the UK fails to vote for Brexit on 23rd June, many will ask why Farage and his MEPs failed to utilise their vast MEPs’ information budget and their EFDD funding to mount a nationwide poster campaign prior to the regulated period of the referendum.
Accusation of gross incompetence, negligence and even sabotage are almost bound to follow.