Stuart Wheeler has been granted a High Court Judicial Review of the Lisbon Treaty. This application, to argue that the Lisbon Treaty is virtually identical,
to the one for which we were promised a referendum in the Labour Party's GE manifesto, will be heard on the 9th. & 10th. June.

How sad that this personal initiative by Stuart Wheeler, John Gouriet & others, has been given virtually no support by UKIP. This action should have central to our main policies in 2008.

On a couple of occasions, I have asked for this legal challenge to be given support and prominance by our party. Is it surprising that Stuart Wheeler
refused an appeal by Nigel Farage to give financial support to UKIP?

An explanation by the NEC, for their dereliction of duty, should be given as a matter of urgency.
[Rep]

Great news.

I thought it would be difficult for Stuart Wheeler to demonstrate sufficient locus standi, but it goes to show the quality of lawyers you can get for big bucks!

This is a lesson for all of those bringing futile cases with no legal training, no lawyers to plead their case and no money or support behind them. Do it properly and you might win, go off half cocked and you will lose.
[Rep]

Now we need to offer him all the help we can.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier:
Stuart Wheeler has been granted a High Court Judicial Review of the Lisbon Treaty. This application, to argue that the Lisbon Treaty is virtually identical,
to the one for which we were promised a referendum in the Labour Party's GE manifesto, will be heard on the 9th. & 10th. June.

How sad that this personal initiative by Stuart Wheeler, John Gouriet & others, has been given virtually no support by UKIP. This action should have central to our main policies in 2008.

On a couple of occasions, I have asked for this legal challenge to be given support and prominance by our party. Is it surprising that Stuart Wheeler
refused an appeal by Nigel Farage to give financial support to UKIP?

An explanation by the NEC, for their dereliction of duty, should be given as a matter of urgency.

As far as the media is concerned Stuart Wheeler is a Tory Millionaire, so why should he help UKIP?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier:
Stuart Wheeler has been granted a High Court Judicial Review of the Lisbon Treaty. This application, to argue that the Lisbon Treaty is virtually identical,
to the one for which we were promised a referendum in the Labour Party's GE manifesto, will be heard on the 9th. & 10th. June.

How sad that this personal initiative by Stuart Wheeler, John Gouriet & others, has been given virtually no support by UKIP. This action should have central to our main policies in 2008.

On a couple of occasions, I have asked for this legal challenge to be given support and prominance by our party. Is it surprising that Stuart Wheeler
refused an appeal by Nigel Farage to give financial support to UKIP?

An explanation by the NEC, for their dereliction of duty, should be given as a matter of urgency.

What support should we have given him?
Good grief!
He is a major donor to the Tory party. If we had come to him and said "We support you" what would he have said?
The website has highlighted his case. What do you really expect the NEC to do?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier:
Stuart Wheeler has been granted a High Court Judicial Review of the Lisbon Treaty. This application, to argue that the Lisbon Treaty is virtually identical, to the one for which we were promised a referendum in the Labour Party's GE manifesto, will be heard on the 9th. & 10th. June.

I wonder if the media will cover this today what with all attention now on the London election results (due between 7 pm to 9 pm this evening).
[Rep]

You are missing the point gentlemen. Stuart Wheeler asked for 150 individuals or organisations to give him £1000 each, to demonstate how concerned many people and organisations are about this issue. A millionaire, going to court on his own, was precisely the image that he did not want to project.

Let us make a comparison, with a previous court (Brighton) concerning this matter. With the best will in the world, one of our members, sought an application to establish that a manifesto pledge constituted a legal contract with the electorate. Not only was that a patent nonsense, it unnecessarily complicated the issue. Wheeler is assuming that the government would honour their pledge, concerning the Lisbon Treaty, but the original Treaty was wholly different from the one finally agreed; therefore the promise did not apply. Wheeler is concerning himself with that asssertion alone. Not even the authors of the second Treaty do agree with the British government that the second Treaty is substantially different; they say that it is essentially the same. That is strong support for Wheeler's case: he could win. This is a far better line of attack, than that argued in the Brighton court.

UKIP must really become more serious if we are to make an impact. Obstruction and histrionics must be replaced with more substantial things. What we have to endure is most frustrating!
[Rep]

I wish him well, what a shame UKIP where not leading this. My case has yet again been delayed; a favourable ruling would have been very useful to his case.
[Rep]

go to LISBON TREATY LITIGATION
[Rep]

I hate the Tories also, but UKIP would have looked a lot more sensible supporting Wheeler (who is a decent, traditional Tory) than backing that nutter who tried suing Brown through 'Small Claims'.

I hope the party haven't given him a sub.
[Rep]