Originally Posted by the englishman:
How the agreement was reached and any other things that may have been said or done are specious. The point is that if this is true, the UKIP candidate reneged, and that's not on.

No, what is not on is that you can expect to write such totally outrageous garbage that you are allowed to get get away with this fabrication of the truth in the archives of internet history.
[Rep]

Getting back to the thread title statement stabbed in the back by UKIP written by Richard the lion heart.I find it hard to believe that it was posted in the first place as something worth discussing it boils down to the cut and thrust and the nature of the politics of today and its something FEP and Richard the lion heart are just going to have to put up with I am afraid.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Independent UKIP:
No, what is not on is that you can expect to write such totally outrageous garbage that you are allowed to get get away with this fabrication of the truth in the archives of internet history.

Ind UKIP: How do you know it's garbage?

Danny, I understand and know very well that politics is a dirty business, but two wrongs don't make a right. Outright lying happens of course but that doesn't make it OK,especially for a party like UKIP that still has a reputation as being reasonably honest. Don't we want a newer, more honest breed of politician?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by the englishman:
How do you know it's garbage?

Danny, I understand and know very well that politics is a dirty business, but two wrong don't make a right. Outright lying happens of course but that doesn't make it OK,especially for a party like UKIP that still has a reputation as being reasonably honest. Don't we want a newer, more honest breed of politician?

It wasn't the party (if this story is actually true); it was one UKIP representative. Maybe the representative is a backstabber and can't keep his word but I don't think that is liable to let the whole party down. A bit like saying that just because the England First Party want English independence the rest of you English nationalists have exactly the same views. That would be sweeping and a generalisation wouldn't it? In fact it would border on dishonesty.
[Rep]

The facts are, that the UKIP rep came to see me at home during May's campaign, AFTER the nominations had closed. This was for future elections, so that we (UKIP, Free England, and the EDP) could have a chance of gathering voters who didn't want to vote for the big three. The idea was to carve up the town so that we all stood in different wards and offering voters something a bit different to the norm. As we are a small party, I thought there's no harm in giving it a go. After all, none of us could realistically put up a candidate in every ward, but combined we might have at some point.

After a follow up phone call, we decided that might work, and the UKIP guy was going to talk to the EDP guys in the town. I didn't hear anything else, and when the by-election came up, I thought I might have to face just the big three. I was very disappointed to learn UKIP had decided to compete not only with those three but also a party that shares their aim of withdrawal from the EU.

Bewildering.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Richard the Lionheart:
The facts are, that the UKIP rep came to see me at home during May's campaign, AFTER the nominations had closed. This was for future elections, so that we (UKIP, Free England, and the EDP) could have a chance of gathering voters who didn't want to vote for the big three. The idea was to carve up the town so that we all stood in different wards and offering voters something a bit different to the norm. As we are a small party, I thought there's no harm in giving it a go. After all, none of us could realistically put up a candidate in every ward, but combined we might have at some point.

After a follow up phone call, we decided that might work, and the UKIP guy was going to talk to the EDP guys in the town. I didn't hear anything else, and when the by-election came up, I thought I might have to face just the big three. I was very disappointed to learn UKIP had decided to compete not only with those three but also a party that shares their aim of withdrawal from the EU.

Bewildering.

One or two UKIPers made the decision. It would be bizarre to use this to attack the whole party, wouldn't it?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Richard the Lionheart:
The facts are, that the UKIP rep came to see me at home during May's campaign, AFTER the nominations had closed. This was for future elections, so that we (UKIP, Free England, and the EDP) could have a chance of gathering voters who didn't want to vote for the big three. The idea was to carve up the town so that we all stood in different wards and offering voters something a bit different to the norm. As we are a small party, I thought there's no harm in giving it a go. After all, none of us could realistically put up a candidate in every ward, but combined we might have at some point.

After a follow up phone call, we decided that might work, and the UKIP guy was going to talk to the EDP guys in the town. I didn't hear anything else, and when the by-election came up, I thought I might have to face just the big three. I was very disappointed to learn UKIP had decided to compete not only with those three but also a party that shares their aim of withdrawal from the EU.

Bewildering.

Richard

Thank you for replying.

So after hearing nothing back from the UKIP representative you assumed that an agreement was in place for future by-elections.

Personally I would have phoned him to ensure that that was the case.

My guess is that he spoke to the EDP, they showed no interest in the idea so he decided not to pursue it.

Isn't 'Stabbed in the back by UKIP' slightly melodramatic? It just unfortunate for the FEP that a by-election has cropped up in one of the two council wards in the country they have a history of contesting and that it is also in a borough where UKIP are stepping up their participation in council elections.

For what it's worth though, I've no doubt that the FEP will beat UKIP given your longer history of campaigning in this ward. But I also want to see UKIP contesting as many local elections as possible to build their vote for the future.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Northumbrian:
You can't make deals with any other party, where ever they are eligible to stand in elections. The fact that they are a another party means you're in competition with them.

You can make deals with another party and it has been done for years. If he got a verbal agreement then that's good enough. Going back on any deal is low practice but fairly common. He will be warned and won't ask again!
[Rep]

Yes, thanks to Richard for belatedly replying. It might or might not be worthy of observing that the UKIP candidate is undoubtedly local to the ward (based on postcode not personal knowledge) and did not contest any ward for UKIP at the last local elections (ie UKIP did not contest the ward the FEP candidate did contest then).

I agree that FEP is likely to beat UKIP here. IIRC this will be the first time FEP and UKIP have both contested an election. I surmise it will be of far more significance to FEP than to UKIP and the effort of FEP will reflect that and also be reflected in the result.
[Rep]

I find the whole thread statement astonishing its a local dispute if there is one it would be interesting to have the side of the local UKIP people. But to post a thread title stabbed in the back by UKIP.Well its really pretty poor stuff
[Rep]