I've just read the article "Plymouth's new UKIP councillor: 'Judge me on my personality, not my party" on the Plymouth Herald website.
Well, the thing is we could have judged you on your personality if you didn't stand for a party.
I live up the A38 in Exeter, and from what I've heard and read about you and the campaign over re-opening Plymouth Airport, you could have stood as an Independent (or even a single issue Viable candidate) and probably won on your own personality.
But you didn't.
You chose to stand as a Party candidate - and that brings baggage.
I don't know you - but I do know Nicky Williams who lost her seat in
Honicknowle on Thursday.
She didn't lose her seat because of her personality, she lost her seat because of her party and your party. That's the way it goes in politics.
Nicky did great work trying to get survivors of Domestic Violence exempt from the Bedroom Tax. A great campaign taken up by Alison Seabeck in Parliament. Maybe you would like to continue in her footsteps?
In the article you say that your party has a great local election manifesto.
But to UKIP Plymouth Chairman, Hugh Williams, all that means nothing.
I'm sure you heard him on the Sunday Politics South West slot on 25/05/14 (available on iPlayer until 01/06/14 - see from 43:25) on Sunday in response to questions about policies tell Lucie Fisher:
"I look on UKIP...as a single issue Party because we have to leave the European Union first and then we can sort out all the other things".
Can Plymouth City Council make that happen - NO
Does this help residents of Plymouth in any way - NO
To me, Mr Williams has just trashed the local election manifesto on which you stood. He has no interest in the local problems you say you want to tackle - "homelessness, poverty, that's what I stand for". That may be so, but from Mr Williams comments, that's not what your local Party stand for.
When challenged on the same programme on your Party's plans to cut maternity pay (from 56:250), you said:
"I can't see that happening...we fought so hard to get it, haven't we."
And who helped us get maternity pay and leave. Well the EU , of course.
The House of Commons Library Standard Note SN/BT/1429 Maternity Pay and Leave published on 13 January 2010 states:
At EU level, the Pregnant Workers Directive 92/85/EC provides for a minimum maternity leave period for employees of 14 weeks and for a minimum payment during this leave at the level of sick pay. The maternity provisions in the UK generally either meet, or are more generous than the minimum requirements of this directive.
You went on to say:
"I don't understand why THEY want to cut it" (my emphasis).
Well, the THEY that want to cut that hard-won maternity pay is YOUR Party.
And they know that claim is toxic.
It was made on various people's websites but this claim has been removed.
For example, Vox Political is informed that Amjad Bashir, UKIP's Small and Medium Business Spokesman, has changed his website to remove the reference to maternity pay and other employment
rights.
Fortunately, another member of our online community had the
presence of mind to keep a copy of the site as it was before the edit,
and created an image that demonstrates the differences.
Make no mistake, Maddi, that would mean the end of Statutory Maternity Pay.
You have said that you are the first female elected as a UKIP councillor.
To me that speaks volumes for your Party - you are more important to them for this, than for any other reason.
Of course you aren't the first female UKIP councillor - there was at least one previously, Cllr Donna Edmunds in Lewes, but she defected to your Party from the Conservatives.
Maddi, I am sorry that you have been called racist and homophobic - I don't believe either you or your Party are.
But your Party does seem to attract a fair few that are racist and homophobic - Cllr Dave Small in Redditch seems to be just the latest of a long list associated with your Party.
I look forward to your public condemnation of him.
Yours
Paul
