UKIP or the Conservatives? The choice for Hendon Tories

If you live in Barnet and you are inclined towards the right rather than the left, you may well want to consider whether you would prefer to vote for the Conservatives or UKIP. Now as regular readers will know, the Barnet Eye is not a right leaning blog. We do however admire honesty and integrity across the political spectrum. In Barnet, the local UKIP candidate is Adrian Murray Leonard. Prior to 2010, I'd never heard of Mr Murray Leonard. He was chairman of the West Hendon Conservative Association. Long time readers of this blog will recall that when local Tory Council bigwigs awarded themselves a payrise, Mr Murray Leonard went public with his disgust. This story in the Hendon Times was our first encounter with Mr Murray Leonard

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/8297992.Conservative_association_member_brands_party_colleagues__greedy_vultures__over_allowance_hike/

Given that Mr Murray Leonard was one of the few Barnet Conservatives to display any integrity over this matter, we kept a watchful eye on his career.

He next cropped up in 2011, after a public fallout with local Tory MP Matthew Offord. Mr Murray Leonard took Mr Offord to task for being a bit lazy and not serving his constituents. Mr Murray Leonard described himself as a "true Tory" and a Thatcherite. He described Mr Offord as like the Scarlett Pimpernell.

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/8800651.MP_criticised_by_Tory_defector/

It was clear from this report that Mr Murray Leonard was not keen on people who get jobs at the taxpayers expense and then give nothing back.

Mr Offord hit back, using parliamentary priviledge to accuse Mr Murray Leonard of Anti Semitism

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/8808912.Tory_defector__shocked__by_anti_Semitism_accusations_by_MP/

Mr Offord made the accusations from the floor of the House of Commons, where libel laws do not apply. Mr Offord, rather bizarrely stated "However, this individual started making anti-Semitic comments. Once I was elected, I would have no truck with any such individuals."

The statement made it quite clear that he was prepared to work with Mr Murray Leonard to get elected, but once he got the job, he was happy to dispense with his services. Mr Murray Leonard has always denied the charges and countered by saying that Offord simply didn't like Mr Murray Leonard asking him to do some work for his constituents. At the time of the accusations, the Barnet Eye spoke to friendly Hendon based Tory Councillors who stated that they were totally unaware of any whiff of Anti Semitism from Mr Murray Leonard and would have not worked with them, had their been any substance to such rumours.

Mr Offord has positioned himself to the right of the Tory Party. He has been very critical of the more Liberal parts of David Camerons agenda, such as Gay marriage. To my mind, the only difference between Offord and Murray Leonard is the issue of integrity, not political policies (although I am not aware of Mr Murray Leonards views on Gay Marriage. I will leave you to guess which one I think has more of it. When you cast your vote, it is something you may wish to consider.

UKIP candidate apologises for party stance on the disabled

Perhaps one of the better things to come out of the BAPS meeting on Wednesday was a frank admission by the local UKIP candidate that the party had let itself down in regards to the comments of its former member Owen Lister, who stated that disabled children should be guillotined at birth. UKIP candidate Adrian Murray-Leonard was confronted by an incensed disabled rights campaigner, Mr John Sullivan, who angrily asked Mr Murray-Leonard whether he supported the comments of Owen Lister. The Barnet Eye spoke to Mr Murray-Leonard on Thursday and he was bemused by Mr Sullivans comments. As a result of the Barnet Eye blog and conversations with the local party, Mr Murray-Leonard read the full story. He states that he'd never heard of Mr Lister and his comments prior to being approached by Mr Sullivan. I suggested that Mr Murray-Leonard should read the full story and then comment. He has now read the full story and here is his comment

Hi Roger

After reading that Daily Mirror article,it made me feel quite sick to be honest.

I have never heard of Owen Lister nor do i particularly want to know him.I fully understand Mr Sullivan`s anger towards me on Wednesday evening.

UK independence party have now set up a dedicated vetting team to root out the fruitloops of society,i will certainly bring this individual (Lister) to their attention and do my best to have him brought to account,i have no powers to their decisions.

Please send my warmest regards to Mr Sullivan,as you know me better than he does

Adrian.

It can only be a positive thing that the UKIP candidate has made his position on this 100% clear. In private talks with UKIP officials, they agreed that given the fact Mr Sullivan has a disabled daughter, Mr Sullivan was well withing his rights to raise the matter in such a forthright manner. They also agreed that a man who had publicly made such disgusting comments, should never have been given a platform by their party. 

There is however a far more disturbing story, one which both Mr Murray-Leonard and Mr Sullivan have missed. Whilst UKIP have not covered themselves in glory, the original story in the Mirror shows a far more scandalous story  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-deputy-mayor-owen-lister-558677#.UnpB-P0YiHM.twitter  - 

Mr Lister was a member of the Conservative party and a deputy Mayor when he made the comments. The local authority he was serving on took disciplinary action against him and suspended him from the Council. The charge was for bringing the council into disrepute with his comments. The Barnet Eye fully agrees that this was an appropriate punishment for the authority to take. What became clear however is that whilst the Council recognised that Mr Lister was beyond the pale, the Conservative Party did not. One has to ask the question "WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO DO TO GET SLUNG OUT OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY". Researching the story of Mr Lister  I found the answer  http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/2096074.Conservatives_sack_councillor_for_joining_UKIP/  Mr Lister was later slung out of the Conservative Party. You may ask "what could be worse than suggesting that disabled babies should be guillotined?" Well if you are a Conservative, it appears that joining UKIP is a worse crime. That is the warped world of British politics. Whilst Mr Murray-Leonard of UKIP conceded that if he agreed with Lister, Mr Sullivan would have been within his rights to thump him, let alone tell him off, the Tory Party think that Mr Lister was a valued member until he joined UKIP. So what can we conclude about the Tory party attitude towards the disabled? Well of all the groups in society, the disabled have been hardest hit by the Tory cuts both locally in Barnet and Nationally. Whilst I have no doubt that many Tory members would recoil at the thought of guillotining handicapped babies, they are quite happy to champion cuts, which will ruin the lives of such babies. We hear stories of "care packages" being cut. If a handicapped person needs care and it is cut, we can only conclude that they "dont care".

So what can we conclude from this. Well what I would conclude is this. I am not a Conservative voter. If however I was a Conservative voter and I lived in Barnet and believed the UK would be better off outside of the EU (which I most definately don't), I would defect to UKIP. Whatever his faults, Mr Murray-Leonard at least has the human decency to state unequivicably that the views of Mr Lister are abhorrent. In the Barnet council chamber, Conservative members have voted time and time again for policies which hurt the disabled. They may not be so crass as to call for them to be gullotined, but their policies are extremely cruel and heartless, to a group who has no choice but to suffer them. The one character trait I despise above all others is dishonesty. I admire people who can admit they got it wrong. Mr Murray-Leonard admitted that when he realised the reasons for Mr Sullivans anger, he fully understood it and actually felt Mr Sullivan had probably been more reasonable than the situation warranted. It is almost unheard of for a Politician to admit they deserved a thump, but in this case, it shows a realistic understanding of the situation. Sadly, Mr Murray-Leonard seems to be unique in the world of Barnet politics for acknowledging that parents of disabled children such as Mr Sullivan are not being "unreasonable" or "cranks" when they stand up for their childrens rights.

For the record, I do not agree at all with the majority of UKIP policies. I believe that the only way the UK can remain prosperous and influential is to remain in the EU. I disagree with many UKIP policies on immigration and I find their economic policies to be naive in the extreme. With regards to local policies, I agreed with the fact they weren't invited onto the BAPS panel, as they haven't published any. I suspect that Mr Murray -Leonard is going to cause a lot of trouble in Barnet in the coming months. I suspect that most of it will be for the local Conservatives, because despite all of his faults, he is not afraid to stand above the parapet and take the shots. Given the total anonymity of the local Conservatives and their total cowardice in not turning up for the BAPS meeting, Mr Murray-Leonard is onto a winner. Only the dimmest Tory will fail to realise that Mr Murray-Leonards stunt at BAPS has gained him great publicity and raised his local profile. We can only conclude that he relished the role of the hard done by outsider and that this will do him a lot of good with disgruntled Tory voters.

Press Complaints Committee (PCC) reject Matthew Offord MP's complaint against the Hendon Times

Following the resignation of Adrian Murray-Leonard from the Conservative Party, local Tory MP, Matthew Offord launched a complaint with the PCC,  stating that the Hendon Times had printed an inaccurate and misleading article. The PCC have rejected the complaint. I will return to this matter later this week, but for now, here is the judgement, without comment from me.
-------------------------------------------------------

HENDON MP Matthew Offord reported the Hendon & Finchley Times to the Press Complaints Commission over an article headed Hendon MP Matthew Offord Criticised By UKIP defector, published on January 20, 2011, which he claimed was inaccurate. The PCC has now confirmed that his complaint has not been upheld, and that the Hendon & Finchley Times did not breach the Editors’ Code of Practice. The text of the Commission’s decision is given in full below:

Commission’s decision in the case of

Offord  v Hendon & Finchley Times

The complainant said that the article contained inaccuracies in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code.

The article reported Adrian Murray-Leonard’s defection from the Conservative Party to UKIP, and contained his view that the complainant – a Conservative MP – had been “uncontactable” since being elected. The complainant said that this was inaccurate: he was available to those who needed to contact him, and had two numbers in the public domain. Moreover, Mr Murray-Leonard could not have resigned as he had not been a member of the Conservative Party for some time. As such, he could not represent the local Conservative Association. The newspaper had been advised of this, and that there had been some incidents involving Mr Murray-Leonard which called into question his status as a credible source, but had nonetheless published the inaccurate and misleading article.            

The newspaper did not accept that the article was inaccurate. While it conceded that the use of the word “resignation” was technically wrong, it said that the crux of the story – that a prominent Conservative had defected to UKIP – was not in dispute. Further, the newspaper was, it said, entitled to report Mr Murray-Leonard’s honestly-held views about the complainant. The journalist had gone to considerable lengths to obtain the complainant’s comments prior to publication. The newspaper subsequently offered to publish a clarification detailing the complainant’s response to the allegation: that he did not accept the claim that he was “uncontactable”; and that he had two numbers in the public domain.

There were several issues to consider here. First, the newspaper was entitled to report that a staunch Conservative had transferred his allegiances to another party, and to quote him on his reasons for doing so. Mr Murray-Leonard’s views on the complainant had been clearly distinguished as such, and the newspaper had not commented on the veracity of his claims.

That said, given that Mr Murray-Leonard had criticised the complainant, it was of course necessary for the newspaper to allow him the opportunity to rebut those claims. The newspaper had contacted the complainant with the allegations prior to publication and had sought his comments on them. It had therefore taken steps to fulfil the terms of Clause 1 (Accuracy), which state that the press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information. The Commission welcomed the newspaper’s subsequent offer to clarify that the complainant did not accept Mr Murray-Leonard’s allegations, and trusted that this offer would remain open should he subsequently wish to take it up.

In regard to the question of the precise date of Mr Murray-Leonard’s “resignation” – and therefore the validity or otherwise of his criticism of the complainant – the newspaper had been able to point to the minutes of the local Conservatives’ Ward Annual General Meeting (which had taken place in late December 2010) where his departure from the position of Ward Chairman had been announced. Further, it was not in dispute that Mr Murray-Leonard had been involved in the election campaign, and had continued to participate in local politics, notwithstanding the issue of when his party membership had formally lapsed. In these circumstances, the Commission did not consider that the use of the term “resignation” was significantly misleading as to require separate correction or clarification. Moreover, Mr Murray-Leonard’s comments had clearly been made in the capacity of someone involved with the Conservative Party, and would not imply to readers that constituents generally should have access to the complainant’s personal details.

Finally, the Commission noted the complainant’s view that – in light of allegations about Mr Murray-Leonard’s character – the newspaper should have declined to publish his claims about the complainant. The Commission could not comment on these allegations (which did not relate to the content of the article) nor could it come to a view that the newspaper should not have published the article.

Reference No. 110331

Open Letter : Adrian Murray-Leonard writes to the Barnet Eye regarding Matthew Offords comments

Dear Roger

I would like to say a personal thank you to you and your fellow bloggers for the fantastic support I have found in you all .

Please let me express how I feel at the moment. At this time I feel extremely hurt by this vicious slur that has been put upon me,and the same goes for my family,close friends,and Conservative officials, and political opponents in Hendon. Yesterday I found it be a very sorry day when yet again politics was driven further down into the sewer by a certain individual who chose to make a false and baseless allegation against me using his parliamentary privilege.

So if I am such a raving anti-semite,why is it that I chose to work alongside my close friends and campaigners Alain Bornstien,Lisa Fachler,Mark Shooter,Maureen Braun,Brian Schama,Darrel Yawitch,Brian Gordon,and the current Mayor to Barnet no less Anthony Finn,and other life long friends i have made in the Jewish community.

So i now would like to say to Mr Offord. I now lay down a challenge to you sir,that is if you are man enough of course, to offer me no less than a public apology or step out of the chambers of the house and repeat what you have said about me to my face and give me one strand of evidence to back your allegations, very doubtful you are not man enough!!!!..

I shall also be taking this matter up with Conservative central office at the very highest level as Saddleworth comes to mind at the moment as I can now empathise with the gentleman up there who was himself on the receiving end of utter un-truths i know how he must of felt sir not a pleasant feeling. Roger again I would like thank you for your support on this heinous issue i,m very moved by all the support you have all given me, thank you....

My warmest of regards to you
Adrian Murray-Leonard.