Re Your letter of 31st August 07.
I am sorry that you have been forced to write the above letter to me. It seems to many of us that Nick Griffin is getting totally unbalanced and believes that no-one should challenge him for the Leadership of the Party, despite the fact that the Constitution allows for such challenges. You will know that the Party has lost, by various means, several key members over the last few weeks. I believe this is due to Nick's refusal to run the Party openly and properly:
Andrew Spence, the very successful Sedgefield parliamentary candidate, praised all over the Party newspaper. He is alleged to have said, "He couldn't get on with the sleazy people close to Griffin."
Simon Smith, Sandwell Councillor and Black Country organiser. Left because he queried BNP accounts and expenses. Are the Party Accounts still overdue with the electoral Commission?
Clive Potter, President of Solidarity union. Expelled because he insisted on receiving the union accounts.
Scott McLean, resigned as Deputy Chairman and Chairman of the disciplinary committee, in particular, because Nick prevented him doing his job and disciplining Mark Collett. I understand that Scott has remained an ordinary member.
Jonathan Bowden, Advisory Council member, for similar reasons to Andrew Spence.
Before answering your letter in detail, I must point out, as any experienced person dealing with personnel matters knows, that proper reasonable procedures must be carried out. In this matter no steps have been taken. The expulsion came out of the blue.
In your letter, no doubt drafted by Nick Griffin, there is a reference to my relationship with John Tyndall.
In our recent Leadership Challenge, we refrained from repeating the very many stories that are around concerning Nick, for example, his relationship with Martin Webster and his continual incompetence with money. It seems to me to be very foolish of Nick to get into a slanging match when he, himself, is so vulnerable!
In your letter you make assertions that I have not complied with a request from John Walker for information concerning the Reform Group of the BNP. This is a blatant lie!
The situation has not changed from the 7th June, which is the Reform Group has never raised any money.
Consequently, I believe without further comment that the whole basis for your letter collapses.
Please take this letter as formal notice of Appeal against the decision to expel me from the Party.
Letter from Mike Easter to John Walker7th June 2006
Thanks for your letter of 30th May enquiring about the "Reform Group" within the BNP. (I have been away and only just read it.)
As you can well imagine, I would need to consult with others before replying to your letter in any detail. However, I can say straightaway that there is no intention to raise cash, if at all, that would come under the Electoral rules.
Generally the Reform Group is concerned with getting the structure of the Party into a normal one for a society or corporate body. We want to get away from the current dictatorship system.
Also, and this is my own special area,* I would like to see the politics of the Party laid out once and for all and not, as now, changed every few minutes. In particular, and just as two examples, the current Party Leader has an obsession with Moslems, just as his predecessor had a similar obsession with Jews.
Email received from the Electoral Commission9th September 2007
I write further to our telephone conversation earlier today.
I can confirm that there are no reporting requirements to the Commission that result from the BNP leadership campaign.
There is a requirement that regulated donees provide details of donations received by them of an amount of over £1,000. Regulated donees include members of political parties that receive donations that relate to political activity, such as an internal party leadership campaign.
I hope this information is helpful.