YOUR most recent issue contained several interesting letters relating to the UKIP result in the recent EU election, and I would like, with your approval, to respond in one composite letter.

Firstly, I agree with the views of Geoffrey Cox as to what is needed for this country to reclaim its independence and ability to govern itself. Unfortunately, his party is quite unable to do what is necessary ? to renegotiate treaties with the EU ? whilst it is not prepared to threaten to withdraw from the EU if it cannot be satisfied.

Michael Howard has already abandoned that card in his Berlin pledge on February 12 this year: ?I am determined that Britain shall remain a positive and influential member of the European Union.?

Secondly, Noel Thompson misses the point regarding the efforts made by UKIP in the elections. We fielded a full-strength slate of MEP candidates across the country with the results shown, and could not, as a small party, support all the local elections at the same time. UKIP does have more than 40 local councillors from last year?s election, and will continue to build on that in future.

Thirdly, Amy Wilson?s concern at UKIP seeking representation in the EU parliament is understandable, but it is justified in order to gain attention to the party and its policy and the funding available from the EU which we use to further our policy.

If we were not prepared to stand in that forum and attack it, who would listen to us? We would be just another of the many pressure groups which can be conveniently ignored by the media, particularly the BBC. UKIP is now recognised by the BBC as a main political party and its views must be adequately represented according to the BBC Charter.

Finally, the view of Mr Langman is utterly incorrect, as is known and recognised widely. If the UK withdraws from the EU and negotiates a free trade agreement as an associate, it will continue to trade as before with the EU, as does the USA for example, which sells far more to the EU than does the UK. We do not need to be ruled by the EU in order to trade with it.

We import far more from the EU than we sell to the EU, and have a huge cumulative trade deficit with them since we first joined. No jobs are under threat if we leave, other than those quisling bureaucrats who have been the real gravy trainers of the last 30 years.

Graham Booth MEP

SW UKIP

WHILST I could take your correspondent Dave Weeks to task over all of his letter (Times, June 24) there are two points in particular I would like to challenge.

Firstly is his assertion that ?the people sent a clear signal by supporting the UK Independence Party?s message?, is not as clear-cut as that by any definition.

Without a doubt, a good many of the voters in the recent elections did support UKIP, however, over 50% of those who voted supported one of the three big parties, all of whom are against leaving the EU.

So perhaps he should more accurately have written something along the lines of ?a reasonably sized minority sent a message?.

And as for his suggestion that UKIP has a ?full manifesto for our Westminster parliamentary elections?, well you have to laugh, as Mr Weeks seems to know something his party?s most high profile politician doesn?t.

On the same day as his letter appeared, the national press carried a quote from Kilroy-Silk. It makes for interesting reading, saying, as he did, ?Our prime task is to get our country back from Brussels. That is why we are here. We have no other function, no other purpose.?

I have come across plenty of party supporters of all hues who don?t know as much as their party?s leadership do (myself included), but the other way round is a new one on me. Rather worrying as it?s the politicians not the rank and file supporters who put their party?s manifestos into practice.

Dave Goodwin

Cleave Cottage , Sticklepath