UKIP - a 'one trick pony'?

[JBR]

No, it will be a Labour government in May. And, dread of all dreads, that might even be some sort of Lab/Dem/Green/Scottish coalition. There will be a party in Brussells when that happens. I just hope Gideon hides the cheque book when he leaves.

I pray (and I'm an atheist) you are wrong. If that should happen then all is lost.

Still, on the bright side, with their 'borrow, borrow, borrow, spend, spend, spend' philosophy things could be quite easy for a few years. Then, when the country is completely bankrupt, I'll probably be in my box or too far gone to worry about it!

 

[Doug99]

All parties should provide a 100 bullet point list - something to discuss during their pre election debates.

If we ever pull out of the EU, all the donkey work to renegotiate trade agreements will be done behind the scene by senior civil service. The PM of the day is purely be a figurehead and is told what/when to sign.

 

[Newboy]

Whilst I understand (and agree) with the intent of quite a proportion of the list, it looks like a list of headlines the Daily Mail would like to publish.

Realistically, there is no chance the UKIP will form the next UK government - they may have a few seats and be able to influence votes but I suspect we're going to end up with a coalition of some sort (much as Germany has had for the past decade).

Farage is a bright guy who has managed to get himself a well paid job within the organisation he decries without actually achieving anything (nice work if you can get it!) but can you realistically see him heading up the country?

The EU won't be allowed to fail - to many vested interests and, in my view, the principle is right even though the practise need some significant improvements! How much it gets reformed (if at all) will depend on how the major players behave and how much pressure they come under from the EU-sceptic parties in each country.

The UKIP 100 list has lots of vague aims but is very short on detail (well it's a manifesto after all!) and some of the wording seems strange.

For example:

6. Cutting £9bn from our foreign aid budget
The budget is a shade under £13bn - why cut £9bn and leave £4bn?

77. British companies to be prioritised to deliver foreign aid contracts
Based on cutting £9bn from the budget?


21. Opposing tolls on public roads – we’ve already paid for them
42. Opposing plain packs for cigarettes
Well if you're in government you don't oppose you simply don't enact!


37. Official documents to be published primarily in English
Ermmm - they already are!

32. Reversing the government’s opt-in to the European Arrest Warrant
Because?

It almost reads as if the list has been cut and pasted from different sources

 

[jockscott]

[quote="newboy";p="3303922"

The EU won't be allowed to fail - to many vested interests and, in my view, the principle is right even though the practise need some significant improvements! [/quote]

Which principle is that then? Oh yeah, Germany wanting a Federal Europe, with them as the boss.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

This has been a good thread. Despite different views, some honest give and take. No slanging either yet. To the guys that are anti UKIP big up for respectful criticism and admission to some of the good points.

 

[EFLImpudence]

101. Abolish the whip system.
102. Lying to be outlawed.

 

[longdogs]

If they can achieve the first point on the list, then probably 50% of the rest will follow naturally.

They might not achieve all the promises, they might not achieve any of them, but that's no different from the clowns we have had to endure for the past two decades.

I read through the list and could not disagree with anything.

 

[ntb]

The only one I disagree with is scrapping the so called (by idiots) 'bedroom tax'.

 

[Newboy]

Which principle is that then? Oh yeah, Germany wanting a Federal Europe, with them as the boss.

Not the principle I was thinking of!

 

[conny]

Newboy. Regarding item 37, I assumed, rightly or wrongly, that they meant in 'Plain' English that the ordinary man and woman in the street can understand.

Far too many legal documents contain terms and conditions that only a Philadelphia lawyer would understand, and be able to interpret them to his way of thinking.

 

[handyjack]

The only one I disagree with is scrapping the so called (by idiots) 'bedroom tax'.

Why?

 

[Newboy]

Newboy. Regarding item 37, I assumed, rightly or wrongly, that they meant in 'Plain' English that the ordinary man and woman in the street can understand.

Far too many legal documents contain terms and conditions that only a Philadelphia lawyer would understand, and be able to interpret them to his way of thinking.

I must admit I hadn't thought of that - Fair point


Edit: Having re-read it, the phrasing ("published primarily in English")
suggests English as a language rather than plain English

 

[JBR]

I must say that I am pleased that so many people have put their views forward, whether in favour or against. More importantly, there has been a noticeable lack of mud-slinging which, admittedly, I had feared would be inevitable. It's good that we can conduct sensible discussions on here.

I must agree that there is very little chance of UKIP forming a government, but in laying out their intentions they have, at least, made it clear how they would conduct themselves in the Commons, regardless of how many or how few MPs they should have. The impression I get is that, unlike some (!), they would not practise frequent U-turns just to suit the political climate and to protect themselves.

I think I read somewhere that Nigel Farage is hoping for 17 UKIP MPs. If that happens they will, at least, have some influence on proceedings and we should remember that, as some Tory backbenchers are also Eurosceptics, that influence may prove greater than expected.

Likely or not, I sometimes imagine what would happen if UKIP did actually gain a majority. Wouldn't that stir things up a bit?! And, who knows? They could actually make real improvements to our nation.

 

[ntb]

The only one I disagree with is scrapping the so called (by idiots) 'bedroom tax'.

Why?

Money is taken from me by force to give to people who can't or won't support themselves. I don't begrudge them 3 hot meals, medical treatment and a warm place to sleep.

 

[jeds]

The only one I disagree with is scrapping the so called (by idiots) 'bedroom tax'.

Why?

Money is taken from me by force to give to people who can't or won't support themselves. I don't begrudge them 3 hot meals, medical treatment and a warm place to sleep.

This is a tricky one because I fundamentally disagree with chucking old ladies out of houses they've brought up families and lived half their lives. On the other hand I worked with a housing association a few years back and saw first hand some very well off single people living in huge three and four bed HA flats and houses in the smartest areas of Bristol - Clifton, Redland etc - paying miniscule rents compared to the open market. Some of these places are worth a £million plus and the areas are very, very sought after. You could play 5-a-side football in some of the living rooms. They pay these tiny rents because they've lived in them for 20 odd years and were probably on low wages when they moved in. But a lot of these people have done very well for themselves since yet they still get the benefit of a heavily subsidised, hugely desirable, massive flat in the smartest location. It is just plain wrong that I should be subsidising them.