Is it time that we took a closer look at UKIP?

First topic message reminder :

The UKIP vote in Eastleigh rose from 3.6% in 2010 to 27.8% in the by-election on Thursday. It may have been because the party is mopping up the mid-term protest votes which traditionally went to the Liberal Democrats before they climbed into bed with the devil in May 2010. It may be because many people – wrongly - feel that the three main parties in Westminster are “all the same”, a feeling which the Tories have helped to create by transferring so much real power from democratic accountability to unelected and unaccountable corporations as they privatise everything on which they can lay their grubby hands. What I don’t believe is that this bubble of support for UKIP is because of the party’s reactionary, right-wing policies, which aim to take us back to the 1950s.

The one policy which everyone associates with UKIP is withdrawal from the EU. UKIP has claimed that by leaving the EU, the UK would save over £45 million a day plus £60 billion a year, conveniently ignoring any EU rebates and regional grants. I’m not sure where it gets those figures from, since the Treasury says that the UK paid £8.9 billion into EU budget in 2010/11 (out of £706 billion of public spending). The European Commission puts the UK's net contribution at £5.85 billion.

The EU is the UK's main trading partner, accounting for 52% of our total trade in goods and services; if Britain went for a clean break from the EU, its exports would be subject to EU export tariffs. Millions of jobs could be lost as global manufacturers move to low-cost countries within the EU, and Britain's foreign-owned car industry might well shift into the EU. However, withdrawal from the EU was the issue which UKIP exploited and which put it on the political map. With his half-baked promise of a referendum at some point in the future, the idiotic Cameron has increased UKIP’s credibility by showing that he’s afraid of it.

Cameron also said that UKIP is “full of fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists", and perhaps on that last point he could now be right. The Eastleigh by-election showed that UKIP is appealing to racists, causing one person on Twitter to refer to it as “the BNP for the Notting Hill set”. UKIP may be more subtle than the BNP, but it wants to freeze immigration, pandering to the Alf Garnetts who see all foreigners as problems, and has even thrown in the contentious claim that “multiculturalism has split our society”.

In December 2011, the UK had 88,179 people in prison, more per head of the population than any other country in Europe, yet UKIP wants to double the number of prison places. UKIP says that the £2 billion cost of building new prisons is negligible compared to the cost of crime, but it hasn’t factored in the cost of keeping prisoners in jail, which amounts to at least £40,000 a year for each of them. Yet UKIP would refuse to accept European Arrest Warrants, which could well mean delays for the UK in extraditing suspects from other European countries.

The NHS would be no safer with UKIP than it’s been with the Tories, since the party believes that “other models are worth considering to see whether lessons can be learned from abroad”. On education, UKIP wants to bring back grammar schools, so that we can once again tell about 80% of eleven-year-olds that they’re failures, while at the same time giving parents education vouchers, which would be a way of subsidising private school fees.

The cornerstone of UKIP’s tax policies is to roll the employee national insurance and basic rate income tax into a flat rate of income tax of 31%. There would be no higher rate tax, since UKIP perpetuates the Tory lie that the 50% income tax rate cost the economy money; it hasn’t, it has brought in £2.7 billion a year. UKIP’s policy would be a massive tax cut for the rich, far bigger than the one that’s being introduced by the Tories in April. Even greater inequality would be created by abolishing national insurance for employers.

UKIP policies, like so many Tory ones, amount to an attack on our rights. UKIP would put an end to most legislation regarding matters such as weekly working hours, holidays, overtime, redundancy and sick pay, while leaving it up to each employer to decide whether to offer parental leave. It says it would also scrap most ‘equality and discrimination’ legislation.

If you need any more reasons not to vote for UKIP, it denies climate change and would make increased defence spending “a clear priority, even in these difficult times”. It opposes equal marriage, would hold a referendum in each county on ending the hunting ban and would allow smoking in allocated rooms in public houses, clubs and hotels. It’s no wonder that UKIP has been likened to “the political wing of a Home Counties golf club”.

You may not like the EU, and you may think that after 38 years it’s time to hold another referendum on our membership. However, before you vote for a party that makes that its flagship policy, look a little more closely at what else you would be voting for at the same time.

Sources used:-

http://www.ukip.org/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20448450

Not sure any of the conventional news media are being very balanced Red.
As it goes, I didn't watch it - the less I see of that braying jackass the better for me I think

I think I will take your stance on this boatlady, it only makes me want too put my foot through my TV.

too true Redflag,he is so smarmy is he not?

Apologies, I thought Redflag was speaking of Cameron, no way can farage be smarmy is there Claudine? he really is Racist is he not?

May I ask you a question please Claudine?

If the racism was aimed at yourself Claudine I can only apologise from the more decent minded people in this country.

Ask away, Stuart!!!

Were you on another forum prior to this one Claudine?


This thread is about UKIP. We have a personal messaging system for asking people questions and starting private conversations. Threads 'go cold' if they are diverted from their subject in this way, so please don't do it!
Ivan

This is my very first political forum.

Another gem from David Schneider


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDT4NwZWgAAxO6-.jpg

If his party hates so much, yet has approximately 15% of the vote? does that mean that 15% of the country actually think like the moron?

Frightened people often get nasty - Tory policies have made many people frightened and they look for someone to blame - leads to politics of hatred and fear - UKIP offers what seems a simple solution

UKIP seem a party of hatred boatlady, but not frightened in any way or form?

To use a historical parallel - Hitler and his mates were not frightened, but they were able to use the fear of their countrymen to whip up fear and hatred against Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, disabled and mentally ill people, the Poles, and ultimately most of the rest of the world.

If people are afraid, as many Germans were in pre-World War II Germany, they will do a lot for someone who claims to have the solution to their problems.

In England we have a recession - both Cameron, and Farage, in their slightly different ways claim to have the solution - one proposes to eliminate vulnerable and 'non-productive' members of society and to impose an austerity that will 'pay down the debt' - the other proposes to eject all the foreigners, put women back in their place, get rid of gays and basically return our society to a calmer and less threatening era. Those are both messages which have a certain appeal to people who are afraid of losing whatever for them represents security - that's why the Labour strategy has been to talk to as many people as possible about what they are afraid of, so as to show them that the Tories and UKIP do not really have the answer

understood now boatlady thanks.

Kippers are losing their local government seats all over Norfolk - sadly, the Tories are winning them

Heaven help the people of Norfolk boatlady, but then again its the people of Norfolk are voting Tory so Hell Slap it Into Them as they will be getting everything they asked for.

I see that Farage was not very happy that Labour won last weeks by-election and they came a very poor second, and that is where they should be because all they are is the Second Hand Tory Party.

I just hope that people of the UK wake up and see this before the May elections that will take place right across the UK.

They will no doubt attempt to capitalise on the 'threat' from all Muslims, much as the National Front in France have done.

It is boring and predictable but nonetheless what I expect from Farage & Co.

Though it's probably worth remembering that there are rather more Muslims than there are UKIPs and Frent Nationale candidates.

Dear old Nigel won't be able to resist the lure of going for the Muslim angle. He isn't reasoned enough to think things through.

Claudine wrote:They will no doubt attempt to capitalise on the 'threat' from all Muslims

I have heard many times, from many quarters, that terrorist threats come from the Muslim community. I have never heard anyone say that ALL Muslims are a threat. The expression "Allah Akbar" isn't often shouted by Jews or Christians. Lets argue properly, shall we?

marco.

Let's face it me old son, you don't come on here to argue. You come on here to pontificate. The unfortunate aspect about your aspect is it casts no light, and has no relevance, in the real world; but if it makes you happy pontificating like a grasshopper in an ivory tower about the ants on the ground so be it! I have also noticed your willingness to discuss religion in some depth and quite seriously.....and that foible, whilst I respect a persons right to free speech, makes you quite gullible, quaint, and renders your pontification weak and rather pointless.......in my opinion.

My poor misinformed sickchip - the above is a good example of pontification.  So lets claim equal honours.
My previous post related to the Muslim threat in the real world, one that comes from SOME Muslims but not all and one that you seem to have declined to comment on in favour of insults. We of this world are not universally loved, sickchip. If your good intention was simply to help Claudine, I commend your chivalry - but come on a charger next time, not a donkey.
If religion is a puzzle to you then you are wise to keep away. My best wishes.

marco

Thanks for the type of response I expected.
Religion is not a puzzle to me. It is a foolish pursuit others waste time, effort, and life on.
I do not think Claudine needs my help; and your damsel in distress scenario is indicative of a slight tendency toward old fashioned, politically incorrect sexism.
Your comment re: muslims is an inconsequential observation, rather than an opinion, and does not facilitate room for debate, or argument.

Seriously though, I would be interested to read your ideas on solving issues such as terrorism, the economy, benefits, inequality, etc. You are clearly a knowledgeable fellow, and eloquent with it; but posts on political issues that are simply observant, or critical without offering valid alternative 'ideas' can become a little tiresome.......as can sarcasm.

Please conduct private conversations via the personal messaging system. Thank you.

Maybe it's time we took a closer look at UKIP? Why is it not making the impact that Marine Le Pen's fascists are currently achieving in France? Why does Farage appear to be a busted flush (and I don't just mean at closing time!), while Trump is the front runner for the Republican nomination for US president? Could it be that our Tories have become so right-wing that they're putting UKIP out of business?

Ivan wrote:Could it be that our Tories have become so right-wing that they're putting UKIP out of business?

I believe that people have become fed up with Europe - or at least what is reported in the press about the many excesses and ludicrous decisions we have to tolerate. UKIP echoed their annoyance. The Tories played along and offered a referendum so UKIP is not the attraction it was.
On the point about terrorism, made earlier, and making Islam a scapegoat, which wins UKIP a lot of support, this is something that politicians can't get round; it affects every home and causes concern. Political correctness is an expensive courtesy when it means we cannot ask questions that might offend folk. When we are dealing with terrorists it is an irrelevance that folk might get offended. If we're afraid to investigate in case we make a mistake about identities, then the terrorist has won. UKIP often seem to say what the man in the street privately thinks; and if they seem to say the right thing about terrorism, they will continue to be a force in British politics.

marcolucco wrote:
.... UKIP often seem to say what the man in the street privately thinks; and if they seem to say the right thing about terrorism, they will continue to be a force in British politics.

"The Silent Majority" was a catchphrase coined by Tricky Dickie President Nixon to claim thousands of "supporters" who didn't actually vote for him.

It is similarly bogus in its use by Mr Donald Trump in his current Republican campaign, and as successive British pollsters have been unsuccessful in divining "what the man in the street privately thinks" that isn't much practical help to UKIP either.

oftenwrong

UKIP's message must clearly resonate with many 'people in the street'. The last election saw them win 3.9million votes - almost half the amount of Labour; but this resulted in them getting just one seat in parliament compared to Labour's 232 seats. The SNP got 1.4million votes yet got 56 seats, and the Lib Dems 2.4million votes were given 8 seats..........both far fewer votes than UKIP but winning greater representation in parliament. So UKIP won 12.8% of the votes but were rewarded with 0.2% of the seats. This, to me, clearly means the electoral system is wrong and leads to under representation (and vice versa) of many of the electorates views.

My point is UKIP clearly had / have? a lot of support in the UK and the fact that a flawed electoral system belies that fact should not allow us to ignore the strength of their support from 'the man in the street'. I am in no way supporting or condoning UKIP's message personally; but I do think they have been victims of a flawed electoral system and that they were only awarded one seat should not blur our vision as to their 'real' rise in political influence and presence......they are still very much a force to be reckoned with and Labour, and others, would do well to remain vigilant in combatting them.

I guess what the figures would seem to show is, that, whereas some areas of the country are solidly behind one or other of the 'main' parties, in all areas of the country a significant minority is strongly behind UKIP (or the Greens)

I suppose this means a vote for UKIP (or the Greens) continues to be a protest vote - but the protest is getting stronger - people are hungry for a simple solution to the problems they see, and as you say, Sickchip, that's a dangerous situation.

Boatlady Ukip came a very poor 2nd in Oldham & old Nige was not a happy bunny at all and cried foul, because all he has is ONE Ukip MP in the HOC.

I'd like to see them scoring a bit like the monster Raving Loony Party - a fun protest vote for the politically disengaged but in no way significant - even a poor second is a significant number of people who actually believe UKIP has the answers and that scares me, because UKIP's answers are dangerous to us all

UKIP?  Is that American?


©primemomento.com

He thinks that if he does his La Penn act the USA might just put him into the White House if they do they will come to regret it.

The UK is unrecognisable from the one anyone over 50 years old grew up in. Far from becoming a 'free market economy' that 'threw off the shackles of socialism', the UK has become a crony capitalist state with an effective stranglehold by a wealthy oligarchy. It relies on rigging markets to guarantee corporate profits with the full collusion of the UK Establishment which benefits from it. Many in the Labour PLP are as guilty of this collusion as Conservatives.

UKIP is harder right than the Conservative Party and holds itself out as being a defender of free market capitalism, anti EU and wanting to vastly reduce immigration. At the same time, they have some policies of the libertarian right that easily cross the class divide in the popularity stakes.

In my opinion, immigration has benefited many in the middle, upper and business classes by keeping labour supply high and therefore wages low during a period of shackling trade unions and free collective bargaining. This has meant lower labour costs and higher profits for those at the top. The results for many in the working class have been devastating in terms of job insecurity and wages well below what is needed to live on. Migrant workers and the EU are an easy scapegoat that UKIP has effectively exploited. There has been an utter failure (deliberate in my view) to enforce the National Minimum Wage vigorously and shut down gang masters and traffickers which would have largely surpressed the undercutting of UK workers on price and/or hours worked.

There has also been a failure to plan adequately for an increasing population and to invest in our public infrastructure so that migrants workers in the UK do not cause schools and hospitals in some localities to run out of capacity with all the understandable ill-feeling that that creates. Crony capitalists have used the increased tax revenues that immigration has definitely generated to partly subsidise the huge amount of tax being avoided by global corporations, the wealthy and powerful.

Working class voters who embrace UKIP are like anyone drowning who grabs anything that appears to float. I don't blame them as they are desperate. It is the failure of the left that they are not reaching out for us. We must give them a way back to land rather than a lump of floating driftwood.

Indeed. UKIP has always attracted the drop-out and rugged individualist who is determined to plough life's farrow differently. The Great British Eccentric can always capture a place in the popular imagination, but the attraction for decent working-class, salt of the earth Brits is not so readily understood. Migration is a global phenomenon, and people whose only earning ability lies in their physical body's capacity will naturally go where such a capability is in demand. Better-educated locals can find better-paid alternatives to manual labour, so conflict ought to be minimal. British workers in particular have little appetite for menial tasks that foreigners will undertake, so the answer as usual is better education, not novelty-politics.