UKIP - The Future - Volume 2

[Halb]

Benbay001 said:

Roger Helmer
Paul Nuttall
William Legge, the Earl of Dartmouth
Patrick o Flynn

If you were really interested you could always search out some videos of the above and you may find that UKIP are not a one man band.

Nuttall's is st, very much in the mould of a Labour/Tory drone.
UKiPs man on QT was good, and a quick search reveals it was Roger Helmer.

[Halb]

don4l said:

Planning regulations control how much new building takes place.
There is plenty of money available for house building. There just aren't enough sites with suitable planning permission.
When I bought my current house (22 years ago) the cost of the plot was 3 times the cost of the building. Now, it is probably 5 times.
The availability of suitable plots controls the availability of housing.

Good points. But the criticisms raised here seem valid.
The right-to-buy scheme has been criticised for the following reasons:

Speculating investors were able to buy up council properties through deferred transaction agreements, hastening the rise in property costs;
Commercially and socially valuable council assets being sold at below their market value or replacement cost;
The remaining stock of council housing was concentrated in undesirable areas with little employment opportunity, further isolating and stigmatising the tenants.

A report published in January 2013 by London Assembly member Tom Copley, From Right to Buy to Buy to Let, showed that 36% of homes sold under Right to Buy in London (52,000 homes) were being let out by councils from private landlords, leading to criticisms that the scheme "represents incredibly poor value for money to taxpayers" since it "helped to fuel the increase in the housing benefit bill, heaped more pressure on local authority waiting lists and led to more Londoners being forced into the under-regulated private rented sector"..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Buy#Critici...

[xjsdriver]

don4l said:

Planning regulations control how much new building takes place.

Planning regs can be aided by Compulsory Purchase Orders can't they?

don4l said:

There is plenty of money available for house building. There just aren't enough sites with suitable planning permission.

If there was the political will CPO's can be used to find the sites.

don4l said:

When I bought my current house (22 years ago) the cost of the plot was 3 times the cost of the building. Now, it is probably 5 times.

This is due to a lack of political will to address the issue (namely: ripping up and starting afresh with planning regs to allow for population growth) - which is reaching crisis point in SE England

don4l said:

The availability of suitable plots controls the availability of housing.

As the population grows of course we need to start addressing the madness that is our housing (lack of) policy.

[steveT350C]

David Davis has spoken out telling the Tories that quitting the EU would be a revolution and spur jobs

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597945/Ge...

[steveT350C]

More from David Davis,

"Quitting the EU would be good for Britain"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2597954/...

[mrpurple]

steveT350C said:

More from David Davis,

"Quitting the EU would be good for Britain"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2597954/...

UKIP & Nigel Farage dictating the political climate again and without a single MP............yet

[santona1937]

As much as I disagree with most of UKIP's positions/ policies, I do think that M. Farage is an interesting change for a politician, and that the emergence of UKIP as a potential seat winning political party can only be a good thing for UK politics.

[FiF]

As posted on the NF v NC debate thread.

The rise of UKIP is the first completely new national party to appear in British politics since Labour. Additionally they have attracted a large number of voters who have hitherto turned their backs completely and not voted or protest voted with fringe parties / candidates.

They are taking votes off both Tories and Labour.

They have yet to do the one thing that any emerging party must do which is to identify areas where success is most achievable and build up local support, an infrastructure and local activists. They have so far mainly preferred a "build the brand" approach.

They have great support and potential to speak for a section of the population who have been ignored by Blair and Cameron et al in their rush for the educated liberal mobile middle classes.

Once their message gets out and is understood and is not drowned out by the drones and idiots of the spot the difference parties there is potential for a sea change.

However there is a long way to go yet.

The drift in support in the months following a EU election must not be allowed to reoccur.

Of course there is the potential that theywill fail at the same hurdle all emergent parties find so difficult and usually end up stumbling, namely the UK First past the post system which is very unfriendly to emergent parties.

It could go either way.

[powerstroke]

fking hell we could have saved some time and maybe even
Had a cons majority if the utter cretins in the Tory party
Had voted for Davis instead of cammoron...idiots just when they needed a Tory they vote for green Dave...

[FiF]

One begins to wonder if they are deliberately letting UKIP do well in the EU election.

[NicD]

steveT350C said:

More from David Davis,

"Quitting the EU would be good for Britain"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2597954/...

Cant believe a politician is making such sense!

'Rejecting arguments that departure would be damaging for British jobs and trade, Mr Davis claimed leaving the EU could trigger "a bright new future" for the UK.

Mr Davis insisted that exit is "neither high-risk nor frightening" for Britain, giving it a strong bargaining position in any membership renegotiation if it makes clear it is ready to walk away.'

[FiF]

Digga said:

steveT350C said:

NF's regular Diary in the Spectator.

The comments are strikingly positive!

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/diary/9176081/...

I dare anyone to call him a Little Englander after reading that piece.

And a plug for the book from him.

[Benbay001]

FiF said:

One begins to wonder if they are deliberately letting UKIP do well in the EU election.

For what reason?

[FiF]

Benbay001 said:

FiF said:

One begins to wonder if they are deliberately letting UKIP do well in the EU election.

For what reason?

Thinking it may give them more leverage to negotiate with the EU.

It's fairly widely accepted that UKIP will do well. What has happened after previous EU elections is that the support has drifted away in the post election months and hasn't held up in the next GE.

It's a possibility that they want to pick up on a good result for UKIP make some pretence at sticking it to the EU, saying to the electorate we're listening and put the squeeze on UKIP.

Libdems have been tricked into taking the flat out pro EU stance and will be hung out to dry.

Pure speculation admittedly, but their pre election efforts are stupendously pathetic don't you think?

[Randy Winkman]

This Telegraph TV review is pretty negative about Farage. But the review of the same programme in today's Sunday Telegraph was also really disparaging about the whole idea of the party. I cant find it on the net myself , can anyone post a copy?

[HonestIago]

Guam said:

Randy Winkman said:

This Telegraph TV review is pretty negative about Farage. But the review of the same programme in today's Sunday Telegraph was also really disparaging about the whole idea of the party. I cant find it on the net myself , can anyone post a copy?

The game is up for the MSM, they have been rumbled, what little credibility they had vapourised following the debates.

People will vote on their instincts now I reckon, the only casualty in this fiasco will be the MSM's circulation figures.

I hope you are right. I worry that too few people question the MSM like us right-thinking PHers do though!

[FiF]

It's one of the common reasons for complaints about the democratic deficit within the EU.

Across the EU and not just in the UK turnouts are appallingly low and those who do turn out tend to vote on party lines decided by reference to largely national issues local to the voter.

[Laurel Green]

Listening to LBC this morning and two different politicians referred to UKIP as the anti-establishment party. Is this to be the new buzzword of the opposition I wonder.

[Wombat3]

Guam said:

Laurel Green said:

Listening to LBC this morning and two different politicians referred to UKIP as the anti-establishment party. Is this to be the new buzzword of the opposition I wonder.

I think that's a great handle for them,

It leaves them free to pull from all the other parties as they cant be described as Tory light, or Labour light etc.

Given NF destroyed Clegg so utterly, it is clear that Cameron and Milliband are terrified to get in the ring with him, this will become increasingly evident to the man in the street

They are damned if they don't damned if they do, if they cancel the leaders debates it will be because of NF, if they have them and don't invite him, it will be because they are scared of him. If they hold it and invite him and do a Clegg on him, it will drive voters away

Lose, lose, lose, for them basically

Definitly a problem for Cleggie & Miliband. Cameron leads a party that is openly split on Europe and always has been - but then he already has an established position of committing to a referendum. In that respect he has the thing about as well covered as it can be.

Farage needs to be a bit careful around that because if he's advocating that we shouldn't wait for a referendum & should just exit the EU then the question as to be asked as to what's his problem with a bit of democracy?

[zygalski]

Turn7 said:

Amen to that....

Trouble is, Im not convinced NF and pals wont get their noses in the trough once they see whats to be had....

Most are ex-Tories so you'll be perfectly safe there.