UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

[Esseesse]

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

[chris watton]

Esseesse said:

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

I think Mike Reid was the BBC Radio DJ who tried to ban a Frankie Goes To Hollywood song in the mid '80's, because it was too 'suggestive'

If memory serves....

[brenflys777]

Esseesse said:

I'm pro-UKIP, I didn't see Winston McKenzie on Newsnight but I can imagine. He seems like a likely liability...

Winston is IMO not a good representative for any party and he's represented a few... Having said that the whole point of saying Mike Reads track is racist was even more ridiculous. It's unspeakably awful and naff but not racist.

I'd put Winston in the same category as Labours Diane Abbot and the conservatives Heseltine and Ken Clarke.

Incidentally the article that was linked had a link to this Ken Clarke interview - apparently Ken thinks there are more conservative MPs who should join UKIP, pity he doesn't name them.

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/6019600

[FiF]

Zod said:

FiF said:

Zod said:

Zoddikins. Well done.

The Conservatives are not saying that the NHS budget should be cut. They should be saying it, but if they do it plays into Labour's hands. Therefore there is no issue with their saying GPs should be available at weekends.

Term of affection, dear heart.

Conservatives aren't saying anything much really, which was the point. Exposing potential hypocrisy.

On the one hand people accuse UKIP of soundbites, yet ignore worse soundbites from other parties.

It's not about soundbites, but about the fundamental incompatibility between all the things UKIP says. I suspect it will just get worse as UKIP continues to woo disaffected Northern Labour supporters at the same time as it continues to play to disaffected conservative supporters.

All parties are between a rock and a hard place on this in reality, impossible to find a balance. If they give a soundbite, people say where's the detail,
If they give some detail, then people start complaining about costings, when only the Govt have access to the true figures.
And so on.

Every party in opposition don't get the same figures the Govt does, the official opposition gets better figures than the other parties, but when power changes hands, the new govt usually says something along the lines of, "well we didn't think it was this bad." When current Cons limped into power because they were so useless they couldn't win against an open goal something similar was said.

To accuse emergent parties of not having a fully costed breakdown that stacks up to full scrutiny, when they don't even have half the figures that even toe opposition have is somewhat disingenuous.

UKIP could do a better job of costing it out and showing their working, but so could every other party not in power since year dot.

[Zod]

FiF said:

To accuse emergent parties of not having a fully costed breakdown that stacks up to full scrutiny, when they don't even have half the figures that even toe opposition have is somewhat disingenuous.

UKIP could do a better job of costing it out and showing their working, but so could every other party not in power since year dot.

I'm not asking for a costed breakdown on the point, but pointing out that putting out a list of platitudes about how to improve the NHS is not compatible with wanting to cut billions in spending on it.

[anonymous-user]

brenflys777 said:

I'd put Winston in the same category as Labours Diane Abbot and the conservatives Heseltine and Ken Clarke.

Heseltine and Clarke. Really? You know who they were, right? MP for 35 years, Secretary of State for Defence, President of the Board of Trade, Deputy PM, successful businessman in his own right; MP for 44 years, Chancellor, Home Secretary, Lord Chancellor, Education Secretary, Health Secretary.

Hell, even Diane Abbot manage to get elected as an MP.

This joker is a former hairdresser, letting agent and mechanic, who couldn't even get elected as a councillor. Although he had managed to retain his deposit. Once. In many attempts.

Seriously, you need to get a grip on reality.

[mrpurple]

Esseesse said:

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

I don't think it is racists...just very very naff and not very well thought out.

UKIP may not have commissioned it but they are promoting it (I have an email from UKIP central). It was performed at the conference to entertain the troops and that is where it should have stayed IMHO....nothing like giving your detractors ammunition to fire at you but then again it is said all publicity is good publicity.

eta and putting Winston up to defend it is even less well thought out than doing the song in the 1st place.

Edited by mrpurple on Tuesday 21st October 11:30

[anonymous-user]

FiF said:

To accuse emergent parties of not having a fully costed breakdown that stacks up to full scrutiny, when they don't even have half the figures that even toe opposition have is somewhat disingenuous.

To be fair, the accusation is that UKIP doesn't have a remotely costed breakdown, and so the money side of its policies don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

The reality is that they have a wishlist, labelled a list of policies.

[Esseesse]

mrpurple said:

Esseesse said:

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

I don't think it is racists...just very very naff and not very well thought out.

UKIP may not have commissioned it but they are promoting it (I have an email from UKIP central). It was performed at the conference to entertain the troops and that is where it should have stayed IMHO....nothing like giving your detractors ammunition to fire at you but then again it is said all publicity is good publicity.

eta and putting Winston up to defend it is even less well thought out than doing the song in the 1st place.

Edited by mrpurple on Tuesday 21st October 11:30

Agree that it's pretty naff, however it says something that it exists and the novelty is that it exists not that it's an incredibly good song (though you hear worse lyrics daily, most popular music means absolutely nothing). Can't see anybody wanting to do the same for Cameron.

Also agree about the all publicity is good publicity point. The only thing detractors will possibly do is attack it from a thinly veiled racist point of view, which because it's plainly not to most, will most likely play into UKIP's hands. The best thing the would be detractors could do would be to ignore it.

[Zod]

Greg66 said:

To be fair, the accusation is that UKIP doesn't have a remotely costed breakdown, and so the money side of its policies don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

The reality is that they have a wishlist, labelled a list of policies.

a wishlist that is not compatible with the stated desire to cut spending.

[voyds9]

If Mike Reid singing in a Caribbean accent is racist.

Then should we also be debating black people playing Elgar.

[trashbat]

I've not always been very nice about UKIP, but in light of their recent work, I have to give them a healthy dollop of credit for pushing beyond the current complacent state of affairs and indeed the boundaries of contemporary civilisation. I never knew this kind of thing was physically possible, let alone feasible in my lifetime, but I'm willing to put my hands up and admit when I've been proven wrong.

I mean, did you have any idea it could be done?

Worse than the John Barnes Rap?

[mrpurple]

Esseesse said:

mrpurple said:

Esseesse said:

Randy Winkman said:

I think Nihal is right - it just adds to the idea that UKIP is racist. Can they really not see that?

It treads close to the PC line in this PC obsessed road, indeed. But AFAIK UKIP did not commission this song? It appears to be created unprompted by a UKIP supporter who happens to be an ex DJ (I don't know him, I'm probably too young).

Personally I don't find it racist, in the same way I don't find people trying to speak with a French accent racist, or (was it) Vettel joking about Nigel Mansells (IIRC) accent at some award ceremony.

I don't think it is racists...just very very naff and not very well thought out.

UKIP may not have commissioned it but they are promoting it (I have an email from UKIP central). It was performed at the conference to entertain the troops and that is where it should have stayed IMHO....nothing like giving your detractors ammunition to fire at you but then again it is said all publicity is good publicity.

eta and putting Winston up to defend it is even less well thought out than doing the song in the 1st place.

Edited by mrpurple on Tuesday 21st October 11:30

Agree that it's pretty naff, however it says something that it exists and the novelty is that it exists not that it's an incredibly good song (though you hear worse lyrics daily, most popular music means absolutely nothing). Can't see anybody wanting to do the same for Cameron.

Also agree about the all publicity is good publicity point. The only thing detractors will possibly do is attack it from a thinly veiled racist point of view, which because it's plainly not to most, will most likely play into UKIP's hands. The best thing the would be detractors could do would be to ignore it.

I would imagine that obnoxious woman Dianne Abbot is having a field day. Took my old mum years to get the full set of Robinsons musicians (I found the missing one in an antique shop in Rye a couple of years ago) but they are now consigned to a box in the draw rather than her display cabinet where they had been for many years....such a shame the way things have gone now.

[brenflys777]

trashbat said:

I've not always been very nice about UKIP, but in light of their recent work, I have to give them a healthy dollop of credit for pushing beyond the current complacent state of affairs and indeed the boundaries of contemporary civilisation. I never knew this kind of thing was physically possible, let alone feasible in my lifetime, but I'm willing to put my hands up and admit when I've been proven wrong.

I mean, did you have any idea it was possible?

Worse than the John Barnes Rap?

But is it worse than Richard Madeley doing the Ali G....

[longblackcoat]

Guam said:

how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

That's for the Labour - The Future thread. Except that there's no point is having one on PH.

Point is, UKIP have come in with some pretty strong claims, and they have no track record. You might argue that Labour and the Conservatives don't have great track records, which is your right, but at least ththey have one. Each of those parties has achieved tangible things in their history that they can point to and demonstrate that yes, they have some credibility

UKIP haven't, hence the need to prove that their more outlandish claims are actually based on sane achievable policies rather than just being a wish list.

[turbobloke]

longblackcoat said:

Guam said:

how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

That's for the Labour - The Future thread. Except that there's no point is having one on PH.

Point is, UKIP have come in with some pretty strong claims, and they have no track record. You might argue that Labour and the Conservatives don't have great track records, which is your right, but at least ththey have one. Each of those parties has achieved tangible things in their history that they can point to and demonstrate that yes, they have some credibility

UKIP haven't, hence the need to prove that their more outlandish claims are actually based on sane achievable policies rather than just being a wish list.

As a purely hypothetical question, does the better option involve no track record, or a completely hopeless track record of serial failure?

Not at all hypothetically, that could provide some of the basis for considering 'Labour-The Future' to be a triumph of dark humour over reality, and the lack of anything remotely resembling it as entirely understandable.

[trashbat]

brenflys777 said:

But is it worse than Richard Madeley doing the Ali G....

Yes. Yes, it is. Whilst I'm sure Madeley put his best efforts into the genre, he was sadly lumbered with the burden of self-awareness, if only a bit, whereas Read et al are unencumbered by any degree of shame or for that matter ideas about what the hell it is they're doing.

[2013BRM]

longblackcoat said:

Guam said:

how exactly are Labour planning to achieve this?

That's for the Labour - The Future thread. Except that there's no point is having one on PH.

Point is, UKIP have come in with some pretty strong claims, and they have no track record. You might argue that Labour and the Conservatives don't have great track records, which is your right, but at least ththey have one. Each of those parties has achieved tangible things in their history that they can point to and demonstrate that yes, they have some credibility

UKIP haven't, hence the need to prove that their more outlandish claims are actually based on sane achievable policies rather than just being a wish list.

I'm puzzled as to how you can deny a Party a chance just because they are new, they need to make a few cock ups to gain experience surely? otherwise there is no chance for new blood
As for having a track record that is credible merely because it exists has got to be a bad thing because it shows that they have not learned from their cock ups

[FiF]

Greg66 said:

To be fair, the accusation is that UKIP doesn't have a remotely costed breakdown, and so the money side of its policies don't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever.

The reality is that they have a wishlist, labelled a list of policies.

Let's look at it fairly then.

UKIP have put up a wishlist with no costings. I look at the list and see some things and think, how are you going to do that then, some things think fair enough, and others don't know, but maybe/ maybe not.

Cons have put up, with no costings as posted above, a nebulous We will make it work better, and GPs at weekends. That's it.

Now I don't care about GPs at weekends, I can see cost issues with it, my GP practice does some stuff on Saturday mornings anyway, late evenings, early mornings, and the only particular issue is in booking an appointment for a specific GP can result in long waiting times, but if you're prepared to see another partner / doctor then you can see someone that day usually. Anecdotal, true, but there it is.

So effectively that's saying to me, that the Cons are going to do square root of not much for me with the NHS at a local level, more widely who knows, no specifics, nothing to judge on, nothing that wouldn't cost much, or even save money that's sensible. That is ignoring the issue of if it's so easy and sensible why not done already.

Which then brings in the question of past record.

UKIP, no track record. Nothing to judge on.

Cons, and can include other parties if we want for fairness. Several attempts over decades of trying to fix the NHS, or make improvements, more and more money being poured into it, reorganisation after reorganisation, PFIs that are a nightmare, restructuring to ape private sector business area models that waste more money, IT projects that fail and eventually get abandoned, things like Stafford, the Welsh NHS under Labour. And yet this time we are expectd to believe, on the basis of a "we'll make it work for you better and possibly see a GP on a weekend" and nothing else, that this time it will all be OK and this time they'll get it right. Really?

Just sorting out NHS appalling attitude to whistelblowers and public who raise issues of concern makes that one a win for UKIP wishlist.

Can argue a similar thing about Policing and Justice system, how many reforms of reforms of reform on Criminal Justice now? Education, Energy policy, Transport,

Many improvements in these areas have been despite political interference rather than because of it. So the track records are looking a bit tainted chaps.

Yet THIS TIME it's all going to OK because we say it's going to work better. Oh but anybody else has to spell it out. Right..


On - Your - Collective - Bikes - And - Get - Out.

[Mojocvh]

voyds9 said:

If Mike Reid singing in a Caribbean accent is racist.

Then should we also be debating black people playing Elgar.

I think it's a brilliant way to get certain members of the BBC along with the other, actual, closet racists to expose themselves, just watch them crawl out of the woodwork....