UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
don4l said:
The three most important pledges for me were, in no particular order:-
A bonfire of quangoes,
Reduce immigration to tens of thousands,
and
Referendum on Lisbon Treaty.
If I had voted Conservative at the last election, I would feel utterly betrayed.
Want to show me where those are in the 2010 manifesto?A bonfire of quangoes,
Reduce immigration to tens of thousands,
and
Referendum on Lisbon Treaty.
If I had voted Conservative at the last election, I would feel utterly betrayed.
The immigration one you have half a point because the manifesto did mention taking steps towards that level . The absolute promise was later of course. The others you have no case at all
With respect to Quangos there are 13 mentions of Quango in the manifesto. None mention bonfire. The closest is this
manifesto said:
Over the course of a Parliament, we will cut
Whitehall policy, funding and regulation
costs by a third, saving £2 billion a year, and
save a further £1 billion a year from quango
bureaucracy
Which they have achievedWhitehall policy, funding and regulation
costs by a third, saving £2 billion a year, and
save a further £1 billion a year from quango
bureaucracy
Cameron did mention a "bonfire of the quangos" in 2009. He said
BBC said:
Mr Cameron told the BBC he was not planning a "bonfire of the quangos", as had been promised in the past by former Tory deputy PM Michael Heseltine and by Gordon Brown when he was in opposition.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8135460.stmThe promise on the Lisbon Treaty had been withdrawn before the manifesto -because Labour had already signed the treaty, so a referendum was no longer appropriate. Something that has been explained to you many times.
So of the 3 things you would have felt absolutely betrayed about, two weren't even in the manifesto. I feel betrayed you haven't given me the £100 you never actually promised to. But i don't bang on about it
968 said:
TKF said:
Is anyone still listening to Godfrey?
@GODDERSBLOOMFormer UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom tweets: I sometimes think UKIP policy depends on who Nigel Farage met in the pub the night before.
Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
968 said:
MGJohn said:
What, an actual politician who listens to folks ~ how novel.
Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
Or perhaps he makes it up as he goes along to appeal to whatever populist rubbish can get him votes.Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
968 said:
MGJohn said:
What, an actual politician who listens to folks ~ how novel.
Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
Or perhaps he makes it up as he goes along to appeal to whatever populist rubbish can get him votes.Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
Even with their best efforts, ace media smoothies try to accuse him of a U-Turn on immigration. Brainwashed media still tainted by Thatcher soundbites and values. The times they are a changing ...
They really must keep up. Little chance of that in their cushioned against reality media establishment jobs for life. Confusing a U-Turn with a refreshing change of approach to an ever increasing problem is not a U-Turn. He runs rings round the media establishment by actually answering their questions. Another refreshing change.
How very annoying for them. He was in fine "thinking on his feet" form with them today.
Speaking to others over the past few months, even my always vote Tory relatives are having second thoughts. Rather more who have mainly voted Labour in the past, including nyself despite my basic conservative values, are also having second thoughts.
If my sample is a reliable indication of what may be happening widely elsewhere in the former green and pleasant, roll on May 7th.
He's certainly got 'em rattled! Praise be and Amen to that.
MGJohn said:
Farage does have a very annoying habit of saying things many want to hear.
All politicians are capable of that. However Cameron et al are trying to please a MAJORITY so they have to temper what they say.initially Farage was only trying to win over a minority so his message only needed to be quite limited/narrow. In order to broaden his appeal he will need different brands of snake oil, at which point his original supporters will become disillusioned.
Countdown said:
In order to broaden his appeal he will need different brands of snake oil, at which point his original supporters will become disillusioned.
There are many other factors that could well broaden UKIP's appeal over time without any of that...- Continuing to be right about the EU.
- Continuing broken promises from other parties relating to the EU.
- Continuing immigration.
- Eurozone disintegration.
- Continuing bad headlines about the EU (pay us £1.7Bn extra or else).
- Another recession.
- Increased representation in parliament improving their credibility.
- Coming 2nd in many seats which will mean a UKIP vote is perceived as not wasted.
Once again we see the term populist used as a denigration of one party. Let's have a reminder what the term populist means.
populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn't think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people's jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don't worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What's so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that's increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
./rant.Yeah yeah 1/10 not enough swearing.
populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn't think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people's jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don't worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What's so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that's increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
./rant.Yeah yeah 1/10 not enough swearing.
Edited by FiF on Thursday 5th March 08:40
FiF said:
Once again we see the term populist used as a denigration of one party. Let''s have a reminder what the term populist means.
populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn''t think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people''s jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don''t worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What''s so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that''s increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
./rant.Yeah yeah 1/10 not enough swearing.
You have a higher opinion of 'ordinary people' than I do.populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn''t think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people''s jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don''t worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What''s so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that''s increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
./rant.Yeah yeah 1/10 not enough swearing.
It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
RYH64E said:
You have a higher opinion of 'ordinary people' than I do.
It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
Of course it all depends on what one considers ordinary people. It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
It seems from your response that you have a condescending view of ordinary people as non employers and non taxpayers. That's a different facet of the tribalistic problem.
FiF said:
Of course it all depends on what one considers ordinary people.
It seems from your response that you have a condescending view of ordinary people as non employers and non taxpayers. That's a different facet of the tribalistic problem.
My experience of 'ordinary people' is that most of them are lazy, selfish, untrustworthy, unreliable and stupid. That's based on many years experience of employing and working with such people. One of my more senior and trusted employees had a career in retail before joining me, his opinion of 'ordinary people', based on many years of interacting with them, is much worse than mine...It seems from your response that you have a condescending view of ordinary people as non employers and non taxpayers. That's a different facet of the tribalistic problem.
RYH64E said:
My experience of 'ordinary people' is that most of them are lazy, selfish, untrustworthy, unreliable and stupid. That's based on many years experience of employing and working with such people. One of my more senior and trusted employees had a career in retail before joining me, his opinion of 'ordinary people', based on many years of interacting with them, is much worse than mine...
I wonder what the opinion "ordinary people" have of you.FiF said:
RYH64E said:
You have a higher opinion of 'ordinary people' than I do.
It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
Of course it all depends on what one considers ordinary people. It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
It seems from your response that you have a condescending view of ordinary people as non employers and non taxpayers. That's a different facet of the tribalistic problem.
I don't (as I'm sure you've guessed), but I come from quite an ordinary background. Everyone has the right to vote and to have his needs taken into account. The problem is the cynical way. Politicians, very much including UKIP, tailor their messages to appeal to different groups.
steveT350C said:
That's an interesting article! A smattering of the usual 'bonkers' insults etc... but an admission that the consensus the other parties have come to about not dealing with immigration is hurting or is going to hurt issues that they all have conflicting consensus on - the environment, schools etc. Inability to restrict numbers means inability to plan effectively for infrastructure. If there are shortages of school places can you blame local authorities when Cameron suggests an external increase of tens of thousands and allows three hundred thousand?
I'm not expecting ukip to win the GE but they are leading the debate on the issues that affect ordinary people like me.
Zod said:
FiF said:
RYH64E said:
You have a higher opinion of 'ordinary people' than I do.
It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
Of course it all depends on what one considers ordinary people. It will be interesting to see how UKIP manage to reconcile the two wings of their party. On one side you have the early UKIP supporters who were largely drawn from the right of the Conservative Party, now there's the other side comprising mostly disaffected blue collar workers and white van man. Will their common hatred of the EU be enough to remain a unified party? I would say not.
As for populist, on it's own that's not sufficient unless such policies are also practical, achievable and fiscally responsible. Policies that are popular with 'ordinary people' almost certainly won't be popular with those who employ them and pay the taxes that keep the country (partly) solvent.
It seems from your response that you have a condescending view of ordinary people as non employers and non taxpayers. That's a different facet of the tribalistic problem.
I don't (as I'm sure you've guessed), but I come from quite an ordinary background. Everyone has the right to vote and to have his needs taken into account. The problem is the cynical way. Politicians, very much including UKIP, tailor their messages to appeal to different groups.
However agree with the last part in bold.
FiF said:
Once again we see the term populist used as a denigration of one party. Let's have a reminder what the term populist means.
populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn't think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people's jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don't worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What's so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that's increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
The problem with populist policies is not their popularity but when they are impractical to implement. populist. noun. A member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
Used as an adjective it has essentially a similar meaning.
So using it as a criticism means that the user doesn't think that the interests of the ordinary person are worthwhile. No, the plebs, the fag end voters on less than 150k are there to be used and abused, much better to look after the top one per cent, or chums in trade unions, or the green sector at the expense of industry and ordinary people's jobs, or wealthy landowners, or PFI contractors, don't worry the plebs and fag end voters and their descendants will pick up the extortionate bill.
What's so wrong with wanting to look after ordinary people anyway? The ordinary people who are denigrated but often have large doses of common sense and an innate feeling for right and wrong, something that's increasingly lacking in many politicians and some posters on this forum.
The Greek election shows you can promise the impossible and win. The problem is what you then do when you win.
An example is UKIP's immigration policy. UKIP say they will reduce immigration by having a points based system but they know to do this other things must happen.
1. You have to repeal the ECHR and opt out of the treaty. This is also UKIP policy. However, whatever you may think of some of the decisions made under the ECHR it remains one of the few legal restrictions on the power of the executive in the UK. Repealing it without some form of replacement maybe even the introduction of a written constitution would be a much greater risk to our liberty than leaving it as it is.
2. You have to leave the EU. However, UKIP policy to leave the EU is impossible to implement.
3. They do not even mention student visas which make up a large number of immigrants and are essential for funding of many universities.
Mrr T said:
3. They do not even mention student visas which make up a large number of immigrants and are essential for funding of many universities.
Lots of action to be taken there I'm afraid. They dodgy students aren't really funding our education establishments- they are eligible for loans from the government, that will never be repaid.paper said:
A private college at the centre of a row over bogus students has had its licence to recruit from overseas suspended by the Home Office.
St Patrick’s College in London is being investigated after its publicly funded student numbers ballooned from zero to 4,000 in just one year.
The students received £95.7 million in loans and grants in 2013-2014 – more than any other private college in the UK.
It was one of a number of institutions examined by the Commons public accounts committee, which this week criticised ministers for wasting taxpayers’ money on loans to students attending colleges run by private companies or charitable institutions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2971217/Britain-s-biggest-college-banned-recruiting-abroad-publicly-funded-student-numbers-increased-zero-4-000-just-one-year.htmlSt Patrick’s College in London is being investigated after its publicly funded student numbers ballooned from zero to 4,000 in just one year.
The students received £95.7 million in loans and grants in 2013-2014 – more than any other private college in the UK.
It was one of a number of institutions examined by the Commons public accounts committee, which this week criticised ministers for wasting taxpayers’ money on loans to students attending colleges run by private companies or charitable institutions.
Edited by Yazar on Thursday 5th March 10:49
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff