Farage Over The Moon at UKIP Gains

Jim,
I think a lot of people are cheesed off because of the large amounts of Polish people who work throughout the UK.
I regularly see distribution centres with Polish people in transport, warehouse, canteen and cleaning. Some factories are the same. In fact, some places have Polish on the tannoy.
I know some people are aware there are Polish people in their cities, towns and villages but they would be suprised just how widespread it is.
I worked overseas so I would be a hypocrite if I complained about other peoples working here but the level of immigration in the UK is quite staggering. Polish people work hard over here, there is no disputing that.
It is the lack of immigration control by successive governments that makes most people angry.
I hear people talking about this all the time.

I hope you're right about bright ideas

In my view, there are two major immigration-related issues that many people feel strongly about. The first is the uncontrolled - and uncontrollable - migration to the UK from other EC nations and the poorer ones in particular. This places a massive strain on the health service, other public services, housing and jobs. The other is that Britain is often viewed as a "soft touch" and favoured destination for third-world migrants some of whom arrive as students or visitors but then overstay. Others pose as asylum-seekers but since they must surely pass through other "safe" countries where they could seek asylum, I see no good reason why they should become Britain's problem. Many of them originate from countries that have been invaded by US-led coalitions such as Iraq and Afghanistan but the US doesn't play its part in providing asylum to those displaced (unless there is coin in it for them), its interests are purely financial.

Under existing EU treaties, the government can not stop the westwards flood from Europe but it can make it somewhat more difficult for those people to remain in the UK. It could, quite legally:

• require all settling EU nationals to pass written and oral English language and "life in Britain" tests within (say) three to six months of arrival with both jobs and benefits - including housing - being conditional on passing these tests;
• require everyone, including indigenous Brits, to carry smart ID cards which would serve as proof as to nationality and entitlement to public services and also as a pan-European travel document;
• require EU nationals who are convicted of criminal offences to serve their sentences in their home country and their rights to re-enter to the UK can be suspended temporarily or indefinitely, depending on the seriousness;
• require employers to prioritise UK nationals applying for jobs and certain sectors should be "UK national only" such as the Police and security services, the armed forces and the civil service.
• prioritise housing provision to UK nationals.

All of the above is possible and represents, in my opinion, a sensible solution to a growing problem. Yes, there will be outcries from the corridors of power in Brussels - hypocritical outcries, I might add, since most of these measures are already in place in much of continental Europe.

Unfortunately the Conservatives - and their Daily Mail/"Red Top" supporters - only see immigration in terms of slant-eyes and dark skin. A party prepared to see and tackle the issue as it really is - and outlined above - would be eminently electable, in my view.

That doesnt just apply to Daily Mail reading Conservatives. It is, unfortunately, innate across the board.

We could be drawn into an era of entrenched coalition government.

The conservatives have lurched way too far to the left, and have lost the trust of the electorate.

What is needed is a party occupying the centre ground of politics, with a strong leader, sensible policy decisions, and no idiot u-turns or lies.

The UKIP and Farage might well provide this.

Only time will tell...

I have an English friend, married to a Filipina, who is absolutely vitriolic on the subject of Polish immigration into Britain.

He has a Polish surname...

Tories 'can win back votes from UKIP', home secretary says

"The Conservatives can win back voters who have deserted them in favour of the UK Independence Party, Home Secretary Theresa May has insisted.

UKIP made gains in local elections as the Tories lost control of 10 councils."

"Senior Tory David Davis is calling for a planned referendum on the European Union to be brought forward to counteract the UKIP threat.

"Mrs May dismissed the idea but said the public needed "greater certainty" that a referendum would happen.

After the Conservatives suffered a drubbing in the local elections and support leached away to UKIP, backbenchers, including the former leadership contender David Davis, are urging David Cameron to break the impression of being privileged and out of touch and to bring forward the planned European Union referendum.

Theresa May has rejected calls to hold the referendum before the next election, but said the Tories must give voters "greater certainty" that they will be given a say on Britain's EU membership.

It's a curious phrase - but points to the fact that despite David Cameron's speech on Europe in January where he promised a referendum, following negotiations, by 2017, too many people still don't believe it will happen.

All three major parties have offered a referendum on the issue before, but there hasn't been one since 1975.

The desire for a referendum is something UKIP have tapped into and the Tory leadership know they now need to show they will keep their promise on it."[/I]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22409522

A reminder of UKIPS policy on immigration.

End mass, uncontrolled immigration. UKIP calls for an immediate five-year freeze on immigration for permanent settlement. We aspire to ensure that any future immigration does not exceed 50,000 people p.a.

http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto1304a.pdf

Thank you. This turkey has no plans to vote for Christmas.

I've just spent a little time looking at UKIP's various policies and I have to say that, whilst I do have one or two concerns, what I've read does seem pretty reasonable and strikes a far more harmonious chord with me than the other three parties' policies.

I like their proposals with regard to national and local referendums which would give the electorate considerably more say in the way their country is governed. Their education policy is, in my view, very sensible and would give university students a much better deal by returning to the grant system as well as more equal funding for all schools by removing the "specialist schools" - which under Labour and the Tories get a far larger slice of pie than other schools.

I naturally welcome UKIP's plan to leave the EU so that the UK would have the same relationship with Europe as Norway and Switzerland. This coupled with revitalising our links with the Commonwealth, establishing a Commonwealth Free Trade Agreement and similarly with ASEAN countries should be welcomed by all who have Filipina spouses.

Immigration is, I agree, a bit of a stumbling block but I note that the party's policy for immigration and asylum is currently under review and doesn't take account of any changes implemented by government since April 2010. I'll wait and see on that one. I am, however, encouraged by the party's aim of forging closer links with ASEAN - as well as re-building our relationship with the Commonwealth - and this may influence how it views immigration of foreign-born spouses.

Health - and the NHS - is another issue mentioned in negative tones here. The very first sentence of its manifesto states: "UKIP believes strongly in the principles of the NHS, which should continue to deliver care free at the point of delivery on the basis of need, not ability to pay." Its proposed policy - including democratically-elected local health boards, free eye and dental checks, the bringing-back of Matrons and SENs to improve frontline patient care - should be welcomed; UKIP seems to be considerably more pro-NHS than the Tories.

I can see why some might have misgivings about UKIP's health policy, however. Its policy document, dated October 2012, contains the following two sentences: "Beveridge’s founding principles of the NHS actually recommended a co-insurance model and a UKIP government would undertake a cost-benefit analysis of reverting to this concept. For the purposes of this policy, however, it means a healthcare system open to all British people, regardless of their ability to pay." and from that one might infer that UKIP plans to scrap the NHS as-is. I would suggest that its cost-benefit analysis would include the political consideration of its continuing existence as a party in power and therefore that principle would be quietly forgotten. That said, though, I do believe there is a very good case for requiring those who want elective surgeries and procedures to pay a percentage of the cost. A woman wanting breast augmentation would have to pay part of the cost but the NHS would continue to provide free cosmetic surgery to those with cleft palates, for example. The co-pay could be means-tested.

I have no problem with its policies for law and order which redress the balance to being pro-victim rather than pro-criminal. But I'm not entirely happy about its plan to abolish the Human Rights Act - although this would make it much easier to deport the likes of Abu Qatarda and other foreigners who use the UK as a base from which to spread their extremist venom and as a recruiting ground for would-be terrorists.

Taken as a whole, UKIP's manifesto isn't quite as far-right as portrayed; in some respects, it's quite centrist. Under a UKIP government it would appear that the electorate would have a considerably greater say in the running of their country, central government would be significantly smaller and more devolved and an end to dictatorship governments.

"Ukip policies

Lower taxes

"Abolish the tax on work – employers' National Insurance [NI]." This would lose around £50bn a year in revenue, at a stroke, reversing all progress in cutting the deficit since 2010.

"Take 4.5 million of low incomes out of tax with a simple, flat rate income tax … Merge 20 per cent basic income tax with 11 per cent NI to create a 31 per cent flat tax on all earned incomes over £11,500." This would create another vast hole in public finances, and mean tax cuts for all higher-rate taxpayers.

"Ukip have a long-standing policy to abolish inheritance tax." This would cost about £3bn a year.

"Global warming is not proven – wind power is futile. Scrap all green taxes, wind-turbine subsidies, adopt nuclear power to free us from dependence on fossil fuels and foreign oil and gas."

"Cut taxes on small businesses." Unspecified.

Lower public spending

"Public spending is increasing and the coalition's cuts do not scratch the surface of Labour's deficit. We must cut down government if we are to return to a sound economy."

Quangos: "Bring them under Parliament's control and cut the cost substantially". No definition of "substantial".

"Make real and rigorous cuts in foreign aid." The aid budget is about £10bn a year.

"By leaving the EU we save over £45m a day plus £60bn a year due to EU trade barriers, business regulation, waste, fraud." £60bn a year is equivalent to the annual spending of the entire Education Department.

Higher public spending

"Spend an extra 40 per cent on defence annually." A cost of £19bn pa.

"Double prison places to enforce zero tolerance on crime." Cost about £4bn pa.

"Roll all state pensions and benefits into a simple, substantial citizen's pension." Uncosted.

Restore student grants, but abandon target of 50 per cent of young people going to university. Uncosted.

A better yesterday

"Only by leaving the EU can we regain control of our borders."

"Life must mean life."

"Our traditional values have been undermined. Children are taught to be ashamed of our past. Multiculturalism has split our society. Political correctness is stifling free speech."

"Support grammar schools."

"End the ban on smoking in allocated rooms in public houses, clubs and hotels."

"Hold county-wide referenda on the hunting ban.""

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...at-voters-should-know-about-ukip-8517997.html

So we vote for all of this and then duh....cant get my wife or fiancee or partner into Britain as they have put a five year block on it.

Also, consider that what they do actually put in print might just be the tip of a larger iceberg underneath.

Incredibly I have been reading of a number of turkeys who have just done that.

Probably quite unlikely.

Well, not really. I wouldn't normally associate voting for the 3 main parties in terms of looneys, fruitcakes and closet racists.

The question is how many loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists are there in the UK that have the potential to vote UKIP into power. Probably not quite enough.

Additionally the UKIP manifesto appears to be an amalgamation of random generated policies with no common thread whatsoever.

I suspect that the eyecatching element of their manifesto is their immigration policy. I see them as a one trick pony. I am not saying the other parties provide the best array of policies but at least there is some depth and breadth and commonality through each of their manifestos.

"If Ukip had a name that truly reflected its priorities, it might be called the UK Immigrationphobe Party. Ostensibly the anti-EU party, an obsession with immigration and exit from Europe as a means to close Britain's doors is its prevailing motive. The word immigration runs through its policy statements like red lettering in seaside rock, and its proposed five-year ban on entries to the UK is the message it rams home on every doorstep."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...at-voters-should-know-about-ukip-8517997.html

Do you really think that the Tories are any less divisive in their immigration policy than UKIP? From my standpoint they are equally odious. Under the current regulations, I - and probably Januarius too - could never bring our respective wives and families back to the UK. However this aspect is, as I was at pains to point out in my earlier post, under review. I feel particularly let down by Ms May as all my life I have paid taxes to the UK Exchequer including lengthy periods when I wasn't physically in the country.

I choose to ignore what newspapers print about political parties and their policies due to an ever-present bias by either the writer, editor or proprietor. Manifestos are not always true reflections of a parties' intentions either since both Labour and the Conservatives have broken many of their pledges repeatedly - viz promises of a referendum on Europe.

It is also unfair to criticise any party aspiring to lead this country if some of its policies are uncosted. Only the party currently in power has any idea of the true state of the country's finances. The Tories, although having been the official opposition, had no idea of the extent of Labour's profligacy until the newly-appointed ministers went to their offices.

You include in your quotation UKIP's plan to scrap Inheritance Tax. It and Death Duties before it are iniquitous and represent a tax on death; it is also a far more expensive tax to collect and the 3bn or so collected will not reflect that. You can't even claim that it's a tax on the very rich, the threshold is set really quite low and anyone who owns their own home and has savings and pensions will be netted. Only a left-wing socialist would support such a tax.

At least with the Tories there is some tempering of approach compared to UKIP. At least wives and fiances can still get through the door and stay here under current ILR rules.

On the possibility that UKIP might temper their stand on Immigration. I think I have seen and heard enough to know better than to even think about voting for them, regardless. This turkey says no thankyou Nigel.

This was enough for me ( 2 minutes in at the point where the lady to his left pushes him on the matter ):

I'm sorry, John, but I cannot take the comments of someone who dismisses any party in those terms with any degree of seriousnes. You may be concerned by the rise in UKIP's popularity as evidenced by their national share of the vote and that is your right. But UKIP has obviously struck a chord with a significant percentage of English voters who have very likely been let down by successive governments and their broken promises.

Of course none of this affects me directly since, unlike the US and several other countries, expat citizens are disenfranchised and I sit here on the sidelines watching the political game with some amusement.