HM

UKIP now have policies to:

1. Cut income tax
2. Abolish inheritance tax
3. Cut corporation tax
4. Give money to fishermen
5. Give money to farmers
6. Increase pensions
7. Increase defence spending
8. Pay for more expensive nuclear power plants

So does this add up? Would the proposed £50-60 billion we give to the EU even cover half of this? And why would a UKIP government be taking the £50-60 billion from UK citizens in the first place with the country having left the EU? I understand that a big message UKIP give is to 'cut red tape' and decentralise services, but again I don't think these are worth the vast amounts of money necessary to fund the 8 aforementioned promises. So can anyone explain how all these UKIP policies are supposed to work without completely messing the UK up? I certainly hope the answer isn't 'stealth taxes'.

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

C_steam

One of Lechlade's continuing issues with UKIP was this very issue. At the time UKIP were not even clear on how much the EU cost. Bottom line is that UKIP do not cost accurately any policy - simple reason, I believe, is that it is recognised they would not get to power and that accurate costing is very difficult until you become a major opposition party - so why bother right now?

(I'm not saying I agree, BTW)

__________________
--------------------------------------------------

Users on ignore list: None. I've got to have people to laugh at.
Cowardly Posters* list: BobFM, Bellatrix.*People who post personal insults then refuse to reply

.

kernow

Where did you read a UKIP statement, stating these policies exactly as you have put it?

mrabody

I tend to agree that our policys do not add up.

I think this could be easily rectified if we promised to cut government spending. There are something on the order of 800 Quangos. I suspect we could safely manage without 700 of them. Under ZANU Labour the NHS has been forced to hire thousands of middle managers, spin doctors etc who do nothing to improve frontline health services. Our complicated tax system requires thousands more.

With the economy slowing, inflation increasing, and house prices collapsing, ordinary people are beginning to fear for their future. They are cutting expenses, tightening their belts, but our government keeps on increasing in size and keeps on raising taxes.

UKIP should promise to cut government spending, put the national budget in surplus, begin paying down the national debt, and ease the burden on taxpayers.

Here are some suggestions how we could achieve this.

1. Review the activities of all 800 Quangos and cut those that are not providing value for money.
2. Cut program spending by all government departments except the NHS by x%
3. Simplify our tax and benefits system (already promised)
4. Review all regulatory burdens that the last government has imposed on local authorities to determine average cost, repeal any that are unnecessary (ie does my local council really need to ask me my employment status, race, or age when I apply to rent a council lockup?, do they really need to pay £100,000+ for a chief executive?) and then cut local authority funding by apportion of the estimated savings.
5. Hold future spending increases to less than inflation.
6. Withhold our yearly payments to the EU, most of which go to CAP anyways.

There are probably plenty of other things that we could propose. In any event, in the current economic climate the general public is likely to be sympathetic to proposals to pare back government spending and remove some of the burden of taxes and regulations that falls so heavily on them.


Now that David Cameron has stupidly backed himself into a corner by reiterating his promise to match Labour spending targets, we have the opportunity to stake out this ground for ourselves.

Anthony Butcher

HM, you missed off doubling the size of the prison system.

__________________
If you care about what's in your food and where it comes from, then get it labelled!
Label My Food - http://www.labelmyfood.org.uk

HM

Not to mention grammar schools and deportations...

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

Hartlepool

A 5 year moratorium on immigration?

eublues

I contend that UKIP's policies add up a hell of a lot better than those of Labour or the Conservatives acting as a proxy for the EU government. Is that not close to self-evident?

Do the present government's policies 'add up'?

C_steam

'add up' in a mathematical sense, dummy! (you know). Can't you see that any party can promise the earth, but as soon as they become a remotely serious threat they would be pulled to pieces by the media over the cost of their proposals.

Of course they look like attractive policies - bu there isn't a chance in hell of achieving them all because they cost too much. So to compare them to the current governent policies which a) are **** BUT b) are fully costed (don't we know it!) is false.

__________________
--------------------------------------------------

Users on ignore list: None. I've got to have people to laugh at.
Cowardly Posters* list: BobFM, Bellatrix.*People who post personal insults then refuse to reply

.

eublues

The claim that the present government's policies are 'fully costed' can't be true in reality since they certainly didn't do their costings on the basis of oil at 140 dollars a barrel and they predicted only 13000 immigrants from EU accession countries in the first year, and so on.