Do you think the Tories will get a majority in 2015?

P.S. the 2017 EU referendum is not CONDITIONAL on Cameron's EU policy renegotiations, like on open borders other leaders have major concerns about; whatever he can achieve to make the EU work better for the UK will also be put to the people, but if the people say 'OUT', we leave.

WetAugust….so based on your answer that Ukip would need a parliamentary majority of 326 seats (from their current zero) to begin changing British law to GUARATEE the extraction the UK out of the EU; would it be fair to say that only the Conservatives could offer the UK a choice by 2017 and that if waiting for Ukip to guarantee a UK withdrawal, it could take 2-3 parliaments from here e.g. the year 2025 onwards?

Moreover, would you agree with me that for the United Kingdom Independence Party to target not so bright Conservative votes, using the pretence Ukip could bring the UK out of the EU before the Conservatives it is as best disingenuous, but also questions the integrity of the Ukip party on it's main policy/namesake?

WetAugust….further to the above question as your starter -for-ten, here is another one;

The Conservatives with a parliamentary majority in 2015, is the only political party that both CAN change British law on EU membership and are willing to offer ‘the people’ a straight IN/OUT referendum on the EU by 2017 - regardless of any EU treaty change exit option - opened to Labour/Lib Dem ‘interpretation’. True or False.

Hi is beaut
Have just logged on so am not yet up to s peed on the financial data you mentioned in your post below. I will respond to that when I've acquainted myself with the issue. However, it is very convenient for the Tories to be questioning UKIP's expenses and thereby drawing fire away from Cameron's pathetic handling of his own mp's recent difficulties in that area. I did hear an Eu commissioner on the radio this morning who was totally unperturbed that the EU's own accounts have failed to be approved by auditors for many years , if ever, and who thought a system of checks and balances such as providing receipts was unnecessary.

Back to your original question. I said below and am now reiterating that the primary policy of UKIP is to leave the eu. It does have other foreign and domestic policies. as for whether UKIP can make the uk leave the eu well first it would ha be to have a w corking majority of mp's sufficient to enable UKIP to pass legislation to hold an in/out referendum, assuming the vote was for leaving then UKIP, as the govt, could pass the legislation that would enable the uk exit. So, no, as it stands at present UKIP cannot make the uk leave the eu. The Tories say they will have a referendum after a period if renegotiation, but renegotiation was tried and failed in the 70s. As far as I know, labour would not give the uk population a referendum and the liberals are pro-eu, although who knows what they believe in this week.

Hope this helps

Hello WetAugust …I suspect poster IronMaiden has gone M.I.A. as knows better than to try and fob me off with political ‘smoke and mirrors’.

So I apologise if it seemed that I was focusing on Ukip’s original immigration stance as I know that they are far more politically astute nowadays, so let me FULLY take on your points and rephrase the question for YOU to answer;

Ukip have one policy; to extract the UK from the EU, but they cannot deliver it. TRUE or FALSE.

Maybe you’ll have a clearer answer to the second post on this link…if as an MEP Mr Farage enjoys an automatic £3,500 MEP allowance paid into his personal account each and every month for authorised ‘things’, based on his 10-years as an MEP from 1999 to 2009, where did the £2 million came from he claimed to have received in May 2009?????

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2051828-EU-Election-22-05-14-assume-the-UK-will-stay-IN

As IronMaiden appears to be elsewhere let me try to help you Ismebut.

UKIP originally was a single policy party with the sole aim of getting the UK out of the EU, however, while this objective is still paramount, in recent years UKIP has also developed a portfolio of international and domestic policies.
I can confirm this as I was at a meeting last week where the UKIP Deputy Leader explained some of their policies.

thus stopping EU immigration; but they cannot deliver it, true or false

Not quite. While the UK is a member of the EU the UK has no control over its borders and must admit any EU citizen who wishes to come to the UK. So no party is able to control EU immigration while the UK is a member of the EU and the EU insists on this 'open-door' policy.

What UKIP is saying is that in order to regain our right to control immigration from within the EU, we must leave the EU, as there is no option to stay in the EU and still curb EU immigration.

Therefore, in order to control EU immigration, the UK must leave the EU. But, leaving the EU does not mean an end to all immigration as the UK would welcome skilled workers from other countries, under a points system, similar to those systems operated by other countries, including Australia.

To be honest, everyone seems to be focusing on immigration and I can see why that' so attractive as it trys to paint UKIP as a racist party - something it is not.

The real reason that UKIP wants to leave the EU is their belief in the UK's right to self-determination without intereference from the a democratically deficit unelected EU Commision.
We have lost too many of our rights to the EU and we want to regain those rights.
You see, to some people , like Cleggy being in the EU means gaining very superficial things such as the EU recently reducing telephone roaming charges, while to others this pathetic gain is nothing compared to losing our right to govern ourselves.

But if you want to focus on immigration, carry on.

Ironmaiden….so three posts that say what, that the United Kingdom Independence Party ensured that The Conservatives (the only party that can/will do it) will offer the people the OPTION of exiting the EU, via a Referendum, and yet ‘I’m missing the point’?

Why have you not answered this question Ukip have one policy; to extract the UK from the EU, thus stopping EU immigration, but they cannot deliver it. TRUE or FALSE.

If as you clearly know that the answer is no, in being so proud of taking votes away from the Conservatives, WHO is missing the point, me or the United Kingdom Independence Party, whose only policy is to leave the EU????

How can anyone trust a party who knowingly refuses the people an option in carrying out the only policy they have, due to their own self serving political interests e.g. survival by not coming out of Europe?????

isitmebut. Farage is a wonderful person, did you see him demolish the spineless jelly fish Clegg? Of whom they say is a 'man' and deputy Prime Minister, on TV recently? Shortly UKIP will be selling mops with Clegg's head on it, so we can 'all mop the floor' with him!
Onwards and upwards.

isitmebut. I think you have missed the point, the only reason Mr. Slippery Cameron is willing to have a referendum in the first place on the EU is because of UKIP. UKIP started out wanting out of EU, but they have rightly sensed the dismay amongst the voting public, and will do well with other policies, other than exiting the EU, as Claig has pointed out.

isitmebut. Are you a man? Sent by the Tories to smear UKIP? Just asking like…………...

Claig….more Ukip lies, having been around 20-years, they have no Uk domestic manifesto they currently stand on – flip flopping populist policies every week hardly makes the the second political coming.

www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-15/u-k-parties-prepare-for-2015-by-erasing-web-histories.html

“UKIP spokesman Michael Heaver confirmed that the party’s 2010 election manifesto had been removed (from their website). While the party now opposes the planned high-speed north-south rail line, the 2010 document advocated building three new routes. “We’re in the process of updating everything,” Heaver said by telephone. “We’re going through a policy review.”

news.sky.com/story/1200525/nigel-farage-disowns-ukip-manifesto-as-drivel
UKIP leader Nigel Farage has disowned the party's entire general election manifesto - which he helped launch - branding it "drivel”.

And I repeat my question to irionmaiden to you.
Ukip have one policy; to extract the UK from the EU, thus stopping EU immigration, but they cannot deliver it. TRUE or FALSE.

Who at Ukip is being truthful, Farage and you, or Janice Atkinson.

There are so many head-up-bum goldbug websites that make a living selling holding the stuff, who have been peddling stories for years to encourage buying - mainly (recently) as having told readers gold was going to $5,000 to $10,000 they look stupid when it peaked under $2,000 - and most of these stories to the wise falls flat at the get-go.

For nearly 20-years from 1980 when gold was falling from around $850 to $250 or so, they peddled government and city plots were to blame and even made up BoE quotes - and the best 'fact' was that Brown sold gold to help out the city that had a massive 'short' position.

The fact that a trending down (in price) market makes a 'short' position shed loads of money, eluded them.

Correct Claig (in relation to UKIPs other policies).

doctor two I was also in favour of letting the banks fail (I worked for an investment bank at the time). Capitalism demanded it.

Alexandra Swann is not happy with the way she has been reported on in the papers. She is still a UKIP member but she is no longer standing as a representative because she is moving out of politics into another career

"I made the conscious decision around a year ago to move away from professional politics and retrain in psychology, with the aim of pursuing a career in mental health. I still take part in tv/radio/panel debates but no longer under the UKIP banner. This is simply because a) I do not want to be affiliated with any political party; and b) I am not an official party spokesperson, so claiming to speak for UKIP would, I believe, be wrong"

www.alexandraswann.co.uk/

Everybody knows that the meeja and the chums will try all sorts of ways to knock the people's party, UKIP, because the Establishment and its chums are terrified that the people have woken up and realised that they are "all in it together".

'Ukip have one policy; to extract the UK from the EU, thus stopping EU immigration, but they cannot deliver it. TRUE or FALSE.'

FALSE. UKIP has lots of policies - scrap green taxes, scrap Climate Change Act, reduce taxation, bring in grammar schools, scrap bedroom tax, scrap tuition fees etc etc

Cleggy was demolished when "making the case" for "the party of in". That is only the beginning. As UKIP gains popularity, they will increasingly set the agenda and the chums in Establishment parties will begin to wobble and follow the UKIP lead and have to adapt their policies in order to remain relevant with the public.

We are on the cusp of change, the chums are chewing their nails and UKIP has wind in its sails.

And why did Gordon sell the gold? Like taking your gold chain to the pawn shop when you don't have too - much better holding on to it for when you might actually really need it....

It was on the advice of Goldman Sachs. If you think the BofE isn't selling gold and gold futures now under Mark Carnage you're deluding yourself. If you go to goldmoney.com there is an article there noting a 'discrepancy' of 400 tonnes of physical gold. They're doing this to keep gold prices artificially low, which will eventually bite them in the arse and hand everything over to those buying the gold, namely China, Russia and the Gulf States, who already own massive amounts of US and European treasury bonds, though China is quietly getting rid of a large chunk of theirs as they know the US dollar is more or less finished as a world reserve currency.

Neoliberalism always fails. Austerity doesn't work, they've had over 20 years of it in Japan and their economy is still in the crapper and will only get worse. Their debt to GDP ratio is getting higher every year, they're busy printing money, diluting the real value of the Yen and just delaying the inevitable collapse.

The biggest mistake made in 2008 was bailing out the banks. They should've been allowed to fail, then nationalised like ABN AMRO. We would then at least not have greedy wankers gambling with our money, knowing we'll bail them out again when they fail.

Nice deluded speech Ironmaiden…telling me what I am and how ‘the people’ have been lied to by all three main parties.

Answer one question to show Ukip are different;

Ukip have one policy; to extract the UK from the EU, thus stopping EU immigration, but they cannot deliver it. TRUE or FALSE.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/24/ukip-eu-exit-take-years
“Ukip will have to negotiate a withdrawal from the European Union over many years and the party still has to work out the details of how it would secure such an exit, a leading Ukip MEP candidate in May's European elections has conceded.”

“Janice Atkinson, who is number two on the party's candidate list in the South East England constituency, admitted it would be impossible just to walk away from the EU.”

So if Ukip themselves tell us that they can’t deliver on the ONE policy they have and promote, before a Conservative 2015 majority referendum in 2017 - which political party (and posters on Mumsnet) are being disingenuous with the public.

If I’m wrong, please tell me why.

Isit I really doubt we could get financial help...but I'm hoping he will at some point realise he can't carry on and retrain etc - help with that would be great - but he is pushing 50 now - going to be hard.
He has been getting treatment for 6+ years, he is off to see yet another physiotherapist next week...
But I do agree - if you are having knee problems get them checked out asap.
I have a dodgy knee too - not often painful but does click loudly when I go up hill sometimes! (My sister joked it was like the clock in the crocodile in Peter pan) - agony if I kneel down. I've had an MRI and basically it is old damage, not suitable for surgery now. They have done the best they can for it. (Did flag it up a long time ago when I had lots of unrelated serious health problems and in that leg specifically so it was overlooked)

The fact is the welfare state should be able to help out short term - and maybe there needs to be a more flexible approach - but longer term? I still don't think that is affordable..if it isn't causing any damage, sometimes we just have to get on with it...

(I think they are doing that now actually, before if you went on DLA, you stayed there and now you get reassessed? I think I could have been put on it ...but didn't know I could... and don't need to be on it now.
Same with disabled badges for cars - I had one, I needed one, against all expectations my leg got better (near normal now) - I gave it up but in theory the GP had signed that it was a problem for life so I could have just kept renewing...)

isitmebut. Your opinion on UKIP is misguided and pompous. People like you believe the working class should not have an opinion, particularly on immigration which effects them more than most. Your views on UKIP are akin to pissing in the wind, the public are not stupid they have been lied to and betrayed by all of the three major parties, they see an alternative and they will vote for UKIP.

As far as Swann is concerned she is a complete idiot, she knew the policies of UKIP when she joined, she is just another fair weather dope, who cannot make her mind up who she prefers, the Tories or UKIP.

Trying to intellectualise something that is as basic as at people of this country not having a voice and saying that they are misguided, says more
about you, than UKIP. If anyones misguided it's you.

Unlucky83 ….re your “But I don't think the welfare state can afford to do that and look after everyone who truly 'needs' help - has no other option at all.”

Through my experience with knee cartilage problems years ago and a current family experience, I fully understand your partners problem, it seemed to take a while to get the treatment you need, but there comes a point where you are just left to get on with it.

But I disagree with your quote above, the State HAS to afford to look after those that need help (such as yours), and locally I have been encouraged by the social services who appear to have a directive to ensure the safety net works for the workers who for no fault of their own ‘fall’, rather than everyone else, of a few years ago.

I don’t know if you have checked into the ‘savings’ aspect, regarding the amount that may preclude you from gaining extra financial/practical help – but if you haven’t gone in and spoke to anyone about your situation, I suggest that you do – even if the only help they can offer is via some government agencies that offer retraining services.

Currently I’ve seen that if they can patch people up one way or another and keep them ‘productive’ for both the state and themselves, that seems to be the priority and there are more options now. Someone literally crippling themselves by work, helps neither the , or the state, over the medium to long term. IMO.

Ironmaiden .... Re Cameron any government that has to sort out major economic and social problems by cutting back the overgrown money tree is unpopular at time - apparently history is kinder and you get a State funeral for solving problems, not creating them.

Re Ukip..personally I think that anyone who feels the need to vote for a party without any domestic policies is very sad for them and the country after 2015 - and could not bring myself to peddle a party with no policies, insisting they are a solution to anything within the UK.

As per your sneer re the misguided souls who have fallen for Dr Nigel Feelgood’s political snake oil – tell me more about this;

“I can't campaign for Ukip any longer, says party's 'future face' Alexandra Swann over concerns with immigration stance”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rising-ukip-star-alexandra-swann-protests-her-own-partys-stance-on-immigration-9244746.html

“A woman who was heralded as the “future face” of Ukip says she can no longer face campaigning for the party because of their illiberal stance on immigration.”

“Alexandra Swann was supposed to represent the party's new, younger membership when she publicly defected from the Conservatives at Ukip's spring conference in 2012. Nigel Farage introduced her to a jubilant party faithful, boasting: "I'm very pleased to say that the Swann has migrated to Ukip".

“However, it seems the Swann has migrated again. She told The Independent: "I can't bring myself to campaign for them."

“The party's increasingly incendiary rhetoric on immigration has pushed Ms Swann, 25, away. She says: "The focus moved to immigration. It was difficult with the anti-gay marriage stuff. Now so much of their argument is anti-immigration which didn't sit well with me.”

Maybe when Ukip publish their domestic policies in 2015 for all to see, rather than swan around having dig at other parties policies, Ms Swann will have something else other than immigration to focus on.

lottie before getting upset with any government for leaving vulnerable people with no support, you should be furious with the dishonest people who are defrauding the system. It is those that leave less in the pot for people who really need it and makes getting the help even harder as they try to weed out the piss-takers.

Even if they are not really consciously doing it...

In the case of disabled children, someone I know used to work in healthcare in a practice that served a poorer area. She regularly saw people who knew ideally you needed 3 children, one, at least, of which had a disability, to get the 'best' benefits. Asthma was a good one. They knew which symptoms the child should have, it couldn't really be tested for. These children never showed any symptoms other than in front of the parents. They were happy for them to be on drugs etc just to get that extra money. (One of the main reasons that she stopped doing that job, it upset her too much)

Those who think it is acceptable to live a life on benefits...are dependent and they are not necessarily 'bad people'. Basically they are doing what they think is best for their family...

These are attitudes that have developed over many, many years. And there is a mentally that is hard to get over - a mentally that the welfare state isn't where you turn in absolute desperation, a last resort - it is an expectation....

My DP has problems with his knees, works on his feet, has had an operation on his knee, takes painkillers more or less daily. He has done everything he can to 'cure' them - he isn't overweight, exercises regularly to strengthen the supporting muscles etc. Once (when he was having a bad day) he wondered about if he could stop working, claim benefits. He shouldn't have to go to work in pain most days should he - surely that isn't right?

We have savings so he wouldn't be eligible. Now I could say that was unfair, he has worked hard for his money (probably why his knees are knackered). Then again it is his safety blanket...(and I don't mean that lightly, it is a deep psychological thing).
He doesn't 'need' financial support - he could live off his savings until they'd all gone. His choice is work or spend his savings ...
He works ...and it is really hard sometimes (maybe he should look more at retraining, but has never done anything but physical work).

If he didn't have the savings he would be less inclined to...would you blame him? I think the majority of people would feel sympathy for someone in that situation (if they didn't have the savings).

But I don't think the welfare state can afford to do that and look after everyone who truly 'needs' help - has no other option at all...

lottieandmia...….may I ask, is it socialist ignorance or some kind of mental illness that makes you and others continually insist the Conservatives exist to “leave the very vulnerable and disabled people with no support’ – yet try your very best through flagship policies, including an extra 2.5 million new citizen sharing public services and a rubbish education - to force welfare/benefits dependency on them?

!n your world neglecting/killing cancer patients by creasing the NHS budget by a factor of 3, but spending most of it on new administrators and salaries (not nurses) is fine, yet they have far less of a chance to even get to the recovery stage.

In your socialist world of the taxpayer money tree, every single benefit/welfare claimant in the country got a 5-star service under Labour - and after 13-years without checks/reforms, there were no false claims and budget pressures overloading the whole system - and diverting money from where it COULD have gone. Well here is one simple reform that shows the fairness of the Labour welfare state, both on the taxpayers and those that needed more help.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9963012/900000-choose-to-come-off-sickness-benefit-ahead-of-tests.htmll

Darling said pre 2010 that ‘he would cut more than Thatcher’ and for years since the election Labour have said MORE needs to be cut from welfare/benefits, but as usual very short of detail; it helps keep their voters happy and deflects their incompetence on to the Conservatives.

UKIP will do very well and of course the Tories will not get in with a majority.

Cameron is not popular for many reasons, and in particular with those who used to vote for him or who were members.

Blair and his Labour chums betrayed the people with mass immigration and buggered up the economy, I hope they do not get any sniff of power!

We really need to disabuse ourselves of this notion that we're a rich country. I hate to talk the country down, but we're certainly not rich.

We spend more on our national debt than we should. If you considered the public finances in proportional terms (with regards to income and expenditure) in the context of a household budget, you'd be shocked.

With regards to the HS2 (I'm still on the fence as to whether it's a good idea or not - probably 60/40 against) it is at least investment - and I mean that in the proper sense, rather than the Gordon Brown sense (which actually meant "spending")

Lastly, apart from medical students (and a handful of other instances) Why should the taxpayer meet the cost of tuition fees?