Let me ask you this. Has anybody here actually looked at UKIP policies? If so, perhaps you can answer some questions for me.
1: UKIP say they want an amicable divorce from the EU. How smoothly do they believe that can happen?
- UKIP want a 5 year hold on immigration. To do so, they think that it is essential to leave the EU as the EU allows citizens of member states to move freely. Ok, what happens to the 2.2 million Brits living in other EU nations? Do we force them to return? It has to work both ways. 3: A flat tax rate can never work. I imagine this is why the party cannot decide whether or not they should have 1 rate or 2. Their 2010 proposal was a rate of 31% for everybody. That is evidently a major tax break for the rich whilst the poor pay more. Is this something you support?
4: A return to the grammar school education model would see communities being ripped in half and children unfairly separated. Who here thinks that is a good idea?
5: UKIP want to increase defence spending to facilitate the building of extra warships and nuclear weapons. When a member or supporter asks why soldiers aren't paid more, be sure to also ask why they'd squander money on these projects?
6: UKIP oppose the HS2 because of the damage it would do to the countryside. However, they also support fracking which would cause even greater damage. How can there be such contradiction? They also oppose manmade climate change. On what evidence do they take this stance?
7: UKIP plan to double prison spaces. How do they propose to fund the building of new prisons and of keeping twice as many inmates? Who will take up these extra spaces? What crimes will become punishable by incarceration? Who will suffer from cuts made elsewhere to fund this?
8: UKIP is proposing "tens of billions" of tax cuts and had set out £77bn of cuts to public expenditure to deal with the deficit. Where will these cuts be made? After increased military and prison spending, the cuts in public spending will have to be a lot higher to compensate.
9: They wish to repeal the hunting ban. This appeals to a minority of people whereas the majority of the country supports the hunting ban. Can you guess which section of society would benefit from the repeal?
It seems to me that most of these policies were plucked from thin air to try and hide the fact that they are a one policy party. Perhaps, by answering these questions, you can change my mind?
