Looks like you did achieve the debate you claimed you wanted Pd.
Obviously you are not a UKIP supporter.
UKIP 's sole original policy was to leave the EU. There was no need for a manifesto as they did not intend to rule - just pass the necessary laws to revoke our EU membership and, having achieved that, they would disband and call an election.
Over the years it has evolved from a single cause party to having a full manifesto. Personally, I think it should have stuck as a one issue party.
I very much doubt there is any party in which its members are in 100% agreement with their manifesto. Indeed, I'd be worried if there were as it would suggest the members did very little free-thinking. So UKIP will have a lot of policies its members disagree with.
But the main, enduring policy is to leave the EU and none of the current 'big 3' are offering that to us.
So, if that is your primary concern, you have to vote for a minority party that also has that aim. Some of those parties are totally unpalatable e.g. BNP, Sin Fein, Monster Raving Loony, so the choice beyond UKIP is pretty limited.
You said you thought that many of UKIP's policies had been "plucked from thin air". In many instances they are traditional or former Conservative policies:
1: UKIP say they want an amicable divorce from the EU. How smoothly do they believe that can happen?
Relatively smoothly as we are fortunate in having retained the pound. The mechanism does exist to trigger an exit. That's one avenue that the EU hasn't yet totally sealed us from, so the British Parliament could vote to leave and not be over-ruled by Europe.
- 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.
It doesn't have to work both ways. Some countries may see the presence of British citizens as a positive benefit and allow them to stay. Nobody (except the EU) would 'force' them to return.
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?
I seem to remember that a flat rate was something the Liberals once supported. It's also common in other countries. Difficult to say if the rate is fair without knowing what the tax encompasses. are we talking about income tax or VAT or inheritance tax or capital gains tax? Or a flat rate for all of them?
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?
I think grammar schools are a good idea. I went to one. I sat along the daughters of train signal men and bus conductors. Some of those girls went to Oxbridge. They would not have achieved that if they had gone to my local comp these days. I doubt if it's had a single Oxbridge entrant in this millennium. Grammar schools do not rip communities in half. You only have to look back at some very prominent but poor people in the past who owe their achievements to the grammar school system. I'd go further - all schools should be grammar schools - there should be no place for the crappy education that kids received in their local comp.
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?
As a former defence employee myself I'd say there was still quite a bit of fat left yet in the budget.
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?
I oppose HS2 and I also oppose fracking. But supporting fracking would not deter me from supporting a party that promised to leave the EU. I'm a bit of a climate change sceptic myself.
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?
Lots of questions to answer.
I presume that old prisons are costly to run compared to modern buildings - so saving fuel costs, guarding savings due to technology / design etc. As for who will take up the spaces and which crimes will be punishable by incarceration - that's up to sentencing policy. Who / what do you suggest?
I expect there's quite a bit of fat in the Home Office budget that could be better spent. I have a really bad feeling about funding Sky subscriptions for murderers.
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.
Any and
every party will have to make "tens of billions" of cuts. Do you have any concept of the serious financial shit this country is in? Don't be so naïve.
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?
I don't support hunting and am happy with the ban. But again, the primary and over-riding issue for me is leaving the EU.
I'm wondering why you felt the need to post your OP. I have a feeling it's a sort of focus group for one of the main 3 parties.
You need to understand that most of the attributes that permit a country to actually be a separate country are being lost or eroded by our EU membership e.g. the right to make our own laws (most are forced on us my EU) or the right to admit/remove people from this country - we no longer have this right.
We were well and truly conned by Heath into believing it was a benign trading association when he knew all along that its ultimate aim was the united states of Europe.