Well, whether they "do God" or not is rarely the point, though if someone (of any party) claimed s/he was doing because of faith, I would have a problem...
"2) We pay £40 million a day to be in the EU."
OK, and how much comes back to the UK in the form of grants and agricultural subsidy, etc ?
"3) The Two richest countries in Europe-Norway and Switzerland are not even in the EU."
Perhaps worth some research as to why.
In the case of Norway, I think they have been stashing away large sums from their share of North Sea Oil. Nothing to do with whether they are, or are not, in Europe.
With Switzerland, I suspect their background with banking, and specialist manufacturing, such as watches, helped. Also as a trading nation in between various countries. All was not peaceful because of the mix of people there, and a civil war back in the 1800s was responsible for a constitution that ensured much greater harmony between cantons than we have between England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales.
Before the current economic crisis, Switzerland was behind Iceland and Ireland at 6th position in per capita GDP ranking, so "being outside the EU" doesn't of itself prove to be essential to have some economic success.
"7) Crime is now out of contol, UKIP would build more prisons. Last but not least, Lord Pearson (leader) is 'posh' and does not try to hide it."
OK, so they would build more prisons, and make "life" sentences mean "life", so will have to continue building more prisons by the sound of it. I do hope these prisons will have very large perimeter walls so they can enclose a couple of farms, else we taxpayers will be spending more on keeping prisoners in the long term than on education or NHS combined.
As for "posh"... so what - anyone who is unashamed about a party slogan of "Sod the lot of them" isn't exactly "mature". How many children get told off for saying words like "bloody" and "hell"... As for "sod" they might ask what it means, too!
I understand not all candidates are happy about that party slogan. Just checked the blurb from a candidate here, and his leaflet says "45 million" (so one of the figures is wrong). His "claim to fame" is that until about two years ago he was a local councillor, he's now a community councillor (so dropped down a rung).
Just checked and it says his "local issues" are (a) keeping a close eye on how money is spent by the council and (b) ensure that the way taxpayer money is spent on MP expenses is brought under strict control.
In the first place, the MPs may well "comment" on how money is being spent, but unless they attend a good deal of the council meetings will not have heard much of the discussion, and could put their foot in their mouth trying to reverse some decisions. Seems to me that MPs are not necessarily respected by the councils in their constituency, and throwing their weight around makes no friends at all.
As for the spending on expenses, it's not exactly a "local issue" and to a large extent has already been dealt with, so this is more "hot air" than not, in my view.