Douglas Carswell's defection to Ukip.

[merehazle]

The Clacton MP's decision to join Nigel Farage is like the rest of his career, principled and decent writes Peter Oborne - Daily Telegraph's chief political commentator.

Well it certainly makes for some exitement at last...as the Tory whips scramble to secure party against further departures after the Eurosceptic MP triggers Clacton  byelection. 

And he is honourable and decent enough to deflect on principle.

Eight Tory MP's are reported to be talking to Ukip about deflection?  (we will see) .....

[danielworgandesigns]

lambsy_uk

It's out there,go and look.You don't need to take my word (or the word of millions of others),
Defend them as much as you want,Cons,Lab & Lib,the country is in the shape it is because of all of the policies they have implemented,they have had control,along with Brussles,now for years.Fair enough they got voted in (although nobody voted for a coalition...did they?),they have had enough time,Cons/Lib & Lab,to blame each other for the mess the "others" left in the previous term.This rhetoric has had its day,to many people are realising they have been/are being shafted.
As i say do your own work and read manifestos from not so long ago,then compare to what is actually going on.
I have voted for what i hope will be a turning point in British politics as i am certain that many others will do.
As for previous replies referring to previous Far right politics and whatever else was spouted out "to prove a point"...well lets just brush over those sort of ignorant remarks,they don't deserve the time imo.

[bookhunter2007]

So to send a message to the self-serving, and elitist "Establishment", the good residents of Clacton are re-electing the 'established' MP who voted:

moderately for increasing the rate of VAT

very strongly against increasing the tax rate applied to income over £150,000

very strongly against an annual tax on the value of expensive homes (popularly known as a mansion tax)Voted strongly against a banker’s bonus tax

very strongly against slowing the rise in rail fares

very strongly against restrictions on fees charged to tenants by letting agents

Well, if I was a banker, hedge fund manager, or an exploitative landlord I think i'd be pretty happy with the way things have gone in Clacton.

Turkeys voting for Christmas springs to mind.

[fallen-archie]

I voted Lib Dem because I thought it would be a coalition and I felt that they would at least take the nasty edge off the Tories or labour. They have been condemned by many but I think they have done a decent job in the circumstances.
UKIP represent the worst kind of popularist parties, exploiting the poor who think Eastern Europeans have stolen their jobs, the rich who feel Europe costs them too much in regulatory rules and the middle ground too because the human rights act has been exploited by some seriously questionable con men.
For me Europe is a complex yet doable concept, it needs independent states and a clear mandate to work as a free trade area. We do not need big government and we don't need others telling us how to run our lives.
Only lazy politicians and opportunists would throw away peace in favour of a return to conflict.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@signtique wrote:

lambsy_uk

It's out there,go and look.You don't need to take my word (or the word of millions of others),
Defend them as much as you want,Cons,Lab & Lib,the country is in the shape it is because of all of the policies they have implemented,they have had control,along with Brussles,now for years.Fair enough they got voted in (although nobody voted for a coalition...did they?),they have had enough time,Cons/Lib & Lab,to blame each other for the mess the "others" left in the previous term.This rhetoric has had its day,to many people are realising they have been/are being shafted.
As i say do your own work and read manifestos from not so long ago,then compare to what is actually going on.
I have voted for what i hope will be a turning point in British politics as i am certain that many others will do.
As for previous replies referring to previous Far right politics and whatever else was spouted out "to prove a point"...well lets just brush over those sort of ignorant remarks,they don't deserve the time imo.

---

That's what all voters need to do whichever is their favourite party - I can't believe that many UKIP supporters have actually read UKIP's last national manifesto.

http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge10/man/parties/UKIPManifesto2010.pdf

"Introduce a flat tax"

"Abolish Inheritance Tax"

"Spend an extra 40% on defence annually"

"put out to tender key NHS services ranging from Long Term Care to local hospitals and GP surgeries.
. . franchising key services . . . to charitable associations, not-for-profit and profit-making private companies"

". . . introducing ‘Health Credit Vouchers’, which will enable people to opt out of the NHS public healthcare system"

"Introduce franchising of schools, colleges and educational institutions across Britain so that charitable associations, parental co-operatives, not-for-profit and profit-making private companies, partnerships or individuals bid to run institutions"

"Allow schools to select pupils based on their suitability for the education provided"

"Allow teachers to do their jobs with minimal government interference. Ofsted will be abolished and its powers transferred to school governing bodies and a new independent Educational Inspectorate made up of experienced teachers"

"Require those on benefits - starting with Housing and Council Tax Benefit recipients in private rented homes - to take part in council-run local community projects called ‘Workfare’ schemes"

"Increase nuclear power generation to provide up to 50% of our electricity needs."

"Repeal the UK’s Climate Change Act"

"Ban schools from using global warming propaganda such as Al Gore’s film ‘An Inconvenient Truth’"

"Stop funding the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change "

"Protect the environment by controlling immigration . . ."

"Invest in three new 200mph plus high-speed rail lines"

". . .  in favour of a major new Hong Kong-style Thames Estuary airport with motorway connections and a high-speed rail service . . ."

"Stop charging business rates on empty premises."

"Introduce an element of proportional representation in national and local elections."

"Safeguard British weights and measures (the pint, the mile, etc) . . ."

" Require UK schools to teach Britain’s contribution to the world, including British inventions and Britain’s role in fighting slavery and Nazism."

"Make St George’s Day a public holiday in England"

"Allow county referendums to reverse the hunting ban at the local level"

"UKIP supports designated smoking rooms in pubs, clubs and public buildings"

Just some of the policies outlined in that manifesto, many of which I support but unfortunately outweighed by UKIP's policy on Europe and immigration and the personal characters of those nominated as candidates for the party.

[joe_bloggs*]

Why 73% of UKIP supporters should actually vote Green

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/73-ukip-voters-green-party.html

Unlike UKIP, the Green Party is an actual alternative to the neoliberal orthodoxy of privatisation, deregulation, tax cuts for the rich & austerity for the poor. Voting Green would would show support for an EU referendum, without endorsing the kind of right-wing economic fanaticism that is absolutely rife within UKIP.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@signtique wrote:

lambsy_uk

It's out there,go and look.You don't need to take my word (or the word of millions of others),
Defend them as much as you want,Cons,Lab & Lib,the country is in the shape it is because of all of the policies they have implemented,they have had control,along with Brussles,now for years.Fair enough they got voted in (although nobody voted for a coalition...did they?),they have had enough time,Cons/Lib & Lab,to blame each other for the mess the "others" left in the previous term.This rhetoric has had its day,to many people are realising they have been/are being shafted.
As i say do your own work and read manifestos from not so long ago,then compare to what is actually going on.
I have voted for what i hope will be a turning point in British politics as i am certain that many others will do.
As for previous replies referring to previous Far right politics and whatever else was spouted out "to prove a point"...well lets just brush over those sort of ignorant remarks,they don't deserve the time imo.

---

You are the one making the claims and therefore the onus is on you to provide the evidence!

If a UKIP MP turned up on my doorstep I wouldn't expect them to say "there are loads of examples out there detailing where x and y political parties have failed to deliver, all we ask is that you go and look them up"!

Are you effing serious!?

For someone with such a great new political vision your attitude towards enlightening your fellow man stinks!

[0125arwen]

It's rather a long list, for all of them.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@signtique wrote:

i cannot use my vote in the hope that Cameron will keep his promise of a referendum (we all know he will not deliver,he has lied so many times before...shame on the man)

---

What has he lied about these many times?

---

Try these for a start:-

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/pre-election-pledges-tories-are-trying-wipe-internet

---

Thank you for your efforts in trying to point me to some examples.

So let's tackle them; firstly the pre-election statement "a Conservative government would not cut any front-line services"; we don't have a Conservative government!

Also Cameron said "they'll be sent straight back to their department to go away and think again", he didn't say it would never happen. Nowhere in that quote does it say "we will not cut front line spending."

"No plans to raise VAT" is not a promise not to raise VAT! It seems some people need to understand basic reading and comprehension!

Means testing child benefit; means testing generally refers to all monetary income; cash income, employment and capital. This includes maintenance payments, rents received, pensions received and earnings. Setting something to kick in at a certain rate of income tax is not a means test!

For the reorganisation of the NHS we had the quote, "No more pointless reorganisations." This was in 2006, 4 years prior to the elcetion BTW; that's before the financial metldown so one could suggest things changed and so the reorganisation was necessary and not pointless!

EMA, the quote was "We've looked at educational maintenance allowances and we haven't announced any plan to get rid of them.", "I said we don't have any plans to get rid of them".  So they had no plan to get rid at that time, but things can change. Are we living in a place where people are so illerterate they can't comprehend plain English?!

Future Jobs Fund; "no plans to change existing Future Jobs Fund commitments". They continued the commitment by replacing it with something else. You may argue the new scheme did not deliver as well as the old scheme but it is not a manifesto u-turn!

Green Taxes;  On 29 October 2006 he told the BBC's Politics Show: "I think green taxes as a whole need to go up". 3 October: "We’ve said publicly, we’ve committed that we think green taxes should take a bigger share of overall taxes." 17 April 2008,  "Our message in this local election campaign is simple: vote blue, go green - and save money. It's been our campaign slogan for the last three elections. Why? Because it goes to the heart of what Conservatives believe. And because that's the kind of change people really want."

So yet again this all happened before the financial meltdown! Now they have had to re-prioritise their Green credentials and taxes as they see the electorate are more concerned about their fuel bills than some spurious notion of saving the planet!

And exactly how much of the guff offered up as evidence was actually in the election manifesto?!

[lambsy_uk]

---

@0125arwen wrote:

It's rather a long list, for all of them.

---

If it is such a long list I'd expect you to be able to present a couple of examples but it appears you are struggling. Your argument is losing credibility by the minute!

[0125arwen]

1. No cuts to front-line services
2. "We have absolutely no plans to raise VAT"
3. Cameron on child benefit: "I wouldn't means-test it"
4. NHS: "no more top-down reorganisations"
5. On Education Maintenance Allowances: "we don't have any plans to get rid of them"
6. Cameron on Sure Start: "Yes, we back Sure Start. It's a disgrace that Gordon Brown has been trying to frighten people about this."
7. On the Future Jobs Fund: "no plans to change"
8. Cameron on green taxes: "[they] need to go up"
9. Osborne on bank bonuses: "totally unacceptable"
10. And finally...Cameron on transparency in 2007

"It's clear to me that political leaders will have to learn to let go. Let go of the information that we've guarded so jealously."
11.No increase in uni fees
12.labour, We will not raise the basic or top rates of income tax , April 2009 Budget, Chancellor Alistair Darling announced an increase in the top-rate of income tax to 50%. The basic rate of tax was raised from 10p to 20p
13.tony blair , we will not bring in uni fees, then did.
14.comprehensive out-of-hours [GP] services .Before 2004 GPs were responsible for their patients 24 hours a day. The new contract allowed them to opt out of 24-hour care by sacrificing £6,000 a year. 90% of GPs accepted.
15.We will put [the EU Constitution] to the British people in a referendum . .Following the Netherlands’ rejection of the EU constitution and its subsequent collapse it was replaced by the Lisbon Treaty. Despite being ‘substantially equivalent’ to the original Constitution, Labour did not keep its referendum promise. Valery Giscard, former Minister of Economy and Finance in France, admitted Lisbon is the ‘same letter in a new envelope’, and that ‘all the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will be hidden and disguised in some way.’
16.‘We will legislate to place reasonable limits on the time bills spend in the second chamber – no longer than 60 sitting days for most bills. No such legislation has been introduced.
17. Promise: Snoopers' charter

Original promise: We will end the storage of internet and email records without good reason.
18.Promise: **bleep** defendant anonymity ,Original promise: We will extend anonymity in **bleep** cases to defendants.
19.Original promise: We will protect historic freedoms through the defence of trial by jury. chip away at another cornerstone of British justice: public trials. Ken Clarke's secret courts scheme, designed to allow sensitive intelligence material to be discussed in secret in court, sparked anger from civil liberties advocates and legal experts
20.Original promise: We will ensure that there is a stronger voice for patients locally through directly elected individuals on the boards of their local primary care trust (PCT). The remainder of the PCT’s board will be appointed by the relevant local authority or authorities, and the Chief Executive and principal officers will be appointed by the Secretary of State on the advice of the new independent NHS board. This will ensure the right balance between locally accountable individuals and technical expertise.
In light of the abolition of PCTs, we are ensuring greater democratic legitimacy in healthcare through the transferral of responsibility for public health to local authorities. We are also introducing Health and Wellbeing Boards (within local authorities), which will set the overall strategies for healthcare in their localities.
21.Original promise: We will maintain the goal of ending child poverty in the UK by 2020. What really happened: The reduction in child poverty achieved by Labour is set to be reversed by the coalition's austerity drive, according to Unicef. Tax credits and improving public services for children have been cut. Policies such as the cap on benefits rises are expected to trigger a worsening of child poverty in the UK, which currently stands at 3.6 million – roughly 27% of children. The situation is so dangerous Save the Children have released their first ever report into the UK.
22.No cuts in frontline services, what really happened, oh dear.

[0125arwen]

Patience is a virtue,

[lambsy_uk]

I've already covered the top ten as someone else had the decency to post a link earlier. If you can provide a source for the remainder I'll have a look!

But here's something for you; "We will end the storage of internet and email records without good reason."

I'd suggest they believe they have good reason!!!!!!!!!!

Next!

[merehazle]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@signtique wrote:

lambsy_uk

It's out there,go and look.You don't need to take my word (or the word of millions of others),
Defend them as much as you want,Cons,Lab & Lib,the country is in the shape it is because of all of the policies they have implemented,they have had control,along with Brussles,now for years.Fair enough they got voted in (although nobody voted for a coalition...did they?),they have had enough time,Cons/Lib & Lab,to blame each other for the mess the "others" left in the previous term.This rhetoric has had its day,to many people are realising they have been/are being shafted.
As i say do your own work and read manifestos from not so long ago,then compare to what is actually going on.
I have voted for what i hope will be a turning point in British politics as i am certain that many others will do.
As for previous replies referring to previous Far right politics and whatever else was spouted out "to prove a point"...well lets just brush over those sort of ignorant remarks,they don't deserve the time imo.

---

You are the one making the claims and therefore the onus is on you to provide the evidence!

If a UKIP MP turned up on my doorstep I wouldn't expect them to say "there are loads of examples out there detailing where x and y political parties have failed to deliver, all we ask is that you go and look them up"!

Are you effing serious!?

For someone with such a great new political vision your attitude towards enlightening your fellow man stinks!

---

Tut, tut such language.  Why did Singntique,  deserve that?  

Well ''fellow man'' Really?  On here...    From astro's post at 51.   I think her point has been proven actually. 

All the UKIP trolls are out it seems telling us what rubbish UKIP are.  And how informative, that is Well it's nice to know who is who.   Well... not that I didn't already  

Signtique take your time, a few are out on YOU.......

Now me, no doubt..... but I WONT feed them zzzZZZzzz

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@signtique wrote:

i cannot use my vote in the hope that Cameron will keep his promise of a referendum (we all know he will not deliver,he has lied so many times before...shame on the man)

---

What has he lied about these many times?

---

Try these for a start:-

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/11/pre-election-pledges-tories-are-trying-wipe-internet

---

Thank you for your efforts in trying to point me to some examples.

So let's tackle them; firstly the pre-election statement "a Conservative government would not cut any front-line services"; we don't have a Conservative government!

Also Cameron said "they'll be sent straight back to their department to go away and think again", he didn't say it would never happen. Nowhere in that quote does it say "we will not cut front line spending."

"No plans to raise VAT" is not a promise not to raise VAT! It seems some people need to understand basic reading and comprehension!

Means testing child benefit; means testing generally refers to all monetary income; cash income, employment and capital. This includes maintenance payments, rents received, pensions received and earnings. Setting something to kick in at a certain rate of income tax is not a means test!

For the reorganisation of the NHS we had the quote, "No more pointless reorganisations." This was in 2006, 4 years prior to the elcetion BTW; that's before the financial metldown so one could suggest things changed and so the reorganisation was necessary and not pointless!

EMA, the quote was "We've looked at educational maintenance allowances and we haven't announced any plan to get rid of them.", "I said we don't have any plans to get rid of them".  So they had no plan to get rid at that time, but things can change. Are we living in a place where people are so illerterate they can't comprehend plain English?!

Future Jobs Fund; "no plans to change existing Future Jobs Fund commitments". They continued the commitment by replacing it with something else. You may argue the new scheme did not deliver as well as the old scheme but it is not a manifesto u-turn!

Green Taxes;  On 29 October 2006 he told the BBC's Politics Show: "I think green taxes as a whole need to go up". 3 October: "We’ve said publicly, we’ve committed that we think green taxes should take a bigger share of overall taxes." 17 April 2008,  "Our message in this local election campaign is simple: vote blue, go green - and save money. It's been our campaign slogan for the last three elections. Why? Because it goes to the heart of what Conservatives believe. And because that's the kind of change people really want."

So yet again this all happened before the financial meltdown! Now they have had to re-prioritise their Green credentials and taxes as they see the electorate are more concerned about their fuel bills than some spurious notion of saving the planet!

And exactly how much of the guff offered up as evidence was actually in the election manifesto?!

---

It's easy to try and use semantics to disguise what are essentially broken promises - all a manifesto is, is a list of 'plans' a party intends to put into force should they gain power - by your reasoning not carrying out any of those plans is not deception - i.e. lying!

Then there is means testing - this covers a whole range of different scenarios, you outline one, benefit eligibility based on income is another - again just semantics.

Oh - and what happenned to the last item on that list - bonuses for bankers?

As for what was in the manifesto then I'm not sure why that matters - by your reasoning it wouldn't matter if policies weren't carried out - after all they're only 'aims'

manifesto (n) - a public declaration of policy and aims, especially one issued before an election by a political party or candidate.

[merehazle]

Oh some look like this ...........

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@merehazle wrote:

---

Tut, tut such language.  Why did Singntique,  deserve that?  

Well ''fellow man'' Really?  On here...    From astro's post at 51.   I think her point has been proven actually. 

All the UKIP trolls are out it seems telling us what rubbish UKIP are.  And how informative, that is Well it's nice to know who is who.   Well... not that I didn't already  

Signtique take your time, a few are out on YOU.......

Now me, no doubt..... but I WONT feed them zzzZZZzzz

---

Let me get this right  -  anyone who disagrees with your views and expresses an alternate opinion is a troll - right, got it

[merehazle]

God almight is this one NAILED to his computer 24 hours a day????

He.s WRONG!!!  answer...ONLY the trolls.

[lambsy_uk]

---

@merehazle wrote:

---

"Tut, tut such language.  Why did Singntique,  deserve that?"

Guilty of being lazy and expecting me to have to put in the time and effort to prove their point, just plain ridiculous! Perhaps I could have tempered my reply but it's a reflection of how Signtique's reply made me feel.

"All the UKIP trolls are out it seems telling us what rubbish UKIP are.  And how informative, that is Well it's nice to know who is who.   Well... not that I didn't already "

I made no attack on UKIP, just asked for someone to produce evidence for the attack they made against the Torys! I guess you'd call them Tory Trolls!

Have a nice day!

---

[lambsy_uk]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

---

It's easy to try and use semantics to disguise what are essentially broken promises - all a manifesto is, is a list of 'plans' a party intends to put into force should they gain power - by your reasoning not carrying out any of those plans is not deception - i.e. lying!

Then there is means testing - this covers a whole range of different scenarios, you outline one, benefit eligibility based on income is another - again just semantics.

Oh - and what happenned to the last item on that list - bonuses for bankers?

As for what was in the manifesto then I'm not sure why that matters - by your reasoning it wouldn't matter if policies weren't carried out - after all they're only 'aims'

manifesto (n) - a public declaration of policy and aims, especially one issued before an election by a political party or candidate.

---

In you first line you say they were promises and your second line says they are plans and intentions; you finally call them aims!

By your own definition a manifesto contains no promises! If one doesn't want an argument about semantics I'd suggest they don't use semantics for their own purposes!

People may think it is quite clever to find where a government has fallen short of its aims and intentions and claim they are Broken Promises; because this sounds so much better and serves their purpose far more than attaching an accurate description such as un-met plans!!!

It's a typical tabloid approach, don't tell the plain truth when you can mislead, influence and imply with the use of semantics!

I'm not so easily led; I'm not that stupid!!!

[lambsy_uk]

---

@merehazle wrote:

God almight is this one NAILED to his computer 24 hours a day????

He.s WRONG!!!  answer...ONLY the trolls.

---

A lot of people back their posts and opinions with sources and reasoned arguments; that is not trolling!

Trolling is upsetting people by the posting of inflametory extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Who here is Off-Topic? Who here is provoking an emotional response? Who here is disrupting on-topic discussion? Who here is using inflametory messages?