UKIP's manifesto doesn't tell me anything

One of the major UKIP plans is reform of the way things currently work. If they can infact do that, then current services can be delivered for less, savings without cuts. Its obviously questionable how much it would cost to implement even if they would result in savings.

The reduction of waste, bureaucracy and over-government will also yield substantial savings.

Just as we owe it to the taxpayer to crack down on tax avoidance, so we must crack down on dishonesty in the benefit system. We will start with a clampdown on Housing Benefit fraud, estimated to cost £2 billion a year, and will maintain action against benefit fraud of all kinds.

Not only must waste be eliminated, but we must also be bold
about finding big areas of spending that can be cut completely

To an extent, but Lab-Con are so similar no serious reform is ever going to happen, you are going to need a party off the central line or an true leader to driver any kind of meaningful change.

Obviously but is that really a problem? A government planning for the long term rather than the next election is probably what we could do with.

as regards grammar schools, they want at least one in every single town in this country.

they are certainly more gimicy - wouldn't have seen Brown/Cameron in a crappy plane trying to win votes on election day.

A policy worth voting for if ever there was one.

Cost?

I think you have forgotten this

That being said but the real problem is that Nigel Farage and UKIP have not thought of the details if we did leave. It is all 'lets pull out'.

This is the same person who does not know his facts because on QT he confused the EU with the ECHR. Not true because the ECHR is a different organisation

Frankly it is no good you saying UKIP is different from these old parties, Thatcher in 1979, Blair in 1997, Clegg in 2010 and Disraeli in 1874 all claimed they were different from what had gone before. All politicians always do.

I don't think UKIP are any more long term than anyone else, they are certainly more gimicy - wouldn't have seen Brown/Cameron in a crappy plane trying to win votes on election day. More seriously their enthusiasm for police commissioners has to be more about getting people into positions rather than giving a damn about whether the role is good value.

Again, I don't care whether they are, I care that they are projecting a view of them being in favour of long term reform and anyone who wishes to steal their votes is going to have to make that part of their plans when election time comes.

On election day?

A soapbox and actually saying stuff is a bit different from being Biggles with a vote for me banner.

The soapbox was first adopted on 28th March 1992, was used again on 30th March 1992 and several times thereafter before polling day on 9th April. It won't have been used on polling day because party leaders generally go round supporting their own constituency workers on polling day.

I don't know how they'd balance it out. I'm talking about the principle. If it's economically feasible then great.

You mistake my position. I don't care what they are, I care what they claim to be. UKIP are not going to get any substantial number of seat in the next election, but they may force the conservatives to change their current line to keep their voter base. That is more what I'm interested in, a stronger right opposition for the Labour majority.

As far as the establishment parties are concerned they still prefer to pretend that UKIP don't exist. This is the typical sort of media interrogation UKIP are met with, imagine any of the current Westminster crop facing this down:

Given that the media has been almost universally hostile to UKIP since they formed, is it any wonder that they've had to try out (sometimes misguided) stunts like the plane to try to get their message across?

It is UKIP that benefits (in non-Parliamentary elections) from being ignored.