Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

UKIP 2015 Manifesto to be agreed tomorrow some interesting policy revealed so far Watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I look forward to reading the scientific and economically illiterate document in full.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Oh, and by the way, ostracising the HSE might get cheap laughs, but it's entirely inaccurate and does a great dis-service to the organisation that has given us one of the lowest rates of worker death or injury in the world.

    The many stories you hear about "health and safety gone mad" are almost never anything remotely to do with the HSE, it's people who are poorly educated or companies avoiding responsibility.
    Whilst i can understand what you are saying, what about people who have died due to health and safety regulations stopping people carrying out their jobs? The emergency services for example have to battle this all the time.

    I ran a business in construction for 2 years before uni and most health and safety inspectors are little spectacle wearing ***** who quite frankly haven't got a clue. I stopped one stupid ******* entering a room full of asbestos (big sign on the door as well) and thankfully he won't end up with pleuracy or worse. Health and safety has gone too far and just like teachers aren't allowed to teach properly without political intervention a lot of professionals can't do their job properly because of it.

    I agree with a degree of health and safety because some people have no common sense whatsoever and do stupid things but the UK has gone too far and its all to add more costs on to the working and middle class. Don't see multinationals paying for training courses and so on though - all subsidies from the EU and governments (WDA) etc. cover that.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Whilst i can understand what you are saying, what about people who have died due to health and safety regulations stopping people carrying out their jobs? The emergency services for example have to battle this all the time.

    I ran a business in construction for 2 years before uni and most health and safety inspectors are little spectacle wearing ***** who quite frankly haven't got a clue. I stopped one stupid ******* entering a room full of asbestos (big sign on the door as well) and thankfully he won't end up with pleuracy or worse. Health and safety has gone too far and just like teachers aren't allowed to teach properly without political intervention a lot of professionals can't do their job properly because of it.

    I agree with a degree of health and safety because some people have no common sense whatsoever and do stupid things but the UK has gone too far and its all to add more costs on to the working and middle class. Don't see multinationals paying for training courses and so on though - all subsidies from the EU and governments (WDA) etc. cover that.
    The fault is not the laws but the over-zealous/under-trained nature of those who implement it. The vast vast majority of the 'nuisance' health and safety regulations comes not from laws or the HSE but from councils.

    Plain text and simple readings of the laws does not cost the companies. Or at least, does cost them, but costs them far less than the death of an employee would.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RFowler)
    Climate change is definitely an important issue due to its likely impacts. Any explanation as to why my claim is "complete *******s"?
    No its not. Ample research proves that without a globally united attack on climate change all efforts are done in vain.

    Of course it uses money. But you seem to be exaggerating it quite a bit. People want to avoid tax because some of it is spent on climate change?
    We can afford to fund education, NHS, policing, etc as well as climate change policies.
    No we can't. We have run a deficit for ****ing years driving the national debt into the trillions and we have an over inflated public sector. How can we afford it? It's nonsense. I suggest you do some research on economics. We need to cut spending and run a surplus for years to sort this mess out.

    As for wanting to avoid tax yes it makes me feel that way. I worked my *******s off for 2 years turning over 6 figures and paying 5 figure tax amounts and I want that spent on the NHS. Education, Job creation, infrastructure etc. - I don't want it spent on foreign aid, climate change, EU membership fees and so on. Yes that pisses me off.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I do believe climate change is definitely a huge problem for Britain and the planet long term and it's ridiculous for UKIP to suggest we just ignore it completely.

    But I do agree that the current EU driven methods and regulations are ridiculous and aren't making much of a difference and we should look into it ourselves how to properly help the planet.

    The biggest problem facing the planet by an absolute mile is overpopulation it will have massive negative effects on the planet and humanity. The likes of the Green Party don't like to mention that though: as it goes against their lefty liberal stance of letting all immigrant flood into our country.

    I would rather we didn't just build over our countryside, I would rather we don't end up living in small cramped spaces in the future as the population rises there won't be enough resources on the planet to support us all, There isn't enough resources as it is that is the reason there are billions of people who are in extreme poverty, and I can assure you the as the population rises the problem will become even bigger, not to mention all these animal conservation efforts are a complete waste of time as they will be wiped out if the worlds population continues to grow at the current unsustainable rate.

    Eventually the world will naturally compensate and bring the population down through Famines and wars over the remaining resources with the rich 1% lording it over the rest of us.

    We need to keep our population down to sustainable levels and combined with new technology be able to sustain ourselves for the most part. We can't stop over population worldwide it just isn't achievable but in the UK we certainly can if we plan and act appropriately starting now then we can prosper and thrive while everyone else is struggling.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shabalala)
    I do believe climate change is definitely a huge problem for Britain and the planet long term and it's ridiculous for UKIP to suggest we just ignore it completely.

    But I do agree that the current EU driven methods and regulations are ridiculous and aren't making much of a difference and we should look into it ourselves how to properly help the planet.

    The biggest problem facing the planet by an absolute mile is overpopulation it will have massive negative effects on the planet and humanity. The likes of the Green Party don't like to mention that though: as it goes against their lefty liberal stance of letting all immigrant flood into our country.

    I would rather we didn't just build over our countryside, I would rather we don't end up living in small cramped spaces in the future as the population rises there won't be enough resources on the planet to support us all, There isn't enough resources as it is that is the reason there are billions of people who are in extreme poverty, and I can assure you the as the population rises the problem will become even bigger, not to mention all these animal conservation efforts are a complete waste of time as they will be wiped out if the worlds population continues to grow at the current unsustainable rate.

    Eventually the world will naturally compensate and bring the population down through Famines and wars over the remaining resources with the rich 1% lording it over the rest of us.

    We need to keep our population down to sustainable levels and combined with new technology be able to sustain ourselves for the most part. We can't stop over population worldwide it just isn't achievable but in the UK we certainly can if we plan and act appropriately starting now then we can prosper and thrive while everyone else is struggling.
    Hence why I sensible immigration policy is needed. Something that cannot be done with EU membership.

    I have great concerns about the population level of this country and don't want to see the countryside destroyed in order to build more and more houses to house immigrants.

    With a stable "home" population, over population would not be a problem if mass immigration was ended.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I wanna see the healthcare policies
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...lection-Pledge

    -Abolishment of inheritance tax
    -Raising the starting rate tax is paid so the poorest pay no tax at all
    -Abolishing energy and climate change department
    -Scrapping HS2
    -40% tax rate for middle earners to start a higher rate
    -45% tax rate scrapped
    -Bedroom tax could be abolished and will be decided tomorrow

    Thoughts on these? and what else do you think they should include?
    On these, generally good effort on tax, and particularly on inheritance tax. Taxing people 40% when they die on property they've acquired lawfully and paid taxes on while alive is ludicrous.

    I quite like HS2. I'm not exactly sure what scrapping the energy dept says about general commitment to reducing climate change; if it says 'we, as a party, would not take any action in the area', that is obviously bad. If they choose to say they'll abolish the bedroom tax I think that is pure populist tokenism, designed to keep former labour voters around for a while longer before they realise UKIP is basically a Thatcherite party in terms of economics (which I'm fine with, personally, but I'm not a UKIP-supporting former labour voter).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    No its not. Ample research proves that without a globally united attack on climate change all efforts are done in vain.


    No we can't. We have run a deficit for ****ing years driving the national debt into the trillions and we have an over inflated public sector. How can we afford it? It's nonsense. I suggest you do some research on economics. We need to cut spending and run a surplus for years to sort this mess out.

    As for wanting to avoid tax yes it makes me feel that way. I worked my *******s off for 2 years turning over 6 figures and paying 5 figure tax amounts and I want that spent on the NHS. Education, Job creation, infrastructure etc. - I don't want it spent on foreign aid, climate change, EU membership fees and so on. Yes that pisses me off.
    There is global action though. Lots of EU countries are doing stuff, USA looks like it's finally taking the issue seriously. China, one of the worst polluters, also has a growing renewable energy sector.
    Even some African countries can afford to do something - Ghana has feed in tariffs for renewable energy. Are you telling me that Ghana can afford to spend on climate change measures but the 6th biggest economy in the world somehow can't?

    Even if some countries are not doing enough, that is no excuse for us to abandon all action ourselves. There are other benefits to tackling climate change as well, like clean air, less reliance on imported energy resources and cheaper energy in the long run because fossil fuels are going to become more expensive. You also have the creation of green jobs in the renewable sector, which Britain could be a world leader in.

    I know there is a deficit but climate change policies need government funding. It is just as essential as other areas of spending like the NHS, education, etc.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    On these, generally good effort on tax, and particularly on inheritance tax. Taxing people 40% when they die on property they've acquired lawfully and paid taxes on while alive is ludicrous.

    I quite like HS2. I'm not exactly sure what scrapping the energy dept says about general commitment to reducing climate change; if it says 'we, as a party, would not take any action in the area', that is obviously bad. If they choose to say they'll abolish the bedroom tax I think that is pure populist tokenism, designed to keep former labour voters around for a while longer before they realise UKIP is basically a Thatcherite party in terms of economics (which I'm fine with, personally, but I'm not a UKIP-supporting former labour voter).
    Given the choice, I'd rather be taxed when I'm dead than when I'm alive tbh.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Given the choice, I'd rather be taxed when I'm dead than when I'm alive tbh.
    Me too, as of right now. I suspect this might change when we're approaching death and have kids/ others to leave our stuff to.

    But taxes while you're alive aren't going to disappear, so you don't really have the choice.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    Me too, as of right now. I suspect this might change when we're approaching death and have kids/ others to leave our stuff to.

    But taxes while you're alive aren't going to disappear, so you don't really have the choice.
    Yeah possibly. But then I kinda hope/expect they'd be self sufficent by their 50s and don't require me to die to have the funds they need.

    No they won't disappear, inhertitance tax make pretty negligible amounts for HMG as it effects so few estates.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    While I'm still not voting Ukip the simple approach I take is that we should go second rather than first. That is to say that once a country with a population rather than our own gets 75% renewable over the whole year rather than a summers day, that's when we should make the jump. Until then, nuclear.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    Why can't private firms be free of bureaucracy? All you need is a few laws and safety measures, you don't need a whole department for that.
    You need someone to enforce it, whether that be a quango or dept. You could I suppose make the laws criminal ones and make it a Police matter, but God knows we have enough criminalisation already.

    You could in theory rely on competitor companies enforcing it, but getting locus standi would prove difficult for in such a situation, and even if they did convince a court of that there's not going to much motivation for them to give teeth to a law that may disadvantage them long term should they win the next tender.

    I suppose in theory Treasury sol could do it, but the idea they have the time or know how to take on what would no doubt be an absolutely crack Enviro team, instructed by EDF, in an area on which they have no expertise is laughable.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Sanctimonious)
    Whilst i can understand what you are saying, what about people who have died due to health and safety regulations stopping people carrying out their jobs? The emergency services for example have to battle this all the time.

    I ran a business in construction for 2 years before uni and most health and safety inspectors are little spectacle wearing ***** who quite frankly haven't got a clue. I stopped one stupid ******* entering a room full of asbestos (big sign on the door as well) and thankfully he won't end up with pleuracy or worse. Health and safety has gone too far and just like teachers aren't allowed to teach properly without political intervention a lot of professionals can't do their job properly because of it.

    I agree with a degree of health and safety because some people have no common sense whatsoever and do stupid things but the UK has gone too far and its all to add more costs on to the working and middle class. Don't see multinationals paying for training courses and so on though - all subsidies from the EU and governments (WDA) etc. cover that.
    Why does any co. making decent money pay attention to HSE?

    Conversation. 'Oh you're fining me, cool I'm issuing for JR tomorrow' 'Oh you can't afford to lose because of my costs, hell you can barely afford your own so you'll settle for a minisucule percentage of the fine, see you'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Le Nombre)
    You need someone to enforce it, whether that be a quango or dept. You could I suppose make the laws criminal ones and make it a Police matter, but God knows we have enough criminalisation already.

    You could in theory rely on competitor companies enforcing it, but getting locus standi would prove difficult for in such a situation, and even if they did convince a court of that there's not going to much motivation for them to give teeth to a law that may disadvantage them long term should they win the next tender.

    I suppose in theory Treasury sol could do it, but the idea they have the time or know how to take on what would no doubt be an absolutely crack Enviro team, instructed by EDF, in an area on which they have no expertise is laughable.
    I'd rather the police deal with a few corrupt businessmen trying to cut corners on nuclear power stations, than spend millions and millions on more bureaucracy. The police are there for this exact thing - protecting the public.

    I just don't understand why we need a energy and climate change department. Surely energy supply is something that should be dealt with on a prime ministerial board level, and climate change is something the planet needs to focus on?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ace123)
    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...lection-Pledge

    -Abolishment of inheritance tax
    -Raising the starting rate tax is paid so the poorest pay no tax at all
    -Abolishing energy and climate change department
    -Scrapping HS2
    -40% tax rate for middle earners to start a higher rate
    -45% tax rate scrapped
    -Bedroom tax could be abolished and will be decided tomorrow

    Thoughts on these? and what else do you think they should include?
    So a tory manifesto then......

    Where are they going to make up the money for tax cuts.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    While I'm still not voting Ukip the simple approach I take is that we should go second rather than first. That is to say that once a country with a population rather than our own gets 75% renewable over the whole year rather than a summers day, that's when we should make the jump. Until then, nuclear.
    How do we expect other countries to reduce their emissions if were not....

    Britain has been great because it was a pioneer not a follower. The risk's are low, and we have the best conditions for wind and wave energy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    UKIP has hired all sorts of Spin Doctors for this manifesto
    the True image of UKIP in its natural state is the manifesto from the last election which advocated flat taxes, doubling the number of prisons and investigating discrimination against white people at the BBC.

    At its core UKIP remains a Enoch Powell party and farage tries his best to present it as a Ron Paul Libertarian Party but the rank and file are one nation conservatives with 1950s social attitudes
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    I'd rather the police deal with a few corrupt businessmen trying to cut corners on nuclear power stations, than spend millions and millions on more bureaucracy. The police are there for this exact thing - protecting the public.

    I just don't understand why we need a energy and climate change department. Surely energy supply is something that should be dealt with on a prime ministerial board level, and climate change is something the planet needs to focus on?
    But this would be bureacracy on a mega scale, because there's nothing more bureacuratic than courts, and you can guarantee whichever company it was, likely EDF, would hit them with both legal barrels, the Police and CPS simply don't have the expertise in this area to cope with that, you need specialists.

    It doesn't have to be a department, it could be a quango or a particular specialist branch of the Police, but someone has enfore enivronnmental law and it takes a lot of manpower, in part because of the international aspect you mention complicating things (not the EU, which doesn't have a criminal pillar, but the many treaties we signed on nuclear/climate change can, and are, combed for loopholes).
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.