Mark Reckless critcises Nigel Farage

[AgnesIO]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30157507

Farage and Reckless contradict each other. Apparently, Reckless was merely quoting UKIP policy, which Farage has quickly denied...


New UKIP MP Mark Reckless has said he feels "a bit sore" about the way he "came out of" controversy over his party's policy on EU migrants.
He was criticised after implying that migrants might have to leave after a "transitional period" if the UK left the EU - which Nigel Farage denied.
Mr Reckless told the Times (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4275262.ece) the UKIP leader had changed the party's policy.
He later said the policy had been "clarified" to say EU migrants already in the UK would be allowed to remain.
The former Conservative MP explained the party had previously guaranteed people from the EU would be able to stay for a two-year "transitional period" while negotiations with the EU took place - the aim of which would be a deal allowing both EU nationals already in the UK and Britons living in the EU to remain where they were.

Thoughts?

[dbgtz]

I'm going to be optimistic and say there's no lies involved, just unclear policy within the party as they've transitioned to become more "mainstream".

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm going to be optimistic and say there's no lies involved, just unclear policy within the party as they've transitioned to become more "mainstream".

Not good enough though is it, they need to get a grip.

[dbgtz]

Not good enough though is it, they need to get a grip.

No, and the fact they're changing policy to become more appealing in the first place is somewhat worrying.

[Chippiewill]

No, and the fact they're changing policy to become more appealing in the first place is somewhat worrying.

God forbid a party changes their policies over time to better reflect the changing views of the electorate.

[dbgtz]

God forbid a party changes their policies over time to better reflect the changing views of the electorate.

It's more that they will end up saying one thing and doing another as they're just trying to get votes.

[Chippiewill]

Well

a) Every current major party does that.
b) We have no evidence whatsoever that UKIP does that.

[FlyingJesus]

b) We have no evidence whatsoever that UKIP does that.

What about when they went from a NO TAX EVER party to INCREASE TAXES TO HELP POOR FAMILIES in one swift move after realising that it's poor people who are the most likely to be enraged about immigrants "stealing" low level jobs

It's not changing small ideas to suit the electorate, it's changing radically to suit the parts of the electorate they think they can manipulate out of desperation

[Chippiewill]

I never said they don't change their party's direction, I said that we have no evidence so far that they go back on things they promise once in office.

[FlyingJesus]

Well considering they've done it to their own members and representatives I'd say it's a fairly safe bet :P not one that we'll see come to term though with any luck

[AgnesIO]

God forbid a party changes their policies over time to better reflect the changing views of the electorate.

Not sure the views of the electorate have ever been to "kick every non-Britain out of the country in a few months"...

[-:Undertaker:-]

What about when they went from a NO TAX EVER party to INCREASE TAXES TO HELP POOR FAMILIES in one swift move after realising that it's poor people who are the most likely to be enraged about immigrants "stealing" low level jobs

It's not changing small ideas to suit the electorate, it's changing radically to suit the parts of the electorate they think they can manipulate out of desperation

Actually if you look at their proposed policies as far as I am aware they advocate lowering taxes on both wealthy earners and poorer earners with a two-stage flat tax - makes sense to me, as does prioritising lower wage earners before higher wage earners.


Not sure the views of the electorate have ever been to "kick every non-Britain out of the country in a few months"...

That has never been policy and you know it.

[AgnesIO]

God forbid a party changes their policies over time to better reflect the changing views of the electorate.



That has never been policy and you know it.

Did you bother to read what I had quoted? I clearly quoted Chippiewill suggesting that the party had changed its policies to fit what the electorate was currently thinking. I agree, parties do do this all the time.

BUT, if that is the case, that would be an admission that UKIP previously wanted to gradually deport people of other nationalities - now, I am not saying they did (or do), however Chippiewill's post implies that the party used to think what Mark Reckless said, however is changing its policy based on the changing views of the British electorate.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Did you bother to read what I had quoted? I clearly quoted Chippiewill suggesting that the party had changed its policies to fit what the electorate was currently thinking. I agree, parties do do this all the time.

BUT, if that is the case, that would be an admission that UKIP previously wanted to gradually deport people of other nationalities - now, I am not saying they did (or do), however Chippiewill's post implies that the party used to think what Mark Reckless said, however is changing its policy based on the changing views of the British electorate.

The policy was as I understand it that a visa system would be introduced as it exists already for non-EU immigrants (and which by the rest of the world operates on) where by when Great Britain ceases to be under the auspices of the community treaties, former EU 'citizens' would have to apply for visas to continue their stay: those who qualify for visas would be allowed to stay, those who don't qualify (ie they are out of work) would have to leave within a certain time.

That's hardly wanting to deport people of other nationalities. That's just fair.


God forbid a party changes their policies over time to better reflect the changing views of the electorate.

Interestingly I just watched a live debate on Sky News about ten minutes ago between Douglas Murray and some journalist about Ken Clarke's recent comments, and the woman just sat there basically saying parties should ignore what the voters want. Predictably, she also came out with the waycism line before the debate had ended after Murray had taken her apart like a piece of cheap flat-pack IKEA furniture.