# UKIP's transport policy: get benefit claimants and cyclists off the road



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jan 2015)

The party which personifies farkwittery supreme has excelled itself with this campaign leaflet:






It reads like a Viz letters page. The worrying thing is that there are some people who'll think it's a good idea.


GC


----------



## glenn forger (21 Jan 2015)

Disgusting. Horrible. Repulsive. It's "TAXPAYERS' MONEY".


----------



## Markymark (21 Jan 2015)

UKIP are fudging idiots shocker.


----------



## winjim (21 Jan 2015)

Are they sending their leaflets pre-crumpled for ease of disposal? Very thoughtful of them.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (21 Jan 2015)

Good grief, where do you start? At least the Viz letters page makes me laugh, this is just depressing...


----------



## Spinney (21 Jan 2015)

'pastime' not 'past-time' FFS


----------



## Markymark (21 Jan 2015)

There can't be that many morons in this country that vote for them, could there?


----------



## glenn forger (21 Jan 2015)

Two split infinitives.


----------



## smutchin (21 Jan 2015)

Yes, get rid of bikes from the road. That'll solve all congestion problems in one fell swoop. Obviously.


----------



## TissoT (21 Jan 2015)

Joke of century .. The things they say to win votes.


----------



## smutchin (21 Jan 2015)

See that bike on the roof of that car? Just think of all the congestion that could be prevented if they banned it...


----------



## Drago (21 Jan 2015)

It's not taxpayers money. It's the Treasuries money.


----------



## raleighnut (21 Jan 2015)

Someone tell them that PASTIME is one word and not hyphenated like that, ill educated nobbers the lot of em.


----------



## LCpl Boiled Egg (21 Jan 2015)

winjim said:


> Are they sending their leaflets pre-crumpled for ease of disposal? Very thoughtful of them.



I did think of a way to reuse the leaflet, but the paper looks a bit too shiny.


----------



## AndyRM (21 Jan 2015)




----------



## Spinney (21 Jan 2015)

Nope.


----------



## Dmcd33 (21 Jan 2015)

Looks like a spoof? But I fear it's probably not.

Has anyone verified it (found it elsewhere on the NET?)


----------



## Dave Davenport (21 Jan 2015)

Taking the grammar into account, are you sure it's from UKIP and not Count Arthur?

(That will only be relevant to anyone who watched last night's episode).


----------



## winjim (21 Jan 2015)

ABikeCam said:


> I did think of a way to reuse the leaflet, but the paper looks a bit too shiny.


I would suggest recycling it, but that would involve mixing it in with other pieces of paper from all over the place, some of which might even be a different colour...


----------



## Drago (21 Jan 2015)

I can see me having problems round our village and most of the roads I use cos there are no bleeding footpaths.

And why the liberal use of capital letters and bold or highlighted type? Do they think we're chuffing stupid?


----------



## Dave Davenport (21 Jan 2015)

I like the 'go back' to the pavement. Quite ironic considering UKIP would like us to 'go back' to the 1950's when people hardly ever cycled on the pavement, unlike today.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jan 2015)

Dmcd33 said:


> Looks like a spoof? But I fear it's probably not.
> 
> Has anyone verified it (found it elsewhere on the NET?)



I've not been able to verify it, only found this on Buzzfeed attributing the leaflet to UKIP candidate Lynton Yates.

_"A UKIP spokesman disowned the statements, and told BuzzFeed News: “These are not UKIP policies and they will not form part of the UKIP manifesto.”
Yates did not return repeated requests for comment."_​
GC


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jan 2015)

Drago said:


> Do they think we're chuffing stupid?



UKIP is banking on it.

GC


----------



## Hitchington (21 Jan 2015)

Trouble is the UKIPs don't have much coherent policy on anything apart from "rid Britain of foreign people." Each candidate has their own set of local policies ranging from the daft to the downright dangerous. They're a mixed bunch of racists, homophobes and now it seems anti-cyclists. I suppose they judge the content of their election leaflet on what ever lowest common denominator they think will get them votes. That and "no more brown people."


----------



## mjr (21 Jan 2015)

Strange. Why would UKIP hate the modern safety bicycle, basically invented in the UK? Is it because it's usually considered to be from Coventry?


----------



## Drago (21 Jan 2015)

Coventry's in the UK now?


----------



## Markymark (21 Jan 2015)

mjray said:


> Strange. Why would UKIP hate the modern safety bicycle, basically invented in the UK? Is it because it's usually considered to be from Coventry?


Because UKIP's demographic will include what it perceives as the majority and excludes anyone it considers a minority particularly those that they perceive as a financial drain or an inconvenience - which includes cyclists.

A party of idiots for idiots.


----------



## StuartG (21 Jan 2015)

What I can't stand about UKIP is their inconsistency. Bikes, benefit claimants - but what about <sssshh>black cars oh, and dark brown ones too. Plus pink cars 'cos we know who drives those. And Dacias 'cos some filthy Romany will have not washed his hands after defecating. What have I missed?

Got it! Women drivers. They should walk behind except when waxing it.


----------



## Dave Davenport (21 Jan 2015)

Wasn't/isn't compulsory registration and insurance an official UKIP manifesto policy?


----------



## Drago (21 Jan 2015)

I spent worry. We're not going to get a UK UP government, and if we did the country hasn't got a pot to pith in so there'd be no sponduliks to pay for administering and enforcing any of this. Even the Labour party cost their manifesto policies, although their cos projections have traditionally been a work of fiction worthy of Douglas Adams.


----------



## BrumJim (21 Jan 2015)

https://twitter.com/stevenjbrookes/status/556448444207071233/photo/1

No further comment.


----------



## GhostDancer (21 Jan 2015)

Why let them fill up our buses? Make them walk, or cycle.... oh er, no.


----------



## screenman (22 Jan 2015)

I just heard this on the radio, sorry about the Telegraph link.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...g-to-ease-congestion-Ukip-candidate-says.html


----------



## compo (22 Jan 2015)

Apart from those disabled people who exchange their DLA for a car, I often wonder how people on out of work benefits can afford to run a car. We see it round here, people who haven't worked for years driving around in nice cars. It is not only the cost of the car but the running costs of tax, insurance, and petrol. What they spend their benefit money on is obviously their business, but maybe there is an argument to look more closely at their income and expenditure.


----------



## clarion (22 Jan 2015)

Most people on benefits have a job. This includes delivery drivers and care workers, who need to use their own transport for work.

UKIP are the party of the stupid, the gullible, the evil and the ignorant.


----------



## jonesy (22 Jan 2015)

Quite. It is easy to laugh at them, as a bunch of fruitcakes and idiots, but these people could end up with real influence over government policy. They are actually dangerous.


----------



## screenman (22 Jan 2015)

He must have a very small universe, we do not have pavement between the villages out here.


----------



## Turbo Rider (22 Jan 2015)

compo said:


> Apart from those disabled people who exchange their DLA for a car, I often wonder how people on out of work benefits can afford to run a car.


 
I think you might have answered your own question.


----------



## Bromptonaut (22 Jan 2015)

compo said:


> Apart from those disabled people who exchange their DLA for a car, I often wonder how people on out of work benefits can afford to run a car.



The answer to whether a person on benefits can afford a car is surely 'it depends'. Given the infrequent and expensive bus service round here I'd expect people to hang on to one as long as they possibly could. Ignore depreciation, assume a car with minimal road tax (even our 1.6 Berlingo is less than £2/week) and cheap insurance paid by instalments then keeping one going for a few months at least shouldn't be impossible. 

What else are they supposed to use for (a) job hunting and (b) accessing agency work that starts 'tomorrow'?


----------



## anotherDave (22 Jan 2015)

Hitchington said:


> Trouble is the UKIPs don't have much coherent policy on anything



You can read UKIP's policies on their website.

http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people

http://www.ukip.org/speeches_from_annual_conference

There is no mention of cycling. Their stated transport policies are:

"*Transport*

– We will scrap HS2.

– UKIP opposes tolls on public roads and will let existing contracts for running toll roads expire.

– UKIP will maintain pensioner bus passes.

– UKIP will require foreign vehicles to purchase a Britdisc, before entry to the UK, in order to contribute to the upkeep of UK roads and any lost fuel duty.

– UKIP will ensure that speed cameras are used as a deterrent and not as a revenue raiser for local authorities."


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Jan 2015)

anotherDave said:


> You can read UKIP's policies on their website.
> 
> http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people
> 
> ...



A bit thin on detail, especially so close to a General Election. Probably thought up on a back of a fag packet.


----------



## Hitchington (22 Jan 2015)

jonesy said:


> Quite. It is easy to laugh at them, as a bunch of fruitcakes and idiots, *but these people could end up with real influence over government policy. They are actually dangerous*.


I quite agree, but if we don't laugh at them what can we do?


----------



## Turbo Rider (22 Jan 2015)

Hitchington said:


> I quite agree, but if we don't laugh at them what can we do?



Vote for AN Other. Quite depressing though, when the only reason to vote is to stop that lot getting in, but duty calls...


----------



## Hitchington (22 Jan 2015)

anotherDave said:


> You can read UKIP's policies on their website.
> 
> http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people
> 
> ...



I'd rather not click on the UKIPs website link thanks. It would be rather embarrassing if anyone looked at my browser history. Hardcore supersex porn, fine. But UKIP.org. No way.


----------



## andyfraser (22 Jan 2015)

Hitchington said:


> I'd rather not click on the UKIPs website link thanks. It would be rather embarrassing if anyone looked at my browser history. Hardcore supersex porn, fine. But UKIP.org. No way.


That's what incognito/private mode is for.


----------



## andyfraser (22 Jan 2015)

[QUOTE 3492105, member: 259"]Your ISP will still be able to sell the information to Nigel's war chest[/QUOTE]
But at least it saves the embarrassment of family and friends seeing.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Jan 2015)

[QUOTE 3492123, member: 259"]I saw Mr Farage in Brussels last week. He walks like Max Wall.[/QUOTE]

That explains a lot - Max Wall has been dead for nearly 25 years!


----------



## Bollo (22 Jan 2015)

[QUOTE 3492123, member: 259"]I saw Mr Farage in Brussels last week. [/QUOTE]
He'll be picking up his benefits.


----------



## S.Giles (23 Jan 2015)

This thread reminds me that I don't frequent CycleChat for the quality of its political discourse!

Steve


----------



## spen666 (23 Jan 2015)

tissot said:


> Joke of century .. The things they say to win votes.


No other political parties would say things just to win vote


----------



## Mr Peps (23 Jan 2015)

I thought the leaflet must have been a joke but it was genuine and he's been suspended by Ukip.

From the Daily Mail: 

*Ukip spokesman disowned policies and said: 'He's been a bit of an idiot'*


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ection-candidate-people-really-catch-bus.html


----------



## shadow master (23 Jan 2015)

Mr Peps said:


> I thought the leaflet must have been a joke but it was genuine and he's been suspended by Ukip.
> 
> From the Daily Mail:
> 
> ...


Imagine if other parties suspended members because they were idiots with bad policies.....oh what a great day that would be! Where would the failed lawyers,doctors and school teachers go....always the church I suppose!


----------



## BrumJim (24 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> Imagine if other parties suspended members because they were idiots with bad policies.....oh what a great day that would be! Where would the failed lawyers,doctors and school teachers go....always the church I suppose!



Is there anyone you like?


----------



## shadow master (24 Jan 2015)

BrumJim said:


> Is there anyone you like?


Not the Looney left winger's!


----------



## shadow master (24 Jan 2015)

User said:


> Tricky step over and drag back?


Not likely


----------



## jarlrmai (27 Jan 2015)

Surely nutmeg and run through the gap?


----------



## BrumJim (27 Jan 2015)

shadow master said:


> Not the Looney left winger's!



Or Grammar Police?


----------

