UKIP and Tory Policies are Eerily Similar

New contributor Jasmine Ferrari on the strange similarities between the policies of UKIP and the Conservatives.

At the moment, most people seem keen to voice their opinion of UKIP. Not unlike the aftermath of a particularly offensive joke made in the pub, some people are defensive and can’t help shouting ‘political correctness gone mad’ at anyone who’ll listen, whereas others are (usually rightfully) appalled.

Others still take the marginally less subtle ‘brick in the post’ approach. Although I vehemently disagree with 100% of UKIP’s antics, and really appreciate the sense of community that has arisen in response; I can’t help but shiftily look back to the main party in power and draw comparisons. It won’t come as a surprise to most, but for those who have been drawn into the political fray by the unbridled madness of UKIP, drawing attention to the similarities between them and the Conservatives may stop the slicker and more tactfully spun party slipping through the net.

Immigration

 

This is the issue which started the controversy around UKIP, branding them as racist and out of touch with the UK’s proud multicultural past and present. This is what they suggest:

Regain control of our borders and of immigration – only possible by leaving the EU.

Immigrants must financially support themselves and their dependents for 5 years. This means private health insurance (except emergency medical care), private education and private housing – they should pay into the pot before they take out of it.

A points-based visa system and time-limited work permits.

Proof of private health insurance must be a precondition for immigrants and tourists to enter the UK.

Strikingly similar are the Conservatives‘ plans:

Clamping down on benefits tourism and health tourism – so that we only welcome those who want to work hard and contribute to our society.

Cutting non-EU net immigration to its lowest level since 1998 – to ease pressure on the schools and hospitals that all hardworking people rely on.

Introducing a new citizen test with British values at its heart.

All of these ideas could very well push one towards an identity crisis. How far back in your lineage do you have to go to not be considered an immigrant? How many of us would actually be here were it not for immigrants? Am I ‘hardworking’ and deserving of help should I need it? Would I pass a test based on ‘British values’? What ARE ‘British values’?! The tories say they’re the champions of ‘hardworking’ people and their access to schools and hospitals, but when they’re done with privatising everything, why should it matter who has access to it? Surely it’s in the best interest of a business to serve as many people as possible. Obviously this is going along with their strange assumption that ‘hardworking’ people really want to deny education and healthcare to people who can’t name six generations of the royal family and the correct way to batter a cod.

Welfare

 

Although all of UKIP‘s policies manage to get muddled with their idea of patriotism and making sure only ‘British’ people get anything for free, they are quite specific about who will be allowed anything for free once only British people are allowed in. The pool of people UKIP actually represent slowly dwindles to a puddle:

Prioritise social housing for people whose parents and grandparents were born locally.

Make welfare a safety net for the needy, not a bed for the lazy. Benefits only available to those who have lived here for over 5 years.

The Conservatives take a slightly different tack, hammering home their ‘we are the voice of the hardworking people’ bit:

Capping benefits – so no out-of-work household can claim more in benefits than the average family earns in work.

Stopping benefits rising faster than wages – to ensure that it always pays to work.

Introducing Universal Credit – so it always pays more to be in work than on benefits.

Both parties work on the assumption that people claiming benefits are lazy. This assumption is gobbled up willingly by a lot of people because it’s asserted in most UK newspapers on an alarmingly regular basis. It’s a devious ploy that works on ‘hardworking’ people’s indignation that someone could be less ‘hardworking’ than they are and be given money. It also works on the mass acceptance that money is equal to happiness. ‘Those benefits claimants are as happy as I am! They have the same telly! They can afford a takeaway! They aren’t even BRITISH!!!!!!’. Both parties include policies on benefits because this system of diversion has lead people to ignore other massive and arguably much more harmful tax expenditures like war. It’s sickeningly clever how the public idea of people being so poor they turn to the state for help has been warped to strike people more emotively than warmongering in other ‘far away’ countries. Of course this all links in with the ‘British good, anything else bad’ approach..

Both parties are stuck in a confusing rut

 

Keep immigrants out – keep British things for British people – keep British things for ‘hardworking’ British people – restrict access to help for those deemed unworthy of it.

Although this process is being sold, and often accepted, as benefitting ‘the masses’, really it only benefits a very few. A very rich and powerful few. Who are laughing into their Moet as people they will never meet or understand scrabble to defend them.