Click on link below
Do you remember receiving this leaflet?
So are you surprised the lights are still switched off?
If you voted Conservative on the 4th May, do you feel conned ?
Well, the Conservatives have a track record for Broken Promises
Promise: Cut Net Immigration to less than 100,000 per year
Reality: Net Immigration continued around 300,000 per year
Promise: Balance the books by 2017 and then run a budget surplus.
Reality: The deficit is still £50 billion a year and will not even be down to zero by 2020.
Promise: Scrap the Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights.
Reality: Promise abandoned.
Promise: Deliver a strong NHS.
Reality: A&E is in meltdown and doctors were forced to strike. NHS has a staffing crisis while pay rises for key workers are pegged below inflation. Waiting times have soared.
Promise: Clamp down on dangerous extremists with new Counter Extremism Bill.
Reality: Bill quietly dropped as unable to agree a definition of “extremism” (true!).
Promise: Protect schools funding.
Reality: Funding is being cut by 6.5% with many inner city schools facing even bigger losses.
Promise: Introduce a new Victims’ Law to enshrine key rights for victims of crime.
Reality: Still waiting..
Promise: Recover £500 million a year from migrants who use the NHS
Reality: Not even a half of that recovered.
In addition, since 2010, the Conservatives have reduced police numbers by 20,000, cut hospital beds by 15,000 and cut our armed forces by 30,000.
Now do you really trust Teresa May and the Conservatives to deliver BREXIT?
A powerful “coalition” of the LibDems, Labour, the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens, Big Business, the EU, the House of Lords, the Press Barons and Tory Remainers all want to dump Brexit.
There is tremendous pressure on Teresa May to fudge Brexit. Remember the Tories, including Teresa May, campaigned to Remain. Cameron and Osborne promised ruin and destitution if we voted to Leave.
Tellingly, Teresa May has NOT said that Brexit is in the UK’s BEST interest. Unwilling to say that, she says “she is carrying out the will of the people”.
Can you trust the Party that claimed to put the lights on in Spelthorne, but didn’t, to ensure that Brexit means Exit ? Will they say anything, spend anything to win an election? Is it a case of Power is more important than Service, Party more important than People?
In Spelthorne, if you voted UKIP in 2015, vote UKIP again on Thursday 8th June and continue to ensure that UKIP remains the party that all the other parties fear. Vote for Brexit, Honesty and Ordinary folk.
The Leader of Spelthorne Borough Council, Councillor Ian Harvey, has instructed UKIP Spelthorne
to post an apology and retraction on its website in respect of a leaflet distributed by our candidate,
Christopher Beresford, in which he made the following factually inaccurate statement: “The Tories
amended a motion asking for two engines manned by two crew full time 24/7 to only one full time
crew.” Mr Beresford accepts that the amended motion was silent as to the number of crews, so
that it was not correct to assert that the Conservatives had called for only one full time crew. He
unreservedly apologises for this error, which was the result of an honest misinterpretation of the
For the record, the amended motion, showing the text that was deleted from the original motion, is set out below:
“That Spelthorne Borough Council request that the new Fire Station proposed by Surrey County
Council to be built at Fordbridge Roundabout, has two pumps/appliances/fire engines,
each fully To
manned by trained Fire Fighters whole time (full time at all times, 24hrs a day, 7 days a week).
do otherwise would seriously endanger and disadvantage the lives and property of the residents of
Spelthorne, which is an area of high demand for both Fire and Rescue Services and one of
elevated risks due to many factors.”
Mr Beresford accepts that the deletion of the request for both engines to be fully manned at all
times does not mean that those who voted for the amendment were calling for one full time crew
and leaves entirely silent the wishes as to crewing of those who voted in favour of the amended
Since the motion was passed, Surrey County Council has confirmed there will not be 2 full-time
crews. We share the disappointment Councillor Harvey has expressed about this, as UKIP is very
concerned about the reduction in fire services in Spelthorne, which are the result of Tory spending
cuts. We note that Mr Harvey issued a statement on the Spelthorne Borough Council expressing
disappointment at the decision and calling for it to be reconsidered. However, we were surprised
and disappointed that he did not support a motion explicitly calling for two full-time crews before
the decision was taken, as this may have given Surrey County Council the impression that there
was not strong opposition on Spelthorne BC to both engines being fully staffed at all times.
UKIP Defence spokesman Bill Etheridge has called for European nations to increase their spending on defence.
The call comes as news emerged that the UK had failed to meet its pledge of 2% after an increase in GDP.
European leaders in Brussels received a warning from US Defence secretary Jim Mattis that allies must significantly increase their defense spending “if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to this alliance”.
Such has been the decline in spending since the break-up of the Soviet Union that the Belgian military was forced to ask the U.S. for hand-me-down flak jackets for its soldiers when it deployed domestically in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels in recent years.
Mr Etheridge, MEP for the West Midlands, said “With the twin threats of Islamic fundamentalism and a resurgent Russia, it is imperative that all NATO nations meet or exceed the agreed 2%.
“We have a crisis in Armed Forces recruitment despite government protestations there is no problem. We have a severe lack of heavy artillery, of operational submarines, carriers without aircraft and insufficient infantry fighting vehicles.
“The UK should not be in a position where an uplift in GDP means we miss our 2% target. We should be spending much more than that because we have a ground to make up after years of deficiencies.
“Unfortunately after years of Blairite internationalism where we send our troops to everyone else’s conflicts and the mistaken belief that spending billions on foreign aid is better than defence spending, we have insufficient numbers of armed forces who are not properly equipped, and a Defence procurement system which is not fit for purpose.”
UKIP Fisheries Spokesman, Mike Hookem MEP, has blasted “desperate attempts” by MEPs to “grab” UK fish stocks following Brexit saying, “UK waters and fish stocks must return to UK control, post-Brexit.”
Memos leaked to a British newspaper state that “MEPs have drafted seven provisions to be included in Britain’s “exit agreement”, including the stipulation that there will be “no increase to the UK’s share of fishing opportunities for jointly fished stocks*.”
Speaking of the leaked memos, Hull-born MEP, Mr Hookem said, “This is nothing more than the EU wanting to have their cake and eat it. Time and again we are told the UK will not get any ‘special deals’ post-Brexit. Well, in that case, it should work both ways, and UK waters must return to UK control regardless of what the EU want!”
“In 1973 the Government sold out the fishing industry. This cannot be allowed to happen again. Under the terms of paragraph three of Article 50, all treaties including the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) will “cease to apply” to the UK, and Britain’s waters will be protected by a 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under international law. This will mean that there will not such thing as “jointly fished stocks” when we leave the EU.
“Anything less than getting back full control of our waters post-Brexit will be another utter betrayal of the fishing industry. Fishermen knew in 1972 that their industry had been stolen from them by politicians desperate to get into the EEC ‘club’ and Brexit is our opportunity to retake control our waters.
“A recent report stated that the British fishing industry could be worth as much as £6.3 billion to the UK economy in the post-Brexit age, and what is needed are solid plans to capitalise on that, not use the fishing industry as a bargaining chip for concessions in other areas of the negotiations.”
“Essentially, this makes Fishing the acid test of whether we are going to get full control of our country back following Brexit or let the EU continue to dictate to us.
“However, it is not unexpected that the EU would make a grab for UK fish stocks when you consider that we currently have billions of pounds’ worth of fish caught in UK waters by EU vessels.
“It is obvious they would be desperate to cling on to that, but it is up to our elected politicians to make sure that does not happen.”
A paper released today by the UKIP Parliamentary Resource Unit (PRU) concludes that while Britain is right to support the development of poorer countries, prioritising foreign aid payments over our own public services is not an effective use of public resources. The paper, Rethinking Aid, Freeing Trade, by Simon Gordon, recommends phasing out development aid and repealing the Act that commits UK aid spending to 0.7% of GNI.
Having broken down aid spending in some detail, Gordon has been able to demonstrate that a significant portion of the budget is not spent on either emergency or development aid; is abused to fund political advocacy which harms developing nations; and that Britain’s multi-lateral aid partners rack up huge administrative costs.
Moreover, Gordon notes that development aid has largely failed to relieve long-term poverty – a fact which calls the original basis for the 0.7% aid target into question. He says:
“Development aid has not proven to be an effective means by which to promote economic development in poorer countries. The economic assumptions behind the 0.7% target have proved inaccurate. In some cases, aid can arguably make matters worse by perpetuating poor government; limiting the potential for change in developing countries to come from within; and therefore perpetuating poverty. In some cases, aid payments even go to organisations acting in direct opposition to British foreign policy.”
The paper recommends reducing foreign aid to £2.5 billion per annum to enable allowing the UK to deliver emergency and humanitarian aid; contribute to disease eradication; and enable the government to increase spending on stretched public services here in the UK. Rethinking Aid, Freeing Trade also advocates pursuing free trade agreements with developing countries post Brexit, via minimal and simple tariff regimes, in contrast to the current and complex EU tariff regime which puts up barriers to trade; is highly protectionist; and tends to punish poorer countries for economic growth.
UKIP Foreign Aid Spokeswoman, Lisa Duffy says: “I welcome this research by the UKIP PRU. For too long, our government has prioritised ineffective aid spending over its basic obligations to British citizens. That has to change, not just so we can help those struggling in our own country, but so we can act in the best interests of developing nations too.
“As this paper shows, an increasing body of evidence suggests that more aid is not the best path to prosperity for developing countries, but that more trade is.
“Decades of development aid have failed to grow poorer economies, but post-Brexit free trade deals will. It’s time to ditch the out-dated 0.7% aid spending target; relieve global poverty with a hand up, not a hand out; make cutting trade barriers with the developing world a priority; and fill the funding gaps in our own public services.”