Are the UK Government using PPI and Banks as a way to put money back into peoples pockets?

Are the UK Government using PPI and Banks as a way to put money back into peoples pockets?

By Dark Politricks

I just saw an advert on Channel 5 USA (a UK channel) in which a PPI Claims company said that if you had taken a loan out within 15 years and had added Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) then you could attempt to claim it back.

Now I had taken a load of loans out in my youth, with PPI, and when the first adverts started appearing the adverts were only saying that you could claim the money back if you had taken a loan out within the past 3 years. I didn't do anything because my loans were 10 years old.

However it seemed that the time length that you could claim for was extending and extending every few months. It seemed to coincide with the UK finances getting worse and our GDP going down and inflation going up.

First I started seeing adverts for 5 then 7 years and then when I first saw an advert earlier this year for 10 years I was straight on the phone. I shouldn't have gone through one of the "specialist PPI companies" however it was money I wouldn't have got back if I hadn't of attempted it in the first place - so in reality it was literally free cash in my pocket.

From an initial 3 years to 15 years is a long time and I have a feeling that the government is hoping that PPI payouts will help stimulate the economy by putting money back into people's pockets in a stealthy Keynesian method without any government minister having to  admit to it of course! Austerity, Austerity - that is the only way says our supposed economic wizard George Osborne.

It is Georgey boy who's claim that our deficit and debt would be reduced through his spending cuts and VAT tax rises would have started working by now. Anyone with half an eye can see they blatantly haven't done the job.

Their are no private jobs rushing in to fill all the public ones he is gutting. He is forcing people off disability allowance onto job-seekers (a much lower benefit) and making them look for jobs that don't exist.

He is introducing "bedroom" taxes  for the poor so that people with extra rooms have to give up more of their money or move across  the country to places where one bedroom flats exist. All the while he is cutting public services and yet at the same time he has reduced the top rate of tax for the richest people in the country. What happened to "We are all in this together"?

The politicians know the banks were mainly to blame for our current crisis and the UK is one of the most indebted nations on the planet.

This doesn't only include Government debt but personal debt as well. All through the later 90's, and the years of the Labour government, people were re-mortgaging their houses and spending the money or having loans literally thrown at them by the banks. I know for a fact I and many other people I know were.

After the first law suit over PPI was won by someone years ago the banks have had to set aside billions in case they had to pay out more to future customers who were mis sold PPI.

From The International Business Times

PPI has become the biggest mis-selling scandal to hit UK banks and they have repeatedly underestimated the scale of the problem.

Britain's biggest retail bank, Lloyds Banking Group Plc , has set aside 6.8 billion pounds for PPI compensation. Barclays Plc has set aside 2.6 billion and RBS has provisioned 2.2 billion.

So far the banks have set aside around £20 billion and the payouts so far amount to £8.9 billion.

Payment Protection Insurance was meant to protect borrowers against redundancy and sickness , but it was often sold to customers who didn't want or need it or who couldn't claim it even if they took it out. People such as those with certain medical conditions or people who were self employed. Often, like myself, I had PPI added to my loans or credit cards without my knowledge!

The worst thing, in my mind anyway, was that if you had to claim (as I did once) the money from the insurance only lasted for a year. Plus the amount the insurance cost you worked out exactly the same as if you had added an extra years worth of  loan to your original debt. It was a total con!

Because the UK finances are in such a state and recent news reports show customers are holding back from buying goods. I have a sneaky feeling that the government is secretly hoping that the PPI payouts will be a way of putting cash into potential shoppers pockets to stimulate the economy. The added benefit of course is that it's all at the cost of the banks who caused the mess in the first place.

To me it sounds like a good plan. The banksters are the ones who caused the mess and I am not joking when I said they used tot literally  throw loans at people.

For instance I was given a £5,000 loan when I left college with no job or way of paying it back. Then every year the same bank would give me an extra £5,000 - £7,000 loan and overdrafts up to £3,500 to pay back the outstanding amount and give me some more spending cash! It was truly a time when "debt was good" and people didn't think about the future.

As a young man who didn't really think he would have to pay back the money anyway (I had a bit of death wish back then, plus the money management skills of a frog) it seemed like free money and I grabbed whatever the banks would offer me. One of the things I often feel our schools let the population down with is real world lessons in living. How to manage money, how to look after yourself, how money works, how to use logic and reason and think for yourself.

Young men are worse than woman who are often taught these skills from their mothers so if the schools are not teaching the boys and they are not getting taught at home they are left to the mercy of the loan sharks and banksters. Shuffling money from one account to another to pay off monthly repayments and sticking to the minimum payment to keep them off your back is not exactly "good" money management!

Unlike other people I know who "went missing" for 5+ years and now have mortgages and are debt free. I honestly OR  stupidly (pick your own word) decided to pay off my debts. Even thought this took over 6 years I managed to do it. Therefore when I saw the opportunity to reclaim all the PPI which amounted to around £5,000 I took it.

Some credit cards I didn't even realise I had PPI on at the time and on other banks I had no details apart from the name of the bank but their customer service department returned a list of 6 loan accounts taken out within 7 years. I used one of these companies on TV but didn't realise they took a THIRD of the money as recompense for doing the job you could easily do yourself.

Luckily for me they forgot about one loan and I got £2,000 all to myself without deductions but I would recommend anyone who has ever taken a loan out in the last 15 years to check if they can reclaim the PPI on it.

The Government is not helping us and the banksters who caused the mess are still making billions therefore we should not feel sorry for them in the slightest.

Just remember if the EU can order the Cypriot government to just take 10% of any bank savings without your say then who is to say the UK government won't do the same?

I would expect the time you can claim for any PPI to continue to go up and up until either the banks have dolled out all the money they said they set aside years ago but haven't given out yet. Or until the UK GDP rises above a single percentage point for more than 3 months in a row!

To anyone thinking of claiming their PPI back I would definitely recommend everyone to do the work themselves. It is not hard.

You can just write t o the banks customer complaints department and ask for all your loan details that had PPI on them, then write a letter back saying you want your PPI money for any of the following reasons:

1. You were not informed that the PPI protection would only last a year.
2. The PPI was added without your consent.
3. You were self employed which meant the PPI wouldn't cover you.
4. You were depressed or had another medical complaint that would have meant the insurance would not be paid out.
5. You were not informed you wouldn't get the insurance if you were sacked.
6. The PPI insurance was not fully explained to you at the time. Most of the employees who sold the PPI will be long gone and those that remain won't remember what  they said when they sold it to you. Therefore this is probably the best one to use as they will not be able to re-call what they said when they sold the loan to you.

A good thing to do is to write off to one of these PPI companies, get a payment pack sent to you and see what sort of questions they ask you to answer. All they do is use the answers and send the paper work off to the same places you could easily do. Therefore use these packs as a guide and write to the same Financial Ombusdman yourself if  the Bank doesn't pay out after your first letter of complaint.

Remember - this could be your chance of getting out of any recent debt. If they are going back 15 years then I would guess that the majority of adults in this country would have had a credit card or loan within than time. Even if you don't think you took PPI out it is worth checking in-case the bank added it on without your knowledge.

View the original article "Are the UK Government using PPI and Banks as a way to put money back into peoples pockets?" at www.darkpolitricks.com

The UK is in trouble, how do we fix it before it breaks?

By Dark Politricks

I have just watched the Andrew Marr show with his interview with David Cameron which covered an number of interesting matters such as the influence of lobbying and lobbyist especially his closeness betweeen the government and Rupert Murdoch, the economic crisis which has seen the UK enter a double dip recession.

Thinking of this interview and the state our country is in at the moment and with a bit of previous thought that has always remained in my consisouncess I believe we need to come up with a basic plan of steps that can help to restore our country.

These steps should not be ideologically bound and should be considered in a "what works, works" conceptiuial basis. Whether you are a Tory, Liberal or Socialist we all are suffering under the same problems and a solution that works should be considered whether or not it neatly fits inside your ideological view box or not.

The Economy

The private sector has not rushed into fill all the public sector jobs that are being lost. People are being put on the dole which increases government payments for jobseeker allowance and housing benefit and in turn increases the amount we need to borrow and therefore increases national debt. Therefore the question needs to be asked whether or not in makes more logical sense (and in turn basic mathematical sense) to keep on this track.

Many people might blame our tax rates and they might be right. If it can be proven that lower company taxes or a flat tax rate system will bring in more actual revenue to the governments coffers then I have no problem with it.

However corporation tax has already been dropped, our tax free allowance raised twice already, the higher rate of tax dropped from 50% to 45% and no influx of private sector jobs has occurred yet.

Here is something that ought not to be just a thought experiment. I would love to know if some university professor with too much time on his well paid hands has tried workig this out or not and please if anyone knows the answer let me in on it.

In the 1980's our PM of the time Maggie Thatcher went to war with the miners. Many mines were unprofitable but they supported whole villages and towns and were often the only place for people in the local area to work.

Therefore when the mines were closed whole swathes of the country were made unemployed and in time due to the 3 million unemployed people on the dole the government told the employment agency to shift people onto disability allowance if there were eve the slightest thing wrong with them so that the figures were reduced and they could claim success in the war against unemployment.

This is the same government (although a different generation) that is now trying to get people off the disability allowance they had put them on to help win elections. Hypocrisy?

There were no private companies in these places for the people to go to work in and most of the miners were unskilled manual labourers with little other skills. The only "fix" given by the government of the time was from Norman Tebit who said "Get on your bike" and look for work.

Many of these miners are still jobless and many of the towns and villages that were based around the mines are now desolate wastelands full of empty or broken houses, drugs, drink and other social problems.

Now if someone at the time of this massive descission could have done the maths and worked out whether over the next 20-30 years the amount of money spent in dole money, sickness and housing benefit, extra police, court and prison costs and all the other long term costs that come with massive social deprivation and compared it with the subsidies or lost money from the mines which would come out on top?

Is it better to have a town full of people all working, all feeding their familes, all with a sense of pride in their community living in a town with lower social deprivation at the cost of a government subsidy?

Put aside your libertarian or socialist views and consider it from a basic mathematical point of view. Which do you think costs more?

This is the question we should be asking now with the current public sector cuts. Without knowing the actual true cost of the massive mine closure over 30 years I would surmise that it is cheaper to keep people working and off multiple government subsidies (dole, housing etc) and keeping a loss making mine open - another government subsidy.

So it comes down to a simple question of which subsidy is more benefiial for society? The ones handed out in dole and police wages or the one keeping open the mine and along with it the town that works there.

Remember that the higher cost of current government subsidies for unemployed people has brought our borrowing levels up NOT down and it is only our low interest rates that have kept our heads above water and not turned the UK  into a permanent London riot all year long like Greece and Spain.

Stimulating the Economy

Just a few off the top of my head.

• Tax breaks for UK companies that make their products within the UK and don't offshore them to slave labour camps like China.
• Tax breaks for companies who hire long unemployed people e.g if you have been unemployed for over 1 year or even 6 months.
• More emphasis on ensuring companies are not hiring illegal migrants and keeping UK citizens out of jobs through the use of slave labour. A National Insurance card must be provided, photocopied and saved for every employee and provided on demand by people who's actual job is to prevent slave labour from occurring.
• Closing all tax loopholes and ensuring any international company who wants to sell their goods in one of the biggest markets in the world has a UK company setup on these shores and all relevant corporation tax paid to our treasury from that company.
• Setting up a UK PLC company that is owned by all the taxpayers of the country who will recieve dividends from the company each year - used to stimulate the company. They would battle in the economy like any other company for private work but for government contracts they should get first dibs - and why not I ask? The Labour government has shown us through PPI how much money was (and still will be for the next 20 odd years at least) on these private public investment schemes. The UK PLC company would be filled with UK workers with valid national insurance cards, the long term unemployed, ex prisoners, other people struggling to get work AND any other workers who apply to vacacnies when required. The only benefits this company would have compared to others is in the non private workspace e.g government contracts.

1. It gets first refusal on any government contract whether it be an IT system or new Hospital building or even just a maintenance role at a school. Why pay a private company hundreds of pounds to change a light bulb when we should be able to do it cheaply? Believe me through Gordon Browns PPI system we do pay hundreds of pounds to change light bulbs in hospitals and schools all around the country.
2. If it makes a profit the profit is divided between expanding the company and paying dividends to us taxpayers who will then use that money stimulating the economy in the private marketplace.
3. It is a first port of call for the long term unemployed and others seeking work to find a job working for their country.

Banking.

1. We need to create a national bank that has proper interest rates for savers and encourage people to save money again at a rate that makes it worthwhile.
2. We need a bank that is owned by the people of the country and is willing to loan out money to small businesses who are the companies who give people jobs.
3. We need a bank that is owned by the people that's job isn't to make money purely from money e.g gambling, as we know all the big players do with their high frequency trading and front running.
4. We need s bank that is owned by the people where the profit is given out to the shareholders of the company each year (the taxpayers of the country) and not in million pound bonuses to a few of their best AND most of their worst gamblers.
5. We already have huge stake-holds in more than one bank. We should take the whole thing over and turn it into a bank run for the people of the nation for the benefit of the nation.

Can you imagine as a working tax payer being given a yearly cheque for a few thousand pounds to spend as you wish because you as a taxpayer are also a shareholder in a national bank?

This is one way to stimulate the economy as well as incentivise people without jobs to get jobs and to start paying tax.

The European Union

We should leave the European Union as soon as possible. We should give them an ulimatium either make the whole shaky house of cards what is should have been a free trading zone, with free movement of people and goods and not a semi quasil supra government in which unelected people can weild enormous power and the elected EU government can weild little.

The Euro should never have gone ahead as it was clear to many people at the time that the North and South European countries were two totally different systems that would never mesh together and it was only with the help of the criminals at Goldman Sachs that allowed countries like Greece to hide their huge debts and get on board the Titanic with no-one noticing.

We will save money and keep our own embassies and seats at the UN instead of what is surely on the EU's roadmap a huge polical union like the USA in which the EU is the only embassy in each country and the EU Foreign Minister makes descisions for all European nations.

Whilst there are some good things in the EU there are plenty of bad and I cannot see the balance being tilted the other way anytime soon.

The case of Abu Qatada has shown our weakness in the face of unelected European judges and whilst I am happy to know that an appeal lodged at the European Court of Human Rights will take up to 7 years to be heard and maybe prevent Gary McKinnon from being deported to the USA the flipside is also true and it prevents us from deporting dangerous criminals like Abu Qatadar.

Law, Equality and Liberty

The case of Abu Qatadar brings me onto the legal system in the UK.

We should create our own Bill of Rights on the same lines as the US Bill of Rights and that every single person wether they be a policeman or royal is covered by the Bill and everyone in the UK is equal under the law.

I want to know 100% that I will be given the same treatment by the judiciary as the Queen if she let her pack of Corgi's maul a child to death or drink drive into a bus stop full of people killing many of them. Only when we are all equal under the same law - a British made law and one that is the highest law in the land can we call ourselves free and equal.

Alongside this the true "Freedom Bill" should be implemented post haste not the weak and feeble cut down version making its way through parliament at the moment. It is a disgusting stain on the Lib Dem's character that they allowed the Tories to rip out everything good about the bill and turn it into a wheel clampers justice bill.

These reforms will rebalance our extradition treaty with the USA, restore our right to silence under police interview, give back our right to protest near parliament and many more important laws the pro-surveillence governent of Labour (and now seemingly the coallition) had brought in.

The English should have their own parliament to solve the West Lothian question and to prevent Scottish MP's voting to raise UK students tuition fees whilst they can keep University free in their own country.

We should do away with this mismash of devolution which Tony Blair started and go the full hog. 

We should have full devolution for all 4 parts of the UK in which citizens of those countries vote for their local MP to sit in their countries parliament on matters that affect their country alone and then sit within the Westminister parliament when the matter is UK wide e.g whether to go to war, to sign treaties with other nations and other important UK matters.

The English parliament can sit in the Houses of Parliament in Westminster and matters covering the whole UK will involve members of parliament from the Scottish parliament, the Welsh parliament and the Northern Irish one.

Immigration

I live in a town that due to Joanna Lumley is no longer recoognisable due to the ex Gurka veterans (who I have no problem with at all) bringing their whole families over to live in this country. This would be fine if:

• They could speak English.
• They were not all given houses straight away, houses some of us have waited decades on the housing list for.
• They were not overloading our already strained and mercilessly cut public services.
• They would at least try and learn our culture and fit in. A thank you wave when you let someone through at a junction is not too much to ask - I know a little thing that many other people don't do but it's little things like this that really grind my gears (quote Peter Griffin)

People come to the UK from Africa with HIV and turn up at the nearest hospital and then given the best treatment around for free whilst someone who has live in this country their whole life and can trace their history back hundreds of years is treated contentably by the NHS when they have a serious illness.

I am not against immigration as it was badly needed after World War II and when English people won't take the jobs someone needs to do them.

• What I am against is the fact that whole swathes of the UK are now ghettos where a white person would feel threatened to walk at night.
• Where on a bus ride in certain towns you can hear a myriad of conversations, that is apart from English.
• Where if you open a door to a woman in a head scarf or let her pass in the street she won't even look at you in the eye let alone say thank you. I know their culture forbids it but this is Britain not Saudi Arabia and we treat women as equals not slaves therefore we should expect some modicum of "fitting in" if we are going to allow tens of millions of people all from various cultures into our country.

I feel that we should have tigther border controls and that anyone wishing to migrate to this country should be able to pass an entrace exam on our history as well as basic English before being allowed on our soil.

Once they have completed there exams they should be given a citenship ceremony in which they are presented their national insurance card. A card by the way which should be mandatory display at any doctors, hostpital or benefits agency. 

We all got them when we were 16 and any new immigrant should be proud to achieve the right to hold one. They are not national ID cards but they are a sign you are entitled to work, pay tax, claim benefits and this should include health care.

Not only will this help social cohesion it will install a sense of pride at achieving British Citizenship. We should abolish the stupid tests Labour brought in which were more about how to claim benefits than history and our existing culture. Labour ruined this country in more ways than can be counted.

We want people who want to live here and accept our way our life. I don't want our government sending troops to foreign lands so that they can say that "we fight them over there so we don't fight them over here"  whilst at the same time we have thousands of men and women within our shores looking at our culture in disgust and planning payback for all that "collateral damage" we do across the world. It goes both ways and I definitely don't agree with the wars we are in.

There are so many other things I could go on about including stopping the wars, ending the surveillence state, removing our tongue from the USA's ass and much more but I think I have said enough for one morning. Lets cross our fingers and pray to the great big Spaghetti monster in the sky that some of it becomes true.

Are protest votes wasted votes

Are Protest Votes Wasted Or Necessary?

By Dark Politricks

Here in the UK we are gearing up for the general election which must be held by next June. The general perception of the outcome seems to be that the Tories will win but the size of the defeat is still up for debate. It could range from a very small majority to a massive swing to the right on the same magnitude as Labours historic win in 97. Therefore with the result of the election in all probability decided already is there any point in voting for anyone other than Tory at the next election?

The recent history of elections has shown that a large segment of British society is prepared to vote outside the main 3 parties in what can be termed by those who expect conformity and consistency in voting patterns “protest votes”. 

In the recent European elections UKIP, the BNP and the Greens all managed to win seats. History shows that elections to the European parliament have always been a way for the British public to vent frustration at the current UK government at the same time as not having to worry about the consequences of their actions due to the very limited power that the EU parliament can exert over EU policy.

In very basic terms a protest vote to the UK Independence Party (UKIP) tells Gordon Brown and co how unhappy you are about the rapidly expanding power of the EU, the broken promises about referendums on the Lisbon treaty and the general lack of democracy that the EU in its current form entails.

A vote to the racist British National Party shows the government that your concerned about uncontrolled immigration. Free flats to asylum seekers and long waiting lists for nationals. Overcrowded NHS services and jobs being taken by those willing to work for a much lower wage than the British worker is used to.

A large percentage of people voting for the BNP probably didn’t even consider themselves as racist or even agree with the majority that the party believes in, however the protest vote seems to have worked. Since the European election Labour has started to sound a lot tougher on immigration. At the last election when Michael Howard tried to make immigration an election topic he was deemed to have lurched to the right and it was considered as a major reason for him losing the election. However it seems times have changed and more importantly Labour is so far behind in the polls it doesn’t want to be losing votes to those parties that are willing to tackle the question of immigration.

Limits on the number of non EU immigrants have been brought in with a new point system. A system to ensure that newly advertised jobs must be offered to nationals first before going to foreign workers has been introduced. There is a new UK Border Agency to secure, monitor and control entry into the country. 

Asylum claims have been speeded up and more people are getting deported but more importantly than that the dialogue used by Labour politicians has changed from a purely “immigration is good for the UK” standpoint to one in which Gordon Brown can say in a speech that he wanted “British jobs for British workers”. In fact since the BNP started winning council and European seats numerous Labour ministers have spoken publicly about how Labour dropped the ball on immigration and have to tackle this topic if they are not to lose more ground to the BNP.

Therefore it seems that the threat of the BNP gaining support from disillusioned working class whites has had the effect of making Labour reconsider or at least re-market its policy on immigration in such a way as to reach out to this constituency which they used to consider their core supporters. However they haven’t moved to tackle the other and more importantly larger group of protest voters which are those people who voted for UKIP.

The Conservative party has always had a problem with its MP’s in that on the topic of Europe and they are split between Eurosceptics and Europhiles with both policy and rhetoric swinging between these two points of view. With David Cameron and William Hague as Foreign Secretary the Tories seem to be trying to reach out to UKIP supporters with their recent European policies. They have broken away from the major centre right group the in the EU parliament the EPP and created a new anti-federalist reformist group along with some other right wing parties from Eastern Europe.

They also tried to appeal to the majority of the British public who were outraged at Labours broken promise of a referendum on the Lisbon treaty by promising a referendum of their own on the treaty. However due to the fact that the treaty has now been implemented across Europe due to the Czech republic finally signing it they decided to drop this promise much to the outrage of public and MP’s alike. 

Both main parties have now broken promises to hold a referendum on Europe. This is a vote that the British electorate are itching to have seeing that the majority of people have never been asked their opinion on Britain’s role in Europe. 

Even those people that did vote in the last referendum in 1975 only voted for whether the UK should join the EEC which was at the time a free trade zone and not a political entity with federalist super-state trappings. Therefore a large proportion of the British people feel betrayed by this rail-roading of the country into a Euro-State something that right or wrong they feel they should be asked about.

Therefore a party like UKIP with the charismatic Nigel Farage as their leader has a good chance on capitalizing on this growing resentment and anger at broken promises. Add to this the public outrage with the recent MP expenses scandal which has tarred all the major parties at Westminster and it might just be the right point in time for people to consider making a protest vote at the next election and for it to actually count for once at a national level.

Nigel said in his recent conference speech that UKIP would be putting candidates up for every seat in the next election. This means that everyone has a chance of expressing their anger at the increasing lack of democracy within this country by voting for a party that would offer the country a chance to finally express their opinion on the matter. People might consider that UKIP is a one policy party and I would tend to agree however this one policy is one that matters to anyone who cares about democracy and our place within Europe.

The EU is a blatantly undemocratic entity which has just been proven by the recent installation of the new EU president Herman van Rompuy and Foreign Minister Baroness Catherine Ashton. Both of these people have been put into powerful positions without the consent of the people of Europe. There was no election which enabled the people of Europe to choose for themselves the right person for the job. Instead these two people, who have never won any kind of election on a national level, were chosen by our EU leaders for their own reasons.

Poll after poll has shown that the majority of British people want to belong to a Europe of nation states where each country has full control over its own economy, law and borders. They believe in free trade and movement of goods, services and people across Europe but they don’t want a federal super state. Although our politicians are very good at telling us that the EU is not turning into a federal super state it sure does seem that way.

The EU has given itself all the trappings of a country with a European national anthem, a flag, a president of Europe, soon to be embassies around the world and a seat at the UN as well as all the shared laws rules and regulations. 

Many people all across Europe see the formation of a single federal entity as desirable and I am someone who can definitely see the benefits that being part of Europe has brought to the UK. However on a point of principle the people of this country should have the chance to decide on what kind of relationship they want to have with Europe.

Therefore I am seriously considering using my vote at the next election to vote for UKIP. I live in a constituency that always unfortunately votes Tory and has done for time memorable. Therefore a vote for any other party is wasted anyway as there is no chance that Labour or the Liberals would manage to capture this seat. 

However even if UKIP doesn’t win many seats, if they can get enough votes to show the probably new Conservative government that the country considers the EU question important enough to vote for a single issue party like UKIP, then because the Tories are so split on this issue, there is a good chance the Tories will have to consider giving the people a vote on the matter.

Recent election results have shown that protest votes do work. Even if the party in question is not elected the large percentage of votes they collect means that the public’s decision has an effect on the behaviour and policies of the major parties, especially those parties who have shrinking support or small majorities in parliament. 

Every vote counts and these main parties require the votes of not only their core base but those people in the centre as well as those people who are considering changing their vote from another party. The good thing is that people who are concerned about the lack of democracy that our current position in Europe entails as well as the lack of democracy at home by not giving the people the right to choose their own destiny, exist on all sides of the political spectrum.

Probability theory states that UKIP will not win the next general election and the Tories will. A victorious Tory government with a large majority are less likely to be influenced by public unease over Europe than a small majority that is scared of losing every seat. 

Therefore if you are unhappy with the current state of British politics, angry at the greed shown up by the expenses scandal and concerned about Europe and the lack of democracy, then I would urge you to think about voting UKIP in the next election. 

Even if they do no win, we maybe able to influence government policy, by showing the level of support for a party that wants to give the British public a vote on their own future in Europe.

By Dark Politricks

© 2009 Dark Politricks