Robin9 wrote:

'Recliner[_3_ Wrote:
;155440']Robin9 wrote:-

-

Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they
can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly
that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet
dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of
motorists.-

The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky
to
get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP
by
the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum,
regardless of the result, what will be its point?

If Ukip had done as I suggest, their share of the vote
would be much higher. I agree they will come nowhere in
the current Mayoral election.

It would be interesting to see how well a pro-motorist candidate did in the
London mayoral elections. I don't see any on this year's list:

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-v...o-you-can-vote

UKIP has other baggage, so even if the UKIP candidate was pro-motorist, it
would be overshadowed by other considerations that usually make UKIP do
badly in London. It would be a better test if there was someone promoting
those policies alone, and not the usual UKIP stuff. For example, Peter
Whittle's manifesto has these policies:

- End open borders and introduce an Australian style points system [What
has this to do with the London mayor?]

- Build more houses across London and ensure Londoners have priority in
social housing [How?]

- Scrap council translation services and reinvest the money into London's
communities [I don't think this comes under the mayor]

- Support police stop and search powers to help reduce knife crime and save
young lives

- Cut immigration and tax vacant foreign owned properties to reduce
pressure on London's housing [I don't think these come under a London
mayor]

-----

So he's repeating familiar UKIP policies that aren't relevant to the
mayor's powers, but not mentioning things that are, such as public
transport investment, fares, roads, congestion charge, local pollution,
taxis, planning permission for new tall buildings, council tax levels,
cycling, etc. He also tells us nothing about why he would be qualified for
the job.

He's obviously not a serious candidate, any more than UKIP is a serious
party. Compare his absent policies and cv with the much more specific,
relevant manifesto pledges by the only two serious candidates:

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...ate-sadiq-khan

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...-zac-goldsmith


Even other no-hopers at least have serious manifestos:

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...roline-pidgeon

https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...ate-sian-berry