The BNP promises voters that they can both increase spending on our public services and cut your taxes at the same time, all the while restoring the nation’s finances to a sound footing.
But their plans for the nation’s finances simply don’t add up. A BNP government would almost certainly have to raise taxes, cut spending and bankrupt the public services.
Here’s why:
- No credibility on spending. The BNP have made no attempt to cost their policies, or choose priorities. As discussed yesterday, the BNP plans to spend hundreds of billions on buying up foreign companies and our utilities, while all the while boosting spending on the NHS and education and quintupling border controls.
- A preference for printing money. If this wasn’t enough to make international investors take flight, the BNP’s own attitudes to inflation is all too clear. Their 1997 manifesto went so far as to argue that all government expenditure could be fair for by printing money. With the structural deficit looming, it seems unlikely that the BNP government would resist the temptation to inflate away some of the debt.
- The risk premium rockets. With understandable fears about inflation and default looming, the cost of Britain’s borrowing would jump. The BNP want to turn back the clock on our economy, and the resulting worry is that our interest rates would go back up to those we had in the 1970s, at about 12%. The cost of our debt could triple to £90 bn, more than education, defence and transport combined.
- The new era of cuts. With £90 bn added to the structural deficit, the BNP would have no choice but to start massive, across the board cuts. Soldiers would lose on equipment. Hospitals short of doctors, the rationing of drugs clamped down on. Schools would grow tatty and overcrowded, all building work shut down. Teachers, nurses and squaddies would see their wages fall.
- Inflation returns. But that is unlikely to be enough to close down the gap. Inflation will have to take some of the burden. The prices of ordinary goods will start to rocket, the value of wages will go down and everyone in Britain will find themselves suddenly a whole lot poorer.
Tags: policy
Policy Focus #19: How a normal, respectable, decent, christian-valued political party turned into an absolute laughing stock…
How that party turned its back on good old fashioned christian values to embrace islam and homosexuality…
Nothing British about the CONservatives!
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
2
“Hospitals short of doctors, the rationing of drugs clamped down on. Schools would grow tatty and overcrowded, all building work shut down. Teachers, nurses and squaddies would see their wages fall.”
Cue the tumbleweed…
Yet more apocalyptic conjecture from the would-be governors of our beleaguered nation!!!
Vote BNP to stop this nonsense!
Hot debate. What do you think?
22 
2
You don’t seem to have taken on-board the comments on previous articles! A BNP government would CUT OVERAL SPENDING in the various ways outlined in previous comments. You’d be amazed out much less spending will be possible when you’ve created 3 million jobs by repatriating foreign workers and getting unemployed Brits back into work.
Further the BNP considers that many public sector workers are overpaid, and quite a few simply surplus to requirements. The overpaid ones will be getting pay cuts and the surplus ones, starting with anyone with “diversity”, “outreach”, “LGBT” or “BME” in their jobs titles will be getting the boot.
What you fail to appreciate is that a lot of New Labour’s spending is simply dane geld to pacify their millions of imported voters (commonwealth and EU citizens can vote in the UK) and once we don’t have the immigrants we won’t need to pay the dane geld.
If you really want people to vote Tory try getting a bit more hardline on immigration (ie, not a points system, just send them back!) and the EU. Then some of the BNP supporters who come to your site for their daily amusement might actually consider voting Conservative.
Hot debate. What do you think?
21 
2
Nationalist, we’ve already explained why its an economic fallacy to assume that immigrants take jobs.
The recent House of Lord report on immigration concluded that it had zero effect on the UK’s fiscal position
Hot debate. What do you think?
2 
22
I think what you talk about in your headline will happen under a Conservative government which will be the effect of dealing with Labour’s mess.
Our currency is devaluing, inflation is up, cuts will be made in public services to try & get to grips with the debt & deficit.
Except the Conservatives won’t slaughter the holy cows of QUANGO’s & foreign aid the BNP would.
How “The recent House of Lord report on immigration concluded that it had zero effect on the UK’s fiscal position” beggars belief.
Many of us can point to examples of how immigration has cost us money.
For example just pick one foreign criminal & the cost of prosecution & imprisonment for a start.
What about the well publicised cases of immigrants in million pound “council” housing?
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
2
This is all very good, and glad to see there’s some research being done. But on the practical side of how we alleviate the country’s finances of immigrants, how do we identify third generation immigrants?
They are statistically invisible i.e. they are born to mothers/father who were themselves born here.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Nationalist
I have suggested many times to NB how the Conservatives could see off the BNP & get a landslide victory by giving the voters what they want.
But they never explain why they won’t do it.
Both Jonathan & Maurice explain that they are not members of the Conservative party & are not privy to that information!
My theory is that the Conservatives have sold their souls for the trappings of power, they are signed up to an agenda which we don’t get a say on.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
1
Bilderberg puppets.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
4
WTF, I think the Tories are suffering from a failure of nerve at the moment. They’ve got some sort of Stockholm syndrome from being under the New Labour cosh for so long. New Labour shouts schools ‘n’ ‘ospitals and the Conservatives cower in the corner.
It’s not helping that the Party is now run by an ultra-wealthy coterie of old Etonians, rather than say, a grocer’s daughter. From the top of the Ivory Tower it’s difficult to see any problems.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
0
The BNP have never worked out the cost of their proposed policies for the simple reason that they know they will never be in a position to govern.
Lets be realistic, the BNP are only a very small party and the majority of the public find Nick Griffin much too unsavoury to vote for. So you BNPers out there had better hope and pray that UKIP get enough MPs to show Cameron that we don’t appreciate his new brand of “progressive” conservatism.
I’ve voted conservative in the past, but this new branding has forced me into voting for a smaller party who actually represents my views and I’m sure there are millions of others just like me.
Hot debate. What do you think?
4 
15
And if it doesn’t play out to your liking you’ll up sticks and go and ride ponies on a ranch in Virginia, yeah, we know.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
3
You are right in at least one respect Lauren, UKIP is the BNP’s biggest problem. Many disaffected former LibLabCon supporters looking for a new political home buy into the tabloid mythology of the BNP being racist, facist, Nazi etc and steer clear and head to UKIP instead.
The BNP needs to reach some accommodation with UKIP. The BNP also needs to communicate the message to the public that it is not Nazi, fascist, racist or even socialist. At the moment the media rarely cover BNP policy dispassionately. The tabloids are much keener to drum up sales with tales of skin-headed BNP stormtroopers goose-stepping down the High Street (and of course the journalists writing such stories earn brownie points from the government as well.)
I’m not sure why you consider Nick Griffin “unsavoury”. It’s true he has a past; he’s been a member of parties which had racist policies, but as soon as he gained control of a party, the modern BNP, he moved it away from all that onto more reasonable ground. If he hadn’t plenty of us, including me, would not be supporting him.
It’s also true he has a criminal record. But New Labour has so abrogated our right to free speech that it’s difficult to oppose them without breaking the law, and although most of us simply get away with it, Nick Griffin is New Labour’s Public Enemy Number 1 and is always under scrutiny and liable to prosecution. He could even end up in jail due to the current EHRC court case; and if he does, I for one, will just support him even more for having the guts to take on the quangocracy at any personal cost.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
0
Lauren,do you expect UKIP to be in a position to form a government ?
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
“The cost to British taxpayers, who help to fund appeals from immigrant families whose relatives are refused UK visas, totals as much as £50 million each year”.
There’s one for starters Maurice.Or is £50 million just loose change to you?
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
0
“The cost to British taxpayers, who help to fund appeals from immigrant families whose relatives are refused UK visas, totals as much as £50 million each year.”
There’s one for starters Jonathan. Or is £50 million just loose change to you?
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
I don’t see, factoring in the cost of old age, illness and housing, how permanent immigration can ever be of net gain to any nation. Guest workers maybe but permanent settlers only add to the numbers. We have funded vast immigration by borrowing. We will all pay the price and those who have spent years bleating ridiculous, liberal platitudes will feel extremely sad and silly.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
MLJ, immigrants pay taxes like the rest of us. They’re no more of a burden than anybody else in the nation.
Hot debate. What do you think?
0 
14
What’s this – a new form of censorship? Why are you placing my comments way out of place and context????
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
I know that feeling MLJ, I think there is a glitch in the Matrix, I have seen the same black cat walk past the door twice now!
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Why would anyone argue in favour of mass immigration unless they can put their hand on their heart and say that they are happy to give up their job, their home and their very life for the benefit of a newcomer? That has to be the ultimate conclusion of what the government has done. Now, I’m not a saint so I can’t say that – I don’t want to give up what I feel is legitimately mine.
Don’t let anyone believe that a country pile in Hampshire or whichever select location, will remain unscathed, because in the end, it won’t. The toffs will see exactly the same things happening to their landscape as we ordinary mortals have suffered in the past 10 years.And there won’t be a thing they can do about it.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
So the idea of British jobs for British workers disgusts you tories does it?
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
2
So what is the difference between the tories and liebour?
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
2
I give up, what is the difference?
Ah blue ties not red ones!
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Where are my comments going? I answer your questions JD and my answers are deleted. The page says there 39 responses to this article but only 28 are visible.
You’re busted!
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
I haven’t deleted any comments from you today Nationalist. Try again?
Like or Dislike:
0 
4
Ah it’s that glitch in the Matrix I was talking about or the Ghost in the machine?
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Those BNP doubters dont care to explain how,leaving the EU and all its restrictions and daily cost of over £46 million,not giving £12 Billion in foreign aid,regaining our fishing rights and promoting our excelent farmers will cost our country`s future? Oh..and getting shut of over 10,000 foreign criminals in our prisons!
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
0
“Fire teachers”? surely that’s your policy? (The ones who don’t tow the establishment line anyway).
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
I certainly would reduce spending on education. In spite of money being thrown at this particular black hole, with computers all over the place (part of the problem?) and the highest teacher to pupil ratio ever, the results are appaliing.
Exam passes are not down to better education nor pupil achievement. They are down to “educationalists” feathering and protecting their nests. My recently retired schoolteacher friends assure me that in the latter decades of their profession, their job was to turn up, obey the increasing number of deputy heads (most of whom seldom appear in classrooms) and do anything but instill education.
Time to go back to basics! (Funny, I remember when I was a member of the Conservative Party, that being a slogan. O tempora! O mores!).
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
If my memory searves me Dupont has something to do with the communist gang known as seachlight.Howver he and his ilk will be the first ones to come crying to the BNP when his islamic mates turn on him and his ilk.So will the rats who run Nothing British.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
The question is on the economy. The BNP would rightly end foreign aid saving £8 billion, pull out of Afghanistan and withdraw from the EU. The problem is this only saves about £16 billion, we have a deficit of £178 billion. We need deep and savage cuts to public sector spending including public sector pensions.
The repatriation policy is a vote loser for the BNP, those not born here and their offspring should be encouraged to leave by removing their right to free healthcare and education and replacing it with a charge for education of £6,000 per person and £2,500 for NHS cover. For an average pakistani family of two adults and five children this would cost £59,500 a year, would they stay and pay? I think not.
Britain can be sorted out but it needs a leader with guts and voters prepared to suffer in the short term for our countries long term good, that is what our people did during WW2.
Me, I’m not that man, just a voice crying out in the wilderness, if you would like a full explanation on policies I believe can solve Britain’s problems visit http://www.vocalize.org.uk.
I wrote this site last April, i see no reason to change my views today.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
“The recent House of Lord report on immigration concluded that it had zero effect on the UK’s fiscal position”
We’re not blaming immigrants for our current “fiscal position”…
We’re blaming the political elite like you!
Hot debate. What do you think?
15 
2
Never worked in construction have you Jonathan? You ain’t got a clue son.
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
5
JD, I assume you are refering to this report:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeconaf/82/82.pdf
The very first paragraph of the abstract says:
“Immigration has become highly significant to the UK economy: immigrants comprise 12% of the total workforce—and a much higher proportion in London.
However, we have found no evidence for the argument, made by the Government, business and many others, that net immigration—immigration minus emigration— generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population.”
I wrote a detailed critique when the report was published; available here:
http://britishnationalist.blogspot.com/2008/04/mass-immigration-is-bad-for-uk.html
Then gist of my response was that New Labour likes to run the immigration debate on its terms. It points to a boosted GDP as though that were an unalloyed benefit and points to immigrants paying taxes without wanting to view the flip side of services consumed by immigrants (roads, schools, hospitals, etc) and of job vacancies and self-employment business opportunities taken by them leaving a massive social security bill (now roughly £200bn pa) to be paid by the rest of us to support the unemployed.
And I’m sorry to say, but if the Conservatives still regard immigrantion as broadly neutral rather than a major disaster for the UK then they have no feel for the mood of the general British public and aren’t going to be garnering many votes.
JD, your efforts would be far better spent changing the Conservatives rather than attacking the BNP. The BNP would melt away if a major party actually tackled the issues important to ordinary people.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
2
Nationalist, you can’t have it both ways. You earlier argued that immigration was a severe cost to the UK economy and we could save lots of money by ending it, you’re now agreeing that it doesn’t have any effect.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4
I never intended to say that immigration didn’t have any effect on the UK. I believe it be a massive drain on the exchequer and very bad for anyone already resident in the UK.
Of course it’s very good for the government, which is why they like it. Immigrants vote Labour and have other benefical effects for the government.
Big business also likes it: cheap workers, and drives down wages generally, which is why the Tories won’t oppose it.
The only loser is the ordinary British working man or woman who has to pay more for housing, earn less for working (if they can even get a job) while standing behind a long line of immigrants to see a doctor, get a child in school or even drive down the road.
It is grotesquely unfair that a British worker who wants to keep a spouse and put a roof over the heads of a couple of children should have to compete for work against a bunch of immigrants living 10 to a house including a few sleeping in the kitchen. There’s no way the Brit can work on the same terms as the immigrant and it’s not surprising many now live permanently on welfare (paid for by us the taxpayers of course.)
And if there’s no future for the ordinary British working man and woman then in the long run there’s no future for the country either.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Okay, Nationalist – sorry if I misunderstood you. You completely disagree with the House of Lords report then? (Which is fine – I’m not sure I agree with all of it either).
But where is your evidence that immigration costs the taxpayer and drives down wages? Not just anecdotes please, but actual hard numbers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
No I agree with their Lordships that immigration is not a net benefit to the UK.
Plenty of “actual hard numbers” can be obtained here;
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org
Here are some hard numbers from the Daily Mail:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231150/Mapping-strain-NHS-243-sick-babies-treated-London-hospital-ward—just-18-mothers-born-UK.html
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Yes, but they think its not a net loss either – again, you either agree with them or you don’t.
Which point of Migrationwatch’s work were you referring to?
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Ooh that was wicked but true Required!
I do wonder if Lauren will be jumping from the frying pan into the fire though?
I however will be staying put, as this website needs me!
It doesn’t?
Oh dear, now I have hurt feelings!
Maybe my country needs me?
Anyway I am staying & hoping for the best, preparing for the worst!
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
I agree with the report that there’s no net benefit but disagree about the scale of the downside. They haven’t factored in the social costs. Also they haven’t disaggregated the “good” immigration (rich, clever migrants from 1st world countries) from “bad” migration (non-English speaking, bringing no money, taking low-skill jobs for which we have plenty of takers.) By adding the tax bills of American bankers into the equation they can almost balance the books.
MigrationWatch is a source for immigration numbers. (They collate rather than do much original research; the underlying authority is usually the government.)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
No I think Lauren expects a few more MP’s than the BNP, maybe that will lift the lid on a few things, block some of the excesses?
It will be a strange election, lots of new faces, a mixture of extreme apathy from some, with others like us straining to get up there & vote, hoping this nightmare can be changed.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
If trends forcasters like Gerald Celente are right, then the worst is to com. GUI.
Like or Dislike:
5 
2
Nicholas,
No I don’t expect UKIP to form a government. They are a Tory pressure group who will hopefully gain enough MPs to make life more difficult for the new brand of socialist conservatives.
I’m just trying to be realistic here, I’m not expecting miracles.
Both UKIP and the BNP are going to get torn to shreds by the press in the run up to the election so we need to stop bickering with one another and pull together to survive the onslaught which will be starting soon.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
1
I think UKIP maybe talked up at the expense of the BNP running into the election.
Hopefully afterwards the resulting MP’s can co-operate on areas where policies overlap to achieve something to challenge the mainstream politics, that I want most of all.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Yes, but the debate isn’t about immigration numbers – its about the fiscal cost of immigration. Where do MigrationWatch argue that it causes a negative effect? I’m genuinely interested.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
No Jonathan, there’s lots of evidence that a fair few of them don’t pay taxes like the rest of us.
Certain immigrant communities have a high proportion of non working benefit receiving members.
But there are also white communities in ex mining towns for example, who have been left idle & abandoned by succesive governments, there are various theories to why that it is.
But why bring the immigrants in then?
Is it a double edged sword to destroy Britain’s culture & identity from within & without?
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
0
But you know that the country is already struggling financially – there is a huge government deficit and immigration costs a great deal in extra services and benefits.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
MigrationWatch make their arguments here:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPapers
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Do you vote Labour? or are the Tories the same thing now? I wonder why people are turning to the BNP and UKIP?
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Yes, Nationalist, I’ve read MigrationWatch’s site, but which part were you pointing to – where does it claim a massive negative fiscal impact?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
MLJ, there isn’t any evidence for that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So where’s our dialog about MigrationWatch then?
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
0
Honestly, no idea. I didn’t delete it. Very strange.
The last thing I remember asking you was where on the site you saw evidence that immigration was a fiscal loss to the UK government.
Hot debate. What do you think?
0 
8
Nationalist,
Nick Griffin and Mark Collett have done irreversible damage to the BNP and the character assassination by the media is never going abate. Your party is never going to have mass appeal, as most people want to keep their distance from extremist views, can’t you at least see that?
Do you know what happens to all the money that you donate to your party? I’ll bet you don’t
Was Nick Griffin capable of defending his party on QT? No he wasn’t He crumbled because he has too much negative history to defend. If all of the small Nationalist parties joined together maybe then you might actually get somewhere, but that’s not going to happen is it?
Hot debate. What do you think?
1 
10
Well Said Nationalist, I agree with your views 100%.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Indeed, and I answered and now the comment is gone.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Makes you think that Jonathan didn’t like your answer. Doesn’t it?
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Well we don’t need to do much about 3rd generation immigrants unless they are a burden on the state?
If they want to go “home” then fine.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
0
Do you REALLY expect free speech here?
Maurice and Co appear to be a minority who cannot get enough support so their only reaction is to delete posts or ignore them.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0