Hermeneutics is the interpretation of texts. Usually these are biblical texts but all textual material can be subjected to a hermeneutic.
Yesterday I received my first election text. It arrived hot from the UKIP presses and the front cover stated boldly that it contained information about what a UKIP Government would do and positioned beneath a Union Flag and above an acclamatory image of raised hands it declared that it offered: Policies for People.
But which policies for which people?
Inside the leaflet a series of very specific paragraph headings declare in bold exactly what policies are proposed. For example, who would not wish to see jobs protected and prosperity increased? However as you read the the paragraph in detail what is being promised is a renegotiation of our relationship with the European Economic Community. Reviewing legislation and removing laws which 'hamper British prosperity'. A particular issue for UKIP is the free movement of labour which 'prevents the UK managing its own borders.
This protectionist attitude challenges the views of many British Employers that isolating ourselves from Europe will not lead to prosperity but will adversely affect trade and profitability.
But as you read the leaflet this pattern of positive statements which in one context might be viewed as progressive are interpreted in ways that are simply regressive.
Along with the Con-Dem Coalition, UKIP aims to repair the UK economy, they don't use the word broken, but it is implicit if the economy needs to be repaired, but this does not mean, setting people back to work or introducing a living wage or a basic citizens income.
The mechanism that UKIP propose is simply amending the tax burden for individuals, increasing allowances, abolishing inheritance tax, lowering the higher rate of tax and introducing a turnover tax on businesses.
It is hard to know how these proposals can be represented as policies for people? The old socialist campaigner Tony Benn always had a line in his speeches when he visited or revisited a town, 'I arrived earlier today' he would say 'and had a chance to look around, you know, there's so much which needs doing to improve the environment, so many people needing support, yet we have thousands out of work, why not set them to work to improve the environment or care for others'?
The fact is that the tragic loss of public sector jobs has not been compensated by new jobs being created, so much of what has been lost has been replaced by minimum wage, part-time, zero hours contracts or 'self-employment'.
If UKIP were serious about repairing the economy it is this level of damage that needs to be addressed ensuring that the divisions and disparities that have been introduced and encouraged are closed and society is restored.
At first the section entitle prioritising Education and Skills is encouraging but as you read on it becomes clear that UKIP's real emphasis is the promotion of nostalgia without recognising that nostalgia is not what it used to be. So the detail of its policies with regard to education is essentially a return to the 1950's (of course for many potential UKIP supporters there's nothing wrong with that), but as we welcome back Grammar Schools under a UKIP Government at what point will we recall the many and compelling reasons why Comprehensive Education was introduced?
In each section of the leaflet, which presumably echoes the manifesto to a greater or lesser degree, UKIP's policies are seen as a fuzzy mixture of the desirable, the undesirable and the populist.
Seeking to reduce the debts we leave our grandchildren UKIP proposes to leave the EU, cut foreign aid, scrap HS2, scrap green subsidies and abolish the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. If any of these proposals do in fact reduce the tax burden and leave a surplus for our grandchildren imagine for a minute what a grey, fragile, isolated country we will bequeath them instead.
Who wouldn't wish to honour our military assets and personnel but does the guarantee of a job for those who have served in the armed forces for a minimum of twelve years, in either the police, prison service or border force equal honouring that service?
It is good to note that the media description of UKIP introducing an insurance based health service is wrong, they will ensure, we are assured that the NHS will continue to be free at the point of delivery and time of need. But it would be wrong to imagine that the Kingdom of Bevan will continue to be nigh! Visitors and Migrants have to pay NI for 5 years and until then they will require approved private health insurance.
The twin themes of the leaflet are clear, leaving the EU, abandoning Green Policies, controls and taxes, an appeal to nostalgia and a return to the Britain of the 1950's. Tucked into each section under its straightforward heading can be found a number of interesting twists and turns. Anyone positively attracted by an offer such as 'more free parking in the High Street' or in Hospitals or 'properly ventilated smoking rooms in pubs' needs to remind themselves about how the limitations and charges were introduced in the first place.
UKIP is not proposing the end of the requirement to wear a seat belt in a car. It demonstrably saves lives and has cut down on emergency admissions to hospital. It is generally accepted as sensible legislation and even a populist Government wouldn't now change the law. So under Transport it is not mentioned. Instead populist policies regarding Toll Roads, Free Bus Passes for pensioners, HS2 and the use of speed cameras as revenue raisers are all targeted. But the anti EU little englander attitude is reflected in the requirement that visitors to the UK will have to buy a Britdisc before they can drive on our roads?
I am not an economist but I do find myself thinking that the proposals and policies contained in the leaflet have neither been properly costed or subject to stress testing. New layers of administration are proposed, County Health boards for example, new Quangos will be required, the savings do not seem to equal the cost increases implied in the rafts of new legislation and it is hard to see how savings made from leaving the EU are balanced by the loss of jobs and income derived from continued membership.
I nearly binned the leaflet without reading it. I'm glad that I didn't but I find it scary. The only saving grace is that whatever happens on May 7th the likelihood of a UKIP Government being elected is pretty remote and so, viewing the document as a gadfly and a call for change in the way our national affairs are run, some of the proposals certainly stimulate radical thoughts.
Takes me back to the heady days when politics were conducted in smoke filled rooms where real ale was served in pewter tankards.
Yesterday I received my first election text. It arrived hot from the UKIP presses and the front cover stated boldly that it contained information about what a UKIP Government would do and positioned beneath a Union Flag and above an acclamatory image of raised hands it declared that it offered: Policies for People.
But which policies for which people?
Inside the leaflet a series of very specific paragraph headings declare in bold exactly what policies are proposed. For example, who would not wish to see jobs protected and prosperity increased? However as you read the the paragraph in detail what is being promised is a renegotiation of our relationship with the European Economic Community. Reviewing legislation and removing laws which 'hamper British prosperity'. A particular issue for UKIP is the free movement of labour which 'prevents the UK managing its own borders.
This protectionist attitude challenges the views of many British Employers that isolating ourselves from Europe will not lead to prosperity but will adversely affect trade and profitability.
But as you read the leaflet this pattern of positive statements which in one context might be viewed as progressive are interpreted in ways that are simply regressive.
Along with the Con-Dem Coalition, UKIP aims to repair the UK economy, they don't use the word broken, but it is implicit if the economy needs to be repaired, but this does not mean, setting people back to work or introducing a living wage or a basic citizens income.
The mechanism that UKIP propose is simply amending the tax burden for individuals, increasing allowances, abolishing inheritance tax, lowering the higher rate of tax and introducing a turnover tax on businesses.
It is hard to know how these proposals can be represented as policies for people? The old socialist campaigner Tony Benn always had a line in his speeches when he visited or revisited a town, 'I arrived earlier today' he would say 'and had a chance to look around, you know, there's so much which needs doing to improve the environment, so many people needing support, yet we have thousands out of work, why not set them to work to improve the environment or care for others'?
The fact is that the tragic loss of public sector jobs has not been compensated by new jobs being created, so much of what has been lost has been replaced by minimum wage, part-time, zero hours contracts or 'self-employment'.
If UKIP were serious about repairing the economy it is this level of damage that needs to be addressed ensuring that the divisions and disparities that have been introduced and encouraged are closed and society is restored.
At first the section entitle prioritising Education and Skills is encouraging but as you read on it becomes clear that UKIP's real emphasis is the promotion of nostalgia without recognising that nostalgia is not what it used to be. So the detail of its policies with regard to education is essentially a return to the 1950's (of course for many potential UKIP supporters there's nothing wrong with that), but as we welcome back Grammar Schools under a UKIP Government at what point will we recall the many and compelling reasons why Comprehensive Education was introduced?
In each section of the leaflet, which presumably echoes the manifesto to a greater or lesser degree, UKIP's policies are seen as a fuzzy mixture of the desirable, the undesirable and the populist.
Seeking to reduce the debts we leave our grandchildren UKIP proposes to leave the EU, cut foreign aid, scrap HS2, scrap green subsidies and abolish the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. If any of these proposals do in fact reduce the tax burden and leave a surplus for our grandchildren imagine for a minute what a grey, fragile, isolated country we will bequeath them instead.
Who wouldn't wish to honour our military assets and personnel but does the guarantee of a job for those who have served in the armed forces for a minimum of twelve years, in either the police, prison service or border force equal honouring that service?
It is good to note that the media description of UKIP introducing an insurance based health service is wrong, they will ensure, we are assured that the NHS will continue to be free at the point of delivery and time of need. But it would be wrong to imagine that the Kingdom of Bevan will continue to be nigh! Visitors and Migrants have to pay NI for 5 years and until then they will require approved private health insurance.
The twin themes of the leaflet are clear, leaving the EU, abandoning Green Policies, controls and taxes, an appeal to nostalgia and a return to the Britain of the 1950's. Tucked into each section under its straightforward heading can be found a number of interesting twists and turns. Anyone positively attracted by an offer such as 'more free parking in the High Street' or in Hospitals or 'properly ventilated smoking rooms in pubs' needs to remind themselves about how the limitations and charges were introduced in the first place.
UKIP is not proposing the end of the requirement to wear a seat belt in a car. It demonstrably saves lives and has cut down on emergency admissions to hospital. It is generally accepted as sensible legislation and even a populist Government wouldn't now change the law. So under Transport it is not mentioned. Instead populist policies regarding Toll Roads, Free Bus Passes for pensioners, HS2 and the use of speed cameras as revenue raisers are all targeted. But the anti EU little englander attitude is reflected in the requirement that visitors to the UK will have to buy a Britdisc before they can drive on our roads?
I am not an economist but I do find myself thinking that the proposals and policies contained in the leaflet have neither been properly costed or subject to stress testing. New layers of administration are proposed, County Health boards for example, new Quangos will be required, the savings do not seem to equal the cost increases implied in the rafts of new legislation and it is hard to see how savings made from leaving the EU are balanced by the loss of jobs and income derived from continued membership.
I nearly binned the leaflet without reading it. I'm glad that I didn't but I find it scary. The only saving grace is that whatever happens on May 7th the likelihood of a UKIP Government being elected is pretty remote and so, viewing the document as a gadfly and a call for change in the way our national affairs are run, some of the proposals certainly stimulate radical thoughts.
Takes me back to the heady days when politics were conducted in smoke filled rooms where real ale was served in pewter tankards.
