UKIP’s Les Arnott writes that individual scandals are not relevant to the electoral process. (Letters, The Star, March 24). I disagree.
Of course, in any large organisation or, even, family, it is inevitable that someone will misbehave at some point.
We should judge them with how they deal with the issue.
However, the UKIP story is quite different. Hardly a day goes by without one of its candidates being exposed for racist, sexist or homophobic comments, an affiliation to a far-right extremist group or an expenses scandal.
If a company had spent the last 12 months recruiting 450 new employees and was now sacking one every day for gross misconduct, wouldn’t you have serious reservations about doing business with it?
It reflects significant managerial incompetence, as well as a lack of judgement and character.
Mr Arnott then goes on to state that it is policies that are important. I agree.
But, which UKIP policies are we meant to consider when they change on an almost daily basis?
What’s happened to the WAG tax, the turnover tax, the tourist tax, the fees for visiting the GP and hospital – all announced with fanfare and then just ditched? It all reflects a preference for opportunism over principle or coherence.
Last month, The Star published my letter arguing that every spending and tax commitment in the manifestos of the political parties should be independently audited by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
It is noticeable that UKIP has now said that its manifesto will not be published until 10-14 days before General Election day, leaving insufficient time for proper scrutiny. I’m not surprised.
Howard A Knight
Lyons Street, Sheffield, S4 7QS