Sir - So, what's the difference between criminals and the unemployed?

Apparently, there is none, at least according to David Cameron's promise to compel any young people becoming unemployed to do work in the community.

Apparently unconcerned about the sense of disenfranchisement already experienced by so many young people unable to find any kind of meaningful job, he now plans to make them appear no better than criminals, since criminals who are not sent to prison are also compelled to work in the community.

Of course, the Tories might say "Ah, but they will be getting a benefit payment", but a) they already do, and b) so do criminals who work in the community.

There is another question arising from this, which is that if the aged need more looking after in their homes and in nursing homes, or streets need sweeping, or graffiti needs cleaning from buildings, why are there not trained professionals already doing it?

One final observation. In a country with a million unemployed young British people, why have Cameron, Clegg, and Miliband supported the Lisbon Treaty, signed by Brown, which has thrown open our borders to limitless numbers of eastern Europeans, rendering the task of British young people finding British jobs even more difficult?

It appears that as a career politician, Cameron would rather further stigmatise the young and unemployed, than help them into real work and apprenticeships.

UKIP rightly want more for the British people, including the unemployed, and unlike any of the other mainstream political parties, they do what any British government should do, which is to put the British people first.

Will Richards

Malvern