Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
If Ed gets in the Kippers will spend 5 years moaning at Cameron for denying them a referendum by losing.
The Kippers' problem is not David Cameron, it is that a referendum to leave the EU is unwinnable, as they are clearly beginning to realise. That's why renegotiation is the only viable option for undoing at least some of the daft and unnecessary concessions made by Blair and Brown - but they're not interested in that, just in shooting at their own feet.
We've been here before. Harold Wilson 'renegotiated' our terms, declared triumph, and went on to win a referendum. If elected, Cameron could do the same again - only tricky bit is his timescale. As in the 70s there are the 'irreconcilables' who will never be happy (largely on the left in the 70s IIRC, today its the right....) and who dress up a desire to quit in requests for changed terms.
As you point out, if UKIP prosper, the already slim prospects of a Cameron government recede further - so Miliband, no renegotiation, no referendum, and by 2020 or 2025 many current UKIP supporters will no longer be with us.....
We're aiming to win. We're not aiming to be a Conservative Party pressure group.
Irrespective of what you think you are aiming at, you are pointing the gun at your feet: what you are doing is leading the country towards a Labour government, the disaster of Miliband as PM, and in the precise opposite direction of everything you claim to want including, most notably, progress on the EU.
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
Higher rate taxpayers will still benefit from an increase in the personal allowance, as well as basic rate payers. So, if there's money to spare, it would be fairer to raise that, rather than just the 40% threshold.
Usually, there is a lowering of the higher rate threshold to prevent them benefiting - at least that's what happened last time. Otherwise the obvious criticism is that it actually benefits the higher-rate payers more (because they're getting a bigger % lopped off).
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
They can vote for whomever they like.
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
I'm afraid Ed the bogeyman doesn't really cut it Richard, it's not going to drive the missing 5-10% back in to Cameron's arms. It will be the SE heartlands which bear the brunt of the Eds in any case. You might think the Conservatives would want to give their core a break by getting the rest of the country on board through having relevant policies for the Midlands and North, but it's entirely up to them
Some heroic spinning from 'Business for [independent] Scotland':
41% of Scottish businesses chose independence related options as their preferred form of governance for Scotland.......
But then the details:
A: An elected Scottish Parliament should make ALL the decisions that affect Scotland and all formal ties with the other home nations (e.g. currency and defence etc.) should cease - 9%
B: An elected Scottish Parliament should make ALL the decisions that affect Scotland, whilst maintaining a common market, and appropriate currency and social/cultural ties with the other home nations - 32%
Only Option A is on the ballot paper......9%.......
A lot of them are currently having a nasty shock after voting for Cameron in 2010.
No they are not. The public finances didn't collapse, the economy is doing remarkably well in the circumstances, unemployment remains muted, education is being tackled, welfare is being reformed, a load of Labour nonsense such as ID cards, ContactPoint and HIPs was chucked in the bin, pensions are safe, public services have remained astonishingly intact despite the inherited deficit, and the referendum lock is in place. All as promised.
Of course if more people had voted for Cameron then things could have been even better.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
The European elections in the Uk are based on the d'Hondt system. This means that votes are not wasted and voting for a party helps that party and no other party. Former Conservatives voting UKIP in the European elections will not mean Labour wins by default. It means UKIP get more MEPs.
David if you read what I wrote, as I referred to the 10 seats won by the LibDems I was obviously referring to Westminster not the Euro Gravy train.
A lot of them are currently having a nasty shock after voting for Cameron in 2010.
No they are not. The public finances didn't collapse, the economy is doing remarkably well in the circumstances, unemployment remains muted, education is being tackled, welfare is being reformed, a load of Labour nonsense such as ID cards, ContactPoint and HIPs was chucked in the bin, pensions are safe, public services have remained astonishingly intact despite the inherited deficit, and the referendum lock is in place. All as promised.
Of course if more people had voted for Cameron then things could have been even better.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
The aim of UKIP is to replace the Conservative Party, not to assist it to hold on to power.
Sean your new party has more in common with Oswald Mosley's lot than the present day Tory Party. Apart from your immigration policy, you are a centre left party led by an egomaniac. Your party in Scotland has disintegrated and you will not replace Britain's oldest and most successful political party.
A lot of them are currently having a nasty shock after voting for Cameron in 2010.
No they are not. The public finances didn't collapse, the economy is doing remarkably well in the circumstances, unemployment remains muted, education is being tackled, welfare is being reformed, a load of Labour nonsense such as ID cards, ContactPoint and HIPs was chucked in the bin, pensions are safe, public services have remained astonishingly intact despite the inherited deficit, and the referendum lock is in place. All as promised.
Of course if more people had voted for Cameron then things could have been even better.
Public services have remained astonishingly intact..........until next year.
A lot of them are currently having a nasty shock after voting for Cameron in 2010.
No they are not. The public finances didn't collapse, the economy is doing remarkably well in the circumstances, unemployment remains muted, education is being tackled, welfare is being reformed, a load of Labour nonsense such as ID cards, ContactPoint and HIPs was chucked in the bin, pensions are safe, public services have remained astonishingly intact despite the inherited deficit, and the referendum lock is in place. All as promised.
Of course if more people had voted for Cameron then things could have been even better.
....and with everything in the garden so rosy, that is why the Tory Party has a 10% lead in the polls......oh, wait there.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
Higher rate taxpayers will still benefit from an increase in the personal allowance, as well as basic rate payers. So, if there's money to spare, it would be fairer to raise that, rather than just the 40% threshold.
Usually, there is a lowering of the higher rate threshold to prevent them benefiting - at least that's what happened last time. Otherwise the obvious criticism is that it actually benefits the higher-rate payers more (because they're getting a bigger % lopped off).
That's exactly right - which is why I queried whether Ozzy grasped his own policy when he claimed on the Sunday Politics that all would benefit. Hmm. If all do benefit then it's a big tax cut - and one that is indeed very defendable on the basis that more and more are being dragged into the 40p rate through fiscal drag.
Whether it fits the austerity meme is another matter...
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
I have to say Richard that I found James Bond's comment somewhat distasteful, and I am usually a fan of his posts. I suspect he didn't mean it as it came across.
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
They can vote for whomever they like.
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
I'm afraid Ed the bogeyman doesn't really cut it Richard, it's not going to drive the missing 5-10% back in to Cameron's arms. It will be the SE heartlands which bear the brunt of the Eds in any case. You might think the Conservatives would want to give their core a break by getting the rest of the country on board through having relevant policies for the Midlands and North, but it's entirely up to them
OK, I just have to bite. Tell us then, Mr. Brooke, what policies would appeal to people in the Midlands and the North that would not also appeal to us in the SE, or those in the SW for that matter.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
The aim of UKIP is to replace the Conservative Party, not to assist it to hold on to power.
Sean your new party has more in common with Oswald Mosley's lot than the present day Tory Party. Apart from your immigration policy, you are a centre left party led by an egomaniac. Your party in Scotland has disintegrated and you will not replace Britain's oldest and most successful political party.
This from a supporter of a party that still has a councillor who sent a gay opponent messages hoping he die of Aids.
The Tories in their current form are a sad shade of their ancestors and are undeserving of support or power.
''es, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake. ''
Which brings us on to the other nonsense being peddled by UKIP = namely that 'they are all the same'
More heroic spinning from 'Business for [Independent] Scotland';
Devo-max is not technically on the ballot paper but neither is separation. In fact, in our view the form of independence on offer to voters is much closer to devo-max than any of the other options that voters may be offered. emphasis added
Astonishing that 6 months out a pro-independence group cannot grasp what 'independence' means!
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
He also has a timeline that means that even if he does appear to have substantive changes agreed they will be meaningless because they will not have been ratified by any treaty and so would not be worth the paper they are written on. That is to a large extent his fault as he has devised an unrealistic timescale for these negotiations and then has hardly even started down the road with them
This is a crucial point. I actually believe that - if you exclude freedom of movement across the EU - there is room for Mr Cameron to achieve concessions.
However, there will not be a new pan-EU treaty until perhaps 2023.
So, Mr Cameron cannot deliver much more than agreements with European leaders (many of whom will not be in their jobs in 2023) about the structure of the next EU treaty.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
The costs of Scottish independence outweigh any perceived benefits for nine out of ten businesses, according to research published as both sides of the referendum debate today marked six months to go until polling day.
University of Edinburgh academics found that companies whose customers were mostly based in the rest of the UK were most worried about the consequences of separation.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
As an aside, UKIP's current strategy seems aimed at maximising their share of the vote, not at removing the UK from the EU.
If you wish the UK to leave the EU, the best way to achieve it would be to ask MPs (of all parties) to sign pledges that you believe Britain is "better off out" and that said MP will campaign for British exit if elected.
Where Conservative MPs sign the pledge, do not stand against them. Where they do not, run an active campaign.
And UKIP should feel free to endorse non-Conservative candidates if they are sufficiently BOO. (Wasn't Nick Harvey a BOO LibDem?)
This should ensure that the Conservative Party and the composition of the HoC became increasingly Eurosceptic.
However, I think Farage has his eyes set - not on leaving the EU - but on becoming a cabinet minister in a Conservative/UKIP coalition. He sees UKIP becoming the third force in British politics, and perhaps achieving power on its own in the medium term, if it can become the opposition to Labour in the North.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
"Between 2008 and 2013, a massive $421bn – equivalent to 20pc of Russian GDP – in private sector money flowed out of the country, so there’s lot of Russian cash on which the EU can impose sanctions, hurting high-level business and political interests. That said, the routing of this money through offshore centres makes it difficult to track."
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
They can vote for whomever they like.
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
I'm afraid Ed the bogeyman doesn't really cut it Richard, it's not going to drive the missing 5-10% back in to Cameron's arms. It will be the SE heartlands which bear the brunt of the Eds in any case. You might think the Conservatives would want to give their core a break by getting the rest of the country on board through having relevant policies for the Midlands and North, but it's entirely up to them
OK, I just have to bite. Tell us then, Mr. Brooke, what policies would appeal to people in the Midlands and the North that would not also appeal to us in the SE, or those in the SW for that matter.
Some thoughts so let's start off with a bit of tone Mr L. That the City of London is not the only business in the UK worth getting behind and indeed maybe has some penance it owes the rest of us since it became dysfunctional. likewise on tone but it drifts in to policy the further you go from the SE the more people worry about community cohesion something the finance chappies can't grasp. Then look at what the rest of us do. We manufacture, work in services ( often back office ) and frequently the public sector the further north you go. We would like some policies which will support these activtities. So more effort on supporting capital investment , better education and training since we'll soon start to hit skill shortages, more delegation of powers back to the regions and away from the overcentralisation of London. A finance sector which works for us rather than for its own enrichment. We'd like some infrastructure that meets our needs - like rural broadband some time this decade, a functional motorway network and some sensible housing. I should think that some these would appeal to you Southern chappies in much the same way as Scottish Indy would as we'd get off your backs and stop seeming like a bunch of ingrates waiting for the next handout. But there you go maybe I'm wrong
He also has a timeline that means that even if he does appear to have substantive changes agreed they will be meaningless because they will not have been ratified by any treaty and so would not be worth the paper they are written on. That is to a large extent his fault as he has devised an unrealistic timescale for these negotiations and then has hardly even started down the road with them
This is a crucial point. I actually believe that - if you exclude freedom of movement across the EU - there is room for Mr Cameron to achieve concessions.
However, there will not be a new pan-EU treaty until perhaps 2023.
So, Mr Cameron cannot deliver much more than agreements with European leaders (many of whom will not be in their jobs in 2023) about the structure of the next EU treaty.
And as such any and all promises Cameron might make are worthless. Which brings us back to the choice being between staying in the EU as it is currently configured with the continual move towards ever closer union or leaving. The fact that Cameron will not admit this even though he must know it is one reason why he cannot be trusted.
Yeah sure. He's at 32% in the polls and isn't on course to win outright in 2015. hardly the sign of a grateful nation.
Yes, many people seem to have fallen into the very dangerous trap of thinking that the stability and progress made under this government can be taken for granted. Big mistake.
The Brechtian response "wouldn't it be easier to dissolve the people and elect a new one ?"
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
Brecht and Beckett on the same thread, Mr. Brooke?
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
In fact, it's both epic and absurd
I'm expecting a Romanian Rhinoceros next.
Only if it's talking french.
But I'd still give it better odds on writing a better 2014 budget than Sandra.
The Grey Squirrels (Prohibition of Importation and Keeping) Order of 1937 is to be abolished. Oliver Heald, the Solicitor General, says eradicating the North American grey squirrel is "no longer considered feasible".
We've been feeding squirrels for years - none of that racist red-only nonsense.
The Grey Squirrels (Prohibition of Importation and Keeping) Order of 1937 is to be abolished. Oliver Heald, the Solicitor General, says eradicating the North American grey squirrel is "no longer considered feasible".
We've been feeding squirrels for years - none of that racist red-only nonsense.
I am slightly surprised at you. What has happened to the Red Squirrel in the UK is analogous to what happened to the Red Indians in the US!
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
I have to say Richard that I found James Bond's comment somewhat distasteful, and I am usually a fan of his posts. I suspect he didn't mean it as it came across.
Well, I meant it more or less literally; the election after 2020 will most likely be in 2025 and in 11 years' time the average UKIP member will be, well, 11 years older than now. Given where they're starting from, this is a party that's going to get smaller.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Good evening Mr. Bond,
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
The Grey Squirrels (Prohibition of Importation and Keeping) Order of 1937 is to be abolished. Oliver Heald, the Solicitor General, says eradicating the North American grey squirrel is "no longer considered feasible".
We've been feeding squirrels for years - none of that racist red-only nonsense.
I am slightly surprised at you. What has happened to the Red Squirrel in the UK is analogous to what happened to the Red Indians in the US!
Nah, NP is playing the long game. When the Red Squirrel is finally extinct it will give him yet another reason to blame man for a species disappearing from the earth.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
I have to say Richard that I found James Bond's comment somewhat distasteful, and I am usually a fan of his posts. I suspect he didn't mean it as it came across.
Well, I meant it more or less literally; the election after 2020 will most likely be in 2025 and in 11 years' time the average UKIP member will be, well, 11 years older than now. Given where they're starting from, this is a party that's going to get smaller.
One might say the same about the Tories judging by the last thread header.
"Thailand’s military announced Tuesday that it had radar data that seems to corroborate Malaysian military radar data tracking a plane likely to be MH370 flying west over the Malacca Strait.
Why didn’t Thailand release the data before Tuesday? Because it wasn’t specifically asked for it, military officials said"
On topic: surely the problem with this market is that the next Tory leader could be moving into Downing Street or - at least as likely - sitting on the Opposition Front Bench. Would you bet on a horse to win a race if you didn't know where the racetrack was going to be?
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
The aim of UKIP is to replace the Conservative Party, not to assist it to hold on to power.
Sean your new party has more in common with Oswald Mosley's lot than the present day Tory Party. Apart from your immigration policy, you are a centre left party led by an egomaniac. Your party in Scotland has disintegrated and you will not replace Britain's oldest and most successful political party.
The people who aren't effected by immigration can't understand why it's been #2 for years so they ignore it and then wonder why the people who made it #2 think they're all the same.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
I have to say Richard that I found James Bond's comment somewhat distasteful, and I am usually a fan of his posts. I suspect he didn't mean it as it came across.
Well, I meant it more or less literally; the election after 2020 will most likely be in 2025 and in 11 years' time the average UKIP member will be, well, 11 years older than now. Given where they're starting from, this is a party that's going to get smaller.
But, that's obviously not the case. UKIP membership is increasing. Ergo, the people joining the party outnumber party members who are dying off.
The Conservatives, otoh, have lost over half their members since 2006.
George Eustice would be a long shot, partly because he has a marginal seat. But he is the type of person the Tories should be going for. Theresa May is too old and Osbourne will be seen to be part of Camerons failure. Philip Hammond is too boring. Forget Boris Johnson, as I doing think people see him as a sensible candidate for PM.
Why exactly would Theresa May be too old? Is she even 60 yet? I still think she'd be the best bet for the Tories: not overwhelmingly posh, not insane, generally seems to give the impression she's interested in doing what she believes is best for the country rather than chasing votes. If anything, I think the fact she's a bit older than the typical politician would work in her favour, since she'd be a break from the 40-something white male political leaders who all speak in soundbites who the public are so utterly sick of.
Boris is only popular at the moment because he's carefully avoided being associated with the government cuts (indeed, in many cases, actively opposed them, such as housing benefit cuts and EMA). If he started proposing a series of policies that bashed the poor, which would presumably be the requirement for him to get the Tory grassroots to elect him, then you can bet on his privilege becoming an issue immediately. After all, no-one cared about Cameron's and Osborne's backgrounds when they were in opposition and spouting all their guff about compassion for the poor, it only became an issue when they got into government and we were treated to the absurd spectacle of two spoilt posh boys who've never done a hard day's work on their life and got all their life opportunities handed to them on a plate, lecturing the poor on how they deserve what they get, how they should take more responsibility for not being able to find a job, and that their wealthy mates were more deserving of handouts.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
I am on record as saying that Osborne has done a magnificent job and that while I am a huge believer in grammar schools I happily admit that Gove is also doing an excellent job with grammar school lite. He has wound up the leftie teaching unions and I am all for that, however I despise Cameron and could not vote for him.
As for being a loonie, I will vote with my principles thank you, if it makes me a loonie then it's a very shallow world. I am in no way a racist but in my fruitcake mind I just think we should be in charge of our own borders, is that too much to ask?
As for bellowing at everyone, the only person I do that to is Compouter, because he is a typical leftie who gets on my tits, all ideology and no substance.
As an aside, UKIP's current strategy seems aimed at maximising their share of the vote, not at removing the UK from the EU.
They've tried being a pressure group, and got nowhere. It's only since they started competing and winning in local government elections that they've got a response from MPs.
The other parties do not want the UK to leave the EU, so while they make electoral promises of a referendum, or repatriation of powers, they do not follow through on them. To change that, UKIP need to demonstrate that they can attract votes, and win seats, campaigning with the EU as their headline issue.
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
I tell you where you and other posters are going wrong. You think that eurosceptics, and centre-right voters *owe* their votes to the Conservative Party, and that voting for someone else is a form of mutiny.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
I tell you where you and other posters are going wrong. You think that eurosceptics, and centre-right voters *owe* their votes to the Conservative Party, and that voting for someone else is a form of mutiny.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
I'm not sure how the idea of taking away the right of churches to conduct weddings will go down, though.
When I considered this some time ago, it seemed to me that while the "French model" would work rather well, it would be a radical departure from the current position - and more likely to seem to risk the "integrity of marriage" more than same-sex marriages as they will come into force next week will.
That comes with the proviso that I have always been a supporter of same-sex marriage (and let the Churches and other faiths choose) so I don't see next week as a threat.
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
Anyone equating the need for sensible immigration controls with racism has clearly lost the plot.
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
They can vote for whomever they like.
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
I'm afraid Ed the bogeyman doesn't really cut it Richard, it's not going to drive the missing 5-10% back in to Cameron's arms. It will be the SE heartlands which bear the brunt of the Eds in any case. You might think the Conservatives would want to give their core a break by getting the rest of the country on board through having relevant policies for the Midlands and North, but it's entirely up to them
OK, I just have to bite. Tell us then, Mr. Brooke, what policies would appeal to people in the Midlands and the North that would not also appeal to us in the SE, or those in the SW for that matter.
Some thoughts so let's start off with a bit of tone Mr L. That the City of London is not the only business in the UK worth getting behind and indeed maybe has some penance it owes the rest of us since it became dysfunctional. likewise on tone but it drifts in to policy the further you go from the SE the more people worry about community cohesion something the finance chappies can't grasp. Then look at what the rest of us do. We manufacture, work in services ( often back office ) and frequently the public sector the further north you go. We would like some policies which will support these activtities. So more effort on supporting capital investment , better education and training since we'll soon start to hit skill shortages, more delegation of powers back to the regions and away from the overcentralisation of London. A finance sector which works for us rather than for its own enrichment. We'd like some infrastructure that meets our needs - like rural broadband some time this decade, a functional motorway network and some sensible housing. I should think that some these would appeal to you Southern chappies in much the same way as Scottish Indy would as we'd get off your backs and stop seeming like a bunch of ingrates waiting for the next handout. But there you go maybe I'm wrong
This may come as a shock to you, Mr. Brooke, but we down here in the South also have businesses that make things and provide services and we have quite a lot of public sector workers too and we are also quite keen on community cohesion. There is nothing in your list that doesn't apply to us as well as the Midlands and the North. You really shouldn't allow your prejudices to run away with you.
Off topic,but I have just changed broadband,was with BT,and now with BT infinity,I was getting circa 3Mb/sec, and now get 60-70 Mb/sec,with very little change in cost. It is a bit difficult to compare costs as it is all bundled up in your total package. The very helpful call centre chappy asked if there was anything else he could help me with,I told him I was a loyal customer,but would prefer to be a new customer and have the cheaper rates offered to new customers. I fight a personal one man crusade against this sales technique of preferring new business to existing customers,and often swap between me,and Mrs Jayfdee to become a new customer. Try it with the AA (No I am not an alco,just hate a car problem),if you threaten to leave and argue about new customer discounts,they give you the new customer charge. Rant over,the new fast speed is exceptional,fantastic for media downloads etc.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
I am on record as saying that Osborne has done a magnificent job and that while I am a huge believer in grammar schools I happily admit that Gove is also doing an excellent job with grammar school lite. He has wound up the leftie teaching unions and I am all for that, however I despise Cameron and could not vote for him.
As for being a loonie, I will vote with my principles thank you, if it makes me a loonie then it's a very shallow world. I am in no way a racist but in my fruitcake mind I just think we should be in charge of our own borders, is that too much to ask?
As for bellowing at everyone, the only person I do that to is Compouter, because he is a typical leftie who gets on my tits, all ideology and no substance.
Anyone equating the need for sensible immigration controls with racism has clearly lost the plot.
Could you name a country whose immigration policy you would like to see imitated here? Australia perhaps?
Because I'm just wondering if a 'sensible' immigration policy of the type you want is even possible, in the modern world - let alone practicable.
Australia would certainly be one option. However it is all moot at the moment as we have no coherent immigration policy at all - sensible or otherwise - because we have no control over a very large portion of the migration into our country - that coming from the EU.
Any discussion of immigration policy or what is best for the country is a complete waste of time as long as we cannot do anything about it.
As long as we remain in the EU that will remain the case.
I tell you where you and other posters are going wrong. You think that eurosceptics, and centre-right voters *owe* their votes to the Conservative Party, and that voting for someone else is a form of mutiny.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
Look at the party that does attract does such voters, and it's clear why nobody wants you.
It's not a bad litmus test of whether your opinion on something is sound to look around you, and see who shares it. I'm happy to be a climate change sceptic because Nigel Lawson and Richard Lindzen are, and because Sir Paul Nurse and George Monbiot aren't. This tells me I've called this one right.
UKIP just don't survive what a mate of mine calls the Ford Capri test. It looks good in the catalogue, photographs well and the list of features is great. You can see yourself in one. You'd even think about buying one.
And then you look at who does buy them.
And then you don't.
Meanwhile, you're voting against your interests - because you're loonies.
Off topic,but I have just changed broadband,was with BT,and now with BT infinity,I was getting circa 3Mb/sec, and now get 60-70 Mb/sec,with very little change in cost. It is a bit difficult to compare costs as it is all bundled up in your total package. The very helpful call centre chappy asked if there was anything else he could help me with,I told him I was a loyal customer,but would prefer to be a new customer and have the cheaper rates offered to new customers. I fight a personal one man crusade against this sales technique of preferring new business to existing customers,and often swap between me,and Mrs Jayfdee to become a new customer. Try it with the AA (No I am not an alco,just hate a car problem),if you threaten to leave and argue about new customer discounts,they give you the new customer charge. Rant over,the new fast speed is exceptional,fantastic for media downloads etc.
When I lived in the sticks, I used to use a mobile phone dongle thingy from 3. As long as the connection is fast enough for video streaming, I think they're all OK.
I think you're missing the point that UKIP supporters don't want the Tories in either. So why would they vote for something they don't even want?
They can vote for whomever they like.
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
I'm afraid Ed the bogeyman doesn't really cut it Richard, it's not going to drive the missing 5-10% back in to Cameron's arms. It will be the SE heartlands which bear the brunt of the Eds in any case. You might think the Conservatives would want to give their core a break by getting the rest of the country on board through having relevant policies for the Midlands and North, but it's entirely up to them
OK, I just have to bite. Tell us then, Mr. Brooke, what policies would appeal to people in the Midlands and the North that would not also appeal to us in the SE, or those in the SW for that matter.
Some thoughts so let's start off with a bit of tone Mr L. That the City of London is not the only business in the UK worth getting behind and indeed maybe has some penance it owes the rest of us since it became dysfunctional. likewise on tone but it drifts in to policy the further you go from the SE the more people worry about community cohesion something the finance chappies can't grasp. Then look at what the rest of us do. We manufacture, work in services ( often back office ) and frequently the public sector the further north you go. We would like some policies which will support these activtities. So more effort on supporting capital investment , better education and training since we'll soon start to hit skill shortages, more delegation of powers back to the regions and away from the overcentralisation of London. A finance sector which works for us rather than for its own enrichment. We'd like some infrastructure that meets our needs - like rural broadband some time this decade, a functional motorway network and some sensible housing. I should think that some these would appeal to you Southern chappies in much the same way as Scottish Indy would as we'd get off your backs and stop seeming like a bunch of ingrates waiting for the next handout. But there you go maybe I'm wrong
Sounds sensible, what party are you going too stand for?
Anyone equating the need for sensible immigration controls with racism has clearly lost the plot.
Could you name a country whose immigration policy you would like to see imitated here? Australia perhaps?
Because I'm just wondering if a 'sensible' immigration policy of the type you want is even possible, in the modern world - let alone practicable.
Australia would certainly be one option. However it is all moot at the moment as we have no coherent immigration policy at all - sensible or otherwise - because we have no control over a very large portion of the migration into our country - that coming from the EU.
Any discussion of immigration policy or what is best for the country is a complete waste of time as long as we cannot do anything about it.
As long as we remain in the EU that will remain the case.
As will it if we leave the EU, Richard. It will remain the case because you'll have to keep letting them all in. Because the City needs them, and no city means no taxes means no money to repaint all those trains, Richard.
Why can't Kippers just admit that voting for them increases the chances of a Europhile MP being elected. For goodness sake in 2010 in the South-west, the LibDem over Tory majority was smaller than the UKIP vote in 5 out of the 10 seats they won. Vote UKIP and get a rampant pro EU Europhile Labour or LibDem MP.
What does UKIP want? It want's power. Power to really change things here in Britain. It won't happen at the next GE but the party will make huge advances. It may happen in 2020, or sooner if the next government abolish the 5 year nonsense and return to more dynamic politics. However long it takes its worth the effort. The Tories and Labour are clearly worn out parties that have no idea or intention to reinvent themselves. The L/Dems only think of themselves and how wonderful to bask in the EU wonderland. Unlike Richard_Tyndall who only worries about the EU, UKIP worries about Britain.
Nobody in UKIP will still be alive for the GE after the one in 2020.
Really? I like to think that I will live past my late 50s. Not sure I will still be a member of UKIP of course but that could also be said for most members of most parties barring the fanatics who seem to post on here.
I have to say Richard that I found James Bond's comment somewhat distasteful, and I am usually a fan of his posts. I suspect he didn't mean it as it came across.
Well, I meant it more or less literally; the election after 2020 will most likely be in 2025 and in 11 years' time the average UKIP member will be, well, 11 years older than now. Given where they're starting from, this is a party that's going to get smaller.
But, that's obviously not the case. UKIP membership is increasing. Ergo, the people joining the party outnumber party members who are dying off.
The Conservatives, otoh, have lost over half their members since 2006.
There is a critical mass which every political party needs. The Tories have gone below the critical mass in Scotland and the North. In fact, any vote for them there is effectively a wasted vote.
There are signs that the same may be happening in Yorkshire. The Tories are retreating into Fortress South East. They are becoming a regional party.
Next tory leader will have far more to do with actual policy than the last time when all that desperate tories wanted was their own second rate Blair impersonator. Which is precisely what they got.
Next time, if Cammie loses the election then tory backbenchers and the tory grassroots will by choosing a leader on the basis of whether that leader would be able to stop the kippers outpostturing them at every turn on Europe and immigration for the next five or so years. Because unless the kippers somehow crash and burn spectacularly they look hugely unlikely to repeat their 3.1% of 2010 and you can be absolutely certain a kipper showing of anywhere near where they are now and at 5% or above would cause the tories open warfare over IN or OUT and what to do about the kippers. After alll, there were tories blaming the kippers last time for Cammie failing to win a majority and that was at a mere 3.1%
So given that the next tory leader wouldn't be a 'beauty' contest how does that affect things? Well having an electable leader was very far from the tories mind when IDS and Hague were made leader so next time around it is indeed going to be who can win the battle over the Europe and where the grass roots want to be over that and immigration.
We've already had some clear OUT posturing from a few of the would be leaders on this.
Michael Gove and Philip Hammond would vote for Britain to leave the EU
Theresa May and Boris are known to be far more pro EU and IN supporters than would be good for them so they would have to step up the posturing.
How would a continuity Cameron leadership under Osbrowne respond? Easy enough to answer, just the same as they are doing now and that is extremely doubtful to be enough to convince a far more Eurosceptic tory grass roots and base.
Anyone equating the need for sensible immigration controls with racism has clearly lost the plot.
Could you name a country whose immigration policy you would like to see imitated here? Australia perhaps?
Because I'm just wondering if a 'sensible' immigration policy of the type you want is even possible, in the modern world - let alone practicable.
Australia would certainly be one option. However it is all moot at the moment as we have no coherent immigration policy at all - sensible or otherwise - because we have no control over a very large portion of the migration into our country - that coming from the EU.
Any discussion of immigration policy or what is best for the country is a complete waste of time as long as we cannot do anything about it.
As long as we remain in the EU that will remain the case.
As will it if we leave the EU, Richard. It will remain the case because you'll have to keep letting them all in. Because the City needs them, and no city means no taxes means no money to repaint all those trains, Richard.
Nope. That is simply not the case. The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration. There is a clear case for controlled migration but certainly not for an open borders policy. So no. We would not keep 'letting them all in'.
Off topic,but I have just changed broadband,was with BT,and now with BT infinity,I was getting circa 3Mb/sec, and now get 60-70 Mb/sec,with very little change in cost. It is a bit difficult to compare costs as it is all bundled up in your total package. The very helpful call centre chappy asked if there was anything else he could help me with,I told him I was a loyal customer,but would prefer to be a new customer and have the cheaper rates offered to new customers. I fight a personal one man crusade against this sales technique of preferring new business to existing customers,and often swap between me,and Mrs Jayfdee to become a new customer. Try it with the AA (No I am not an alco,just hate a car problem),if you threaten to leave and argue about new customer discounts,they give you the new customer charge. Rant over,the new fast speed is exceptional,fantastic for media downloads etc.
When I lived in the sticks, I used to use a mobile phone dongle thingy from 3. As long as the connection is fast enough for video streaming, I think they're all OK.
Download 23.37mbps. But then again this is Surbiton !!
Theresa May and Boris are known to be far more pro EU and IN supporters than would be good for them so they would have to step up the posturing.
How would a continuity Cameron leadership under Osbrowne respond? Easy enough to answer, just the same as they are doing now and that is extremely doubtful to be enough to convince a far more Eurosceptic tory grass roots and base.
Theresa May is going to be the one pushing through the next power transfer from UK > Brussels, she can't wipe that out with rhetoric.
I tell you where you and other posters are going wrong. You think that eurosceptics, and centre-right voters *owe* their votes to the Conservative Party, and that voting for someone else is a form of mutiny.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
Look at the party that does attract does such voters, and it's clear why nobody wants you.
It's not a bad litmus test of whether your opinion on something is sound to look around you, and see who shares it. I'm happy to be a climate change sceptic because Nigel Lawson and Richard Lindzen are, and because Sir Paul Nurse and George Monbiot aren't. This tells me I've called this one right.
UKIP just don't survive what a mate of mine calls the Ford Capri test. It looks good in the catalogue, photographs well and the list of features is great. You can see yourself in one. You'd even think about buying one.
And then you look at who does buy them.
And then you don't.
Meanwhile, you're voting against your interests - because you're loonies.
Excellent work Bond, keep coming with loonie insults, that's the way to get us back.
The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration.
Really? Even seen buses in central London at 5am on a week day? I have. They are often packed. Who do you think cleans and maintains all those giant office blocks on a daily basis?
I'll give you a clue, the faces on those crowded buses aren't generally white. Neither are the ones standing at the bus stops on the freezing January mornings
Some thoughts so let's start off with a bit of tone Mr L. That the City of London is not the only business in the UK worth getting behind and indeed maybe has some penance it owes the rest of us since it became dysfunctional. likewise on tone but it drifts in to policy the further you go from the SE the more people worry about community cohesion something the finance chappies can't grasp. Then look at what the rest of us do. We manufacture, work in services ( often back office ) and frequently the public sector the further north you go. We would like some policies which will support these activtities. So more effort on supporting capital investment , better education and training since we'll soon start to hit skill shortages, more delegation of powers back to the regions and away from the overcentralisation of London. A finance sector which works for us rather than for its own enrichment. We'd like some infrastructure that meets our needs - like rural broadband some time this decade, a functional motorway network and some sensible housing. I should think that some these would appeal to you Southern chappies in much the same way as Scottish Indy would as we'd get off your backs and stop seeming like a bunch of ingrates waiting for the next handout. But there you go maybe I'm wrong
Yep, unfortunately none of the main parties seem to be able to tackle the City and it's through the other end of the telescope view of the world. Here I am, nary a pay rise for four years, next to no interest on my savings and what drops through the letterbox but my building society AGM recommending me to vote for remuneration packages for the directors that are on another planet to my experience. And that's just a building society.... And then politicians wonder why ordinary people are in a sullen, stuff the lot of them, state of mind..l
The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration.
Really? Even seen buses in central London at 5am on a week day? I have. They are often packed. Who do you think cleans and maintains all those giant office blocks on a daily basis?
I'll give you a clue, the faces on those crowded buses aren't generally white. Neither are the ones standing at the bus stops on the freezing January mornings
Yep, unfortunately none of the main parties seem to be able to tackle the City and it's through the other end of the telescope view of the world.
Agreed and here's why. When people get into government civil servants point out the gargantuan annual tax take from the financials services community. Its a community of more than one million workers, not just the handful of superstars you read about.
It's then pointed out that, if you want to stuff the banks, the money to finance our debt will have to be found from somewhere else.
And there is nowhere else.
Why do you think Osborne is fighting against restricting banker bonuses. Think he wants to do that? Nope. Fact is, the bigger the bonus, the bigger the cut to the treasury.
In fact big fat cash bonuses are far better for the treasury than the delayed clawback hold it for six year sort. With the former, Ozzie gets his cut up front.
Its like the rake in a poker game. The government is the house.
Some thoughts so let's start off with a bit of tone Mr L. That the City of London is not the only business in the UK worth getting behind and indeed maybe has some penance it owes the rest of us since it became dysfunctional. likewise on tone but it drifts in to policy the further you go from the SE the more people worry about community cohesion something the finance chappies can't grasp. Then look at what the rest of us do. We manufacture, work in services ( often back office ) and frequently the public sector the further north you go. We would like some policies which will support these activtities. So more effort on supporting capital investment , better education and training since we'll soon start to hit skill shortages, more delegation of powers back to the regions and away from the overcentralisation of London. A finance sector which works for us rather than for its own enrichment. We'd like some infrastructure that meets our needs - like rural broadband some time this decade, a functional motorway network and some sensible housing. I should think that some these would appeal to you Southern chappies in much the same way as Scottish Indy would as we'd get off your backs and stop seeming like a bunch of ingrates waiting for the next handout. But there you go maybe I'm wrong
Yep, unfortunately none of the main parties seem to be able to tackle the City and it's through the other end of the telescope view of the world. Here I am, nary a pay rise for four years, next to no interest on my savings and what drops through the letterbox but my building society AGM recommending me to vote for remuneration packages for the directors that are on another planet to my experience. And that's just a building society.... And then politicians wonder why ordinary people are in a sullen, stuff the lot of them, state of mind..l
I tell you where you and other posters are going wrong. You think that eurosceptics, and centre-right voters *owe* their votes to the Conservative Party, and that voting for someone else is a form of mutiny.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
Look at the party that does attract does such voters, and it's clear why nobody wants you.
It's not a bad litmus test of whether your opinion on something is sound to look around you, and see who shares it. I'm happy to be a climate change sceptic because Nigel Lawson and Richard Lindzen are, and because Sir Paul Nurse and George Monbiot aren't. This tells me I've called this one right.
UKIP just don't survive what a mate of mine calls the Ford Capri test. It looks good in the catalogue, photographs well and the list of features is great. You can see yourself in one. You'd even think about buying one.
And then you look at who does buy them.
And then you don't.
Meanwhile, you're voting against your interests - because you're loonies.
Well, you aren't going to win over UKIP voters by insulting them.
Anyone equating the need for sensible immigration controls with racism has clearly lost the plot.
Could you name a country whose immigration policy you would like to see imitated here? Australia perhaps?
Because I'm just wondering if a 'sensible' immigration policy of the type you want is even possible, in the modern world - let alone practicable.
Australia would certainly be one option. However it is all moot at the moment as we have no coherent immigration policy at all - sensible or otherwise - because we have no control over a very large portion of the migration into our country - that coming from the EU.
Any discussion of immigration policy or what is best for the country is a complete waste of time as long as we cannot do anything about it.
As long as we remain in the EU that will remain the case.
As will it if we leave the EU, Richard. It will remain the case because you'll have to keep letting them all in. Because the City needs them, and no city means no taxes means no money to repaint all those trains, Richard.
Nope. That is simply not the case. The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration. There is a clear case for controlled migration but certainly not for an open borders policy. So no. We would not keep 'letting them all in'.
Why not change the incentives for immigration, and see if that affects the number.
So, require three years of NI contributions before being eligble for benefits. And only give an NHS 'card' to someone who's been resident for five years. (You can, alternatively, buy an NHS card for £3,000/year.)
That is, allow people to move around as they desire, and allow the free market to decide who lives where, but reduce or eliminate the free-loader issue.
The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration.
Really? Even seen buses in central London at 5am on a week day? I have. They are often packed. Who do you think cleans and maintains all those giant office blocks on a daily basis?
I'll give you a clue, the faces on those crowded buses aren't generally white. Neither are the ones standing at the bus stops on the freezing January mornings
Makes use of and needs do not mean the same thing. The argument that an entirly unfettered and unrestrained City which gets everything it wants without question is always good for the country as a whole has clearly been disproved over the last few years. One also has to wonder how on earth the City managed to maintain its position as the financial centre if the world before all those foreign workers turned up if they are do vital to its existence.
Labour NHS Wales crisis latest. Civil War breaking out among the comrades
I can only say my experience of the NHS in the last year,in England,has been superb. I am normally of good health,but I was stricken down with a problem,probably after years of excessive physical activity. The care and attention ,and speed of appointments,(MRI on a Sunday evening) etc,have been outstanding,I have had perhaps 30 consultations,Gp visits,Consultants,treatment etc in the last year. I have also been helping a young friend with a bone marrow transplant ,and the service is exceptional,I wish people would stop shouting at the current administration,for political reasons,and support the NHS. I am now almost ready to resume my hyper physical activity,and intend to take Chocolates/flowers/Whisky/Whiskey etc to the fabulous staff who have helped me. I have done private on many occasions,but I am a NHS fan, I think the Labour stuff about 30 days,or whatever,to save the NHS,is totally overblown.
The city certainly does not need uncontrolled immigration.
Really? Even seen buses in central London at 5am on a week day? I have. They are often packed. Who do you think cleans and maintains all those giant office blocks on a daily basis?
I'll give you a clue, the faces on those crowded buses aren't generally white. Neither are the ones standing at the bus stops on the freezing January mornings
Well didn't the last census revel that White British are now a minority in London so one would expect to see a lot of non-white faces around the place. However, I strongly suspect that the majority of of the faces you see on those crowded buses are not immigrants, children or grand-children of immigrants perhaps.
Sorry for the delay in replying I've been busy with another effing bank which doesn't think I should have access to my own money.
Mr L the standard Southern response atm is "prejudice" really you chaps need to get in to listening mode. I am well aware that in your neck of the woods you will have businesses which make and design things boats, aircraft and cars for a start, However looming over you all is the impact of the City and of London, it drives everything via house prices, wages and the easier access to credit, services etc. because it is a cluster. The difference in the sticks is that we don't have the great beast sat on our doorstep the dynamics of our economies and communities are much more dependent on let's say slimmer pickings - we're like Scotland without the oil. So while you rightly point out things on my list are attractive to Southerners I would argue they're less vital, we depend more on them working than you do since we haven't got too many other places to go. For reasons I cannot fathom Russian oligarchs eschew Wolverhampton and Stoke in preference to London and the Home Counties.
As an anecdotal example Mr L my friends who work in London basically say London had a recession in 2009 and as ( Sean T pointed out ) then the boom times came back. 100 miles North in the Midlands we only really started picking up in the second half of 2013. Further North as another richard will tell you things haven't really got in to gear yet. So if the UK economy reaches the 2008 peak in the middle of this year, it will be on the back of a fast expanding South dragging an unrecovered North with it. Or in other words those bits of the economy on which we depend more heavily haven't yet recovered.
So coming back to how that impacts the politics the blues seem to think all is well in their backyard so it must be well elsewhere. Unfortunately that doesn't stack up and Cameron still hasn't grasped that happy factory workers in Nuneaton are worth more to him in electoral terms than jolly investment bankers in Windsor where another 2000 votes on the majority means nothing.
I've always suspected that Farage was one of those public-school, mildly libertarian, 'enlightened' Tories - much in the mould of George Osborne. The question is: can Farage take his party with him?
I've always suspected that Farage was one of those public-school, mildly libertarian, 'enlightened' Tories - much in the mould of George Osborne. The question is: can Farage take his party with him?
I think this segment of the electorate is well catered for, it is the socially conservative that is not. Nigel should be trying to secure that part.
I've always suspected that Farage was one of those public-school, mildly libertarian, 'enlightened' Tories - much in the mould of George Osborne. The question is: can Farage take his party with him?
Hasn't he done so already ? I thought Nikki Sinclair was the first elected transgender politician in the UK.
I've always suspected that Farage was one of those public-school, mildly libertarian, 'enlightened' Tories - much in the mould of George Osborne. The question is: can Farage take his party with him?
I think this segment of the electorate is well catered for, it is the socially conservative that is not. Nigel should be trying to secure that part.
I suspect the more time Farage spends with the social conservative ex-Tory Kippers the less he wants to be associated with them. Because he's a fairly normal bloke, like most of us out there.
Comments
'Aside from the EU, what else have you got? What exactly is the UKIP vision for Britain?'
Taxi drivers in uniforms?
Is anyone alive in UKIP today?
As you point out, if UKIP prosper, the already slim prospects of a Cameron government recede further - so Miliband, no renegotiation, no referendum, and by 2020 or 2025 many current UKIP supporters will no longer be with us.....
I think they are in for a very nasty shock if they think having Miliband as PM is an acceptable outcome, but it's entirely up to them.
http://blog.dorries.org/id-2129-2014_3_My_take_on_the_Eton_Mess.aspx
I have to say old Dorries is in fine form on Twitter. There can't be many left in her party who she hasn't tore into today. Go Nadine!
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/boris-johnson-conservative-leader-stanley-johnson-father-speaks
Go Boris snr!
41% of Scottish businesses chose independence related options as their preferred form of governance for Scotland.......
But then the details:
A: An elected Scottish Parliament should make ALL the decisions that affect Scotland and all formal ties with the other home nations (e.g. currency and defence etc.) should cease - 9%
B: An elected Scottish Parliament should make ALL the decisions that affect Scotland, whilst maintaining a common market, and appropriate currency and social/cultural ties with the other home nations - 32%
Only Option A is on the ballot paper......9%.......
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/six-months-past-and-six-months-to-go-independent-opinion-research-published/
Of course if more people had voted for Cameron then things could have been even better.
Whether it fits the austerity meme is another matter...
On the other hand it might just be easier to get better politicians.
The Tories in their current form are a sad shade of their ancestors and are undeserving of support or power.
Which brings us on to the other nonsense being peddled by UKIP = namely that 'they are all the same'
Of course they aren't
Devo-max is not technically on the ballot paper but neither is separation. In fact, in our view the form of independence on offer to voters is much closer to devo-max than any of the other options that voters may be offered.
emphasis added
Astonishing that 6 months out a pro-independence group cannot grasp what 'independence' means!
How absurd.
You'll be telling us you're listening to Kurt Weill and Philip Glass next.
However, there will not be a new pan-EU treaty until perhaps 2023.
So, Mr Cameron cannot deliver much more than agreements with European leaders (many of whom will not be in their jobs in 2023) about the structure of the next EU treaty.
University of Edinburgh academics found that companies whose customers were mostly based in the rest of the UK were most worried about the consequences of separation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10704666/Six-month-countdown-to-independence-referendum-begins-as-business-registers-concerns.html
If you wish the UK to leave the EU, the best way to achieve it would be to ask MPs (of all parties) to sign pledges that you believe Britain is "better off out" and that said MP will campaign for British exit if elected.
Where Conservative MPs sign the pledge, do not stand against them. Where they do not, run an active campaign.
And UKIP should feel free to endorse non-Conservative candidates if they are sufficiently BOO. (Wasn't Nick Harvey a BOO LibDem?)
This should ensure that the Conservative Party and the composition of the HoC became increasingly Eurosceptic.
However, I think Farage has his eyes set - not on leaving the EU - but on becoming a cabinet minister in a Conservative/UKIP coalition. He sees UKIP becoming the third force in British politics, and perhaps achieving power on its own in the medium term, if it can become the opposition to Labour in the North.
Let's all look back in anger.
"Between 2008 and 2013, a massive $421bn – equivalent to 20pc of Russian GDP – in private sector money flowed out of the country, so there’s lot of Russian cash on which the EU can impose sanctions, hurting high-level business and political interests. That said, the routing of this money through offshore centres makes it difficult to track."
difficult to track, hmm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/londons-glittering-spires-nearly-250-highrise-developments-planned-for-the-capital-9190321.html
But I'd still give it better odds on writing a better 2014 budget than Sandra.
The Grey Squirrels (Prohibition of Importation and Keeping) Order of 1937 is to be abolished. Oliver Heald, the Solicitor General, says eradicating the North American grey squirrel is "no longer considered feasible".
We've been feeding squirrels for years - none of that racist red-only nonsense.
Your crass comment is symptomatic of the desperation of anti-UKIP posters, particularly the normally sensible RN. Pray tell me Richard why should I vote for something I don't believe in, for a leader who thinks I am a loonie, fruitcake or closet racist?
You Tories are so arrogant you think we should vote for the party of Clarke, Heseltine etc to do you a favour? I agree getting Ed is a disaster but believe it or not we don't want Cameron either.
Why didn’t Thailand release the data before Tuesday? Because it wasn’t specifically asked for it, military officials said"
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/18/mh370-missing-plane-search-live
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
The Conservatives, otoh, have lost over half their members since 2006.
Boris is only popular at the moment because he's carefully avoided being associated with the government cuts (indeed, in many cases, actively opposed them, such as housing benefit cuts and EMA). If he started proposing a series of policies that bashed the poor, which would presumably be the requirement for him to get the Tory grassroots to elect him, then you can bet on his privilege becoming an issue immediately. After all, no-one cared about Cameron's and Osborne's backgrounds when they were in opposition and spouting all their guff about compassion for the poor, it only became an issue when they got into government and we were treated to the absurd spectacle of two spoilt posh boys who've never done a hard day's work on their life and got all their life opportunities handed to them on a plate, lecturing the poor on how they deserve what they get, how they should take more responsibility for not being able to find a job, and that their wealthy mates were more deserving of handouts.
But in general you *are* loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists, Nigel. That's the whole trouble. You have one or two underlying quite-good points, completely undermined by the foaming screech in which you bellow at everyone, online at least.
The likeliest consequence of UKIP's existence is that we will go back, in 2015, to being appallingly governed by the nastiest and most evil clique of unrepentant backstabbing fvckwits ever to get near power. That you're quite happy with this convicts you of being loonies.
We are at the moment being rather well governed. The deficit is coming down, employment is recovering, and we aren't going through what Greece, Spain, or France is going through. That you think "they're all the same" convicts you of being fruitcakes.
As for the charge of being racists, well, does the cap fit? Do you or do you not hate immigrants for being foreign and here? I am not too happy myself about it, but if I were a skint Polish plumber I'd be over here too, because I'd want to be us, so good luck to them. And at least we're a place people want to fly to, rather than fly from.
The latter would certainly be the case in your fruitcake idea of Britain, full as it would be of uniformed taxi drivers dropping you off at the train station where the trains have all been repainted in traditional British colours. A UKIP-run Britain would be in the hands of the same drooling nutters we get here banging on about Scotch independence. Do you agree Pork and malcolmg sound like vicious, bitter loonies? So do UKIP.
There is much wrong with Cameron's government but he did the main thing right, which was to deal with a historic emergency - the existence of Gordon Brown's administration. We now a generally amiable and competent administration in its place.
And you want to pox that all up.
I am on record as saying that Osborne has done a magnificent job and that while I am a huge believer in grammar schools I happily admit that Gove is also doing an excellent job with grammar school lite. He has wound up the leftie teaching unions and I am all for that, however I despise Cameron and could not vote for him.
As for being a loonie, I will vote with my principles thank you, if it makes me a loonie then it's a very shallow world. I am in no way a racist but in my fruitcake mind I just think we should be in charge of our own borders, is that too much to ask?
As for bellowing at everyone, the only person I do that to is Compouter, because he is a typical leftie who gets on my tits, all ideology and no substance.
The other parties do not want the UK to leave the EU, so while they make electoral promises of a referendum, or repatriation of powers, they do not follow through on them. To change that, UKIP need to demonstrate that they can attract votes, and win seats, campaigning with the EU as their headline issue.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/18/ukip-would-not-overturn-gay-marriages
I'm not sure how the idea of taking away the right of churches to conduct weddings will go down, though.
You don't appreciate that the Conservative Party has to *earn* their votes. Instead of complaining about UKIP, you'd do better to consider why the Conservative Party no longer attracts such voters, and why it's membership is in free fall.
That comes with the proviso that I have always been a supporter of same-sex marriage (and let the Churches and other faiths choose) so I don't see next week as a threat.
It is a bit difficult to compare costs as it is all bundled up in your total package.
The very helpful call centre chappy asked if there was anything else he could help me with,I told him I was a loyal customer,but would prefer to be a new customer and have the cheaper rates offered to new customers.
I fight a personal one man crusade against this sales technique of preferring new business to existing customers,and often swap between me,and Mrs Jayfdee to become a new customer. Try it with the AA (No I am not an alco,just hate a car problem),if you threaten to leave and argue about new customer discounts,they give you the new customer charge.
Rant over,the new fast speed is exceptional,fantastic for media downloads etc.
Could you name a country whose immigration policy you would like to see imitated here? Australia perhaps?
Because I'm just wondering if a 'sensible' immigration policy of the type you want is even possible, in the modern world - let alone practicable.
As for being a loonie, I will vote with my principles thank you, if it makes me a loonie then it's a very shallow world. I am in no way a racist but in my fruitcake mind I just think we should be in charge of our own borders, is that too much to ask?
As for bellowing at everyone, the only person I do that to is Compouter, because he is a typical leftie who gets on my tits, all ideology and no substance.
I will take that as a compliment young Nigel.
Any discussion of immigration policy or what is best for the country is a complete waste of time as long as we cannot do anything about it.
As long as we remain in the EU that will remain the case.
It's not a bad litmus test of whether your opinion on something is sound to look around you, and see who shares it. I'm happy to be a climate change sceptic because Nigel Lawson and Richard Lindzen are, and because Sir Paul Nurse and George Monbiot aren't. This tells me I've called this one right.
UKIP just don't survive what a mate of mine calls the Ford Capri test. It looks good in the catalogue, photographs well and the list of features is great. You can see yourself in one. You'd even think about buying one.
And then you look at who does buy them.
And then you don't.
Meanwhile, you're voting against your interests - because you're loonies.
http://www.speedtest.net
When I lived in the sticks, I used to use a mobile phone dongle thingy from 3. As long as the connection is fast enough for video streaming, I think they're all OK.
Labour NHS Wales crisis latest. Civil War breaking out among the comrades
There are signs that the same may be happening in Yorkshire. The Tories are retreating into Fortress South East. They are becoming a regional party.
Next time, if Cammie loses the election then tory backbenchers and the tory grassroots will by choosing a leader on the basis of whether that leader would be able to stop the kippers outpostturing them at every turn on Europe and immigration for the next five or so years. Because unless the kippers somehow crash and burn spectacularly they look hugely unlikely to repeat their 3.1% of 2010 and you can be absolutely certain a kipper showing of anywhere near where they are now and at 5% or above would cause the tories open warfare over IN or OUT and what to do about the kippers. After alll, there were tories blaming the kippers last time for Cammie failing to win a majority and that was at a mere 3.1%
So given that the next tory leader wouldn't be a 'beauty' contest how does that affect things? Well having an electable leader was very far from the tories mind when IDS and Hague were made leader so next time around it is indeed going to be who can win the battle over the Europe and where the grass roots want to be over that and immigration.
We've already had some clear OUT posturing from a few of the would be leaders on this. Theresa May and Boris are known to be far more pro EU and IN supporters than would be good for them so they would have to step up the posturing.
How would a continuity Cameron leadership under Osbrowne respond? Easy enough to answer, just the same as they are doing now and that is extremely doubtful to be enough to convince a far more Eurosceptic tory grass roots and base.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100260182/the-next-tory-plot-to-embarrass-david-cameron-on-europe-is-already-taking-shape/
Really? Even seen buses in central London at 5am on a week day? I have. They are often packed. Who do you think cleans and maintains all those giant office blocks on a daily basis?
I'll give you a clue, the faces on those crowded buses aren't generally white. Neither are the ones standing at the bus stops on the freezing January mornings
Under UKIP, gay marriage is now here to stay!
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/03/18/nigel-farage-confirms-that-ukip-will-not-abolish-same-sex-marriage/
Agreed and here's why. When people get into government civil servants point out the gargantuan annual tax take from the financials services community. Its a community of more than one million workers, not just the handful of superstars you read about.
It's then pointed out that, if you want to stuff the banks, the money to finance our debt will have to be found from somewhere else.
And there is nowhere else.
Why do you think Osborne is fighting against restricting banker bonuses. Think he wants to do that? Nope. Fact is, the bigger the bonus, the bigger the cut to the treasury.
In fact big fat cash bonuses are far better for the treasury than the delayed clawback hold it for six year sort. With the former, Ozzie gets his cut up front.
Its like the rake in a poker game. The government is the house.
So, require three years of NI contributions before being eligble for benefits.
And only give an NHS 'card' to someone who's been resident for five years. (You can, alternatively, buy an NHS card for £3,000/year.)
That is, allow people to move around as they desire, and allow the free market to decide who lives where, but reduce or eliminate the free-loader issue.
The care and attention ,and speed of appointments,(MRI on a Sunday evening) etc,have been outstanding,I have had perhaps 30 consultations,Gp visits,Consultants,treatment etc in the last year. I have also been helping a young friend with a bone marrow transplant ,and the service is exceptional,I wish people would stop shouting at the current administration,for political reasons,and support the NHS.
I am now almost ready to resume my hyper physical activity,and intend to take Chocolates/flowers/Whisky/Whiskey etc to the fabulous staff who have helped me.
I have done private on many occasions,but I am a NHS fan, I think the Labour stuff about 30 days,or whatever,to save the NHS,is totally overblown.
@HurstLlama
Sorry for the delay in replying I've been busy with another effing bank which doesn't think I should have access to my own money.
Mr L the standard Southern response atm is "prejudice" really you chaps need to get in to listening mode. I am well aware that in your neck of the woods you will have businesses which make and design things boats, aircraft and cars for a start, However looming over you all is the impact of the City and of London, it drives everything via house prices, wages and the easier access to credit, services etc. because it is a cluster. The difference in the sticks is that we don't have the great beast sat on our doorstep the dynamics of our economies and communities are much more dependent on let's say slimmer pickings - we're like Scotland without the oil. So while you rightly point out things on my list are attractive to Southerners I would argue they're less vital, we depend more on them working than you do since we haven't got too many other places to go. For reasons I cannot fathom Russian oligarchs eschew Wolverhampton and Stoke in preference to London and the Home Counties.
As an anecdotal example Mr L my friends who work in London basically say London had a recession in 2009 and as ( Sean T pointed out ) then the boom times came back. 100 miles North in the Midlands we only really started picking up in the second half of 2013. Further North as another richard will tell you things haven't really got in to gear yet. So if the UK economy reaches the 2008 peak in the middle of this year, it will be on the back of a fast expanding South dragging an unrecovered North with it. Or in other words those bits of the economy on which we depend more heavily haven't yet recovered.
So coming back to how that impacts the politics the blues seem to think all is well in their backyard so it must be well elsewhere. Unfortunately that doesn't stack up and Cameron still hasn't grasped that happy factory workers in Nuneaton are worth more to him in electoral terms than jolly investment bankers in Windsor where another 2000 votes on the majority means nothing.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/03/18/nigel-farage-confirms-that-ukip-will-not-abolish-same-sex-marriage/
I've always suspected that Farage was one of those public-school, mildly libertarian, 'enlightened' Tories - much in the mould of George Osborne. The question is: can Farage take his party with him?