Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
You assure multinational companies that you'll have a free trade deal and less regulation outside the EU, and after you leave, you implement an immigration policy that makes it easy for the highly skilled, English-speaking professionals to come here, but is very tough on the unskilled from the world's unstable areas.
Post an EU exit, multinationals world face UK regulation and EU regulation, surely. Furthermore, if today pwc wants someone from the Paris office to work in London for three months there is no regulation whatsoever. Are you going to have special rules for multinationals that smaller companies do not benefit from? Or are you going to accept that large law firms and consultants and investment banks are not going to be based here?
Only in Britain could the job of sorting out a matter of such vital national importance as airport capacity be handed to Howard Davies.
By all accounts Davies is a very nice, intelligent man. However, he was also the first chairman of the disastrous FSA, the bank regulator that later failed so spectacularly during the financial crisis. He then ran the London School of Economics, or the Libyan School of Economics as it was dubbed when on his watch it got too close to the former Libyan dictator.
Neither of these cock-ups was an obstacle to further advancement, however. The British Establishment certainly looks after its own. When the Prime Minister needed someone to fluff the issue, delaying a final decision on Heathrow versus Gatwick until after the election, Davies got the call.
@Socrates What would your plan for devolution to Greater Manchester mean for great counties such as Lancashire?
I am of a belief that devolution within/to England is important and needed. But if we say devolved powers to cities and counties would these be the same as those devolved to Scotland/Wales? If so could we not reasonably get 43 education systems? If this practically viable? Or will it be a different type of devolution with a pan-English NHS? If so we then need an English Parliament too, a possible additional tier of government. An English Parliament would give England a clear political identity, but it certainly does not bring power closer to the people, or not by much. An English Parliament is thus not the answer of itself.
What facts do you expect to be floating around -a colour coded diagram? The US has encirclement strategies for their strategic rivals, bases everywhere, gathers everyone's metadata, and for what? So they can let a random country have the power to blow them up? That's what you're suggesting -that the US would give us the power to destroy them. That they would fail to put in a simple mechanism or require a code that they held. Why exactly would they do that? For the love of good old blighty?
The relationship in 1955 might have been different to the one in 1995.
I hardly think so. Sentiment and some key relationships at the top aside, the US has been waging economic war on Britain since before the First World War.
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
It's cos SLab don't really, in their heart of hearts, believe in No. It is extraordinarily difficult to sell a product that you just don't believe in yourself.
Socialism is antithetical to the nation state. They hate Britain, but they have no real love for Scotland. If Scotland goes indy, it will be more subject to the misery of socialism, not less.
We cannot get serious about reforming the immigration system without also ending the something-for-nothing benefit culture. At times, I wonder if politicians almost depend on the crazy immigration system we have in order to avoid having to make any difficult decisions about benefits. In order to change things for the better, Britain needs to take back control of its immigration system. It is no coincidence that two of the countries with the best immigration systems I can think of – Switzerland and Australia – are both outside the EU.
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Greetings from Arlanda
Is is worth going to California end of October/Start of November, what's the weather like?
The indyref has delayed my normal holiday plans.
Bit cold that time of year - only in the mid 70s. SoCal is always lovely - but you can also fit in trips to LA, Hearst Castle, San Fran etc
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
You assure multinational companies that you'll have a free trade deal and less regulation outside the EU, and after you leave, you implement an immigration policy that makes it easy for the highly skilled, English-speaking professionals to come here, but is very tough on the unskilled from the world's unstable areas.
Post an EU exit, multinationals world face UK regulation and EU regulation, surely. Furthermore, if today pwc wants someone from the Paris office to work in London for three months there is no regulation whatsoever. Are you going to have special rules for multinationals that smaller companies do not benefit from? Or are you going to accept that large law firms and consultants and investment banks are not going to be based here?
I think membership of the EU is very convenient for multi-national companies. As are very liberal immigration laws.
Sometimes in politics, one just has to pick a side. So, I'd say, it's tough, if leaving the EU makes life harder for them.
@Socrates What would your plan for devolution to Greater Manchester mean for great counties such as Lancashire?
I am of a belief that devolution within/to England is important and needed. But if we say devolved powers to cities and counties would these be the same as those devolved to Scotland/Wales? If so could we not reasonably get 43 education systems? If this practically viable? Or will it be a different type of devolution with a pan-English NHS? If so we then need an English Parliament too, a possible additional tier of government. An English Parliament would give England a clear political identity, but it certainly does not bring power closer to the people, or not by much. An English Parliament is thus not the answer of itself.
Why not just replicate the London system in Gtr Manchester?
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Greetings from Arlanda
Is is worth going to California end of October/Start of November, what's the weather like?
The indyref has delayed my normal holiday plans.
Bit cold that time of year - only in the mid 70s. SoCal is always lovely - but you can also fit in trips to LA, Hearst Castle, San Fran etc
Evening all and just to report the IndyRef debate this evening on STV was refreshingly civilised and non-shouty. Douglas Alexander gave a solid performance, Ruth Davidson gave an inspired performance and Kazia Dugdale more than held her own. The actress Elaine C Smith was more "Mary Doll" than Mother of the people, Patrick Harvie was his usual fantasist Green tree hugger and Nicola Sturgeon did her best but was let down by her weak back up team.
However and sadly I doubt it will make a single shred of difference and by two weeks on Friday we will be into the countdown to the end of the UK as we know it. The Scottish Labour Party will have failed the UK by failing to deliver their traditional supporters to the NO side.
It's cos SLab don't really, in their heart of hearts, believe in No. It is extraordinarily difficult to sell a product that you just don't believe in yourself.
Socialism is antithetical to the nation state. They hate Britain, but they have no real love for Scotland. If Scotland goes indy, it will be more subject to the misery of socialism, not less.
@Luckyguy1983 "Socialism is antithetical to the nation state. They hate Britain, but they have no real love for Scotland." What would you consider "a real love for Scotland? Would it be the same as a real love for England?
Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
I think it's a country mile off the mark, more importantly. "I would like Britain to be the way it used to be". Agree 53%, Disagree 33%. "The world is changing too fast". Agree 61%, Disagree 31%. Mori, December 2013.
There's a huge gap in the market for a real 'nostalgia party' - UKIP have a lot of those voters at the moment, but not all. I think Nigel has recognised that, with noises about renationalising some services from the bug outsourcers, and so on, as a nod to the 'nostalgic left' who need something more than they've had from UKIP so far.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
UKIP's problem is that there are simply not enough voters who share their view of wanting Britain to be forever a cosy hybrid of the National Trust and Test Match Special.
And there is (part of ) the Tory's problem demonstrated perfectly. Tories would be better advised looking at and resolving some of their own issues rather than sneering at and misrepresenting other parties.
I think it's a country mile off the mark, more importantly. "I would like Britain to be the way it used to be". Agree 53%, Disagree 33%. "The world is changing too fast". Agree 61%, Disagree 31%. Mori, December 2013.
There's a huge gap in the market for a real 'nostalgia party' - UKIP have a lot of those voters at the moment, but not all. I think Nigel has recognised that, with noises about renationalising some services from the bug outsourcers, and so on, as a nod to the 'nostalgic left' who need something more than they've had from UKIP so far.
Ukip is also pro-nationalisation of the railway is it not? Probably for similar reasons that Peter Hitchens is
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
Really? This from Carswell's blog
30 Dec 2013
In Parliament: Immigration
Douglas recently delivered a petition to 10 Downing Street, calling on the Prime Minister to take action to prevent large numbers of unskilled EU migrants arriving from Bulgaria and Romania.
He also spoke in a recent debate in Parliament, and put his name to a motion to amend the Immigration Bill.
"I am convinced that the only answer to immigration is for Britain to take the approach that they take in Switzerland or Australia. Both nations attract the brightest and the best. Both nations have immigration systems that allow them to benefit from highly skilled migrants.
Our immigration system should favour those with skills who what to get on in life. Instead, we seem powerless to decide our own immigration criteria for ourselves as a country".
Switzerland and Australia both take a no nonsense approach, and don't let in those that they do not want in".
Both Switzerland and Australia are outside the European Union, which allows them to control their own borders.
I'd go and see a quack if you keep getting those 'feelings'
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
Only in Britain could the job of sorting out a matter of such vital national importance as airport capacity be handed to Howard Davies.
By all accounts Davies is a very nice, intelligent man. However, he was also the first chairman of the disastrous FSA, the bank regulator that later failed so spectacularly during the financial crisis. He then ran the London School of Economics, or the Libyan School of Economics as it was dubbed when on his watch it got too close to the former Libyan dictator.
Neither of these cock-ups was an obstacle to further advancement, however. The British Establishment certainly looks after its own. When the Prime Minister needed someone to fluff the issue, delaying a final decision on Heathrow versus Gatwick until after the election, Davies got the call.
You think that is bad? The British Government in their wisdom have given the job of running the Major Projects Authority to my former boss John Manzoni. This is the man who almost destroyed Talisman Oil and who had previously, during his time at BP, been heavily criticised for his part in the Texas City Refinery disaster in which 15 people died.
Just wondering on latest ISIS beheading (and I haven't seen more than stills from the video), but wondering.... could it be that they have executed a load of hostages and plan to keep releasing the videos over time?
I believe in the audio there is one mention of Mosul Dam that occurred since the first video, is there anything else? And even then as we never see the individual face, we have no idea if everything is just a voice over anyway.
Not trying to don the tin foil hat or anything, just wondering, as it appears a network of ISIS sympathizers have had this video for a little bit and were ordered to all release at the same time, but somebody tweeted it too soon.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
My very pleasant Rhineland tour, courtesy Rupert Murdoch, ends on Friday. After that I might have 5 or 6 days where I could hire a car at Frankfurt and go anywhere, to do some writing and hiking and exploring.
But where? Of all the big European countries, Germany is the one I know least. I've been here, Berlin, Aachen, cologne, Dresden, and Munich, and the Bavarian alps, But all briefly. I'd like somewhere sunny in September (so probably south) but with interesting history, and nice hotels if poss.
The Black Forest? The weird Elbe mountains? Where? Or should I just drive on into France, Switzerland or Italy?
Germanophiles required!
Danke. Vielen danke..
Stop thinking of the nice parts, go visit some "shitholes" and you'll get a wider knowledge of a country than pretty scenery and posh restaurants provide.
Try the Essen-Gelsenkirchen-Bochum area or the drabest parts of the Mecklenberg coast.
I've been to the toilety areas of the Ruhr. Nasty. I don't need to see any more. And I'm not in the mood for a soviet coastline. I've recently been to the chavvier parts of coastal Kent and Bournemouth, which are bad enough, tho I'm sure north East Germany is worse.
I want mountains. September sun. Old churches. Perhaps a weird nazi death shrine.
F*k Germany.
Go to Stockholm. 25C next few days, long nights, and beautiful, uninhibited women,
Greetings from Arlanda
Is is worth going to California end of October/Start of November, what's the weather like?
The indyref has delayed my normal holiday plans.
Bit cold that time of year - only in the mid 70s. SoCal is always lovely - but you can also fit in trips to LA, Hearst Castle, San Fran etc
Cheers, I was thinking a few days at Disneyland.
That could work too... ;-)
Am told it is worth paying up for the jump-the-queue pass that they have
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone e by an arch-socialist.
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
@Socrates What would your plan for devolution to Greater Manchester mean for great counties such as Lancashire?
I am of a belief that devolution within/to England is important and needed. But if we say devolved powers to cities and counties would these be the same as those devolved to Scotland/Wales? If so could we not reasonably get 43 education systems? If this practically viable? Or will it be a different type of devolution with a pan-English NHS? If so we then need an English Parliament too, a possible additional tier of government. An English Parliament would give England a clear political identity, but it certainly does not bring power closer to the people, or not by much. An English Parliament is thus not the answer of itself.
As was mentioned by Han, I'd do limited devolution to Greater Manchester, along a similar level for Greater London. Education and health should be England-wide.
I don't particularly see why it would be a good idea to devolve education or health to the regions. Things like exam systems should be country wide, and the stuff that can be devolved should be devolved right down to the school level, which is what Gove is doing.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone else is saying.”
Carswell: “Well you shouldn’t be able to say that. Remember the Olympics, the opening ceremony, I don’t know about you but that made me feel so good about this country. We were all together and we’ve got to have that sense of we’re all together.”
Supporter: “It was actually organised by an arch-socialist.”
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Really?
Like French working in Geneva, Germans working in Zurich and Italians working in Brig?
A bit like Scots, Irish and Welsh working in England.
Free movement of people between states with similar populations may be desirable (yes, I've read Heidi), but between complete dissimilar countries? I don't think so.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Something Carswell will also face, I think Kippers are in for a suprrise
The subject of the NHS came up, and the supporter claimed it was being exploited by visitors to this country: “When you’ve got the National Health Service, let’s face it, you can’t pay for the influx of immigrants any longer.”
Carswell: “I don’t think that is the fundamental question.”
Supporter: “I’m not allowed to say these things. But I’m speaking what everyone e by an arch-socialist.
Carswell: “Come on, there are some very nice socialists. If it wasn’t for socialism we wouldn’t have the NHS. They have done some good things, the Left in this country.”
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
You assure multinational companies that you'll have a free trade deal and less regulation outside the EU, and after you leave, you implement an immigration policy that makes it easy for the highly skilled, English-speaking professionals to come here, but is very tough on the unskilled from the world's unstable areas.
Post an EU exit, multinationals world face UK regulation and EU regulation, surely. Furthermore, if today pwc wants someone from the Paris office to work in London for three months there is no regulation whatsoever. Are you going to have special rules for multinationals that smaller companies do not benefit from? Or are you going to accept that large law firms and consultants and investment banks are not going to be based here?
I'm not saying outside the EU there woudn't be any disadvantages for MNCs. Just that overall it could be better for them. In terms of regulation, they would face (lighter) UK regulation at home, and EU regulation just for what they sell into the EU.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
Ok thank for the clarification. Do you then seek an English Parliament or would it be a UK Parliament with English votes for English laws that determines that English health policy etc?
Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
Shock! That's what I've been posting for the last 6 months... But @malcolmg keeps telling me I'm a turnip.
Well that's a sign you're right. MalcolmG knows Scotland so well, he called those of us who backed UKIP to win a seat in the Euros in Scotland, turnips (and worse)
LuckyGuy1983 As John Lennon said 'Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too...Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man' The Leftwing Gospel in one
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The government are hopefully going out to tender to build a large border fence to divide England and Scotland. Anpther bl**dy debate on ITV on Scot indy and the same arguments. Nicola Sturgeon is even using the same tactics as Salmond, by walking away from their lectern. I personally dislike nationalists of all types and find them to be inward looking fanatics, who want to separate themselves from outsiders, because they somehow think they are better than other races. I am not sure SNP are that bothered if Scotland finds themselves worse off financially after independence.
Ok thank for the clarification. Do you then seek an English Parliament or would it be a UK Parliament with English votes for English laws that determines that English health policy etc?
Just wondering on latest ISIS beheading (and I haven't seen more than stills from the video), but wondering.... could it be that they have executed a load of hostages and plan to keep releasing the videos over time?
I believe in the audio there is one mention of Mosul Dam, is there anything else? And even then as we never see the individual face, we have no idea if everything is just a voice over anyway.
Not trying to don the tin foil hat or anything, just wondering.
Why wouldn't they kill them?
1) They enjoy killing
2) They don't want anything off us, other than to kill us, so the hostages are not 'chips' in any sense
3) They're not stupid, and realise Western INTEL will be scanning the videos for clues, for possible rescue/revenge missions, etc. Better to leave as few clues as possible. Just perform all the killings at the same place/time and move on.
4) They understand the principles of psychological warfare. Drip feed us the videos.
And the fact there were voiceovers for both videos tends to support this interpretation.
Michael Heaver (@Michael_Heaver) 02/09/2014 22:08 The Sun: David Cameron now begging his MPs in desperate bid to stay in power bit.ly/1vKgqOn
To be fair to Cameron, , it must be pretty grim to be Conservative leader. How do you reconcile Metroplitan Coservatives, whose principal concern is to further the interests of multi-national companies, with rural and small to medium-town Conseratives, who want to end mass immigration and pull out of the EU, and to hell with multi-national companies?
Re-reading his books and articles, it would appear that Douglas Carswell's reason for leaving the EU is not because of immigration, but because of a lack of democratic accountability and a lack of mandate.
I get the feeling he is pro-immigration, which may come as a shock to some Kippers.
He is against uncontrolled immigration... Same as most kippers
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
I feel bad for you because you thought you'd found a negative for ukip, but Carswell isn't pro immigration anymore than Farage is
I wonder if Carswell would also feel uncomfortable living next to Romanians, or hearing people speak another language on a train
He might even marry a foreigner
A German. You know the difference.
Farage is rich enough that even if he did live next door to Romanians they would be wealthy Romanians not gypsys.
But for the majority of people that's not the case and at least he empathised with people that have concerns instead of pretending to be shocked by the mere suggestion
LuckyGuy1983 As John Lennon said 'Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too...Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man' The Leftwing Gospel in one
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
I guess the only issue with English votes for English laws is how you manage the dual majority issue of one party leading in England and another in the UK?
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I guess the only issue with English votes for English laws is how you manage the dual majority issue of one party leading in England and another in the UK?
You could also lead to the farcical situation of say a Scottish MP being Secretary of State for Health (for England) proposing legislation but not being able to vote on it.
Even funnier, take James Callaghan, an MP for a Welsh Seat, not being able to vote on the majority of legislation.
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
Just as Cameron certainly wasn't what many Conservatives were expecting. But until UKIP supporters actually start leaving the party in the numbers that natural Conservatives have deserted Cameron I don't think Carswell will be worrying too much.
I would have thought attacking ISIS from the air would be quite effective. It's not like they're going to be in centres of population. Anyone normal wouldn't go anywhere near them
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
In most areas of Switzerland, they predominantly speak just one language.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
Just as Cameron certainly wasn't what many Conservatives were expecting. But until UKIP supporters actually start leaving the party in the numbers that natural Conservatives have deserted Cameron I don't think Carswell will be worrying too much.
Not quite, the same applies to Boris as it does to Carswell.
Boris as Tory leader brings back Kippers, but his views, on immigration, would be anathema to most Kippers.
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
I would have thought attacking ISIS from the air would be quite effective. It's not like they're going to be in centres of population. Anyone normal wouldn't go anywhere near them
Unfortunately that is exactly where they are. Whilst obviously they are easy targets out in the open they have their strength in the towns and cities where they are effectively holding much of the population hostage.
This appears to be why the US have been effective in helping the Kurds halt the ISIS advance and push them back in places like the Mosul Dam but have not really been able to do much to loosen their grip on much of Northern Iraq.
I guess the only issue with English votes for English laws is how you manage the dual majority issue of one party leading in England and another in the UK?
Let's move to a confederation. Radical devolution with 3 (or 4) countries each on DevoMax. A rump UK government dealing with foreign affairs and defence and not much else. The US Articles of Confederation would be a good model, or the Holy Roman Empire post-Peace of Westphalia.
I guess the only issue with English votes for English laws is how you manage the dual majority issue of one party leading in England and another in the UK?
You could also lead to the farcical situation of say a Scottish MP being Secretary of State for Health (for England) proposing legislation but not being able to vote on it.
Even funnier, take James Callaghan, an MP for a Welsh Seat, not being able to vote on the majority of legislation.
When Lords are ministers, they don't get a vote in the Commons either. However, the sensible solution would be that MPs for Scottish and Welsh seats shouldn't be selected for England-only ministerial posts.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
Carswell sure doesn't want that. He believes we should decide who can and can't come in, same as all kippers, hence he joined ukip and left the Tories
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
Whilst languages might have been your strong point basic logic clearly wasn't. I believe that is what is called a conflation of arguments.
I would have thought attacking ISIS from the air would be quite effective. It's not like they're going to be in centres of population. Anyone normal wouldn't go anywhere near them
Are you on stupid pills again? Dont you think they might be going near people rather than vice versa? Like entire towns under siege etc
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
Do I really need to explain the difference between hearing one foreign language and hearing only foreign languages?
Please do.
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Depends on the context. If you and everyone in your area of England were all speaking foreign languages, it would say something about the cultural shift in the area and might make him feel slightly awkward. If it was just one or two people, probably not at all.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
I've been to Switzerland, they speak many languages, they don't seem uncomfortable.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
In most areas of Switzerland, they predominantly speak just one language.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
Just as Cameron certainly wasn't what many Conservatives were expecting. But until UKIP supporters actually start leaving the party in the numbers that natural Conservatives have deserted Cameron I don't think Carswell will be worrying too much.
Not quite, the same applies to Boris as it does to Carswell.
Boris as Tory leader brings back Kippers, but his views, on immigration, would be anathema to most Kippers.
Which kind of goes to show that your claims about Kippers and immigration is rather ill founded doesn't it? After all, if immigration was the be all and end all of Kipper voting then they wouldn't touch Boris with a barge pole
Like I said logical thinking does not appear to be your strong point this evening.
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
The question is, does Carswell want foreigners to be able to come here and immediately claim benefits? 'Cos I am quite happy for anyone to come here and have to live on their wits. Surely we need the entrepreneurial immigrants, and those who can hold down well paid jobs. Not benefit tourists. Not people who will claim Child Benefit for children living in another country.
We do.
Well you can't have it as long as we stay in the EU.
I am sure you could have a convention about non-English constituency MPs not operating on devolved area departments. However, you still could have (even if the dual majority challenge I noted before did not emerge) of a Scottish constituency MP as Prime Minister and surely also serving as English First Minister without being able to vote on legislation she/he proposes?
What is interesting of course is whether if you went federal (beyond the sustainability with a very large member state in England) you need UK departments of Education and Health like you have in the USA. In a sense this could actually lead to more central control over say, education policy in Scotland and Wales than is currently exercised in London! But I assume in federal systems you have a pan-federation education department to maintain certain frameworks?
I would have thought attacking ISIS from the air would be quite effective. It's not like they're going to be in centres of population. Anyone normal wouldn't go anywhere near them
Are you on stupid pills again? Dont you think they might be going near people rather than vice versa? Like entire towns under siege etc
They seemed to be besieging that Turkmen city called Emerli or something similar. The thought occurred to me that to besiege it they must have dug themselves in around it, and if they have secure positions we should be able to rain fiery death upon them etc
Not quite, he cites Switzerland, you know the place where 20% of the employed are Jonny Foreigners.
Yes and where there is controlled immigration. I don't know why you lot seem to find this so hard to grasp as a concept. Controlled immigration does not mean no immigration. It depends entirely on the country and its individual needs/desires.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
Well I think TSE's (unproven) assumption is that most Kippers not only believe in controlled immigration, they also believe that the correct level of immigration is very, very low.
As you say that is his assumption. It is clearly not Carswell's position - bearing in mind this is who he was criticising - nor is it mine.
I wasn't criticising Carswell, I'm a fan of his generally.
Okay, criticising is the wrong word then - misrepresenting would probably be more accurate.
I wasn't trying to misrepresent him, I was pointing out he might not be what some Kippers are expecting, see his comments on the NHS from his ConHome interview as an example.
Just as Cameron certainly wasn't what many Conservatives were expecting. But until UKIP supporters actually start leaving the party in the numbers that natural Conservatives have deserted Cameron I don't think Carswell will be worrying too much.
Not quite, the same applies to Boris as it does to Carswell.
Boris as Tory leader brings back Kippers, but his views, on immigration, would be anathema to most Kippers.
Which kind of goes to show that your claims about Kippers and immigration is rather ill founded doesn't it? After all, if immigration was the be all and end all og Kipper voting then they wouldn't touch Boris with a barge pole
Like I said logical thinking does not appear to be your strong point this evening.
No, the point is, the general public at large, aren't always knowledgeable about a politician's policies.
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
If that's what you took from my post then there's really no point in me trying to debate with you.
Throw me a bone here, I'm desperately trying to tease out an actual argument from your post. You're somehow joining the dots from Rotherham to justifying feeling uncomfortable about somebody solely because of their race, and I'm just trying to work out how.
JamesM If a government has a UK majority but no English majority then if it has to amend legislation that only affects England to win a majority of English MPs support then so be it
Comments
Only in Britain could the job of sorting out a matter of such vital national importance as airport capacity be handed to Howard Davies.
By all accounts Davies is a very nice, intelligent man. However, he was also the first chairman of the disastrous FSA, the bank regulator that later failed so spectacularly during the financial crisis. He then ran the London School of Economics, or the Libyan School of Economics as it was dubbed when on his watch it got too close to the former Libyan dictator.
Neither of these cock-ups was an obstacle to further advancement, however. The British Establishment certainly looks after its own. When the Prime Minister needed someone to fluff the issue, delaying a final decision on Heathrow versus Gatwick until after the election, Davies got the call.
I am of a belief that devolution within/to England is important and needed. But if we say devolved powers to cities and counties would these be the same as those devolved to Scotland/Wales? If so could we not reasonably get 43 education systems? If this practically viable? Or will it be a different type of devolution with a pan-English NHS? If so we then need an English Parliament too, a possible additional tier of government. An English Parliament would give England a clear political identity, but it certainly does not bring power closer to the people, or not by much. An English Parliament is thus not the answer of itself.
I hardly think so. Sentiment and some key relationships at the top aside, the US has been waging economic war on Britain since before the First World War.
http://oilchangeproject.nationalsecurityzone.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Chokepoints-map1.gif
In order to change things for the better, Britain needs to take back control of its immigration system. It is no coincidence that two of the countries with the best immigration systems I can think of – Switzerland and Australia – are both outside the EU.
Douglas Carswell
PS Loving Han Dodges tonight...
Sometimes in politics, one just has to pick a side. So, I'd say, it's tough, if leaving the EU makes life harder for them.
Daily Mail U.K. (@DailyMailUK)
02/09/2014 22:29
Wednesday's @DailyMailUK #MailFrontPages pic.twitter.com/unXbWjkzD3
"Socialism is antithetical to the nation state. They hate Britain, but they have no real love for Scotland."
What would you consider "a real love for Scotland? Would it be the same as a real love for England?
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/uk-lloyds-scotland-idUKKBN0GX20920140902
There's a huge gap in the market for a real 'nostalgia party' - UKIP have a lot of those voters at the moment, but not all. I think Nigel has recognised that, with noises about renationalising some services from the bug outsourcers, and so on, as a nod to the 'nostalgic left' who need something more than they've had from UKIP so far.
In some cases such as Australia currently this can mean a lot of people coming in. But they would still be filtered and chosen by the host nation based upon their own criteria.
In other cases it might mean very limited immigration of certain specific skill sets.
But both cases involve control and the ability to change criteria to suit changing needs. . Something that is currently lacking entirely in our relationship with the EU and migration from those countries.
How do you think that'll go down with the Kippers?
30 Dec 2013
In Parliament: Immigration
Douglas recently delivered a petition to 10 Downing Street, calling on the Prime Minister to take action to prevent large numbers of unskilled EU migrants arriving from Bulgaria and Romania.
He also spoke in a recent debate in Parliament, and put his name to a motion to amend the Immigration Bill.
"I am convinced that the only answer to immigration is for Britain to take the approach that they take in Switzerland or Australia. Both nations attract the brightest and the best. Both nations have immigration systems that allow them to benefit from highly skilled migrants.
Our immigration system should favour those with skills who what to get on in life. Instead, we seem powerless to decide our own immigration criteria for ourselves as a country".
Switzerland and Australia both take a no nonsense approach, and don't let in those that they do not want in".
Both Switzerland and Australia are outside the European Union, which allows them to control their own borders.
I'd go and see a quack if you keep getting those 'feelings'
UKIP leader Nigel Farage says he feels awkward when he doesn't hear English on the train
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2570198/Nigel-Farage-launches-patriotic-push-Euro-election-victory-Ukips-new-Love-Britain-slogan-used-BNP.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/03/bp-oil-disaster-fracking-executive-hs2-john-manzoni
The idea of him getting within a million miles of anything to do with our nuclear industry fills me with dread.
I believe in the audio there is one mention of Mosul Dam that occurred since the first video, is there anything else? And even then as we never see the individual face, we have no idea if everything is just a voice over anyway.
Not trying to don the tin foil hat or anything, just wondering, as it appears a network of ISIS sympathizers have had this video for a little bit and were ordered to all release at the same time, but somebody tweeted it too soon.
Am told it is worth paying up for the jump-the-queue pass that they have
I don't particularly see why it would be a good idea to devolve education or health to the regions. Things like exam systems should be country wide, and the stuff that can be devolved should be devolved right down to the school level, which is what Gove is doing.
Like French working in Geneva, Germans working in Zurich and Italians working in Brig?
A bit like Scots, Irish and Welsh working in England.
Free movement of people between states with similar populations may be desirable (yes, I've read Heidi), but between complete dissimilar countries? I don't think so.
Have a read. Read UKIP.
Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too...Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man' The Leftwing Gospel in one
I have to say even Basil saw that humungous bear trap about foreigners on a train. Cannot believe someone walked into it.
1) They enjoy killing
2) They don't want anything off us, other than to kill us, so the hostages are not 'chips' in any sense
3) They're not stupid, and realise Western INTEL will be scanning the videos for clues, for possible rescue/revenge missions, etc. Better to leave as few clues as possible. Just perform all the killings at the same place/time and move on.
4) They understand the principles of psychological warfare. Drip feed us the videos.
And the fact there were voiceovers for both videos tends to support this interpretation.
But for the majority of people that's not the case and at least he empathised with people that have concerns instead of pretending to be shocked by the mere suggestion
For example, I can speak, several languages, how awkward would I make Nigel Farage feel?
Between a German family and a group of Eastern European men? Yes, we do.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
Do you really not get that people feel a bit culturally alienated in their own country if everyone around them is speaking a foreign language? Is it really such an alien concept to you that you need to mock people for saying this?
Even funnier, take James Callaghan, an MP for a Welsh Seat, not being able to vote on the majority of legislation.
So he's the one who keeps pulling the communication cord on the Paris Metro......
I believe, Dulwich boy Farage, learned most of the languages I learned.
I believe Douglas Carswell wants our immigration system to be like Switzerland, so get used it.
The event is taking place in the Saturday Night Live studio at NBC.
I hope it's not an omen. The European team is strong.
Boris as Tory leader brings back Kippers, but his views, on immigration, would be anathema to most Kippers.
You know, after 1400 kids were raped because people were afraid to act due to the constant threat of being accused of racism, I would have thought lefties would have become a bit more careful about implying people were racist. But maybe not.
So the lesson you've drawn from that news is that we should suspect people of being child rapists based solely on racial profiling? Because I'm not sure how else you would see it as justifying feeling uncomfortable living next to a group of people where the only information you have about them is their nationality.
This appears to be why the US have been effective in helping the Kurds halt the ISIS advance and push them back in places like the Mosul Dam but have not really been able to do much to loosen their grip on much of Northern Iraq.
Like I said logical thinking does not appear to be your strong point this evening.
What is interesting of course is whether if you went federal (beyond the sustainability with a very large member state in England) you need UK departments of Education and Health like you have in the USA. In a sense this could actually lead to more central control over say, education policy in Scotland and Wales than is currently exercised in London! But I assume in federal systems you have a pan-federation education department to maintain certain frameworks?