Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Are you sure? - I thought Blair said the Lisbon Treaty was just a 'tidying up exercise'?
The likelihood of movement away from UKIP is almost certainly more likely to favour the Tories than Labour or Lib Dems (who are often ex Labour)
Whilst some will complain about immigration, it will be nothing compared to the threat of wealth taxes, unemployment, anti-business etc when the big day comes.
That will leave some of those with the most to lose most sliding back into Tory ranks. It will be those who have nothing to lose that will remain most loyal to the Kippers, and they are Labour demographics.
The money will back the path of least risk and disruption.
Low interest rates, excellent employment numbers and an aversion to extra taxes remain trump cards next May.
Have you looked at the socio economic spit of the UKIP vote in Ashcrofts poll C1, C2 & DE numbers of supporters are relatively similar. A/B are only half that number. As such wealth taxes will be irrelevant and is in large part already factored in I think. Resentment about the 'have mores' after years of earnings stagnancy will be enough to negate that as an issue. People will generally think 'I'm alright Jack'. Ditto business the thought of large Energy companies raking it in is enough to dilute any concerns over business threat. People who support UKIP tend to have a decentralist streak in them and whilst they may see big business as a necessary evil they don't like Big Global Businesses and as such any such scaremongering will likely fall on stony ground.
Which leaves you with the unemployment considerations which frankly given the history of both parties does not resonate particularly well. Labour have never been considered the party of unemployment. You'll get some people to return to the fold but not that many. Miliband just doesn't seem as scary as Brown did.
I'm afraid this is just more Tory straw clutching.
Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs ... The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
Do you know when those changes were agreed? Is it possible that they are part of a phased/delayed implementation of changes that were set down in Lisbon?
It just seems weird that I haven't heard of these at all before, whereas you would have thought that some Eurosceptic or other would have made a big fuss about them at the time they were agreed.
You might know in advance what Dan Hodges is going to say, but he does continually find nice new turns of phrase with which to say it:
Gordon Brown was a polarising figure, but he was liked by Labour voters. Ed Miliband is not a polarising figure. No one thinks he is up to the job of being prime minister, including a majority of potential Labour supporters.
Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs ... The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
Do you know when those changes were agreed? Is it possible that they are part of a phased/delayed implementation of changes that were set down in Lisbon?
It just seems weird that I haven't heard of these at all before, whereas you would have thought that some Eurosceptic or other would have made a big fuss about them at the time they were agreed.
Agreed in the Lisbon treaty under the last government.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
So Cameron can fairly blame Labour for it, then.
I wonder whether there are any he would try to get back as part of his renegotiation?
There's potentially a positive angle on this for Britain, though. Germany has been dragging its heels about taking strong action against Putin, and so there's potential for Britain to build a majority for taking stronger action now that Germany doesn't have a veto over EU Foreign Affairs or Defence.
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year. In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect. Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
The likelihood of movement away from UKIP is almost certainly more likely to favour the Tories than Labour or Lib Dems (who are often ex Labour)
Whilst some will complain about immigration, it will be nothing compared to the threat of wealth taxes, unemployment, anti-business etc when the big day comes.
That will leave some of those with the most to lose most sliding back into Tory ranks. It will be those who have nothing to lose that will remain most loyal to the Kippers, and they are Labour demographics.
The money will back the path of least risk and disruption.
Low interest rates, excellent employment numbers and an aversion to extra taxes remain trump cards next May.
But employment for the vast majority means falling living standards under the Tories if the last 5 years is anything to go by.
Looks like the Tories don't get how damaging that is by the look of we can't afford a 1% increase for nurses but we have to accept an 11.9% increase for MPs and a 20% increase for FTSE100 chiefs.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Two weeks to go before the new areas of Qualified Majority Voting in Brussels comes to fruition and the UK loses vetoes over tens of areas:
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs ... The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
Do you know when those changes were agreed? Is it possible that they are part of a phased/delayed implementation of changes that were set down in Lisbon?
It just seems weird that I haven't heard of these at all before, whereas you would have thought that some Eurosceptic or other would have made a big fuss about them at the time they were agreed.
Indeed funny how all those 'Eurosceptics' in the Tory party are silent about them isn't it?
There is one final reason why the 29 per cent Labour secured in 2010 is no longer the floor for Labour’s vote share. A significant proportion of that 2010 vote has already crumbled away. A YouGov poll published in February found that Labour had lost 26 per cent of its vote from the last election. Half a million Labour voters have died. 1.2 million have switched to other parties. And a further 800,000 say they don’t know how they’ll vote now. In fact, YouGov’s survey found the Tories have more “loyal” voters (6.5 million) than Labour (6.1 million). So, based on those figures, Labour’s base is actually around 21.5 per cent.
You might know in advance what Dan Hodges is going to say, but he does continually find nice new turns of phrase with which to say it:
Gordon Brown was a polarising figure, but he was liked by Labour voters. Ed Miliband is not a polarising figure. No one thinks he is up to the job of being prime minister, including a majority of potential Labour supporters.
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year. In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect. Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year. In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect. Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
Don't think that that is going to happen. Clegg is not giving up as DPM until he has to. There'll be no friendly divorce and a messy split would damage both CON & LD.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year. In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect. Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
Don't think that that is going to happen. Clegg is not giving up as DPM until he has to. There'll be no friendly divorce and a messy split would damage both CON & LD.
Quite agree, I'd very happily bet at 1-6 the coalition will last past year end.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was agreed by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
And they think that after agreeing to the treaty, Labour will give them a referendum? Ha Ha Ha.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
I suppose the argument is that if the Tories opposed it, why didn't they repeal it as soon as they got into office. Probably 1) Lib Dems, 2) that's not really how international relations work.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Isn't that just, well, respect for the rule of law?
You may think that Cameron's attempts at renegotiation have been inept, or insufficiently vigorous, but if one wanted to roll-back some of the changes in Lisbon you would have to do that by negotiation.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
No blaming them for rolling over like the sad little toy poodles they are and offering Brussels their bellies! Typical pathetic Tory misrepresenting what people say in a desperate attempt to make excuses for their simpering supine impotency.
There are now polls in 86 constituencies. The average movement in all of them is CON -8.73, LAB +4.84, LD -13.58, UKIP+15,38, with a swing of 6.78% from CON to LAB, in Tory seats though the swing appears to be a tad smaller than the average. So far in those 86 constituencies LAB gain 40 seats, CON lose 33 and gain 7, LD lose 15 and UKIP gains 4.
Looking at Ashcroft's latest poll we are approaching that area where LAB and CON are close in most seats, though Labour is still ahead in almost all of them. It suggests a Labour majority of around 30-40 seats. Of course that applies to England and Wales only, since there are no constituency polls in Scotland. The other big question apart from Scotland is what is going on in relatively safe Tory and Labour seats with regards to UKIP.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
I suppose the argument is that if the Tories opposed it, why didn't they repeal it as soon as they got into office. Probably 1) Lib Dems, 2) that's not really how international relations work.
Can't blame the LibDems for this one. You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU. There was no going back to the pre-Lisbon position.
That is the tragedy of the whole thing. Everything we are arguing about could and should have been addressed before Lisbon was signed, whilst we still had the necessary vetoes and bargaining chips. As with the rebate, the half-wits who were running the country at the time (and whom Farage wants back in power) threw away the bargaining power for nothing in return.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
So Cameron can fairly blame Labour for it, then.
I wonder whether there are any he would try to get back as part of his renegotiation?
There's potentially a positive angle on this for Britain, though. Germany has been dragging its heels about taking strong action against Putin, and so there's potential for Britain to build a majority for taking stronger action now that Germany doesn't have a veto over EU Foreign Affairs or Defence.
I don't think if European leaders are prioritising their own people rather than US interests there will be further sanctions when the current ones end, we can already see the dramatic effects sanctions are having on the European economy. Europe continues to make a complete mess of the situation, it remains to be seen how it is going to get itself out of the problem with the Ukrainian economy imploding, who will pay to stabilize the situation? Ending the sanctions war and reconciliation with Russia should be a top priority but the damage is done.
The entire conflict between Russia and Europe was completely unnecessary, counterproductive and shows how easy it is for Europe to be led around by the nose against its own interests by an expansionist NATO and the imaginary threat of an aggressive expansionist Russia.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
You mean that they believe, as a country, we should keep to our Treaty obligations, even those signed by a previous government?
I'm sure you would object if the Spanish, for instance, unilaterally tore up the Treaty of Utrecht and marched troops into Gibraltar? Or how about if the French refused to abide by the terms of the Treaty of Troyes?
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
I suppose the argument is that if the Tories opposed it, why didn't they repeal it as soon as they got into office. Probably 1) Lib Dems, 2) that's not really how international relations work.
Can't blame the LibDems for this one. You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU. There was no going back to the pre-Lisbon position.
That is the tragedy of the whole thing. Everything we are arguing about could and should have been addressed before Lisbon was signed, whilst we still had the necessary vetoes and bargaining chips. As with the rebate, the half-wits who were running the country at the time (and who Farage wants back in power) threw away the bargaining power for nothing in return.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
You mean that they believe, as a country, we should keep to our Treaty obligations, even those signed by a previous government?
I'm sure you would object if the Spanish, for instance, unilaterally tore up the Treaty of Utrecht and marched troops into Gibraltar? Or how about if the French refused to abide by the terms of the Treaty of Troyes?
I thought the French already went back on Troyes, centuries ago - and they call us perfidious!
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
"It’s worth noting too that the letter very clearly demonstrates how the party’s campaign team has become increasingly professional with experience. That’s probably why the letter is reflective of the party’s general approach of emphasising local issues (something the Lib Dems did very effectively to win seats in the days before they were in government)."
When push came to shove in Scotland just a few weeks ago, people with money (and I don't mean just the super wealthy) voted according to the safety of their pension, cash in the bank, their mortgage, their job security. Arguments about grievance and appeals to heart and soul failed.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
As an aside, now I know how the left has felt all these years with their split!
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
Typical Kipper - blaming the Tories for a treaty which they opposed and voted against, but which was signed and ratified by Labour, the party you are trying to put back into government.
I suppose the argument is that if the Tories opposed it, why didn't they repeal it as soon as they got into office. Probably 1) Lib Dems, 2) that's not really how international relations work.
Can't blame the LibDems for this one. You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU. There was no going back to the pre-Lisbon position.
That is the tragedy of the whole thing. Everything we are arguing about could and should have been addressed before Lisbon was signed, whilst we still had the necessary vetoes and bargaining chips. As with the rebate, the half-wits who were running the country at the time (and whom Farage wants back in power) threw away the bargaining power for nothing in return.
Exactly – the final vote by Ireland in 2009 ratified the treaty and thus set it in stone. – Gordon Brown signing the damned thing was his final betrayal against the UK.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
As an aside, now I know how the left has felt all these years with their split!
Yeah, the difference is that they have learnt the lesson.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
And everyone knows that if there is a conservative government they will not argue for leaving the EU. (The Cabinet at least, the backbenchers will go wild.) And that is the problem, the Tory party has no credibility on that issue.
It's like Labour saying they are going to balance the budget.
I am curious, I would be grateful for some enlightenment.
Looking at the figures for UKIP it seems that many people are assuming that they are all mostly ex-tory voters who will run back to the flock at the GE. When I look at the voting intentions, I see a lot of people who have never voted before and have now decided to try and make a change.
In Scotland, there was a massive change in voting intention (over aspiration) in the Referendum. And the massive take up of new membership of the SNP and Greens indicates that it is continuing. ( I really think that a lot of the enthusiasm will evaporate on contact with local branch internal politics, but, hey ho, that's another story for another time)
If the slumbering majority has decided to wake up and take an interest in what is going on, then the previous bias assumptions in the traditional polls will need to be rethought out.
If UKIP is considered a viable alternative to the major parties by people who have not voted before and probably not even bothered being on the electoral roll (As in the IR in Scotland) then surely this changes the game plans of the parties, especially with reference to fixed term parliaments.
And everyone knows that if there is a conservative government they will not argue for leaving the EU. (The Cabinet at least, the backbenchers will go wild.) And that is the problem, the Tory party has no credibility on that issue.
The Conservative Party will have strong advocates on both sides of the case. Dan Hannan, for example, is one of the most credible advocates for leaving the EU.
But the people's army will carry the day, surely?
The UKIP position on this is absolutely risible - in one breath you say "the Tory party has no credibility", and yet you think that , even when they are not all on one side of the argument, they will somehow con the populace into voting to stay in.
You might know in advance what Dan Hodges is going to say, but he does continually find nice new turns of phrase with which to say it:
Gordon Brown was a polarising figure, but he was liked by Labour voters. Ed Miliband is not a polarising figure. No one thinks he is up to the job of being prime minister, including a majority of potential Labour supporters.
One historical fact which adds fuel to the suggestion that Labour may drop under the 29% in 2010 is the fact that at every GE following a GE where Labour lost power, their vote share fell in that election. True since at least WW2.
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year. In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect. Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
Personal interest will precede any pretence at party or national interest.There's a nice few extra quid for being a minister and a chauffeur-driven motor to take you backwards and forwards to the races and such like.Policies don't even come into the equation.Take the 1-3.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
If, if, if, if, if...
You don't believe in the referendum offered by Cameron, yet somehow everything will drop into place in 6 years time, and an unknown future government will offer one up as Kippers hope.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
According to Breitbart, the EPP blackmailed/bribed the lady.
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
Unfortunate - loss of group status will mean less funding, fewer seats on committees and reduced speaking time in parliament.
All the more reason to get much greater representation in country then. Its always questionable maintaining relationships with parties from nations with differing standards and outlooks . Still the loss of one MEP from one country is not likely to hold the EFD back for long. I imagine discussions with others will be going on as we speak just as there are discussions going on with Tory and Labour MPs....
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
We will no longer have a budget veto?
Doesn't look like it does it and under 'Ever Closer Union' why would you need it?
That's a bit of a bugger.
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Indeed, I was waiting for that excuse. We all know how the Europhile Tory government has submissively prostrated itself to the terms of Lisbon.For a party that was so against it before it was signed such submissiveness provides deep contrast.
You mean that they believe, as a country, we should keep to our Treaty obligations, even those signed by a previous government?
I'm sure you would object if the Spanish, for instance, unilaterally tore up the Treaty of Utrecht and marched troops into Gibraltar? Or how about if the French refused to abide by the terms of the Treaty of Troyes?
I thought the French already went back on Troyes, centuries ago - and they call us perfidious!
I *think* they waited for the ink to dry before ripping up the Treaty ;-)
Click on the year above each chart for the full breakdown. That what you were after?
In a manner of speaking - yes. (I was really hoping for all of them to be in the same table rather than having to cut and paste 15 times, but it's still better than trying to scrape it from the wiki page so cheers)
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
If, if, if, if, if...
You don't believe in the referendum offered by Cameron, yet somehow everything will drop into place in 6 years time, and an unknown future government will offer one up as Kippers hope.
You couldn't make it up.
Great all you need is to point out where I said I don't believe that Cameron will offer a referendum and then your post will make sense.
Incidentally have the dominant Eastern European representation in the ECR sanctioned Dave's 'tough new stance' on Immigration? I imagine the Tories Brussels partners can't be best pleased with all this anti-immigration rhetoric?
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
According to Breitbart, the EPP blackmailed/bribed the lady.
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
Unfortunate - loss of group status will mean less funding, fewer seats on committees and reduced speaking time in parliament.
All the more reason to get much greater representation in country then. Its always questionable maintaining relationships with parties from nations with differing standards and outlooks . Still the loss of one MEP from one country is not likely to hold the EFD back for long. I imagine discussions with others will be going on as we speak just as there are discussions going on with Tory and Labour MPs....
Quite agree Mr Kent - for the loss of a country, the party was lost..
What will be interesting in the coming weeks will be Farage's negotiating skills as he attempts to bring on-board another member to bring the tally back to seven. I shall be watching with interest.
Lots and lots of lovely ToriesbangingonaboutEurope.
Meanwhile Ed watches on, smiling.
Maybe, but look at imploding economies of Greece, Spain & Italy, the EU is not offering much of a future at the moment, other than more statist misdirection from Brussels.
Unfortunate - loss of group status will mean less funding, fewer seats on committees and reduced speaking time in parliament.
All the more reason to get much greater representation in country then. Its always questionable maintaining relationships with parties from nations with differing standards and outlooks . Still the loss of one MEP from one country is not likely to hold the EFD back for long. I imagine discussions with others will be going on as we speak just as there are discussions going on with Tory and Labour MPs....
Quite agree Mr Kent - for the loss of a country, the party was lost..
What will be interesting in the coming weeks will be Farage's negotiating skills as he attempts to bring on-board another member to bring the tally back to seven. I shall be watching with interest.
Indeed it won't be easy though particularly as some of the funding stream has been cut off. He might decide it's not a priority immediately especially with so many other priorities elsewhere in the coming months. Of course there is always something grubby and intellectually and emotionally conflicted in dealing in an environment you are so fundamentally opposed to. In any case given the slowdown in the EU economy it might be that the search will be more prosperous next year if a further EU recession takes hold.
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
There is a part of me that thinks that this may be a good election for the Tories to lose and that 5 years of Ed could kill Labour for ever.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.
Indeed - as you imply 5 years of Ed may also sink this country for ever. It might also make calling an EU referendum after 2020 very difficult as the UK would not look an attractive proposition for inward investment and may need to hold on to nanny EU's coat tails.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
There is a part of me that thinks that this may be a good election for the Tories to lose and that 5 years of Ed could kill Labour for ever.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.
Indeed - as you imply 5 years of Ed may also sink this country for ever. It might also make calling an EU referendum after 2020 very difficult as the UK would not look an attractive proposition for inward investment and may need to hold on to nanny EU's coat tails.
To believe the country might be sunk for ever suggests you have little belief in the British people. I do believe in them. Miliband will likely be a setback but no miserable Labour misfit is capable of breaking the British people.
That Tories seem to believe this just demonstrates how much Labour has undermined them and sent them to a very bad place psychologically. One might diagnose it as a type of political Stockholm syndrome,
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron do better? How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Farage only had to keep a dozen or so on board. Never managed it in 3 previous groups of MEPs. 300 is a much much bigger number than 12. UKIP currently has 24.
Q: How well would you expect a Green Council to perform on recycling? Ans: Brighton "with the result that Green Brighton now ranks 302nd out of 326 councils for its recycling record. The problem is a mix of poor information, a strange recycling collection programme open to abuse, and ceaseless disruptions to the service that mean people have given up trying to do ‘the right thing’. http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9342592/brighton-has-become-an-object-lesson-in-why-it-is-a-disaster-to-vote-green/
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron do better? How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Farage only has to keep a dozen or so on board. Never managed it in 3 previous groups of MEPs. 300 is a much much bigger number than 12. UKIP currently has 24.
haha lighten up!
You made the criticism before remembering the UKIP defections, it was an open goal
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
According to Breitbart, the EPP blackmailed/bribed the lady.
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron do better? How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Farage only has to keep a dozen or so on board. Never managed it in 3 previous groups of MEPs. 300 is a much much bigger number than 12. UKIP currently has 24.
haha lighten up!
You made the criticism before remembering the UKIP defections, it was an open goal
This whole thing about UKIP losing MEP's when its primary aim is to make all it's MEP's redundant has the potency of wet flatulence!
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
Brilliant!
Lighten up you cant twist everything x
Not twisting anything. Just calling you out on your BS...
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
According to Breitbart, the EPP blackmailed/bribed the lady.
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron do better? How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Farage only has to keep a dozen or so on board. Never managed it in 3 previous groups of MEPs. 300 is a much much bigger number than 12. UKIP currently has 24.
haha lighten up!
You made the criticism before remembering the UKIP defections, it was an open goal
This whole thing about UKIP losing MEP's when its primary aim is to make all it's MEP's redundant has the potency of wet flatulence!
Would you prefer the stat that UKIP has lost 50% of all MPs that it has every had?
(Don't think there is anyone other than Spink and Carswell?)
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
Brilliant!
Lighten up you cant twist everything x
Not twisting anything. Just calling you out on your BS...
God you are a bore!
As if a UKIPper isn't going to cite Cameron failing to keep his MPs from defecting when people criticise Farage for some Latvian MEP leaving a group!
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
Why add the Con and UKIP shares of the vote, you could add Labour + Alliance in the 80s and get them over 50%...
Except it's a terrible (And frankly patronising) piece of logic to do so - because Alliance voters were not Labour on holiday, and UKIP voters are choosing UKIP, not the Tories.
Labour + Lib Dems got over 50% in the last election. Didn't mean a thing.
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
Why add the Con and UKIP shares of the vote, you could add Labour + Alliance in the 80s and get them over 50%...
Except it's a terrible (And frankly patronising) piece of logic to do so - because Alliance voters were not Labour on holiday, and UKIP voters are choosing UKIP, not the Tories.
Labour + Lib Dems got over 50% in the last election. Didn't mean a thing.
Don't see the parallel myself. Thatcher obtained a much higher vote share than Ed is likely to do. Ed could win a majority on just a third of the votes if the Tory/UKIP split is something like 30%/20% but will be sustained by Scot Lab MPs. I certainly wasn't making any point about Ukip voters being Tories on holiday but rather given those numbers Ed won't have a lot of moral authority to pursue a leftist agenda even if he was able to do (and financial constraints mean he won't)..
IIRC I think I read somewhere that of some 800-900 times UK MEPs in unison had voted against something in Brussels because it was against this country's interests well over 700 of those votes went against them..
Welcome to the Brave New World of the EU. Ever closer union will be so much fun......
Anyway I have a window to gloss while the sun is peaking through. Have fun
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron do better? How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Farage only has to keep a dozen or so on board. Never managed it in 3 previous groups of MEPs. 300 is a much much bigger number than 12. UKIP currently has 24.
haha lighten up!
You made the criticism before remembering the UKIP defections, it was an open goal
This whole thing about UKIP losing MEP's when its primary aim is to make all it's MEP's redundant has the potency of wet flatulence!
Would you prefer the stat that UKIP has lost 50% of all MPs that it has every had?
(Don't think there is anyone other than Spink and Carswell?)
or how about the one that the Tories have not won a majority for 22 years (and at this rate will likely not win a majority in the next 22 years either)
Ed M in "power" on a national 33% vote share here we come. Not sure how he can morally represent the people with a possible Con plus Ukip vote share of around 50% and being propped up by Scot Lab MPs.
There is a part of me that thinks that this may be a good election for the Tories to lose and that 5 years of Ed could kill Labour for ever.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.
Indeed - as you imply 5 years of Ed may also sink this country for ever. It might also make calling an EU referendum after 2020 very difficult as the UK would not look an attractive proposition for inward investment and may need to hold on to nanny EU's coat tails.
To believe the country might be sunk for ever suggests you have little belief in the British people. I do believe in them. Miliband will likely be a setback but no miserable Labour misfit is capable of breaking the British people.
That Tories seem to believe this just demonstrates how much Labour has undermined them and sent them to a very bad place psychologically. One might diagnose it as a type of political Stockholm syndrome,
Well the previous Labour administration came close to doing that so you have to excuse my concerns. I also have confidence in the British people but tend to feel the quirks in the electoral system will not lead to the outcome you want. If against my expectations Labour do well they will be re-elected in 2020 with the right remaining split and no EU referendum being available. If they do badly the scenario I describe before comes into play.
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
...Cameron can do better?
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Less than 1%.
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
Brilliant!
Lighten up you cant twist everything x
Not twisting anything. Just calling you out on your BS...
God you are a bore!
As if a UKIPper isn't going to cite Cameron failing to keep his MPs from defecting when people criticise Farage for some Latvian MEP leaving a group!
Sooooo touchy
Smiley face insert!!! all in light heart:):):)
Just responding to your criticism...
I just hate the misuse of statistics...
(edit: any my view on the Latvian Question is - if the comments on here are true - it's a shabby and pathetic trick by the EPP. If you disagree with a group argue with them. Don't try to close them down through procedural games)
" You can't unilaterally un-ratify a treaty which 26 other countries have ratified and which restructures the EU"
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
Indeed, and if there is a Conservative government they will be able to argue for leaving the EU when the referendum is held. If there isn't a Conservative government, we'll be stuck where we are.
With a Tory government pretending to get concessions from the EU and then holding a referendum it will probably get an "in" vote. I'm sure the EU will play ball with them to get the right result and then revert to type afterwards.
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
Farage has not yet been able to hold his MEPs together from one set of EC elections to the next. If Farage can do this......
According to Breitbart, the EPP blackmailed/bribed the lady.
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
Surprise, surprise. How do you think Westminster became as corrupt as it is? It copied Brussels.
That is the EPP group which Farage said Cameron would never leave......
Putting aside your response bares no relation to the substance of my comment (the whole way that Brussels works is corrupt) have you never heard of reverse psychology and scaremongering as a political ploy. One of the reasons the Tories are a broken political force is the division within them over the EU. Anything which seeks to further agitate that division is fair game As it goes half the Tory party didn't believe Cameron would leave the EPP until he did either.
The thing is given his EU master plan was to negotiate from inside the EU rather than drag us free from the EU completely, withdrawing from the dominant EPP grouping and creating a rival group would have seem to have been a particularly stupid thing to do.
Surely he would have had far more leverage within the EPP than without? From that perspective pressuring him to live up to his word would seem to be a sensible strategy for his opponents to adopt especially those who want us out of the EU.
Comments
Regarding the referendum lock, the transfer of power actually happened when Lisbon was signed, it is just that the date of transfer was in the future.
Which leaves you with the unemployment considerations which frankly given the history of both parties does not resonate particularly well. Labour have never been considered the party of unemployment. You'll get some people to return to the fold but not that many. Miliband just doesn't seem as scary as Brown did.
I'm afraid this is just more Tory straw clutching.
It just seems weird that I haven't heard of these at all before, whereas you would have thought that some Eurosceptic or other would have made a big fuss about them at the time they were agreed.
Gordon Brown was a polarising figure, but he was liked by Labour voters. Ed Miliband is not a polarising figure. No one thinks he is up to the job of being prime minister, including a majority of potential Labour supporters.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100289499/things-are-bad-for-labour-but-they-could-get-a-lot-worse/
I wonder whether there are any he would try to get back as part of his renegotiation?
There's potentially a positive angle on this for Britain, though. Germany has been dragging its heels about taking strong action against Putin, and so there's potential for Britain to build a majority for taking stronger action now that Germany doesn't have a veto over EU Foreign Affairs or Defence.
With the Tories reportedly about to introduce supposedly far more stringent Immigration regulations as well as announcing middle income-friendly tax concessions (for example by increasing the starting point for higher rate tax as well as relaxing the starting point for Inheritance Tax), it seems to me that on both of these issues they are likely to enter into full-bloodied conflict with the LibDems. So much so in fact that I see the coalition between the parties coming to an early end, probably before the end of this year.
In fact I always saw the formal, if reasonably friendly break-up taking place in the early part of 2015 in order to allow both parties to go on the offensive in being able to differentiate one from the other and so therefore to be openly critical of their opponents' policies. With the Yellows currently faring so badly in the polls at present I see this as being particularly important from their aspect.
Those PBers who agree with me that such a break-up is now likely to take place sooner rather than later, might like to take advantage of the odds being offered by those nice people at SkyBet who are offering 6/1, no less, against the Year of Coalition break up being 2014 (compared with 1/3 on 2015 and 7/2 against 2016 or later haha). The link to this market is:
http://www.skybet.com/politics/coalition-specials/event/14185193
As ever DYOR.
Aggregate vote for the five Great Britain by-elections in 2011:
Lab 53.2
LD 15.1
Con 14.4
SNP 6.4
UKIP 5.2
BNP 2.5
Green 0.7
others 2.5
and the aggregate for the seven GB contests in 2012:
Lab 49.1
Con 13.9
Respect 12.5
UKIP 9.7
LD 5.9
BNP 1.9
Green 1.9
Plaid 1.1
others 4.0
But the sea-change occurred in 2013. For the two GB by-elections last year:
UKIP 26.5
Lab 25.0
LD 20.6
Con 20.2
BNP 1.1
others 6.6
And even more dramatic for the four by-election contests so far this year:
UKIP 36.7
Lab 28.2
Con 26.2
LD 3.3
Green 2.7
BNP 0.6
others 2.4
Looks like the Tories don't get how damaging that is by the look of we can't afford a 1% increase for nurses but we have to accept an 11.9% increase for MPs and a 20% increase for FTSE100 chiefs.
Osborne really is thick.
Will have a few quid
Thanks
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/tory-hopefuls-vie-to-contest-25350/
You may think that Cameron's attempts at renegotiation have been inept, or insufficiently vigorous, but if one wanted to roll-back some of the changes in Lisbon you would have to do that by negotiation.
Like I said, not really a big deal since policy is about to change.
The average movement in all of them is CON -8.73, LAB +4.84, LD -13.58, UKIP+15,38, with a swing of 6.78% from CON to LAB, in Tory seats though the swing appears to be a tad smaller than the average.
So far in those 86 constituencies LAB gain 40 seats, CON lose 33 and gain 7, LD lose 15 and UKIP gains 4.
Looking at Ashcroft's latest poll we are approaching that area where LAB and CON are close in most seats, though Labour is still ahead in almost all of them. It suggests a Labour majority of around 30-40 seats.
Of course that applies to England and Wales only, since there are no constituency polls in Scotland.
The other big question apart from Scotland is what is going on in relatively safe Tory and Labour seats with regards to UKIP.
That is the tragedy of the whole thing. Everything we are arguing about could and should have been addressed before Lisbon was signed, whilst we still had the necessary vetoes and bargaining chips. As with the rebate, the half-wits who were running the country at the time (and whom Farage wants back in power) threw away the bargaining power for nothing in return.
The entire conflict between Russia and Europe was completely unnecessary, counterproductive and shows how easy it is for Europe to be led around by the nose against its own interests by an expansionist NATO and the imaginary threat of an aggressive expansionist Russia.
I'm sure you would object if the Spanish, for instance, unilaterally tore up the Treaty of Utrecht and marched troops into Gibraltar? Or how about if the French refused to abide by the terms of the Treaty of Troyes?
Well, you can by leaving the EU. I suppose that is UKIPs argument.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/sirajdatoo/heres-why-ukip-thinks-voters-in-rochester-and-strood-should?utm_term=3wgjfgo#1q55vew
"It’s worth noting too that the letter very clearly demonstrates how the party’s campaign team has become increasingly professional with experience. That’s probably why the letter is reflective of the party’s general approach of emphasising local issues (something the Lib Dems did very effectively to win seats in the days before they were in government)."
England will behave the same way.
And that is the problem, the Tory party has no credibility on that issue.
It's like Labour saying they are going to balance the budget.
Looking at the figures for UKIP it seems that many people are assuming that they are all mostly ex-tory voters who will run back to the flock at the GE. When I look at the voting intentions, I see a lot of people who have never voted before and have now decided to try and make a change.
In Scotland, there was a massive change in voting intention (over aspiration) in the Referendum. And the massive take up of new membership of the SNP and Greens indicates that it is continuing. ( I really think that a lot of the enthusiasm will evaporate on contact with local branch internal politics, but, hey ho, that's another story for another time)
If the slumbering majority has decided to wake up and take an interest in what is going on, then the previous bias assumptions in the traditional polls will need to be rethought out.
If UKIP is considered a viable alternative to the major parties by people who have not voted before and probably not even bothered being on the electoral roll (As in the IR in Scotland) then surely this changes the game plans of the parties, especially with reference to fixed term parliaments.
But the people's army will carry the day, surely?
The UKIP position on this is absolutely risible - in one breath you say "the Tory party has no credibility", and yet you think that , even when they are not all on one side of the argument, they will somehow con the populace into voting to stay in.
You can't have it both ways.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29646414
'MEP grouping including UKIP collapses:'
That lasted all of 3 months?
If Labour get in and are as big a disaster as we're all expecting then UKIP will gain a lot of support for 2020 allowing them to demand when the referendum is held and be in a much stronger position to win it.
You don't believe in the referendum offered by Cameron, yet somehow everything will drop into place in 6 years time, and an unknown future government will offer one up as Kippers hope.
You couldn't make it up.
Click on the year above each chart for the full breakdown. That what you were after?
"She told the General Secretary of the EFDD Group that the EPP chairman Manfred Weber and European Parliament Martin Schulz told her she must resign from the EFDD Group in order to attain the presidency of a European Parliamentary delegation to Kazakstan"
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/10/16/EFDD-Collapses-As-Latvian-Member-Pulls-Out
All because of a Latvian MEP.
Remember the good old days, when PB was focussed on Latvian MEPs and whether they were homophobes?
Meanwhile Ed watches on, smiling.
What will be interesting in the coming weeks will be Farage's negotiating skills as he attempts to bring on-board another member to bring the tally back to seven. I shall be watching with interest.
http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/10/16/ashcroft-polling-sees-tory-chances-improve-in-three-key-marginals
What's losing 2 of your MPs described as then?!
it will be interesting to see how it pans out....
How my MPs has he lost since the last election?
Until that changes Tory attempts to leave the EU are doomed.
That Tories seem to believe this just demonstrates how much Labour has undermined them and sent them to a very bad place psychologically. One might diagnose it as a type of political Stockholm syndrome,
Ans: Brighton
"with the result that Green Brighton now ranks 302nd out of 326 councils for its recycling record. The problem is a mix of poor information, a strange recycling collection programme open to abuse, and ceaseless disruptions to the service that mean people have given up trying to do ‘the right thing’.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9342592/brighton-has-become-an-object-lesson-in-why-it-is-a-disaster-to-vote-green/
What percentage of MEPs has Farage lost in the last 5 years?
edit: Carswell, Reckless & Mensch. Considered Newark as a replacement rather than a loss.
You made the criticism before remembering the UKIP defections, it was an open goal
Lighten up you cant twist everything x
(Don't think there is anyone other than Spink and Carswell?)
As if a UKIPper isn't going to cite Cameron failing to keep his MPs from defecting when people criticise Farage for some Latvian MEP leaving a group!
Sooooo touchy
Smiley face insert!!! all in light heart:):):)
Mensch was not a loss for political reasons.
And the Reckless seat is not yet a Tory loss.
Qualified Majority Voting leads to the tyranny of minority rule
http://ukipdaily.com/qualified-majority-voting-leads-to-the-tyranny-of-minority-rule/
IIRC I think I read somewhere that of some 800-900 times UK MEPs in unison had voted against something in Brussels because it was against this country's interests well over 700 of those votes went against them..
Welcome to the Brave New World of the EU. Ever closer union will be so much fun......
Anyway I have a window to gloss while the sun is peaking through. Have fun
In the same way that Eskimos have 126 words for snow, Hodges has 126,000 ways of saying Ed Miliband is a disaster for Ed Miliband
Now that window!
http://www.nuneaton-news.co.uk/Vicky-Fowler-Labour-parliamentary-candidate/story-20284837-detail/story.html
I just hate the misuse of statistics...
(edit: any my view on the Latvian Question is - if the comments on here are true - it's a shabby and pathetic trick by the EPP. If you disagree with a group argue with them. Don't try to close them down through procedural games)
The thing is given his EU master plan was to negotiate from inside the EU rather than drag us free from the EU completely, withdrawing from the dominant EPP grouping and creating a rival group would have seem to have been a particularly stupid thing to do.
Surely he would have had far more leverage within the EPP than without? From that perspective pressuring him to live up to his word would seem to be a sensible strategy for his opponents to adopt especially those who want us out of the EU.