I thought I'd heard every stunt that those parasites could play but this leaves me gobsmacked. They've basically just decided that we can pay an extra £1.7 billion and much of it will be going to France. So we're effectively paying for Hollande's economic illiteracy. You could not make it up.
EU makes Britain pay for recovery The Prime Minister is ambushed with a demand for an extra £1.7billion because Britain has outperformed other European economies over past decade
How can anyone support our involvement with these daylight robbers?
Cameron said the other day that his boss was the British people, not Brussels. As it's almost certain that the British people oppose this cash grab from the feckless Eurocrats, Cameron should surely refuse to hand over the money. Or is he going to be told what to do by Jean-Claude Juncker?
Yep,2 big moments here for Cameron,his big announcement near Christmas on EU immigration and the EU money grab.
Don't wobble dave.
Indeed. We agreed a budget a little while back. They can't change the terms on us now. Cameron must stick to his guns on this and not hand over the cash. How can he justify having another round of cuts in the UK when we are handing over almost two billion quid to the EU because France and Italy are screw-ups?
So its now a tie and has been creeping that way for some while. I recall the overconfidence of Nick Palmer and others (but him especially) stating that the Labour lead was about 5% and was fairly static. I wonder how things will be at the turn of the year. I think UKIP's candidates are going to be shown up for what Dave always said they were.
I see the EU is now demanding an extra two billion Euros off us. i thought Cameron had bravely negotiated a limit in the amount we paid in? Looks like it's absolute bollocks once again. Brussels simply isn't a trustworthy negotiating partner.
What do you think Cameron's reaction will be?
Talk tough. Cave in.
Talk tough,cave in and blame the previous labour government ;-)
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
Being on the telly does seem to go to Ukipper heads. Diane James was all over the show on Clacton night, predicting 100 gains!
In a way such amateurism is part of their appeal.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, as they're not schooled by Oxford PPE and a party machine.
Scott, I wonder if Salmond sees himself leading a larger SNP grouping at Westminster, leaving Sturgeon to get on with local politics again at Holyrood?
How on earth did Bours make it so high up UKIP's list in the North West? She is useless and totally out of her depth.
As much as I don't like career politicians it does help if a politician is reasonable at debating and doesn't announce a policy on TV that actually isn't party policy.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
Being on the telly does seem to go to Ukipper heads. Diane James was all over the show on Clacton night, predicting 100 gains!
In a way such amateurism is part of their appeal.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, as they're not schooled by Oxford PPE and a party machine.
No, Bours is not a polished performer, not every one is. However she is improving but I do wish she would have notes on local and foreign facts of the moment.
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
I've no moral objection to it. Some people deserve to be executed. The problem lies in determining who deserves execution as opposed to a whole life sentence, which must be arbitrary.
How on earth did Bours make it so high up UKIP's list in the North West? She is useless and totally out of her depth.
As much as I don't like career politicians it does help if a politician is reasonable at debating and doesn't announce a policy on TV that actually isn't party policy.
It's probably all UKIP had up there at the time. She'd probably be good in a back room role....probably. ;(
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
Being on the telly does seem to go to Ukipper heads. Diane James was all over the show on Clacton night, predicting 100 gains!
In a way such amateurism is part of their appeal.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, as they're not schooled by Oxford PPE and a party machine.
No, Bours is not a polished performer, not every one is. However she is improving but I do wish she would have notes on local and foreign facts of the moment.
The BBC regularly uses spying powers granted under The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, intended for the interception of communications by terrorists, in order track down people for non-payment of the £145.50 per annum license fee.
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
I've no moral objection to it. Some people deserve to be executed. The problem lies in determining who deserves execution as opposed to a whole life sentence, which must be arbitrary.
The other problems foreseen with re-introducing the death penalty is that it will bugger up the legal system.
1) You will get people on juries who are opposed to the death penalty on principle, and will never vote to convict
and this is crucial.
2) The benchmark for convicting someone will be raised by the jury will be raised, if they their decision will lead to someone's execution, we could see more guilty people found not guilty
3) The appeals process will go on and on, look at some of the length of appeals in the US!
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
Is why I hope Priti Patel never becomes Tory leader.
Another person who was woeful on Clacton by-election night, but for the diametrically opposite reason to James: just a characterless party hack spewing out the same old soundbites as an answer to every question.
I thought I'd heard every stunt that those parasites could play but this leaves me gobsmacked. They've basically just decided that we can pay an extra £1.7 billion and much of it will be going to France. So we're effectively paying for Hollande's economic illiteracy. You could not make it up.
EU makes Britain pay for recovery The Prime Minister is ambushed with a demand for an extra £1.7billion because Britain has outperformed other European economies over past decade
How can anyone support our involvement with these daylight robbers?
Cameron said the other day that his boss was the British people, not Brussels. As it's almost certain that the British people oppose this cash grab from the feckless Eurocrats, Cameron should surely refuse to hand over the money. Or is he going to be told what to do by Jean-Claude Juncker?
Yep,2 big moments here for Cameron,his big announcement near Christmas on EU immigration and the EU money grab.
Don't wobble dave.
Indeed. We agreed a budget a little while back. They can't change the terms on us now. Cameron must stick to his guns on this and not hand over the cash. How can he justify having another round of cuts in the UK when we are handing over almost two billion quid to the EU because France and Italy are screw-ups?
Reading about the details this has a lot less to do with contemporary economic performance, and more to do with recent revisions to estimates of growth all the way back to 1995 - to include things like prostitution and the drugs trade.
Bizarre to ask for 19 years worth of back-payments within one month, but apparently these are all rules that Britain agreed to - that past payments would be recalculated on the basis of new estimates of the sizes of economies all the way back to the 90s. Maybe the British simply assumed that the Italians and other Europeans would have a larger black market than us, and that we would be the ones receiving a repayment?
Anyway, there's a lot of ignorant talk about Hollande, and the EU unilaterally re-writing budgets which is completely wide of the mark. The EU is simply following the rules that the 28 member nations agreed to. Maybe they should have thought about what they were agreeing to more carefully at the time.
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
I've no moral objection to it. Some people deserve to be executed. The problem lies in determining who deserves execution as opposed to a whole life sentence, which must be arbitrary.
The other problems foreseen with re-introducing the death penalty is that it will bugger up the legal system.
1) You will get people on juries who are opposed to the death penalty on principle, and will never vote to convict
and this is crucial.
2) The benchmark for convicting someone will be raised by the jury will be raised, if they their decision will lead to someone's execution, we could see more guilty people found not guilty
3) The appeals process will go on and on, look at some of the length of appeals in the US!
I think the practical objections would be insuperable. So, it's best to go for the whole life option.
Were we involved in a prolonged and brutal war, however, then the use of the death penalty would be both reasonable and practical.
Well, that's UKIP 'libertarian' pretences out the window (though they were only ever half-heartedly entertained at best). The state's right to bring about the death of its own citizens is the ultimate authoritarian presumption.
Carswell has in the past said he was opposed to the death penalty but would support a referendum and campaign 'NO'. The inference from this on the hoof policy is that UKIP support YES. Do they, or is this yet another dog whistle by Farage?
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
Oh come off it. It's the EU officials that write-up the small print, not the politicians. Maybe the politicians were mugged when they put their signature down, but when that's done by money lenders and banks its called "predatory behaviour". That's exactly what the EU is doing with the UK: pretend they're agreeing to a cut, but actually stitching us up another way.
Well enough is enough. Cameron simply shouldn't hand over the cash. Certainly not without concessions. Who's his boss? The British public or the Brussels bureaucracy?
I thought I'd heard every stunt that those parasites could play but this leaves me gobsmacked. They've basically just decided that we can pay an extra £1.7 billion and much of it will be going to France. So we're effectively paying for Hollande's economic illiteracy. You could not make it up.
EU makes Britain pay for recovery The Prime Minister is ambushed with a demand for an extra £1.7billion because Britain has outperformed other European economies over past decade
How can anyone support our involvement with these daylight robbers?
Cameron said the other day that his boss was the British people, not Brussels. As it's almost certain that the British people oppose this cash grab from the feckless Eurocrats, Cameron should surely refuse to hand over the money. Or is he going to be told what to do by Jean-Claude Juncker?
Yep,2 big moments here for Cameron,his big announcement near Christmas on EU immigration and the EU money grab.
Don't wobble dave.
Indeed. We agreed a budget a little while back. They can't change the terms on us now. Cameron must stick to his guns on this and not hand over the cash. How can he justify having another round of cuts in the UK when we are handing over almost two billion quid to the EU because France and Italy are screw-ups?
Reading about the details this has a lot less to do with contemporary economic performance, and more to do with recent revisions to estimates of growth all the way back to 1995 - to include things like prostitution and the drugs trade.
Hate to be the one to point this out, but illegal activities are, by their very nature, not taxable.
So Britain's bill has gone up but the ability to pay for it hasn't.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
Is why I hope Priti Patel never becomes Tory leader.
Another person who was woeful on Clacton by-election night, but for the diametrically opposite reason to James: just a characterless party hack spewing out the same old soundbites as an answer to every question.
Possibly bias because I fancy Priti Patel, but I think her robotic performances of late are because she obviously wants to defect and is not comfortable with the charade!
I thought I'd heard every stunt that those parasites could play but this leaves me gobsmacked. They've basically just decided that we can pay an extra £1.7 billion and much of it will be going to France. So we're effectively paying for Hollande's economic illiteracy. You could not make it up.
EU makes Britain pay for recovery The Prime Minister is ambushed with a demand for an extra £1.7billion because Britain has outperformed other European economies over past decade
How can anyone support our involvement with these daylight robbers?
Cameron said the other day that his boss was the British people, not Brussels. As it's almost certain that the British people oppose this cash grab from the feckless Eurocrats, Cameron should surely refuse to hand over the money. Or is he going to be told what to do by Jean-Claude Juncker?
Yep,2 big moments here for Cameron,his big announcement near Christmas on EU immigration and the EU money grab.
Don't wobble dave.
It would seem to be based on revised ways to calculate the GPD - you may remember the changes were announced a few weeks back. I think the controversy is in the back dating it to 1995.
So its now a tie and has been creeping that way for some while. I recall the overconfidence of Nick Palmer and others (but him especially) stating that the Labour lead was about 5% and was fairly static. I wonder how things will be at the turn of the year. I think UKIP's candidates are going to be shown up for what Dave always said they were.
I'm not sure the voters care about the candidates, they care more about the issues and if we cave in on this money grab then it will not bode well for any of the three parties.
Ed reckons they will increase the NHS budget by £2.5m, and they want to nick £1.7m from us to give to his failing mate in France among others. What does Ed, Hugh, big john and the rest think?
EU makes Britain pay for recovery The Prime Minister is ambushed with a demand for an extra £1.7billion because Britain has outperformed other European economies over past decade
Yep,2 big moments here for Cameron,his big announcement near Christmas on EU immigration and the EU money grab.
Don't wobble dave.
Indeed. We agreed a budget a little while back. They can't change the terms on us now. Cameron must stick to his guns on this and not hand over the cash. How can he justify having another round of cuts in the UK when we are handing over almost two billion quid to the EU because France and Italy are screw-ups?
Reading about the details this has a lot less to do with contemporary economic performance, and more to do with recent revisions to estimates of growth all the way back to 1995 - to include things like prostitution and the drugs trade.
Bizarre to ask for 19 years worth of back-payments within one month, but apparently these are all rules that Britain agreed to - that past payments would be recalculated on the basis of new estimates of the sizes of economies all the way back to the 90s. Maybe the British simply assumed that the Italians and other Europeans would have a larger black market than us, and that we would be the ones receiving a repayment?
Anyway, there's a lot of ignorant talk about Hollande, and the EU unilaterally re-writing budgets which is completely wide of the mark. The EU is simply following the rules that the 28 member nations agreed to. Maybe they should have thought about what they were agreeing to more carefully at the time.
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
The EU has only twice had periods of negative growth and both of those are related to the current economic crisis (and IIRC during most of the period the UK outperformed most countries in Europe). Do you seriously think that under such circumstances the majority of these so called discretionary payments come from before 2007 when the EU was permanently in growth or from when EU countries were almost going bankrupt? Do you also seriously think that if the EU was in perpetual growth it would be asking for this money?
And we know what people think of corrupt politicians 'just following the rules' from the expenses disgrace!
» show previous quotes If you are a low paid British worker who votes Labour it must feel like belonging to a trade union that advertises your job behind your back to anyone who will do it for less.
bigJohnowls said:
Wheras voting UKIP must make you feel like belonging to a club where the heirachy, MPs and majority of PPC are ex Tories who voted against workers rights every time. eg minimum wage when introduced and WTD legislation.
On the contrary, leaving the EU and therefore halting the flow of cheap foreign labour undercutting you is the best thing that could happen to the country if you are a low paid British worker
I don't see it as very left wing to justify depressing the wages of tradesmen by a quoting a GDP figure that is inflated by big profits for the richest
Even The Guardian agree today that Labour have forgotten the reason they were formed in the first place by their actions on this issue
» show previous quotes If you are a low paid British worker who votes Labour it must feel like belonging to a trade union that advertises your job behind your back to anyone who will do it for less.
bigJohnowls said:
Wheras voting UKIP must make you feel like belonging to a club where the heirachy, MPs and majority of PPC are ex Tories who voted against workers rights every time. eg minimum wage when introduced and WTD legislation.
On the contrary, leaving the EU and therefore halting the flow of cheap foreign labour undercutting you is the best thing that could happen to the country if you are a low paid British worker
I don't see it as very left wing to justify depressing the wages of tradesmen by a quoting a GDP figure that is inflated by big profits for the richest
Even The Guardian agree today that Labour have forgotten the reason they were formed in the first place by their actions on this issue
Being allowed to price yourself out of a job is good for you? What a crass political vision you have.
If British workers could stir themselves we would not have immigrants. Millions more in work and still millions of brits not working and on benefits.
Well, that's UKIP 'libertarian' pretences out the window (though they were only ever half-heartedly entertained at best). The state's right to bring about the death of its own citizens is the ultimate authoritarian presumption.
Carswell has in the past said he was opposed to the death penalty but would support a referendum and campaign 'NO'. The inference from this on the hoof policy is that UKIP support YES. Do they, or is this yet another dog whistle by Farage?
I expect this is the 'policy' she is referring to
– UKIP will introduce the Citizens’ Initiative to allow the public to initiate national referendums on issues of major public interest.
I imagine Bours believes this will be used for a referendum on capital punishment.
Therefore capital punishment would be the people's policy and not UKIP's. It's called direct democracy dontcha know.
As for dog whistle's it got a mutt like you out of its kennel so I suppose it's worked........
I do wonder if Bours was looking to be controversial for the sake of being controversial. UKIP's success is partly coming from questioning what the other party's consider to be unquestionable.
But when it comes to capital punishment, it really isn't worth it even if you aren't opposed to it morally.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
If they did that would be the final straw for me. No government should have the power to execute it's citizens.
Assume, for the sake of argument, UKIP won 326 seats. There'd surely be a free vote on capital punishment, but it would probably get voted down.
But as a matter of principle I could not support a party that was in favour of capital punishment whether they allowed a free vote or not.
Is why I hope Priti Patel never becomes Tory leader.
Another person who was woeful on Clacton by-election night, but for the diametrically opposite reason to James: just a characterless party hack spewing out the same old soundbites as an answer to every question.
Possibly bias because I fancy Priti Patel, but I think her robotic performances of late are because she obviously wants to defect and is not comfortable with the charade!
Half the backbench Conservatives want to defect. It's how to go about it.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Disappointing result for UKIP, who we are told in header were 'rubbing their hands with glee'. But this might just be a temporary lull: the memory of Mike Read will fade.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
– UKIP will introduce the Citizens’ Initiative to allow the public to initiate national referendums on issues of major public interest.
I imagine Bours believes this will be used for a referendum on capital punishment.
Therefore capital punishment would be the people's policy and not UKIP's. It's called direct democracy dontcha know.
Start with a terrible policy, then advertise it with a particularly awful possible consequence it could have.
Well I'm sold!
So direct democracy is a 'terrible policy'? Do tell why?
The likely reintroduction of the death penalty isn't a clear enough illustration for you? What about the act of self-immolation Scotland recently almost performed?
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
Of course, you'd never do such a thing in Nighthawks, would you?
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I haven't read it, what is he going to do about the grooming gangs?
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
Oh come off it. It's the EU officials that write-up the small print, not the politicians. Maybe the politicians were mugged when they put their signature down, but when that's done by money lenders and banks its called "predatory behaviour". That's exactly what the EU is doing with the UK: pretend they're agreeing to a cut, but actually stitching us up another way.
Well enough is enough. Cameron simply shouldn't hand over the cash. Certainly not without concessions. Who's his boss? The British public or the Brussels bureaucracy?
Christ-on-a-bike it's not like the PM goes into EU negotiations on his own is it? He has a huge backroom team to go through stuff line by line and flag up any gotchas. I've no idea who it was who agreed to this, but if it's the law we signed up to then we've got nothing to complain about - except for whichever moronic politician it was who signed us up to it without telling us they were putting us on the hook for two decades of back payments.
I can easily imagine what the fuss would be like on here if it had turned out the other way, and the French and Italians were supposed to pay us back, but trying to wiggle out of it.
By all means see this as yet another reason why the UK should leave the EU - it beggars belief that anyone would think it was sensible to mess around with twenty year old budget payments, rather than just use the new rules for future payments - but you can't go around refusing to follow laws you helped to write and have any credibility in future negotiations.
Why would anyone make any sort of agreement with the UK if they thought we were a pathetic little country who reneged on our agreements just because we didn't like the implications that followed from them?
It's much easier for you lot to lay all the blame at the feet of the EU, and then you let the British politicians who helped to create this mess escape without having to account for their actions.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
He's not criticised Labour in his election leaflet.
Has he criticised this government's strategy of non-action ?
And if he's so hostile to Labour will he tell Conservative voters to put UKIP as their second vote ?
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I haven't read it, what is he going to do about the grooming gangs?
His first step, Get rid of those whose duty was to protect chikdren and ignored the evidence/allowed the crimes to continue.
Still no real voting figures from the Tory Rochester primary. Why not?
I reckon the Tories may be trying to allegedly cover up the fact that a large number of the 5,688 returned ballots were in fact spoiled or blank papers. The original reports gave a figure of 4,000 so that means 30% (ie. 5688-4000=c.1688) of the supposed total may not have been valid votes.
The UKIP MEP on BBC QuestionTime tonight was very poor, even worse than her last outing on the programme. She wasn't just unprepared on Foreign and local facts and issues, she also didn't appear to have a clue about UKIP policy on issues that were definitely going to come up tonight.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
It's not UKIP policy to have a referendum on capital punishment
I was being slightly sarcastic. I am not actually watching it, and didn't think for one minute they would do that. Maybe she has just got a little bit excited being on the tele.
Being on the telly does seem to go to Ukipper heads. Diane James was all over the show on Clacton night, predicting 100 gains!
In a way such amateurism is part of their appeal.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, as they're not schooled by Oxford PPE and a party machine.
No, Bours is not a polished performer, not every one is. However she is improving but I do wish she would have notes on local and foreign facts of the moment.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I haven't read it, what is he going to do about the grooming gangs?
His first step, Get rid of those whose duty was to protect chikdren and ignored the evidence/allowed the crimes to continue.
Does that include May, Penning, Timpson and Warsi ?
Tony Blair was against capital punishment in the UK but was okay with Saddam's hanging in Iraq.
Perhaps it was more nuanced that he wasnt going to oppose what the Iraqi government decided? I honesty can't remember the specifics.
But his government was at the same time against capital punishment in the USA and refused to allow drugs used in lethal injections to be shipped there.
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
Oh come off it. It's the EU officials that write-up the small print, not the politicians. Maybe the politicians were mugged when they put their signature down, but when that's done by money lenders and banks its called "predatory behaviour". That's exactly what the EU is doing with the UK: pretend they're agreeing to a cut, but actually stitching us up another way.
Well enough is enough. Cameron simply shouldn't hand over the cash. Certainly not without concessions. Who's his boss? The British public or the Brussels bureaucracy?
Christ-on-a-bike it's not like the PM goes into EU negotiations on his own is it? He has a huge backroom team to go through stuff line by line and flag up any gotchas. I've no idea who it was who agreed to this, but if it's the law we signed up to then we've got nothing to complain about - except for whichever moronic politician it was who signed us up to it without telling us they were putting us on the hook for two decades of back payments.
I can easily imagine what the fuss would be like on here if it had turned out the other way, and the French and Italians were supposed to pay us back, but trying to wiggle out of it.
By all means see this as yet another reason why the UK should leave the EU - it beggars belief that anyone would think it was sensible to mess around with twenty year old budget payments, rather than just use the new rules for future payments - but you can't go around refusing to follow laws you helped to write and have any credibility in future negotiations.
Why would anyone make any sort of agreement with the UK if they thought we were a pathetic little country who reneged on our agreements just because we didn't like the implications that followed from them?
It's much easier for you lot to lay all the blame at the feet of the EU, and then you let the British politicians who helped to create this mess escape without having to account for their actions.
i think you will find those of us most critical of the EU have already abandoned the moronic politicians in this country who agreed this rubbish specifically because of things like that!
It still doesn't excuse that rotten cesspit in Brussels from attempting such daylight robbery!
Would the referendum on capital punishment have a supplementary question on our preferred method of capital punishment, it could be conducted under AV, so we rank our preferences
a) Hanging b) electric chair c) lethal injection d) death by artillery gun e) firing squad f) sodomised to death by a bunch of horny honey badgers
g) being made to watch all of Michael Bay's movies back-to-back
Would the referendum on capital punishment have a supplementary question on our preferred method of capital punishment, it could be conducted under AV, so we rank our preferences
a) Hanging b) electric chair c) lethal injection d) death by artillery gun e) firing squad f) sodomised to death by a bunch of horny honey badgers
a) of course. The British form of hanging was the best method in the world. Clean, humane and practically instantaneous, although still quite a terrifying prospect...
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I haven't read it, what is he going to do about the grooming gangs?
His first step, Get rid of those whose duty was to protect chikdren and ignored the evidence/allowed the crimes to continue.
Does that include May, Penning, Timpson and Warsi ?
Go and ask him at his open meeting in the next few days. Is open to all.
I haven't got a link to the venue or date, but it should be up somewhere.
Would the referendum on capital punishment have a supplementary question on our preferred method of capital punishment, it could be conducted under AV, so we rank our preferences
a) Hanging b) electric chair c) lethal injection d) death by artillery gun e) firing squad f) sodomised to death by a bunch of horny honey badgers
a) of course. The British form of hanging was the best method in the world. Clean, humane and practically instantaneous, although still quite a terrifying prospect...
Still no real voting figures from the Tory Rochester primary. Why not?
I reckon the Tories may be trying to allegedly cover up the fact that a large number of the 5,688 returned ballots were in fact spoiled or blank papers. The original reports gave a figure of 4,000 so that means 30% (ie. 5688-4000=c.1688) of the supposed total may not have been valid votes.
Giving the public a chance to pick the candidate but not telling them the results
The problem the Tories have now is, their primary was such a flop, the only conceivable way they can win is a v low turnout.. yet they have pledged to throw the kitchen sink at it, with Cameron due to make at least 4 more visits, and every cabinet minister forced to go 3 times
Rochester Tories are expecting us to believe that out of 70,000+ potential voters not a single one returned a spoilt or blank paper. They must think we were born yesterday.
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
Oh come off it. It's the EU officials that write-up the small print, not the politicians. Maybe the politicians were mugged when they put their signature down, but when that's done by money lenders and banks its called "predatory behaviour". That's exactly what the EU is doing with the UK: pretend they're agreeing to a cut, but actually stitching us up another way.
Well enough is enough. Cameron simply shouldn't hand over the cash. Certainly not without concessions. Who's his boss? The British public or the Brussels bureaucracy?
Christ-on-a-bike it's not like the PM goes into EU negotiations on his own is it? He has a huge backroom team to go through stuff line by line and flag up any gotchas. I've no idea who it was who agreed to this, but if it's the law we signed up to then we've got nothing to complain about - except for whichever moronic politician it was who signed us up to it without telling us they were putting us on the hook for two decades of back payments.
I can easily imagine what the fuss would be like on here if it had turned out the other way, and the French and Italians were supposed to pay us back, but trying to wiggle out of it.
By all means see this as yet another reason why the UK should leave the EU - it beggars belief that anyone would think it was sensible to mess around with twenty year old budget payments, rather than just use the new rules for future payments - but you can't go around refusing to follow laws you helped to write and have any credibility in future negotiations.
Why would anyone make any sort of agreement with the UK if they thought we were a pathetic little country who reneged on our agreements just because we didn't like the implications that followed from them?
It's much easier for you lot to lay all the blame at the feet of the EU, and then you let the British politicians who helped to create this mess escape without having to account for their actions.
Anyone still struggling tog understand the UKIP phenomenon please read the above passage
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
He's been attacking them, on the news, on his website, on the radio.
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
So Establishment Tory more interested in criticising UKIP for mentioning Rotherham than in criticising what happened / still is happening in Rotherham or criticising government toleration of what happened / still is happening.
Can't you read?
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I haven't read it, what is he going to do about the grooming gangs?
His first step, Get rid of those whose duty was to protect chikdren and ignored the evidence/allowed the crimes to continue.
The first step needs to be building the case to arrest the hundreds of child rapists still walking the streets.
Still no real voting figures from the Tory Rochester primary. Why not?
I reckon the Tories may be trying to allegedly cover up the fact that a large number of the 5,688 returned ballots were in fact spoiled or blank papers. The original reports gave a figure of 4,000 so that means 30% (ie. 5688-4000=c.1688) of the supposed total may not have been valid votes.
Do we know how many spoiled ballots were received in Totnes and Gosport ?.
I would imagine that Rochester would have a higher percentage.
Approximately 1688 spoiled ballots would still only be about 2% of the total and so not an unreasonable number.
If you think there was ever any possibility that the EU could rule that money had to go back to Britain then you truly are naive. If France had to pay more it would go to the EU, not back to member states. Money and power only flows in one direction.
Would the referendum on capital punishment have a supplementary question on our preferred method of capital punishment, it could be conducted under AV, so we rank our preferences
a) Hanging b) electric chair c) lethal injection d) death by artillery gun e) firing squad f) sodomised to death by a bunch of horny honey badgers
a) of course. The British form of hanging was the best method in the world. Clean, humane and practically instantaneous, although still quite a terrifying prospect...
– UKIP will introduce the Citizens’ Initiative to allow the public to initiate national referendums on issues of major public interest.
I imagine Bours believes this will be used for a referendum on capital punishment.
Therefore capital punishment would be the people's policy and not UKIP's. It's called direct democracy dontcha know.
Start with a terrible policy, then advertise it with a particularly awful possible consequence it could have.
Well I'm sold!
So direct democracy is a 'terrible policy'? Do tell why?
The likely reintroduction of the death penalty isn't a clear enough illustration for you? What about the act of self-immolation Scotland recently almost performed?
If a large majority of the public want the death penalty back, then it should come back, even if I personally oppose it. The same can be said about Scottish independence.
Still no real voting figures from the Tory Rochester primary. Why not?
I reckon the Tories may be trying to allegedly cover up the fact that a large number of the 5,688 returned ballots were in fact spoiled or blank papers. The original reports gave a figure of 4,000 so that means 30% (ie. 5688-4000=c.1688) of the supposed total may not have been valid votes.
Do we know how many spoiled ballots were received in Totnes and Gosport ?.
I would imagine that Rochester would have a higher percentage.
Approximately 1688 spoiled ballots would still only be about 2% of the total and so not an unreasonable number.
We do know that the total vote figure given earlier for Gosport of 12,659 was for valid votes only:
Comments
Don't wobble dave.
Indeed. We agreed a budget a little while back. They can't change the terms on us now. Cameron must stick to his guns on this and not hand over the cash. How can he justify having another round of cuts in the UK when we are handing over almost two billion quid to the EU because France and Italy are screw-ups?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2723856/Fifty-years-execution-Britain-UKIP-MEP-calls-death-penalty-reintroduced.html
I think she imagines it will come about because of this policy
– UKIP will introduce the Citizens’ Initiative to allow the public to initiate national referendums on issues of major public interest.
http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people
In which case it is not UKIP policy but would be a possibility under the above policy.......
I recall the overconfidence of Nick Palmer and others (but him especially) stating that the Labour lead was about 5% and was fairly static. I wonder how things will be at the turn of the year. I think UKIP's candidates are going to be shown up for what Dave always said they were.
In a way such amateurism is part of their appeal.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, as they're not schooled by Oxford PPE and a party machine.
I would find it immensely difficult to support a leader who was in favour of the death penalty.
Edit: I know Lady Thatcher was in favour of it, but she came from an era when the death penalty was the norm
Britain Elects @britainelects now4 seconds ago
Burnopfield & Dipton (Durham): Labour GAIN from Independent.
As much as I don't like career politicians it does help if a politician is reasonable at debating and doesn't announce a policy on TV that actually isn't party policy.
Lab 656 Ind 655 Con 83 Green 68
Just a bigger version of the failed better care fund that is fragmenting the NHS as we speak.
http://www.scriptonitedaily.com/2014/10/23/bbc-uses-anti-terror-spy-powers-to-track-down-people-who-havent-paid-their-license-fee/
1) You will get people on juries who are opposed to the death penalty on principle, and will never vote to convict
and this is crucial.
2) The benchmark for convicting someone will be raised by the jury will be raised, if they their decision will lead to someone's execution, we could see more guilty people found not guilty
3) The appeals process will go on and on, look at some of the length of appeals in the US!
By 1 vote (count it)
Greens get 10% of Labour vote . . .
steve hawkes @steve_hawkes
"He wants to be somewhere he's just not sure how to get there," @DavidWooding sums up Ed Miliband's immigration strategy on @SkyNews
Take your pick!
Bizarre to ask for 19 years worth of back-payments within one month, but apparently these are all rules that Britain agreed to - that past payments would be recalculated on the basis of new estimates of the sizes of economies all the way back to the 90s. Maybe the British simply assumed that the Italians and other Europeans would have a larger black market than us, and that we would be the ones receiving a repayment?
Anyway, there's a lot of ignorant talk about Hollande, and the EU unilaterally re-writing budgets which is completely wide of the mark. The EU is simply following the rules that the 28 member nations agreed to. Maybe they should have thought about what they were agreeing to more carefully at the time.
Really annoys me that the stupid politicians would complain about this now when the EU officials were just enacting the rules that the politicians created for them.
Is it okay to impose the death penalty if you are doing it by drone in a foreign country and with innocent people becoming 'collateral damage' ?
This Bours woman really cant string a death sentance (see what i did there) together
Were we involved in a prolonged and brutal war, however, then the use of the death penalty would be both reasonable and practical.
The inference from this on the hoof policy is that UKIP support YES. Do they, or is this yet another dog whistle by Farage?
Well enough is enough. Cameron simply shouldn't hand over the cash. Certainly not without concessions. Who's his boss? The British public or the Brussels bureaucracy?
So Britain's bill has gone up but the ability to pay for it hasn't.
Genius.
UKIP leaflet finally received (still none from the EDP) and quite a professional one at that.
Mention of Rotherham and attacks on Labour **, pointing out that the last SYPCC was Labour.
Bar chart of the back showing Labour and UKIP neck-and-neck at the Euro elections and an explanation of the SV system allowing people to vote Con/EDP first and then UKIP second.
** In comparison TSE's old school chum didn't attack Labour at all in his leaflet. I can only conclude that Establishment Tories see as little wrong with Labour's policing as they did with Gordon Brown's public spending.
Don't wobble dave.
It would seem to be based on revised ways to calculate the GPD - you may remember the changes were announced a few weeks back.
I think the controversy is in the back dating it to 1995.
Ed reckons they will increase the NHS budget by £2.5m, and they want to nick £1.7m from us to give to his failing mate in France among others. What does Ed, Hugh, big john and the rest think?
And we know what people think of corrupt politicians 'just following the rules' from the expenses disgrace!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W8-z30j8I8
What a crass political vision you have.
If British workers could stir themselves we would not have immigrants. Millions more in work and still millions of brits not working and on benefits.
– UKIP will introduce the Citizens’ Initiative to allow the public to initiate national referendums on issues of major public interest.
I imagine Bours believes this will be used for a referendum on capital punishment.
Therefore capital punishment would be the people's policy and not UKIP's. It's called direct democracy dontcha know.
As for dog whistle's it got a mutt like you out of its kennel so I suppose it's worked........
But when it comes to capital punishment, it really isn't worth it even if you aren't opposed to it morally.
http://www.iangwalker.co.uk/pcc/change/
He's also pointed out that any future PCC use temperate language and cited the criticism Ukip received from the parent of one of the victims in Rochdale for exploiting the vile crimes for partisan purposes.
Tories win 36.4 - 27.7 UKIP
Con 385 UKIP 293 Lib Dem 262 Green 61 Lab 57
Britain Elects @britainelects 3m3 minutes ago
Folkestone Harvey West (Shepway) vote result: CON - 385 UKIP - 293 LDEM - 262 GRN - 61 LAB - 57
Britain Elects @britainelects 5m5 minutes ago
Folkestone Harvey West (Shepway) result: CON - 36.4% (-18.8) UKIP - 27.7% (+27.7) LDEM - 24.8% (+3.4) GRN - 5.8% (+5.8) LAB - 5.4% (-18.0)
Well I'm sold!
Lib Dems go from 3rd to 3rd !!!
LDEM - 24.8% (+3.4)
They'll be popping the champagne in Lib Dem HQ tonight.
Nick - How did your party manage it, getting your vote share UP at an election.
Nick will come back saying it was an AMAZING effort by all involved in Shepway, and that they're smashing the LAB-Con there.
Truly a momentous result for the Lib Dems.
That one's even better than your promise to leave the Conservative party if they didn't give proper support to military personnel.
He's been criticising Labour a lot more than he's criticised UKIP.
I can easily imagine what the fuss would be like on here if it had turned out the other way, and the French and Italians were supposed to pay us back, but trying to wiggle out of it.
By all means see this as yet another reason why the UK should leave the EU - it beggars belief that anyone would think it was sensible to mess around with twenty year old budget payments, rather than just use the new rules for future payments - but you can't go around refusing to follow laws you helped to write and have any credibility in future negotiations.
Why would anyone make any sort of agreement with the UK if they thought we were a pathetic little country who reneged on our agreements just because we didn't like the implications that followed from them?
It's much easier for you lot to lay all the blame at the feet of the EU, and then you let the British politicians who helped to create this mess escape without having to account for their actions.
SNP gain Argyll Oban North
No figures yet
Has he criticised this government's strategy of non-action ?
And if he's so hostile to Labour will he tell Conservative voters to put UKIP as their second vote ?
http://www.scottishelections.org.uk/scotland/lby/obannorthlorn2.php
I reckon the Tories may be trying to allegedly cover up the fact that a large number of the 5,688 returned ballots were in fact spoiled or blank papers. The original reports gave a figure of 4,000 so that means 30% (ie. 5688-4000=c.1688) of the supposed total may not have been valid votes.
It still doesn't excuse that rotten cesspit in Brussels from attempting such daylight robbery!
First preference votes are:
530 Kieron Green [Labour]
629 Stephanie Irvine [Independent]
1090 Iain S Maclean [SNP]
415 Andrew Vennard [Conservative]
I haven't got a link to the venue or date, but it should be up somewhere.
The problem the Tories have now is, their primary was such a flop, the only conceivable way they can win is a v low turnout.. yet they have pledged to throw the kitchen sink at it, with Cameron due to make at least 4 more visits, and every cabinet minister forced to go 3 times
I would imagine that Rochester would have a higher percentage.
Approximately 1688 spoiled ballots would still only be about 2% of the total and so not an unreasonable number.
If you think there was ever any possibility that the EU could rule that money had to go back to Britain then you truly are naive. If France had to pay more it would go to the EU, not back to member states. Money and power only flows in one direction.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosport_Conservative_primary,_2009