"The UK has been doing better since 1997 than we thought and that's resulted in this extra payment. The Netherlands will pay more, while France and Germany get a rebate." Sarah Hewin of Standard Chartered on 5 live says the payment has to be made in the next few months. That could mean more borrowing, she says.
Perhaps it is a time for Cameron to just say No. If he doesn't then he might as well disband the Tories now, let UKIP walk over them in R & S. With friends like this in the EU telling the UK to hand over move money cos the economy has done so well since 1997, who needs enemies. It looks like a scam, smells like a scam, and if a single extra £1 or €1 is handed over it just confirms that Cameron is like the jellyfish, spineless and floating on the tide.
On the one hand, it's not unreasonable that the richest, best-performing countries should contribute most, nor that from time to time, payments should be re-assessed to account for performance since the last assessment. On the other, this is a singularly poor time to be doing so, unless tied to institutional reform driven by those whose pockets are being tapped.
Care to tell us what the point of austerity is then?
The extra contributions are due because of the rise in GNI from 1995.
The prime period of outperformance of course being 1997-2007.
During the period of austerity GNI growth was significantly slower.
As regards would the money be better spent on the NHS of course but so would the tax cuts to millionaires and the £3bn just recently committed to bomb iraq again.
I am glad someone brought that up. My memory isn't what it once was but didn't Cameron make a big thing about getting the EU to reduce its budget over then next few years? Well, also in the paper this morning was a little snippet that the EU Parliament has voted to increase the budget for the next financial year by £5.4bn, this raising our contributions by £680m a year.
My memory is that Cameron made a big thing about the EU reducing its increase in the budget. (1st differential)
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
Thats an allegation and a smear by the Tories, and as far as I can see unproven. On the other hand I can bring you dozens of cases against labour that are true, however I have better things to do.
Anything which criticises UKIP is a 'Tory smear.' The inferiority and persecution complex is almost palpable, and generally makes for poor decision making.
Farage and you by proxy (ha) are therefore the fools. Or perhaps he should just say what he clearly means: nig-nogs shouldn't be allowed to vote (by post, although he probably thinks at all).
Can't sustain a decent argument so reverting to entirely unfounded claims of racism. My God it's pathetic. Is it because you're angry about the Jews? (See how this works?)
Indeed I do see how you work. You have ignored my relatively long exposition of Mikek's and Farage's inconsistency over the idea of scrapping postal votes. To do so would disenfranchise significant sections of working Britain (medics working abroad, long distance lorry, train and coach drivers, journalists as well as those on holiday etc. etc.). But you brought it back to the comment which I suspect underlies Farage's remarks.
Of course Farage is a racist. Anyone who begins any sentence with the words 'I'm not a racist but …' is invariably one, and Farage goes a whole lot further than that.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Indeed I do see how you work. You have ignored my relatively long exposition of Mikek's and Farage's inconsistency over the idea of scrapping postal votes. To do so would disenfranchise significant sections of working Britain (medics working abroad, long distance lorry, train and coach drivers, journalists as well as those on holiday etc. etc.). But you brought it back to the comment which I suspect underlies Farage's remarks.
Of course Farage is a racist. Anyone who begins any sentence with the words 'I'm not a racist but …' is invariably one, and Farage goes a whole lot further than that.
Just because you're the sort of idiot that goes around saying "peace be upon him" after Muhammad's name even though you're not a Muslim doesn't make everyone else racist. It seems that you yourself have deep-seated bigotry for white middle-aged males given how you use the term as an insult. That probably explains your loony thoughts about Farage hating "nig-nogs", a term he's never used but you toss about freely. That's a pretty unpleasant slur to bring back, by the way.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
I think you will find that postal voting fraud is not one of our proud democratic traditions.
I am glad someone brought that up. My memory isn't what it once was but didn't Cameron make a big thing about getting the EU to reduce its budget over then next few years? Well, also in the paper this morning was a little snippet that the EU Parliament has voted to increase the budget for the next financial year by £5.4bn, this raising our contributions by £680m a year.
Yeah, I missed that one as well. You know what, screw it, we might as well leave. Sure, we'll probably pay for it in the end, and be subject to a lot of rules we don't like without having any influence on them anyway, but the power of the EU over national governments is only going to increase (except in superficial areas where concessions might be able to be won, but nothing substantive), any influence we do have on the rules is small and getting smaller, so we might as well be subject to them on the outside so we can at least bitch about them without being told we'd been a part of every new imposition when it was created so we cannot complain and how dare we stand in the way of Brussels (which I saw on a leaflet from the EU recently is the Capital of Europe (no quotation marks as though that is its nickname or slogan or something, just a statement of fact apparently).
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Indeed, my wife as an immigrant from non-colonial Asia had to wait until she got her British Citizenship to vote, which seems fair since I am currently resident in her country and cannot vote here, but could if I took citizenship. Why could another person who is only resident in the UK and holds no citizenship vote when my wife could not.
Yes it is reasoned but it is based on a lack of information. This payment is not based solely on the last couple of years' performance by the UK economy but upon our performance over the last 20 years. This is why Greece is also having to pay extra in spite of the parlous state of their economy whilst Germany is getting a rebate!
I don't think that's quite right.
My understanding is that they have gone back over the last 20 years and added in the black economy to the GDP figures (as was decided to do going forward earlier this year). So it's not really that the UK has performed better, more that we are proportionally bigger.
On this basis they have then recalculated the contributions that would be due from each country for the last 4 years and submitted an "adjustment" to the previously paid contributions.
From an administrative perspective it's actually pretty mundane and reasonable.
But the appropriate response is, to quote @easterross, is to tell them to go fuck themselves.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Dear god I've just seen Russell Brand on newsnight. He is fantastically fantastically fantastically moronic.
I do hope you borrowed it from the library.
What's worse is buying a book or a CD twice. I've done that a few times, and with only one exception it was because the book or CD was utterly unmemorable.
Dear god I've just seen Russell Brand on newsnight. He is fantastically fantastically fantastically moronic.
I think he appeals to the trend of thought that because he dislikes many things other people may dislike (corporations, the elites etc) and is eloquent (in a flowery sense at least) and unapologetic about it, without actually having any risk of his other ideas happening (as in any case he and others of a similar ilk are perfectly content to rail from the sidelines and no more, anything else is harder and grubbier, as it comes up against reality and actually convincing people to do things, and as countless revolutionaries acting on behalf of 'the people' inevitably find out, often times 'the people' do not actually agree with you in practice and must be forced to do so), he must therefore be an ok chap whose other ideas should be listened to and indeed supported.
On the other hand, reading back my own writing here, 3 parentheses in one paragraph sized sentence means I probably cannot criticise his actual writing or speaking style directly at least.
The cuts in the EU budget agreed by the EU Council are of course going forward, not back. The position of the EU Parliament is predictable but on this the Council have the whip hand because without agreement there can be no increase in the budget which will therefore fall in real terms.
Any country which chooses to vote socialist is obviously not trying to grow and should have to pay to the EU what they would have paid if they had not been so stupid.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.
EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.
2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.
Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to poll more votes than LibDems do throughout Britain. As I have been saying here for some time.
Very hard to translate into seats, other than a clear Tory majority - anything from 20 to 120.
Presumably you will be betting heavily on such an outcome. And Easterross. And Patrick. If anyone wants to frame a bet PM me. Anyone would think this is just pathetic trolling.
As a Conservative I don't think people who harbour deep seated resentment towards this country should be allowed to interfere in our decisions.
Removing the vote from resentful people is a novel concept in Britain. People who go to great lengths to avoid paying tax, for instance? Or those who seek to exploit ethnic differences? A bit difficult to define exactly what sort of opinions should lead to disqualification from voting - simplest perhaps to define it as disagreement with the government? It might lead to trouble with the ECHR, but hey, Belorussia has shown the way for dealing with such problems.
Off topic, but can I take this opportunity to thank Nick Palmer for leaving some detailed comments on my latest blog piece on tribalism in British politics. I really appreciate it and have replied in the comments myself. I don't get around to writing as often as I would like, but if anyone else wants to read please just visit: http://thesceptredisle.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/reflections-on-tribalism-in-british-politics/
Thanks, James. I agree with everything you say in your reply.
Indeed I do see how you work. You have ignored my relatively long exposition of Mikek's and Farage's inconsistency over the idea of scrapping postal votes. To do so would disenfranchise significant sections of working Britain (medics working abroad, long distance lorry, train and coach drivers, journalists as well as those on holiday etc. etc.). But you brought it back to the comment which I suspect underlies Farage's remarks.
Reforming the postal vote system wouldn't disenfranchise anyone.
I left a copy of "Wings" by Terry Pratchett on the train once, entirely by accident, that I'd been reading to my daughter. So at least some books on trains are worth reading.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Off topic, but can I take this opportunity to thank Nick Palmer for leaving some detailed comments on my latest blog piece on tribalism in British politics. I really appreciate it and have replied in the comments myself. I don't get around to writing as often as I would like, but if anyone else wants to read please just visit: http://thesceptredisle.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/reflections-on-tribalism-in-british-politics/
As political tribalism is a particular topic of bother for me, I shall do so at once.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Dear god I've just seen Russell Brand on newsnight. He is fantastically fantastically fantastically moronic.
I do hope you borrowed it from the library.
What's worse is buying a book or a CD twice. I've done that a few times, and with only one exception it was because the book or CD was utterly unmemorable.
On commonwealth voting - certainly we should disenfranchise commonwealth countries that don't allow our citizens to vote there.
That'd mean a slightly lower turnout in Kensington most likely.
Australia. Australia has abolished the status of British subject with effect from 26 January 1984. However, British subjects and Commonwealth citizens (excluding South African citizens) and Irish citizens who were on the federal electoral roll on 25 January 1984 can vote. If they leave Australia and their enrolment has lapsed, they are still eligible to re-enrol upon their return to Australia.[9]
Dear god I've just seen Russell Brand on newsnight. He is fantastically fantastically fantastically moronic.
On the other hand, reading back my own writing here, 3 parentheses in one paragraph sized sentence means I probably cannot criticise his actual writing or speaking style directly at least.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Actually the concept of there being no crime without law has been a fundamental principle since Roman Law times and forms the basis of Article 7 of ECHR.
Or as Durkheim put it: "We do not condemn it because it is a crime, but it is a crime because we condemn it.”
Why people think two ignorant morons shouting at each other is entertaining is simply beyond me.
Mr. L, isn't that a mal in se, mal prohibita difference, though?
ie speeding is wrong because we've decided certain roads have certain limits. There's nothing inherently wrong with driving at 57mph. On the other hand, even if we had no law, just about everyone would consider rape to be immoral, unjust and indefensible.
Anyone who apes Jesus as a look clearly has a wee bit of narcissistic personality in my view... Imagine if Julian Assange had that - he'd be even more unbearable.
Bought it in Smith's and left it on the train for some other poor sap.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
I find anyone taking his views seriously AKA Newsnight totally bizarre. I made a point of reading his autobiog to see if there was anything under his endless self-promotion. Alas not. A day of my life wasted, I'd have been better off cleaning litter trays.
Morning all and boy starting with OGH many of you seem to have been getting your knickers in a twist about the Rochester Tory selection. Frankly whether it is 4000 or 5600 votes which counted, it is a whole lot more than the roughly 100 or so who would have selected Mark Reckless as Tory candidate in 2005 or 2010.
EU 1.3 billion euros, Cameron should tell them to fcuk themselves.
2015 GE, it really looks more like 1983 all over again. So how about Ed to poll in the range 25-28% just ahead of UKIP with Tories in 33-35 range and Labour to lose seats to Tories south of Birmingham and win no seats back from Tories. SNP and Tories to take a dozen+ seats between them from Labour and LibDems in Scotland and UKIP to win fewer than 10 seats.
Con 35, Lab 25, UKIP 23. SNP to poll more votes than LibDems do throughout Britain. As I have been saying here for some time.
Very hard to translate into seats, other than a clear Tory majority - anything from 20 to 120.
Presumably you will be betting heavily on such an outcome. And Easterross. And Patrick. If anyone wants to frame a bet PM me. Anyone would think this is just pathetic trolling.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
Again, it would be good to get your definition of the "left". The current situation has applied for many a long year under both Labour and Tory governments, as far as I am aware. So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one. As a self-confessed leftie I don't see how that works, so it would be helpful if you could explain.
Amen to that. - I have never understood the BBC’s fascination with Ms Hart, or why they insist on promoting her appearance in several high profile spin offs – she is quite simply bloody awful.
It's the most ridiculous whataboutery I've ever seen from a party leader. I may be dancing on the heads of pins, but it seems to me entirely possible to be highly disturbed about what has happened in Rotherham and elsewhere, and yet also to think that the UKIP Calypso was a load of old tosh.
As a Conservative I don't think people who harbour deep seated resentment towards this country should be allowed to interfere in our decisions.
Removing the vote from resentful people is a novel concept in Britain. People who go to great lengths to avoid paying tax, for instance? Or those who seek to exploit ethnic differences? A bit difficult to define exactly what sort of opinions should lead to disqualification from voting - simplest perhaps to define it as disagreement with the government? It might lead to trouble with the ECHR, but hey, Belorussia has shown the way for dealing with such problems.
I think the proposal is more that people who harbour such deep-rooted antipaties to this country and it's long-established values and cultural norms shouldn't really be here in the first place.
As a Conservative I don't think people who harbour deep seated resentment towards this country should be allowed to interfere in our decisions.
Removing the vote from resentful people is a novel concept in Britain. People who go to great lengths to avoid paying tax, for instance? Or those who seek to exploit ethnic differences? A bit difficult to define exactly what sort of opinions should lead to disqualification from voting - simplest perhaps to define it as disagreement with the government? It might lead to trouble with the ECHR, but hey, Belorussia has shown the way for dealing with such problems.
I think the proposal is more that people who harbour such deep-rooted antipaties to this country and it's long-established values and cultural norms shouldn't really be here in the first place.
But where are all the UKIP supporters going to go then?
Mr. L, isn't that a mal in se, mal prohibita difference, though?
ie speeding is wrong because we've decided certain roads have certain limits. There's nothing inherently wrong with driving at 57mph. On the other hand, even if we had no law, just about everyone would consider rape to be immoral, unjust and indefensible.
But Mr Dancer if we have decided that country roads should have a speed limit of 60mph we have presumably done this for a reason. The reason is that our best assessment is that driving faster than that on those roads is dangerous, not only to the driver but to those who are likely to be hit by him.
Of course many, even most, of us think we know better and can judge a safe speed but the societal view is to disagree (and the evidence in support of society is of course overwhelming) and to make it a criminal act. But to quote Durkheim again: "“When mores are sufficient, laws are unnecessary; when mores are insufficient, laws are unenforceable.”
We do not as individuals (whatever the societal view is) believe that speeding is immoral so the law is not capable of being enforced. We may be wrong about that but our laws are token. Why is any car in this country that is not an emergency vehicle capable of driving faster than 70mph?
The worst thing for Cameron is its emerged he's known about this for months.
I cannot work out what he planned to do about the news, as obviously we'd have to find out about it eventually. Clearly we'll give in eventually, the standard approach is to hope for some short term 'win', or something that can be presented as a win, then the EU essentially takes it all back in the following months and years anyway, but in the many months he's had to consider this issue, what had he actually decided to do, or how did he decide to approach it? So far it is almost as though he was taken by surprise at the news, which is not in the least bit credible, so is that the approach he's decided on? "Well, I too am surprised British public, and I will work to get allies together to fight this. What's that, actually not do it? Well, no, we'll do it, but we will make a lot of noise about how much it isn't right as we open our wallets, what more do you want?"
So thanks to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy our contributions to the EU have increased.
I can live with that.
Given that the recalculated contributions cover the period from 1995, and involve the inclusion of figures on illegal activity, then I don't think Osborne can, or would want to, claim the "credit" for this.
We've already paid past contributions on the basis of our growth as recorded by the figures excluding illegal activity - so Osborne could only claim the credit if it was because prostitution and drug-dealing had boomed since 2010.
I think the payments only relate to the last 4 years
LBC @LBC 7m7 minutes ago Farage: I want the entire postal voting system scrapped. http://l-bc.co/farage #PhoneFarage
So members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces serving this country overseas cannot vote?
Farage is such a jerk. The beauty is that it will be his undoing when the media flick the spotlight switches.
Postal votes are used most by the elderly, who tend to vote UKIP and Tory the most.
It would be very easy for Farage to modify his position that we should abolish postal voting on demand and go back to the situation that prevailed pre-1998 (?) when you could only apply for one if ill, away or had some other just need for one. Indeed, that may well be Farage's position - I've not seen the full quote in context - and it'd be wise not to go off on 'UKIP would ban squaddies from voting' before being sure of the ground first.
A friend has just loaned me a series of hers. I've no desire to watch it, but feel obliged lest I bruise his enthusiasm for it.
Maybe I will be delighted, or not.
Still, it's fair dues since I keep suggesting things to him, so he's probably got that horrible sinking feeling about my taste and too polite to say so...
Amen to that. - I have never understood the BBC’s fascination with Ms Hart, or why they insist on promoting her appearance in several high profile spin offs – she is quite simply bloody awful.
So thanks to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy our contributions to the EU have increased.
I can live with that.
Given that the recalculated contributions cover the period from 1995, and involve the inclusion of figures on illegal activity, then I don't think Osborne can, or would want to, claim the "credit" for this.
We've already paid past contributions on the basis of our growth as recorded by the figures excluding illegal activity - so Osborne could only claim the credit if it was because prostitution and drug-dealing had boomed since 2010.
I think the payments only relate to the last 4 years
I wondered about that. There surely has to be some sort of limitation period on these recalculations.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one.
I for one find it pretty amusing to discover that even 44 years as a Tory MP does not prevent one from being a lefty, but it does seem to be common view on the right, in which case I think the Tory party should really be a bit more robust in its candidate selections - strict ideological consistency on the left-right spectrum is of course not going to happen, and even less so thesedays than previously, but if a person can be turned into a lefty, or drift into becoming one, despite being in the bosom of the faithful right for so long, what hope do any of us have? We could all be lefties right now and not even know it!
Watcher - you are bizarrely obsessed. I guess you will never know how stupid your accusations are. Plato - I actually have no idea what that comment means. None.
Indeed. Hence why many drug laws are insane. It would certainly be wise to regulate what one can and cannot do, while under the influence, as with booze.
But to criminalise a quiet spliff in front of the fire is bonkers. There is no moral reason for it. Hence the law is an ass, and ignored.
As a Conservative I don't think people who harbour deep seated resentment towards this country should be allowed to interfere in our decisions.
Removing the vote from resentful people is a novel concept in Britain. People who go to great lengths to avoid paying tax, for instance? Or those who seek to exploit ethnic differences? A bit difficult to define exactly what sort of opinions should lead to disqualification from voting - simplest perhaps to define it as disagreement with the government? It might lead to trouble with the ECHR, but hey, Belorussia has shown the way for dealing with such problems.
Off topic, but can I take this opportunity to thank Nick Palmer for leaving some detailed comments on my latest blog piece on tribalism in British politics. I really appreciate it and have replied in the comments myself. I don't get around to writing as often as I would like, but if anyone else wants to read please just visit: http://thesceptredisle.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/reflections-on-tribalism-in-british-politics/
Thanks, James. I agree with everything you say in your reply.
Why do you think there used to be restrictions on non-conformist Protestants, Catholics, those without property etc. and that there are still restrictions on prisoners?
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one.
I for one find it pretty amusing to discover that even 44 years as a Tory MP does not prevent one from being a lefty, but it does seem to be common view on the right, in which case I think the Tory party should really be a bit more robust in its candidate selections - strict ideological consistency on the left-right spectrum is of course not going to happen, and even less so thesedays than previously, but if a person can be turned into a lefty, or drift into becoming one, despite being in the bosom of the faithful right for so long, what hope do any of us have? We could all be lefties right now and not even know it!
Left and right are relative terms. You can't have one without the other.
People who claim to be right-wing need left-wingers to disagree with and vice-versa.
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) 24/10/2014 11:11 Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
I am off to the Socialist republic of Liverpool now (well Aintree)
Back on Sunday night
Good luck, John.
I believe the card includes include a number of handicaps - those fine, socialist races in which the horses are given different weights in order to give them an equal chance, despite their manifest differences in ability.
Alan Clark's Diaries may be instructive in understanding this latest European debacle.
He claims that all of Britain's officials connected with the EU are, to the last person, eurofanatics.
Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him).
In its own way, it's quite impressive to make annualised growth of roughly 3% sound alarmingly weak. By way of contrast, this was the FT's Chris Giles's take:
"Healthy and steady UK economic growth for now".
"Growth of 0.7% is still good; it works out at 3% a year and that is better than most of our competitors including France and Germany."
Given that trend GDP growth rates tend to lie c. 2.5 - 2.75% p.a, it is hardly worth sneering about. Imagine the fuss if it had been a negative number.
So thanks to George Osborne's magnificent stewardship of the economy our contributions to the EU have increased.
I can live with that.
Given that the recalculated contributions cover the period from 1995, and involve the inclusion of figures on illegal activity, then I don't think Osborne can, or would want to, claim the "credit" for this.
We've already paid past contributions on the basis of our growth as recorded by the figures excluding illegal activity - so Osborne could only claim the credit if it was because prostitution and drug-dealing had boomed since 2010.
I think the payments only relate to the last 4 years
Thanks. The article I read wasn't clear on the details. Both 1993 and 1995 were mentioned as important dates - but the four-year period wasn't.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
Thought I'd pop in and see if the PB Breitbarters are taking time off demanding direct democracy in order to denigrate an exercise in direct democracy.... Not disappointed...
It's the most ridiculous whataboutery I've ever seen from a party leader. I may be dancing on the heads of pins, but it seems to me entirely possible to be highly disturbed about what has happened in Rotherham and elsewhere, and yet also to think that the UKIP Calypso was a load of old tosh.
Indeed. Hence why many drug laws are insane. It would certainly be wise to regulate what one can and cannot do, while under the influence, as with booze.
But to criminalise a quiet spliff in front of the fire is bonkers. There is no moral reason for it. Hence the law is an ass, and ignored.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
They could just be astoundingly crap at their jobs, but it seems unlikely every single one of them is I suppose.
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick) 24/10/2014 11:11 Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
So they refuse to reveal the precise figures as was done in Totnes and Gosport, thus making a farce of the concept of an "open" primary.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one.
I for one find it pretty amusing to discover that even 44 years as a Tory MP does not prevent one from being a lefty, but it does seem to be common view on the right, in which case I think the Tory party should really be a bit more robust in its candidate selections - strict ideological consistency on the left-right spectrum is of course not going to happen, and even less so thesedays than previously, but if a person can be turned into a lefty, or drift into becoming one, despite being in the bosom of the faithful right for so long, what hope do any of us have? We could all be lefties right now and not even know it!
Bit like the Tea Party members views. People we would regard as quite right of centre seem to be dangerous lefties to them.
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
It's a set-up. Mr Cameron goes to Brussels, waves the shade of a handbag around, has a dramatic meeting where he walks out without agreement, later has an emotional reconciliation at which Britain and the EU decide that they're so much stronger together and agree to work through their differences, and the charge is waived or swapped for something more valuable.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
LBC @LBC 7m7 minutes ago Farage: I want the entire postal voting system scrapped. http://l-bc.co/farage #PhoneFarage
So members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces serving this country overseas cannot vote?
Farage is such a jerk. The beauty is that it will be his undoing when the media flick the spotlight switches.
Postal votes are used most by the elderly, who tend to vote UKIP and Tory the most.
It would be very easy for Farage to modify his position that we should abolish postal voting on demand and go back to the situation that prevailed pre-1998 (?) when you could only apply for one if ill, away or had some other just need for one. Indeed, that may well be Farage's position - I've not seen the full quote in context - and it'd be wise not to go off on 'UKIP would ban squaddies from voting' before being sure of the ground first.
I doubt he has anything as thought-through as a position. Of course he won't ban squaddies from voting, but he does need to be very careful about what he proposes as it could end up disenfranchising a lot of UKIP supporters. Most users of postal votes are not immigrant fraudsters.
Amen to that. - I have never understood the BBC’s fascination with Ms Hart, or why they insist on promoting her appearance in several high profile spin offs – she is quite simply bloody awful.
It's the most ridiculous whataboutery I've ever seen from a party leader. I may be dancing on the heads of pins, but it seems to me entirely possible to be highly disturbed about what has happened in Rotherham and elsewhere, and yet also to think that the UKIP Calypso was a load of old tosh.
That's nothing. I went to see Kylie in concert on Saturday night.
LBC @LBC 7m7 minutes ago Farage: I want the entire postal voting system scrapped. http://l-bc.co/farage #PhoneFarage
So members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces serving this country overseas cannot vote?
Farage is such a jerk. The beauty is that it will be his undoing when the media flick the spotlight switches.
Postal votes are used most by the elderly, who tend to vote UKIP and Tory the most.
It would be very easy for Farage to modify his position that we should abolish postal voting on demand and go back to the situation that prevailed pre-1998 (?) when you could only apply for one if ill, away or had some other just need for one. Indeed, that may well be Farage's position - I've not seen the full quote in context - and it'd be wise not to go off on 'UKIP would ban squaddies from voting' before being sure of the ground first.
I doubt he has anything as thought-through as a position. Of course he won't ban squaddies from voting, but he does need to be very careful about what he proposes as it could end up disenfranchising a lot of UKIP supporters. Most users of postal votes are not immigrant fraudsters.
As long as you still allow people that can't get to a polling station, you're not disenfranchising anyone.
I noticed a few references to articles in the Indy from Kippers - has it decided that it's no longer obsessed by dead seagulls and twattery from Owen Jones/Penny Red.
Mr. L, isn't that a mal in se, mal prohibita difference, though?
ie speeding is wrong because we've decided certain roads have certain limits. There's nothing inherently wrong with driving at 57mph. On the other hand, even if we had no law, just about everyone would consider rape to be immoral, unjust and indefensible.
Depends on the road. Are you saying there is nothing inherently wrong with driving at 57mph outside a primary school?
Speed limits should be evidence based, not defined by people's assessment (usually overestimated) of their driving ability.
Couple of comments here this morning about 'foreigners' (specifically 'Pakistanis and Nigerians') being able to vote in UK elections, which seem to miss the point that this is only Commonwealth (and BOT) residents who are legally resident in the UK and who are resident in a particular constituency.
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
That's not missing the point at all. If you're not a signed up British citizen you shouldn't be voting. A British citizen that resides in India or Mozambique doesn't get the vote there, so it shouldn't happen here. It's clearly an insane system and the only reason lefties like it is because they know that most such voters vote Labour in large numbers.
So, exactly what is a leftie? Yesterday, you said that Ken Clarke was one.
I for one find it pretty amusing to discover that even 44 years as a Tory MP does not prevent one from being a lefty, but it does seem to be common view on the right, in which case I think the Tory party should really be a bit more robust in its candidate selections - strict ideological consistency on the left-right spectrum is of course not going to happen, and even less so thesedays than previously, but if a person can be turned into a lefty, or drift into becoming one, despite being in the bosom of the faithful right for so long, what hope do any of us have? We could all be lefties right now and not even know it!
Leftie seems to be a pretty fluid thing on PB. From what I can work out from assorted comments on here, it seems that we hate the UK, its history and its white citizens, we turn a blind eye to child rape, incite the murder of right-wingers and get very angry about bad calypso.
Alan Clark's Diaries may be instructive in understanding this latest European debacle.
He claims that all of Britain's officials connected with the EU are, to the last person, eurofanatics.
Still? How are you in touch with what he "claims"? Seance? You may be right that this remains the case, but the quote you're referencing was probably made around a quarter of a century ago (I don't have the reference to hand but he was out of parliament between 1992 and 1997 and then the Tories were out of power for the time after his return so his position to observe after '92 was severely curtailed), and certainly before 1999, so is hardly a impartial view of how things are now.
This EU charge is creating a political storm alright, Crick is even suggesting that if Britain pays the money Cameron will face a no confidence vote in the Tory party:
''Alan Clark has been dead for 15 years and out of Parliament for 22 years. His information might possibly be out of date, even if he were to be taken as a scrupulously reliable witness on all matters (rather than someone who was famously economical with the actualité when it suited him). ''
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
It's a set-up. Mr Cameron goes to Brussels, waves the shade of a handbag around, has a dramatic meeting where he walks out without agreement, later has an emotional reconciliation at which Britain and the EU decide that they're so much stronger together and agree to work through their differences, and the charge is waived or swapped for something more valuable.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
The demand comes as part of what is known in Brussels as an amending budget proposal, a routine event that occurs regularly and is dependent on the ebb and flow of payments into the EU machine. There are currently a further six amending budgets on the table in Brussels, some of which may entail returning funds to Britain, meaning the overall bill could yet be cut.
If you were a conspiracy theorist, you could suspect that the amendment that increases our payment has been revealed first, so that if when the total is all totted up we don't have to pay anything, Cameron can present it as a victory over the dark forces of the EU Commission.
Or the total bill to the UK could end up being a lot more than the currently talked about €2.1 billion.
Mr Miliband promised that an immigration reform bill would be included in his first Queen’s Speech if his party wins power next May. It would crack down on illegal immigration by ensuring that everyone is recorded when they arrive in or departed from Britain through electronic checks. He pledged to seek changes inside EU make it easier to deport foreign criminals, and to double to six months the period before which EU nationals can claim benefits and tax credits in Britain.
Enforcing the law, deporting a handful of criminals more quickly, and causing the small minority that are coming to claim benefits wait a few more months before they can scrounge for years. This will be an undetectable effect on the half million coming here each year.
The Tories are only now waking up to the fact they need to do stuff that actually reduces immigration by a sizable share. Labour are still in the tinkering phase.
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
so is hardly a impartial view of how things are now.
What's your explanation for how the UK government has been spectacularly wrong footed by this proposal? Do you agree with Anti frank that's its ''WWE politics??''
LBC @LBC 7m7 minutes ago Farage: I want the entire postal voting system scrapped. http://l-bc.co/farage #PhoneFarage
So members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces serving this country overseas cannot vote?
Farage is such a jerk. The beauty is that it will be his undoing when the media flick the spotlight switches.
Postal votes are used most by the elderly, who tend to vote UKIP and Tory the most.
It would be very easy for Farage to modify his position that we should abolish postal voting on demand and go back to the situation that prevailed pre-1998 (?) when you could only apply for one if ill, away or had some other just need for one. Indeed, that may well be Farage's position - I've not seen the full quote in context - and it'd be wise not to go off on 'UKIP would ban squaddies from voting' before being sure of the ground first.
I doubt he has anything as thought-through as a position. Of course he won't ban squaddies from voting, but he does need to be very careful about what he proposes as it could end up disenfranchising a lot of UKIP supporters. Most users of postal votes are not immigrant fraudsters.
In my experience, the elderly are more than capable of making it to the polling station in person, assuming that's what you're referring to.
Comments
Michael Crick (@MichaelLCrick)
24/10/2014 10:05
Primary mystery. Politcal Betting suggest only 4000 cast votes in Tory Rochester primary & over 1600 spoilt ballots www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/arch…
How about the International Aid budget?
I'd of thought people concerned about immigration would be pleased to see people who have chosen to build lives here integrating, engaging with civic processes, and joining in with our proud democratic traditions?
Of course Farage is a racist. Anyone who begins any sentence with the words 'I'm not a racist but …' is invariably one, and Farage goes a whole lot further than that.
I would have thought audreyanne's comments about Farage are libellous, but I'll leave it to you to decide.
Please can you let me know if the sanction has been lifted on me engaging with Roger, seeing that he's now insulting me without recourse.
I think I've left about 200 books on the train over the yrs. It's a sure sign that they aren't worth reading at all or ever again. Still, someone will pick them up and take them home. Like car boot sales and buying other people's crap.
My understanding is that they have gone back over the last 20 years and added in the black economy to the GDP figures (as was decided to do going forward earlier this year). So it's not really that the UK has performed better, more that we are proportionally bigger.
On this basis they have then recalculated the contributions that would be due from each country for the last 4 years and submitted an "adjustment" to the previously paid contributions.
From an administrative perspective it's actually pretty mundane and reasonable.
But the appropriate response is, to quote @easterross, is to tell them to go fuck themselves.
On the other hand, reading back my own writing here, 3 parentheses in one paragraph sized sentence means I probably cannot criticise his actual writing or speaking style directly at least.
Meanwhile those devious French people are determined to reduce their future contributions to the EU budget even further: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11182224/Two-speed-eurozone-dragged-down-by-weaker-France.html
Any country which chooses to vote socialist is obviously not trying to grow and should have to pay to the EU what they would have paid if they had not been so stupid.
Brand argues that we see criminalising drug users by prosecuting them
Hitchens "that's like saying all crime is caused by law! Ludicrous proposition..."
http://youtu.be/SsMU77TwYM0
Whether Farage is or is not a racist, a court case on the issue would be a wet dream for many.
Postal votes.
1992: 690,000
1997: 740,000
2001: 1,370,000
2005: 3,960,000
2010: 6,996,000
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP12-43/uk-election-statistics-19182012
(on weighted turnout)
That'd mean a slightly lower turnout in Kensington most likely.
Australia. Australia has abolished the status of British subject with effect from 26 January 1984. However, British subjects and Commonwealth citizens (excluding South African citizens) and Irish citizens who were on the federal electoral roll on 25 January 1984 can vote. If they leave Australia and their enrolment has lapsed, they are still eligible to re-enrol upon their return to Australia.[9]
You have my sympathies.
Or as Durkheim put it: "We do not condemn it because it is a crime, but it is a crime because we condemn it.”
Why people think two ignorant morons shouting at each other is entertaining is simply beyond me.
He's quite entitled to do that, and face the electoral consequences.
If you don't like it, don't vote UKIP.
ie speeding is wrong because we've decided certain roads have certain limits. There's nothing inherently wrong with driving at 57mph. On the other hand, even if we had no law, just about everyone would consider rape to be immoral, unjust and indefensible.
84.6% "Strongly agree" with Nigel on the article.
To the extent the tories have a European policy, it is absolutely in shreds. it doesn't, in fact, exist.
I disagree with Ed's Miliband's European policy, but at least we sort of know what it is.
That alone should act as an awooga-awooga for how much we should trust Scotland sub-samples.
Amen to that. - I have never understood the BBC’s fascination with Ms Hart, or why they insist on promoting her appearance in several high profile spin offs – she is quite simply bloody awful.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29747338
Of course many, even most, of us think we know better and can judge a safe speed but the societal view is to disagree (and the evidence in support of society is of course overwhelming) and to make it a criminal act. But to quote Durkheim again: "“When mores are sufficient, laws are unnecessary; when mores are insufficient, laws are unenforceable.”
We do not as individuals (whatever the societal view is) believe that speeding is immoral so the law is not capable of being enforced. We may be wrong about that but our laws are token. Why is any car in this country that is not an emergency vehicle capable of driving faster than 70mph?
Maybe I will be delighted, or not.
Still, it's fair dues since I keep suggesting things to him, so he's probably got that horrible sinking feeling about my taste and too polite to say so...
We've not had an Ed Is Crap Ed Is Not PM blog from Dan The Man all week. Nothing from Ian Martin. Norman Tebbit, etc... either.
All very strange.
Added to that we have the meek, craven, cap in hand response to what the EU have done from British officials.
OOh we'll try and see if we can do something, something might be achievable we'll work with them..
Its almost worse than the demand itself.
Who on earth is running European policy in our country? is there a policy?
Plato - I actually have no idea what that comment means. None.
Indeed. Hence why many drug laws are insane. It would certainly be wise to regulate what one can and cannot do, while under the influence, as with booze.
But to criminalise a quiet spliff in front of the fire is bonkers. There is no moral reason for it. Hence the law is an ass, and ignored.
People who claim to be right-wing need left-wingers to disagree with and vice-versa.
24/10/2014 11:11
Tory officials in Rochester refuse to give precise figures on primary vote. Admit some spoilt ballots, but say not in region of 1600
He claims that all of Britain's officials connected with the EU are, to the last person, eurofanatics.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/oct/24/rochester-and-strood-byelection-politics-live-blog?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Good luck, John.
I believe the card includes include a number of handicaps - those fine, socialist races in which the horses are given different weights in order to give them an equal chance, despite their manifest differences in ability.
Enjoy.
Given that trend GDP growth rates tend to lie c. 2.5 - 2.75% p.a, it is hardly worth sneering about. Imagine the fuss if it had been a negative number.
What's your explanation for how the government have been so spectacularly out flanked by this?
And I own a copy of I Should Be So Lucky by Kylie.
The point is that this was supposed to be an "open primary". If you don't release the full voting results, it's a funny definition of "open" IMO.
It's WWE politics, with Jean-Claude Juncker as the heel.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ed-miliband-attempts-to-take-on-ukip-with-toughened-immigration-policies-9814669.html
Speed limits should be evidence based, not defined by people's assessment (usually overestimated) of their driving ability.
I think this will be popular, despite the bleating on here. If you don't like it, don't vote for it (and vote against by post!).
http://blogs.channel4.com/michael-crick-on-politics/eu-bill-david-cameron-conservative-party-ukip-rochester/4571
Nice handwriting. Were they handing out ballot papers to children?
Or the total bill to the UK could end up being a lot more than the currently talked about €2.1 billion.
Enforcing the law, deporting a handful of criminals more quickly, and causing the small minority that are coming to claim benefits wait a few more months before they can scrounge for years. This will be an undetectable effect on the half million coming here each year.
The Tories are only now waking up to the fact they need to do stuff that actually reduces immigration by a sizable share. Labour are still in the tinkering phase.
If they don't release the real voting figures, an increasing number of people will believe that a lot of ballots were returned looking precisely like the one in this photo.
I didn’trealise seven year old’s could vote in the primary!
My handwriting may be deteriorating with advancing age, but it’s better than that!
What's your explanation for how the UK government has been spectacularly wrong footed by this proposal? Do you agree with Anti frank that's its ''WWE politics??''