Miliband - a decent opposition leader would be on 42-45% leaving no room for these "protest vote " parties.
Perhaps. But you have to say Dave has done a sterling job today reminding everyone to kick him out of office in 5 years time if he achieved on immigration what he has achieved !
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
We're very aware of the reality of the modern UK: stagnant wages, rising house prices, general practice under huge strain. It's the Tories that are out of touch.
Who are these out of touch Tories? Are they the folk running the Conservative party? Or do they embrace all Conservative MPs? Or are you accusing all people who will vote Conservative in 2015? Or is it just the Conservative leaning posters on this website?
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
We're very aware of the reality of the modern UK: stagnant wages, rising house prices, general practice under huge strain. It's the Tories that are out of touch.
Omg - when is this maniac gonna take a break?
I have white outrage fatigue..
Racist!
Let's not spark talk of racism on Black Friday.
Is it just me or did Black Friday only get up and running as an event in the UK this year? Can't seem to remember ads mentioning this day (which started in America!!!!) last year.
It's just you:)
Happened to be in Princes Street this morning admittedly ca 10 am. Very quiet, nothing unusual, so surprised by all the Black Friday posters (Schuh added 'and green'!).
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
When he does I'm sure it will be the wrong kind of referendum. And when Out wins it will be the wrong kind of win, and when there is a trade agreement it will still allow Pakistanis to come here on holiday - you won't ever be satisfied.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
and Farage is going to stand behind all that is in the next UKIP GE manifesto..... Which will break the habit of a lifetime. Farage also portrays himself as a Thatcherite but lately wants no private sector involvement in the NHS. A real head spinner for folk who try to follow UKIP.
'‘He has marched us right up the hill and then pulled us down again. He’s probably lost the election for us today. Whether this will set something off, I do not know. There will be calls over the weekend to decide what to do.’
Another senior eurosceptic says:
‘I am in complete despair about it. It is as minimal as you can get. If this is what the renegotiation is going to be like, there isn’t going to be renegotiation, is there? The idea that we would leave the European Union just on the question of what we’re going to pay migrants in benefits, that’s like dying on the barbed wire for a tin of baked beans.’ "
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Miliband - a decent opposition leader would be on 42-45% leaving no room for these "protest vote " parties.
Perhaps. But you have to say Dave has done a sterling job today reminding everyone to kick him out of office in 5 years time if he achieved on immigration what he has achieved !
Yes, Cameron may have planted the final nail in his own coffin today. It does add credence to what Cummings wrote about the No. 10 operation losing sight of its main objectives.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
Miliband could get traction in the GE run in as the only leader of the big three Westminster parties who didn't break a pledge from last time
Maybe, but Farage trashed all his 2010 manifesto after signing it! But he will probably get away with the largest number of u-turns ever made by a party Leader since WW2.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
When he does I'm sure it will be the wrong kind of referendum. And when Out wins it will be the wrong kind of win, and when there is a trade agreement it will still allow Pakistanis to come here on holiday - you won't ever be satisfied.
Nonsense. On several occasions - vetoing the EU budget, suggesting an emergency brake on EU immigration, etc - I have backed Cameron and have said he deserves credit for doing the right thing. It's only when the proposed policy evaporates that I turn on him again.
No access to tax credits, housing benefits and social housing for four years for EU citizens
"For EU citizens who are workers (as defined by the Treaties and CJEU interpretation) or former workers (as defined by EU legislation, and the CJEU interpretation of the Treaties), there is a right to equal treatment as discussed in my prior blog post. So this change would require a Treaty amendment.
Removal if job-seekers do not find a job within six months
"For EU job-seekers, the EU legislation states that they cannot be expelled as long as they ‘can provide evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and that they have a genuine chance of being engaged’. This reflects the case law of the CJEU, interpreting the Treaties (Antonissen judgment). Therefore this change would require a Treaty amendment."
Stronger measures to deport EU criminals
"It is likely that they would also require a Treaty amendment, since the protection against removal on grounds of public policy, public security or public health is set out in the Treaties for EU migrant workers (Article 45(3) TFEU)."
EU citizens to have a job offer before entry
"... would also require a Treaty amendment, since the CJEU has said (in Antonissen) that the Treaty right to free movement of workers also applies to job-seekers, giving them the right to enter and stay in a Member State to look for work."
Payment of child benefit to children abroad
"Non-payment of child benefit to children living in other Member States is arguably indirectly discriminatory, since it affects more non-UK nationals than UK nationals. Since the equal treatment of workers is guaranteed by the Treaties, a Treaty amendment would likely be necessary to put this change into effect as regards workers’ family members."
Plus four other changes needing Treaty Amendments should the CJEU decide to view them as discriminatory or a disproportionate direct or indirect limitation on free movement rights.
'‘He has marched us right up the hill and then pulled us down again. He’s probably lost the election for us today. Whether this will set something off, I do not know. There will be calls over the weekend to decide what to do.’
Another senior eurosceptic says:
‘I am in complete despair about it. It is as minimal as you can get. If this is what the renegotiation is going to be like, there isn’t going to be renegotiation, is there? The idea that we would leave the European Union just on the question of what we’re going to pay migrants in benefits, that’s like dying on the barbed wire for a tin of baked beans.’ "
Like you they are hysterics. I do not care what the renegotiations are like. I would have thought a eurosceptic would want them to fail. Whatever they are we will get a referendum. The only thing I worry about is the economic uncertainty whilst we either renegotiate or in the end leave and enter something else. The end result will not be much different if we can maintain business confidence whilst in the middle of the process.
The typical kipper notion that we can tell the world to go away by the act of leving the EU is of course absurd. Canada already has large immigration (21%) and has negotiated a free trade deal with the EU which enhances free movement of labour. Norway -- ? The total population that is either born outside Norway, or has one or two parents born abroad, or has one or more grandparents born abroad is 1,100,000 to 5,017,500 (which equals 21.9 percent). 86.2% of the total population are Ethnic Norwegians and more than 660,000 (13,2%) are migrants and their descendants (110,000] second generation migrants born in Norway). Of these 660 000 immigrants and their descendants 325,000 (49%)] have a non-Western background (Turkey, Morocco, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Iran).
I will not bore you with what the immigrant population of Switzerland is.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
I don't quite see the equivalence in magnitude, but hey ho.
The Kippers are angry (try not to hide your surprise!)
Der Spiegel is accusing Cameron of blackmailing the EU
Yvette Cooper claims they were her ideas all along
And the Guardian shrieks that it's a race to the bottom on immigration.
I think we may reasonably conclude that Cameron has got it spot-on.
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
Richard_Nabavi I hope you are right, but the evidence from the pledge points to someone unable to lead a team that are incapable of calculating what all the activities need to be done to meet a tens of thousands promise. The smart move would have been to apologise at the start of the coalition that the LDs would not agree to a series of changes which would have delivered on the promose of tens of thousands..... Someone, such as Letwin, failed to set the policy options and consequences.
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet).
On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
The Kippers are angry (try not to hide your surprise!)
Der Spiegel is accusing Cameron of blackmailing the EU
Yvette Cooper claims they were her ideas all along And the Guardian shrieks that it's a race to the bottom on immigration. I think we may reasonably conclude that Cameron has got it spot-on.
Dave told us to vote him out of office after 5 years if he couldn't keep his promise to the British people on immigration. No ifs, no buts. Shouldn't we respect his political wishes ?
I agree that this does look like a fatal error. Odd that Crosby would understand this whilst Osborne carries on playing tactical games "helping" the europhiles4business lobby and ignoring this elephant in the room.
"Read my lips, no new taxes...." George Bush (1st POTUS) "No ifs, no buts." Cameron
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place, so you were sensible not to take up my bet).
On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
Is that because the are actually Eurosceptics rather than anti-immigrationists ?
David Cameron’s European gamble could backfire by driving voters towards the EU exit door, an exclusive poll reveals today. As the Prime Minister’s big speech on European immigration was interrupted by alarm bells going off in the room, a YouGov poll for the Evening Standard found the outcome of his negotiations will be critical to any in-out referendum.
Traditionally, Londoners support EU membership by a wide margin — but the poll reveals that this would be reversed if Mr Cameron fails to get a deal.
Asked how they would vote in a referendum on Britain’s EU membership, 45 per cent of Londoners would back remaining in, compared with 37 per cent who would want to leave, according to the survey.
But when the pollsters delved deeper into people’s views on Europe they found that the capital is ready to pull out if the Prime Minister is rebuffed in his attempt to negotiate a looser EU relationship for the UK. In fact the figures would be almost reversed, with 43 per cent in support of a split away and just 35 per cent who back staying in.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
I don't quite see the equivalence in magnitude, but hey ho.
It's in exact proportion for a giant compared to a pigmy!
'‘He has marched us right up the hill and then pulled us down again. He’s probably lost the election for us today. Whether this will set something off, I do not know. There will be calls over the weekend to decide what to do.’
Another senior eurosceptic says:
‘I am in complete despair about it. It is as minimal as you can get. If this is what the renegotiation is going to be like, there isn’t going to be renegotiation, is there? The idea that we would leave the European Union just on the question of what we’re going to pay migrants in benefits, that’s like dying on the barbed wire for a tin of baked beans.’ "
Like you they are hysterics. I do not care what the renegotiations are like. I would have thought a eurosceptic would want them to fail. Whatever they are we will get a referendum. The only thing I worry about is the economic uncertainty whilst we either renegotiate or in the end leave and enter something else. The end result will not be much different if we can maintain business confidence whilst in the middle of the process.
The typical kipper notion that we can tell the world to go away by the act of leving the EU is of course absurd. Canada already has large immigration (21%) and has negotiated a free trade deal with the EU which enhances free movement of labour. Norway -- ? The total population that is either born outside Norway, or has one or two parents born abroad, or has one or more grandparents born abroad is 1,100,000 to 5,017,500 (which equals 21.9 percent). 86.2% of the total population are Ethnic Norwegians and more than 660,000 (13,2%) are migrants and their descendants (110,000] second generation migrants born in Norway). Of these 660 000 immigrants and their descendants 325,000 (49%)] have a non-Western background (Turkey, Morocco, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Iran).
I will not bore you with what the immigrant population of Switzerland is.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
I don't quite see the equivalence in magnitude, but hey ho.
Well, Farage has not had much to manage. Fulfilling his expenses promise is not hard for someone who stopped being UKIP Leader for a while. Comes down to a question of trust.
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet). On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
Richard, on this matter it is the voters who count and Cameron MAY have finished off his electoral chances.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
I don't quite see the equivalence in magnitude, but hey ho.
Especially since being an MEP he doesn't claim expenses, he gets an allowance.
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet). On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
Richard, on this matter it is the voters who count and Cameron MAY have finished off his electoral chances.
Hysterical much ? Will he be "gone by Tuesday" (c) MikeK ?
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone.
Err, I think you are pointing the finger at the wrong party. It is UKIP which over the last year or two has put immigration centre-stage.
You are right of course that immigration should be only one factor, and realistically a fairly minor one given that it's unlikely leaving the EU would make much difference on that score. But that seems to be what our UKIP friends are obsessed by.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
True. Tim Montgomerie nailed that one on him a few years ago. Although the expenses of the pre2010 MPs saved UKIP.
DAVID CAMERON’S CONTRACT WITH YOU If we don’t deliver, kick us out
...
With this and other measures, we will reduce net immigration to tens of thousands a year, instead of the hundreds of thousands a year we’ve seen under Labour.
"And I believe that will mean net migration to this country will be in the order of tens of thousands each year, not the hundreds of thousands every year that we have seen over the last decade. ....
But with us, our borders will be under control and immigration will be at levels our country can manage.
No ifs. No buts.
That's a promise we made to the British people. And it's a promise we are keeping."
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet). On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
Richard, on this matter it is the voters who count and Cameron MAY have finished off his electoral chances.
Hysterical much ? Will he be "gone by Tuesday" (c) MikeK ?
The voters do not decide until May 2015, but Cameron has supplied the ammunition to his opponents.
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone.
Err, I think you are pointing the finger at the wrong party. It is UKIP which over the last year or two has put immigration centre-stage.
You are right of course that immigration should be only one factor, and realistically a fairly minor one given that it's unlikely leaving the EU would make much difference on that score. But that seems to be what our UKIP friends are obsessed by.
When Ukip were focussed on Europe they were on 5%. When they turned into BNP lite they rose to 14%, Con stayed on low 30s and Labour fell away.
Does anyone know how much they're 'looking after' on our behalf?
Why would we store in the US? The BoE is a bullion repository in it's won right.
The main use for gold is to give the government-in-exile something to spend if the country gets invaded. Not much use if the invaders are going to get it.
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone.
Err, I think you are pointing the finger at the wrong party. It is UKIP which over the last year or two has put immigration centre-stage.
I did indeed miss Farage's speech today in which he expressly linked getting EU consent on specific immigration matters and nothing else or otherwise 'nothing can be ruled out'. My apologies.
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
You can tell when Tories on here are flailing. They start banging on about silly little things than talk about the big topics.
Cameron's ineptness has been shown in the last couple of days. 160% off target with his immigration pledge, and being told what he's allowed to do by Angela Merkel on EU migration. A pygmy of a politician.
It speaks to a wider problem with Kippers and their misconceptions of the reality of modern UK.
'Just accept the country going to the dogs you bunch of ignorant out of touch biggots - and by the way, I hope we can count on your vote next May?'
But Cameron's going to hold an EU referendum! No ifs, no buts!
Cast iron guarantee.
As good as Farage's word that his expenses would be published and audited.......
I don't quite see the equivalence in magnitude, but hey ho.
Especially since being an MEP he doesn't claim expenses, he gets an allowance.
....boasted that he had recieved £2 million in allowances/expenses........
Admittedly just a rumour, combined with poor polling for Thanet South, - but if Farage did intend to withdraw, then he’s left things rather late in the day to find another constituency – IMHO, he either stands @ThanetS or not at all.
This thread is based on rumour and innuendo. Complete bollocks, that OGH like to stir up on anything that affects UKIP. And I wouldn't put too much trust on that particular poll.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
There are similar parties everywhere, huskies or not. Shitty economies feed right-wing populists.
We haven't had a Conservative government, unfortunately.
It's a distinction lost on anyone who favours purple. Head, meet wall. I can only assume they are being deliberately obtuse, although the similarity to brain-washed cultists is uncanny.
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet).
On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
It seems you're following Theresa May's penchant for rewriting history. I wanted a bet on Cameron's renegotiation and referendum strategy. You backed out of it.
The reason Tory backbenchers want more is that Cameron said cutting immigration a lot was a promise he would deliver on, and he's actually increased it. His response to this is to water down his previous proposals to control EU immigration.
People have a choice at the next election. Those that support open door immigration can support the Conservatives, the Lib Dems or Labour. People that want a controlled point system can vote UKIP.
Does anyone know how much they're 'looking after' on our behalf?
Why would we store in the US? The BoE is a bullion repository in it's won right.
The main use for gold is to give the government-in-exile something to spend if the country gets invaded. Not much use if the invaders are going to get it.
The Kippers are angry (try not to hide your surprise!)
Der Spiegel is accusing Cameron of blackmailing the EU
Yvette Cooper claims they were her ideas all along
And the Guardian shrieks that it's a race to the bottom on immigration.
I think we may reasonably conclude that Cameron has got it spot-on.
Dave told us to vote him out of office after 5 years if he couldn't keep his promise to the British people on immigration. No ifs, no buts.
Shouldn't we respect his political wishes ?
Link ?
That's a promise we made to the British people. And it's a promise we are keeping."
Looks like there was 16 points on there - any others getting your dander up ?
If you elect a Conservative government on 6 May, we will: 1. Give you the right to sack your MP, so you don’t have to wait for an election to get rid of politicians who are guilty of misconduct.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
There are similar parties everywhere, huskies or not. Shitty economies feed right-wing populists.
Not in Australia and Canada. Right-wing populists have only happened in developed nations where the mainstream centre-right party has sold out their national sovereignty to the EU.
Graham Moore UKIP @GrahamHmoore 8m8 minutes ago Welwyn Garden City, East @SuzanneEvans1 ANTI UKIP petition going round NHS and workers are BEING forced to sign it, if they don't they are "accused" of being racist
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
Which is why I'm a strongly UKIP leaning determinedly BOOish probably ex-Tory. In fact I'm Douglas Carswell / Daniel Hannan's political doppelganger.
You are right of course that immigration should be only one factor, and realistically a fairly minor one given that it's unlikely leaving the EU would make much difference on that score. But that seems to be what our UKIP friends are obsessed by.
Latest British Social Attitudes survey found that 77% of the population wanted immigration reduced, 56% by a lot. So its hardly a minority interest.
The Telegraph have got an English medieval history quiz running this morning. Only ten questions all so dreadfully easy that a reasonably educated person should score 10/10.
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
Which is why I'm a strongly UKIP leaning determinedly BOOish probably ex-Tory. In fact I'm Douglas Carswell / Daniel Hannan's political doppelganger.
It seems you're following Theresa May's penchant for rewriting history. I wanted a bet on Cameron's renegotiation and referendum strategy. You backed out of it.
I haven't backed out of it, but you have. It is still on offer from me. Here are the terms, from the previous thread:
"When we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice to stay in the EU on these new terms"
Cameron's words, not mine.
OK, if you are happy to let Peter the Punter adjudicate on whether that has been met, by the end of 2017, we're on. £50 at Evens I think you said. Bet void if there is not a Conservative majority (no matter how small) immediately after the GE.
Why did Dave go and make himself a complete hostage to fortune over immigration ?!
"No ifs, no buts" I mean he didn't even allow himself any wiggle room.
And this is worse than his "cast iron" Lisbon Treaty - Labour were in power when Gordo signed the scrap of paper but so far as I'm aware there has been no change in Gov't from 2011 to 2014.
"That's a promise we made to the British people."
Or was he just saying what he THOUGHT THE BRITISH PUBLIC WANTED TO HEAR ?!
That is no basis on which to make speeches and pledges.He has zero credibility on the issue now. None, zilch, nada, zip.
Unfortunately all our politicians tell us what we want to hear. No need for austerity More money for NHS, Education Winged unicorns for all
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
Which is why I'm a strongly UKIP leaning determinedly BOOish probably ex-Tory. In fact I'm Douglas Carswell / Daniel Hannan's political doppelganger.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
There are similar parties everywhere, huskies or not. Shitty economies feed right-wing populists.
Not in Australia and Canada. Right-wing populists have only happened in developed nations where the mainstream centre-right party has sold out their national sovereignty to the EU.
They've had strong economies thanks to fossil fuels. This isn't just the EU either: Japan, the US...
It seems you're following Theresa May's penchant for rewriting history. I wanted a bet on Cameron's renegotiation and referendum strategy. You backed out of it.
I haven't backed out of it, but you have. It is still on offer from me. Here are the terms, from the previous thread:
"When we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice to stay in the EU on these new terms"
Cameron's words, not mine.
OK, if you are happy to let Peter the Punter adjudicate on whether that has been met, by the end of 2017, we're on. £50 at Evens I think you said. Bet void if there is not a Conservative majority (no matter how small) immediately after the GE.
I missed this post. As long as that negotiated new settlement includes agreement from the European Commission, the European Parliament and all the member states (i.e. everyone needed for the treaty change), I'm on board.
Not convinced Reckless (or indeed majority of kippers) are small state or libertarian. I suspect most of the WWC ex-Labour element are more at the spendy end of the spectrum. I think the left / right inconsistency will ultimately hurt UKIP as it has the LibDems. They're being wildly successful at grafting the front end of a horse onto a donkey's arse. There'll be a civil war in UKIP over size of the state and cultural conservtism at some point. Which I hope Carswell wins.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
There are similar parties everywhere, huskies or not. Shitty economies feed right-wing populists.
Not in Australia and Canada. Right-wing populists have only happened in developed nations where the mainstream centre-right party has sold out their national sovereignty to the EU.
They've had strong economies thanks to fossil fuels. This isn't just the EU either: Japan, the US...
What splits have there been from the main right wing parties in Japan and the USA?
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
Which is why I'm a strongly UKIP leaning determinedly BOOish probably ex-Tory. In fact I'm Douglas Carswell / Daniel Hannan's political doppelganger.
BOO Small state Sound money Libertarian
Just what the world needs..... another Reckless.
Another little helper for Ed..
Be in no doubt - if I thought there was the tiniest scintilla of a chance of Dominic Raab not being re-elected as my MP he'll be getting my vote. But frankly if Surrey is going UKIP then Farage will have a 100 seat majority! I want to vote Tory deep down. But I also feel that Dave is leaving me behind. He seems to like the EU.
@Socrates, No, the bet is about whether David Cameron, or his Conservative successor if he's not PM at the time, will keep his promise and offer the referendum which the Kippers claim they want. It is not about what anyone else will do. It was offered in response to the statement made by you and others that he cannot be trusted.
That is the offer. I understand why no-one takes me up on it. They know I am correct, but can't bring themselves to admit it, because it makes a complete nonsense of the UKIP platform.
The terms as stated are still available to anyone credit-worthy, up to £1000. I don't expect any takers.
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
In every case, voting UKIP meant getting UKIP, or establishing UKIP as challenger to Labour and Lib Dems.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap. So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
To be fair UKIP is completely the Tories creation, when they signed Maastricht. It has largely grown due to the Tories when they disowned the shire tories and social conservatives. If Dave had hugged a few less hoodies, followed a few less huskies, and generally behaved like a Tory and not a Guardianista, UKIP would be no where.
There are similar parties everywhere, huskies or not. Shitty economies feed right-wing populists.
Not in Australia and Canada. Right-wing populists have only happened in developed nations where the mainstream centre-right party has sold out their national sovereignty to the EU.
They've had strong economies thanks to fossil fuels. This isn't just the EU either: Japan, the US...
What splits have there been from the main right wing parties in Japan and the USA?
The US has the Tea Party. They didn't have to split off because they can primary incumbents. Japan has Isshin no Kai.
We haven't had a Conservative government, unfortunately.
It's a distinction lost on anyone who favours purple. Head, meet wall. I can only assume they are being deliberately obtuse, although the similarity to brain-washed cultists is uncanny.
FFS! Ignoring the immigration from outside the EU, he would still have failed his promise. Even if Cameron had a majority of 200 he couldn't have delivered his pledge, because he can't change the amount of EU immigration without a treaty change, and the other countries wouldn't and won't give him one.
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
And what about voting UKIP in Hastings & Rye, or Kingswood, or Broxtowe?
We haven't had a Conservative government, unfortunately.
It's a distinction lost on anyone who favours purple. Head, meet wall. I can only assume they are being deliberately obtuse, although the similarity to brain-washed cultists is uncanny.
FFS! Ignoring the immigration from outside the EU, he would still have failed his promise. Even if Cameron had a majority of 200 he couldn't have delivered his pledge, because he can't change the amount of EU immigration without a treaty change, and the other countries wouldn't and won't give him one.
If you say so. We'll never know, will we, as the conditions of his promise - a majority government - were never met.
@Socrates, No, the bet is about whether David Cameron, or his Conservative successor if he's not PM at the time, will keep his promise and offer the referendum which the Kippers claim they want. It is not about what anyone else will do. It was offered in response to the statement made by you and others that he cannot be trusted.
That is the offer. I understand why no-one takes me up on it. They know I am correct, but can't bring themselves to admit it, because it makes a complete nonsense of the UKIP platform.
The terms as stated are still available to anyone credit-worthy, up to £1000. I don't expect any takers.
I think you need to offer better than evens for that ^_~
It's your own backbenchers that are angry , Richard. They were floated a points system or an emergency brake, and got absolutely no controls on EU immigration whatsoever. A perfect response to net immigration going up!
It's not a surprise that some Conservative backbenchers want more. As you know, there is a very powerful BOO element in the Conservative Party (which incidentally of course absolutely guarantees that the referendum will take place if there's a Conservative government, so you were sensible not to take up my bet). On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
Richard, on this matter it is the voters who count and Cameron MAY have finished off his electoral chances.
Hysterical much ? Will he be "gone by Tuesday" (c) MikeK ?
The voters do not decide until May 2015, but Cameron has supplied the ammunition to his opponents.
In the presence of live ammunition, the most worried of all are Ed Miliband's feet.....
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
In every case, voting UKIP meant getting UKIP, or establishing UKIP as challenger to Labour and Lib Dems.
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
And what about voting UKIP in Hastings & Rye, or Kingswood, or Broxtowe?
How about voting Conservative in Thurrock, Rother Valley, Doncaster North or Heywood & Middleton ?
We seem to be in danger (Dave I'm talking to you) of making the merits of an In/Out referendum somehow a function of immigration alone. Fuck that. Here'd be my Red Lines for not voting to go: 1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK 2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding 3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit 4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation 5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored) 6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today 7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Cameron couldn't get three of those, let alone seven.
Which is why I'm a strongly UKIP leaning determinedly BOOish probably ex-Tory. In fact I'm Douglas Carswell / Daniel Hannan's political doppelganger.
BOO Small state Sound money Libertarian
Just what the world needs..... another Reckless.
Hannan, this would be the man at the top of the Conservative South East England constituency. With friends like the Conservatives...
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
And what about voting UKIP in Hastings & Rye, or Kingswood, or Broxtowe?
It would depend where UKIP took their support from in those seats.
But, if you look at the Ashcroft polling, you see UKIP winning 14% in Watford, and 18% in Stockton South, both ultra-marginal seats, and both of which put the Tories in the lead. If Labour can't win either Watford or Stockton South, their chances of winning an election are remote.
How about voting Conservative in Thurrock, Rother Valley, Doncaster North or Heywood & Middleton ?
At the GE, Labour is going to walk Doncaster North, and Heywood & Middleton, so it's academic there. There might be a handful of seats which UKIP could win which the Conservatives couldn't, but that's speculation.
@Socrates, No, the bet is about whether David Cameron, or his Conservative successor if he's not PM at the time, will keep his promise and offer the referendum which the Kippers claim they want. It is not about what anyone else will do. It was offered in response to the statement made by you and others that he cannot be trusted.
That is the offer. I understand why no-one takes me up on it. They know I am correct, but can't bring themselves to admit it, because it makes a complete nonsense of the UKIP platform.
The terms as stated are still available to anyone credit-worthy, up to £1000. I don't expect any takers.
"Keeping his promise" consists of this:
"The next Conservative Manifesto in 2015 will ask for a mandate from the British people for a Conservative Government to negotiate a new settlement with our European partners in the next Parliament. It will be a relationship with the Single Market at its heart. And when we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice. To stay in the EU on these new terms; or come out altogether."
That's what Cameron said he would do, and that's what I'm trying to bet on: him negotiating a new settlement with the EU, and having a referendum based on that. You are running scared of this bet. Why? Because you know full well that Cameron won't be offering a referendum on the terms agreed. He'll either hold no referendum, or do one on some mythical future agreement that hasn't happened.
@Socrates, No, the bet is about whether David Cameron, or his Conservative successor if he's not PM at the time, will keep his promise and offer the referendum which the Kippers claim they want. It is not about what anyone else will do. It was offered in response to the statement made by you and others that he cannot be trusted.
That is the offer. I understand why no-one takes me up on it. They know I am correct, but can't bring themselves to admit it, because it makes a complete nonsense of the UKIP platform.
The terms as stated are still available to anyone credit-worthy, up to £1000. I don't expect any takers.
Does the referendum have to be legally-binding, or not, to win the bet?
We haven't had a Conservative government, unfortunately.
It's a distinction lost on anyone who favours purple. Head, meet wall. I can only assume they are being deliberately obtuse, although the similarity to brain-washed cultists is uncanny.
FFS! Ignoring the immigration from outside the EU, he would still have failed his promise. Even if Cameron had a majority of 200 he couldn't have delivered his pledge, because he can't change the amount of EU immigration without a treaty change, and the other countries wouldn't and won't give him one.
If you say so. We'll never know, will we, as the conditions of his promise - a majority government - were never met.
Of course you will, because the point is, its not in his gift, its in the EUs gift, and they are not going to let him Change the Freedom of movement. Hell, even the treaty change to stop immigrants getting WFTC and CTC needs a treaty change agreed by all members and Poland has already said it will vote against it. The whole point of this is the choice is not up to the British people, or the British politicians while we are in the EU.
Comments
Huge queues at Heathrow? I left for JFK on the 15th, returned to Heathrow on the 23rd, and both airports processed me quickly and easily.
http://tinyurl.com/lvdopd7
Heartening result for SLab.
Interesting ward, the indy councillor Peter De Vink is an ex Scottish Tory who supports independence.
Der Spiegel is accusing Cameron of blackmailing the EU
Yvette Cooper claims they were her ideas all along
And the Guardian shrieks that it's a race to the bottom on immigration.
I think we may reasonably conclude that Cameron has got it spot-on.
Midlothian has voted No to independence in the Scottish referendum vote with a majority of 56.3% to 43.7%.
Glasgow North East must be a live SNP prospect if I'm reading the tea leaves correctly.
"For EU citizens who are workers (as defined by the Treaties and CJEU interpretation) or former workers (as defined by EU legislation, and the CJEU interpretation of the Treaties), there is a right to equal treatment as discussed in my prior blog post. So this change would require a Treaty amendment.
Removal if job-seekers do not find a job within six months
"For EU job-seekers, the EU legislation states that they cannot be expelled as long as they ‘can provide evidence that they are continuing to seek employment and that they have a genuine chance of being engaged’. This reflects the case law of the CJEU, interpreting the Treaties (Antonissen judgment). Therefore this change would require a Treaty amendment."
Stronger measures to deport EU criminals
"It is likely that they would also require a Treaty amendment, since the protection against removal on grounds of public policy, public security or public health is set out in the Treaties for EU migrant workers (Article 45(3) TFEU)."
EU citizens to have a job offer before entry
"... would also require a Treaty amendment, since the CJEU has said (in Antonissen) that the Treaty right to free movement of workers also applies to job-seekers, giving them the right to enter and stay in a Member State to look for work."
Payment of child benefit to children abroad
"Non-payment of child benefit to children living in other Member States is arguably indirectly discriminatory, since it affects more non-UK nationals than UK nationals. Since the equal treatment of workers is guaranteed by the Treaties, a Treaty amendment would likely be necessary to put this change into effect as regards workers’ family members."
Plus four other changes needing Treaty Amendments should the CJEU decide to view them as discriminatory or a disproportionate direct or indirect limitation on free movement rights.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-nine-labours-of-cameron-analysis-of.html
I do not care what the renegotiations are like. I would have thought a eurosceptic would want them to fail.
Whatever they are we will get a referendum.
The only thing I worry about is the economic uncertainty whilst we either renegotiate or in the end leave and enter something else.
The end result will not be much different if we can maintain business confidence whilst in the middle of the process.
The typical kipper notion that we can tell the world to go away by the act of leving the EU is of course absurd.
Canada already has large immigration (21%) and has negotiated a free trade deal with the EU which enhances free movement of labour.
Norway -- ?
The total population that is either born outside Norway, or has one or two parents born abroad, or has one or more grandparents born abroad is 1,100,000 to 5,017,500 (which equals 21.9 percent).
86.2% of the total population are Ethnic Norwegians and more than 660,000 (13,2%) are migrants and their descendants (110,000] second generation migrants born in Norway).
Of these 660 000 immigrants and their descendants 325,000 (49%)] have a non-Western background (Turkey, Morocco, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Iran).
I will not bore you with what the immigrant population of Switzerland is.
EU immigration is mostly transient and with econimic progress will return home. Our tragedy is that we have people who are unemployable on the scap heap.
So based on total crass ignorance kippers will hand us over to a europhile labour government.
Shouldn't we respect his political wishes ?
On the whole, though, the Eurosceptic wing seem reasonably happy - Peter Bone, Mark Pritchard, Jacob Rees-Mogg have been more supportive than usual.
"Read my lips, no new taxes...." George Bush (1st POTUS)
"No ifs, no buts." Cameron
1. UK law remains supreme and the highest court is in the UK
2. UK opt out of CAP/CFP and associated funding
3. No more stupid jamboree to Strasbourg and the accounts must pass audit
4. UK opt out of all financial services regulation
5. All EU countries accept free movement of services immediately (it's a founding principle that is WIDELY ignored)
6. Reasonable caps on mutual welfare obligations as per Dave today
7. UK opt out of foreign policy and defence (means we can opt in on a case by case basis with decisions of other individual members but no EU level activity)
I'm sure here on PB we can think of many others that might make staying in worthwhile. But to frame the entire In/Out debate in terms of 6 only is beyond feeble. As of today I'm voting kipper in May (admittedly in just about the safest Tory seat there is - JohnO's patch).
Haven't we had enough broken pledges for one day?
You are right of course that immigration should be only one factor, and realistically a fairly minor one given that it's unlikely leaving the EU would make much difference on that score. But that seems to be what our UKIP friends are obsessed by.
DAVID CAMERON’S
CONTRACT WITH YOU
If we don’t deliver, kick us out
...
With this and other
measures, we will reduce
net immigration to tens of
thousands a year, instead
of the hundreds of
thousands a year we’ve
seen under Labour.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13083781
"And I believe that will mean net migration to this country will be in the order of tens of thousands each year, not the hundreds of thousands every year that we have seen over the last decade.
....
But with us, our borders will be under control and immigration will be at levels our country can manage.
No ifs. No buts.
That's a promise we made to the British people. And it's a promise we are keeping."
When they turned into BNP lite they rose to 14%, Con stayed on low 30s and Labour fell away.
Not rocket science.
"If we don’t deliver our side of the bargain, vote us out in five years’ time”.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/files/ge_4pg-newspaper.pdf
The reason Tory backbenchers want more is that Cameron said cutting immigration a lot was a promise he would deliver on, and he's actually increased it. His response to this is to water down his previous proposals to control EU immigration.
People have a choice at the next election. Those that support open door immigration can support the Conservatives, the Lib Dems or Labour. People that want a controlled point system can vote UKIP.
May, we will:
1. Give you the right to sack your MP, so you
don’t have to wait for an election to get rid of
politicians who are guilty of misconduct.
Opposed recall bill :P ?
I don't see Kipper rage on the other one he failed on "reducing the no of MPs."
Better than Ed Miliband would do.
@SuzanneEvans1 ANTI UKIP petition going round NHS and workers are BEING forced to sign it, if they don't they are "accused" of being racist
Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens Official Teaser Trailer #1 (2015) - J.J. Abrams Movie HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMOVFvcNfvE
BOO
Small state
Sound money
Libertarian
http://comres.co.uk/poll/1333/itv-news-index-eu-and-immigration.htm
9/10
Missed out on Braveheart.
Just what the world needs..... another Reckless.
------------------------------------------------------------
Socrates said:
"When we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice to stay in the EU on these new terms"
Cameron's words, not mine.
OK, if you are happy to let Peter the Punter adjudicate on whether that has been met, by the end of 2017, we're on. £50 at Evens I think you said. Bet void if there is not a Conservative majority (no matter how small) immediately after the GE.
Unfortunately all our politicians tell us what we want to hear.
No need for austerity
More money for NHS, Education
Winged unicorns for all
Looks nice and dark.
Population #density per sq mile
1,054 England
840 Massachusetts
739 Connecticut
416 New York State
246 California
91 Texas
Paris 55,000
Manila 111,000
SNP - 29
Lab - 100
Ind- 83
No transfer: 147
Ind (914)
SNP - 229
Lab - 239
No transfer: 446
So Tories very anti-SNP while the Indie split on SNP & Labour but NOTA clearly ahead.
That is the offer. I understand why no-one takes me up on it. They know I am correct, but can't bring themselves to admit it, because it makes a complete nonsense of the UKIP platform.
The terms as stated are still available to anyone credit-worthy, up to £1000. I don't expect any takers.
Can someone please explain how voting UKIP somehow means helping Ed Milliband to get elected?
Voting UKIP in Rochester and Clacton meant electing UKIP candidates. Voting UKIP in Heywood & Middleton, Rotherham, Wythenshawe, and South Shields meant that UKIP came a clear second behind Labour. Voting UKIP in Eastleigh meant that UKIP came a clear second behind the Lib Dems.
In every case, voting UKIP meant getting UKIP, or establishing UKIP as challenger to Labour and Lib Dems.
But, if you look at the Ashcroft polling, you see UKIP winning 14% in Watford, and 18% in Stockton South, both ultra-marginal seats, and both of which put the Tories in the lead. If Labour can't win either Watford or Stockton South, their chances of winning an election are remote.
Thread?
"The next Conservative Manifesto in 2015 will ask for a mandate from the British people for a Conservative Government to negotiate a new settlement with our European partners in the next Parliament. It will be a relationship with the Single Market at its heart. And when we have negotiated that new settlement, we will give the British people a referendum with a very simple in or out choice. To stay in the EU on these new terms; or come out altogether."
That's what Cameron said he would do, and that's what I'm trying to bet on: him negotiating a new settlement with the EU, and having a referendum based on that. You are running scared of this bet. Why? Because you know full well that Cameron won't be offering a referendum on the terms agreed. He'll either hold no referendum, or do one on some mythical future agreement that hasn't happened.