Indeed - but he is a Tory. The point being that the claim May has been attacked solely by metropolitan lefties is demonstrably false.
No one has argued that. Kirkup is also on the right, but he's still one of the metropolitan liberal types.
Look, I don't have a problem with people taking a pro-high immigration position and arguing their case. What I detest is the way such people call ANY argument towards a low immigration position as "divisive" and "inflammatory". They are trying to silence the other side of the debate, and then act as if they are being morally superior by doing it.
They are expressing an opinion. The only way a debate can be silenced is if there is no response. The debate about immigration - which, apparently, has been repressed and silenced - has been raging in the country's newspapers and on its television screens for at least 15 years now.
Perhaps "silenced" is the wrong word but "delegitimised" is not. They are doing exactly the same thing as the Jezlamists calling the Blairites in the party "Red Tories". It is not about having a different opinion and arguing against the other side. It is about trying to smear the other side of the debate so people don't listen to them.
It is also obviously dishonest. There was all of six sentences in a long speech criticising the effects of mass immigration. She also made clear that it wasn't immigrants or immigration that was the problem, but when the scale was too high. And not only did she not blame immigrants themselves, she even sympathised with them in the prior paragraph. And she also castigated the far right extremists. There is literally nothing more she could have said in that speech to appeal to the "it's divisive!" brigade other than not voicing her opinion at all. These people don't want the debate to be nicer. They just don't want anyone voicing a contrary opinion.
Can anyone explain to me why we're still short of the right types of skilled immigrants we need whilst we're at record levels of immigration.
This is the circle both myself and half the general population are trying to square up. Surely with 350k net migration we can get enough doctors/engineers or whatever into that lot ?!
Nationally we are short of about 1 million Social care workers over the next decade according to a Senior NS HR person that I saw speaking the other week.
Leicester city now has just frictional unemployment, just 7 000 at present, and the rate in the county and Rutland is even lower.
So yes. We either need quite a lot of semi and unskilled migration or we need to have other approaches such as robot slaves.
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
IR35 is aimed at people who are effectively employees and have none of the attributes of a self employed business. Uber drivers provide their vehicle and accept the risk of not getting customers.
Is that piece of junk legislation still on the Statute Book?
@IsabelHardman: The Tories have got exactly what they wanted this week. The contrast between their party of government conference and Labour's is huge.
Listening to Cameron now. Wow. The conference finally comes alive, here is someone right at the top of their game. Don't think I've seen him so confident since 2005 and the leadership election.
The CSU is also in real trouble, AfD are surging in Bavaria and are threatening to limit the CSU to under 5% of the national vote. It would be a huge defeat for Merkel to lose the CSU alliance.
Presumably the CSU does pretty well in the constituency seats - does the 5% threshold still matter to them? I'd assumed it was just for the proportional bit.
Hmm. Could've sworn I saw a Corbyn tweet denouncing Cameron for smearing him, but it's not there. May've been a parody account (although I thought it was real), or may've been deleted.
IR35 is aimed at people who are effectively employees and have none of the attributes of a self employed business. Uber drivers provide their vehicle and accept the risk of not getting customers.
Is that piece of junk legislation still on the Statute Book?
To be honest I'm not sure, it's a while since I was in the game. But I am sure something with the same effect still applies. Seems fair to me, a lot of highly paid IT people were benefiting from the more advantageous self employed tax regime while effectively being employees. I would have liked to claim my season ticket against tax as well.
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
JeremyCorbyn4PM @JeremyCorbyn4PM · 7m7 minutes ago We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Mr. Max, I believe not. It does have a blue tick [ironically ]but the bio says it's the former official campaign for him to become leader. Corbyn has his own account.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
IR35 is aimed at people who are effectively employees and have none of the attributes of a self employed business. Uber drivers provide their vehicle and accept the risk of not getting customers.
Is that piece of junk legislation still on the Statute Book?
To be honest I'm not sure, it's a while since I was in the game. But I am sure something with the same effect still applies. Seems fair to me, a lot of highly paid IT people were benefiting from the more advantageous self employed tax regime while effectively being employees. I would have liked to claim my season ticket against tax as well.
It massively penalised a lot of independent contractors and effectively ended a flexible workforce that was replaced by cheap labour imports from India or contracting work out to big US consultancies.
Gordon pronounced that it would stop tax fiddles and raise over £100m a year. After several years an FOI appeared.... " FOI data from HMRC, between 02-03 and 07-08 a total of £9.2m in tax has been directly attributed to IR35."
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Surely Uber is just an agency that finds you thé work.
That's their argument. Two responses:
(1) Customers think they are buying Uber's service in the sense of them providing the drivers rather than just sourcing independent contractors. So they are relying on the Uber trust - there's an element of misrepresentation.
(2) Drivers who earn the majority of their income from Uber are the same as "independent contractors" working for one company. It's a tax dodge.
Fundamentally Uber needs to take responsibility for its actions rather than hiding behind a clever structure. They want to participate in the market: fine. But they shouldn't be allowed to leech off it.
I think I have a different view of employment law. (1) not sure what the customers have to do with it. If you hire a temp from an agency you are buying the agency's services, but it is perfectly possible for the temp to be on a self employed basis. (2) many Uber drivers are part time, and I don't think HMRC would see the arrangement as a way to circumvent employment law. The driver is after all responsible for providing their own tools of the trade (the car) and can decide whether or not to accept a particular job.
But I agree with you on ensuring that vehicles are roadworthy, drivers are insured for hire and reward, and have had DBS checks.
Uber drivers in London need to sign up with TFL in the same way minicab drivers do. There is no lessening of standards, and you are still required to have a PCO license and commercial insurance.
@janemerrick23: Labour's gigantic problem: why did I, from a Liverpool comp, who voted for Blair & never voted Tory, agree nearly every word of PM's speech?
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
IR35 is aimed at people who are effectively employees and have none of the attributes of a self employed business. Uber drivers provide their vehicle and accept the risk of not getting customers.
Is that piece of junk legislation still on the Statute Book?
To be honest I'm not sure, it's a while since I was in the game. But I am sure something with the same effect still applies. Seems fair to me, a lot of highly paid IT people were benefiting from the more advantageous self employed tax regime while effectively being employees. I would have liked to claim my season ticket against tax as well.
Having just been audited by HMRC, I can attest that it most certainly is still on the statute book.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
The US Democrats are quite happy to divide people up into different racial groups.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Britain is united - not even a whiff of a mention for another referendum.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
The US Democrats are quite happy to divide people up into different racial groups.
Not quite happy - that's their entire electoral strategy.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
It's hard to see how three or fewer subs could meet the requirements. You'd have to either massively change the requirements, for example by dropping the 'constantly at sea' capability (*), or develop a new delivery mechanism at massive expense (and probably to operate as well).
(*) Hoping that's what it's called...
It's the "Continuous at sea" deterrent, FWIW.
The reality is that 4 sub's give 1 at sea operational and at least 1 at sea training. So generally 2 at sea and available, probably 3 given notice of a crisis. To repeat also, the extra cost of renewing Trident is about 15 billion, the cost of new subs. The running costs over the lifetime are currently already with us so the immediate extra cost is just 15 bn over 30 years. But the last construction cost of current submarines can be amortised in the same way. In any evenl it is a lie to say the cost of replacing Trident is 100bn.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Britain is united - not even a whiff of a mention for another referendum.
And Corbyn is a *******
Looks more Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer to me, Tories coming out.
Cameron: less Britain-bashing, more national pride – our way, the Conservative way, the only way to greater days.
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Britain is united - not even a whiff of a mention for another referendum.
And Corbyn is a *******
Looks more Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer to me, Tories coming out.
Cameron: less Britain-bashing, more national pride – our way, the Conservative way, the only way to greater days.
Could have been a Salmond speech but with Britain replacing Scotland - but he didn't laugh enough at his own jokes.
I think it does matter. Didn't the FDP drop out of parliament in Germany when they slipped below 5%?
Unlike the CSU, the FDP don't have a strong local powerbase so they're dependent on the proportional section.
Not checked but I think that if a party wins 3 (?) seats directly elected by FPTP, then the proportionality rules do not apply. The CSU should therefore have no problem.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
The US Democrats are quite happy to divide people up into different racial groups.
Not quite happy - that's their entire electoral strategy.
Americans must find it difficult. You have a left-wing party in thrall to multiculturalism and and a right-wing party that's stark raving mad. No wonder people are fed up with politics over there.
"My friends, we cannot let that man inflict his security threatening, terrorist sympathising, Britain hating ideology on this country."
To a standing ovation.
That was the very least that Cameron could have said about Corbyn and the people who elected him and the people who support him and the people who spit on his behalf.
I thought Cameron was excellent on religious extremism and ending discrimination.
Not sure about much of the rest. The Tories are making big promises on immigration, housing and incomes that a decent opposition would be able to hold them to account over. Unfortunately, there isn't one, so the Tories essentially have a free pass.
The Hillary email story is getting more complicated by the day. Now it appears that a second tech company was involved in backing up the data on her server on the Cloud. The significance of that relates to the security of any classified information - no-one at the new company had security clearances to handle such data, and the company is known to have been subject to hacking attacks.
Once the company found out that it was backing up Hillary's data, it immediately knew it had a problem, and has been fully cooperating since with the Feds.
Still, none of this is a smoking gun. But it keeps the story alive, keeps Hillary on the defensive, and plays into existing negatives. No good news for team Clinton here.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
The US Democrats are quite happy to divide people up into different racial groups.
Not quite happy - that's their entire electoral strategy.
Americans must find it difficult. You have a left-wing party in thrall to multiculturalism and and a right-wing party that's stark raving mad. No wonder people are fed up with politics over there.
As opposed to this country, where we have a left-wing party that's in thrall to multiculturalism AND stark raving mad....
Excellent speech by Cameron. But it made me wonder - what the feck were Labour doing for 13 years that we still have a shopping list of injustice that Cameron needs to remedy...?
"My friends, we cannot let that man inflict his security threatening, terrorist sympathising, Britain hating ideology on this country."
To a standing ovation.
That was the very least that Cameron could have said about Corbyn and the people who elected him and the people who support him and the people who spit on his behalf.
Although Corbyn has said, has he not that "he loved this country"
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Britain is united - not even a whiff of a mention for another referendum.
And Corbyn is a *******
Looks more Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer to me, Tories coming out.
Cameron: less Britain-bashing, more national pride – our way, the Conservative way, the only way to greater days.
I've not watched or heard a single second of the speech. But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Yes, but that is a one nation approach and Dave is a one nation Tory.
The US Democrats are quite happy to divide people up into different racial groups.
Not quite happy - that's their entire electoral strategy.
Americans must find it difficult. You have a left-wing party in thrall to multiculturalism and and a right-wing party that's stark raving mad. No wonder people are fed up with politics over there.
As opposed to this country, where we have a left-wing party that's in thrall to multiculturalism AND stark raving mad....
Excellent speech by Cameron. But it made me wonder - what the feck were Labour doing for 13 years that we still have a shopping list of injustice that Cameron needs to remedy...?
"My friends, we cannot let that man inflict his security threatening, terrorist sympathising, Britain hating ideology on this country."
To a standing ovation.
That was the very least that Cameron could have said about Corbyn and the people who elected him and the people who support him and the people who spit on his behalf.
Although Corbyn has said, has he not that "he loved this country"
Also notice that the government is changing the laws on expats' voting rights to make them lifelong - presumably in the (not necessarily correct) assumption that most of them are Tories.
Cynically, the other benefit is that it makes it easier for overseas supporters to donate money.
Less cynically, the actual policy is obviously correct. More and more people are living outside the country they're nationals of, but the world isn't getting any less nationalistic, so it's unusual to be able to vote in the place where you live rather than the place you were born or whatever. (Although the latter would make more sense, IMHO). It's not in anyone's interests to disfranchise huge chunks of the world's population so they only way they can have their say is by buying politicians or setting fire to things.
I served my country as a diplomat for ten years, and was loaned by HMG to the UN to do inspections in Iraq for 4 years. But because I have been honest about my true domicile, and not kept a fake address in the UK, I no longer have a vote. That strikes me as wrong.
It used to be that the expatriate vote leaned Tory. I strongly doubt that is still the case nowadays, given how many people from all walks of life now work in Europe and how much easier in general it is to be an expat.
"My friends, we cannot let that man inflict his security threatening, terrorist sympathising, Britain hating ideology on this country."
To a standing ovation.
That was the very least that Cameron could have said about Corbyn and the people who elected him and the people who support him and the people who spit on his behalf.
Although Corbyn has said, has he not that "he loved this country"
Not watching Cameron's speech but clearly it's going down very well with some. Can anyone actually point to anything interesting that he's actually said though?
Frothers are wetting their pants for sure, it will be Tory Good , Labour Bad and lots of wind.
Britain is united - not even a whiff of a mention for another referendum.
And Corbyn is a *******
Looks more Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer to me, Tories coming out.
Cameron: less Britain-bashing, more national pride – our way, the Conservative way, the only way to greater days.
LOL, that is a stretch even for you. Goodwin honorable mention rather than full blown award, as you avoided using Hitler's name.
I think that speech ends any doubt that Cameron will recommend In.
He also mentioned no ever-closer Union, so presume he's got a paper opt-out from that clause for the UK in any future EU treaty revision. Which will be meaningless.
True story: an Obama-voting American said to a Labour friend of mine the other day, "We'd love Cameron as a Democrat president. What's your problem?"
Et voila.
Plenty of moderate conservatives (by British standards) vote Democrat given the alternative they face. I'd also question whether an American really 'gets' Cameron or just sees his media image.
Remember when Ashcroft's book was going to dominate the conference ?
No. What book?
The idea that the book would perpetually damage Cameron, leaving him a "crippled lame duck blah blah" now looks quite certifiably insane. He is entirely unscathed, as far as I can see.
Don't be silly.
It's done at least as much damage as the horse-riding saga
There is no serious equivalent in America politics for the Corbynite Labour party - in all its terrorist kissing, money-printing, Britain-hating, spittle-gobbing madness.
@hugorifkind: I'm also fairly sure you'd never have got a Tory PM making a speech like that if Ukip hadn't sucked the loonies out. Good old Ukip.
What about the speeches Cameron made from 2005-2007?
It really annoys me how rude some leading Conservatives can be about long-standing, hardworking traditional socially conservative party members who worked very hard for the party for decades, but left because they felt both unloved and unwanted.
@hugorifkind: I'm also fairly sure you'd never have got a Tory PM making a speech like that if Ukip hadn't sucked the loonies out. Good old Ukip.
What about the speeches Cameron made from 2005-2007?
It really annoys me how rude some leading Conservatives can be about long-standing, hardworking traditional socially conservative party members who worked very hard for the party for decades, but left because they felt both unloved and unwanted.
True story: an Obama-voting American said to a Labour friend of mine the other day, "We'd love Cameron as a Democrat president. What's your problem?"
Et voila.
Plenty of moderate conservatives (by British standards) vote Democrat given the alternative they face. I'd also question whether an American really 'gets' Cameron or just sees his media image.
This was a very smart, very well informed American who lives half his time in the UK, so the remark was made with all the facts to hand.
And of course it is true. Cameron's Tories = mainstream Democrats. Mainstream Republicans = UKIP.
There is no serious equivalent in America politics for the Corbynite Labour party - in all its terrorist kissing, money-printing, Britain-hating, spittle-gobbing madness.
I don't think that's quite right: I'd peg Tories = RINOs, although obviously the RINOs have been badly squeezed over the last 10 years.
The GOP is where the Tories would be if UKIP had won...
There is no serious equivalent in America politics for the Corbynite Labour party - in all its terrorist kissing, money-printing, Britain-hating, spittle-gobbing madness.
Bernie Sanders ?
In terms of policy distance from the respective mainstreams, possibly. In terms of actual policy espoused, nowhere near. In Britain, Sanders would be a middle-of-the-road Labour politician with the possible exception of his libertarian edge.
"My friends, we cannot let that man inflict his security threatening, terrorist sympathising, Britain hating ideology on this country."
To a standing ovation.
That was the very least that Cameron could have said about Corbyn and the people who elected him and the people who support him and the people who spit on his behalf.
Although Corbyn has said, has he not that "he loved this country"
His disciples presumably don't believe it either, and assume he is merely pandering to the right wing press.
Remember when Ashcroft's book was going to dominate the conference ?
No. What book?
The idea that the book would perpetually damage Cameron, leaving him a "crippled lame duck blah blah" now looks quite certifiably insane. He is entirely unscathed, as far as I can see.
Don't be silly.
It's done at least as much damage as the horse-riding saga
Pah, that was a mere pinprick, compared to buying a fish pasty in the pub where he lost his daughter. And the foaming pint of Guinness. Or something.
In terms of policy distance from the respective mainstreams, possibly. In terms of actual policy espoused, nowhere near. In Britain, Sanders would be a middle-of-the-road Labour politician with the possible exception of his libertarian edge.
@election_data @election_data · 2m2 minutes ago My map showing the seats which will change hands in 2020 as a DIRECT result of that speech (highlighted in red):
My Corbynista acquaintances are FUMING at the attack on Jeremy Corbyn, regarding it as an outright lie to suggest that Jeremy Corbyn thought Osama Bin Laden's death was a tragedy. My suggestions that it came in the category of fair comment have been assailed as if by a swarm of bees.
Meanwhile, the landgrab of the rest of the speech has gone largely unnoticed.
@election_data @election_data · 2m2 minutes ago My map showing the seats which will change hands in 2020 as a DIRECT result of that speech (highlighted in red):
@election_data @election_data · 2m2 minutes ago My map showing the seats which will change hands in 2020 as a DIRECT result of that speech (highlighted in red):
Comments
It is also obviously dishonest. There was all of six sentences in a long speech criticising the effects of mass immigration. She also made clear that it wasn't immigrants or immigration that was the problem, but when the scale was too high. And not only did she not blame immigrants themselves, she even sympathised with them in the prior paragraph. And she also castigated the far right extremists. There is literally nothing more she could have said in that speech to appeal to the "it's divisive!" brigade other than not voicing her opinion at all. These people don't want the debate to be nicer. They just don't want anyone voicing a contrary opinion.
Leicester city now has just frictional unemployment, just 7 000 at present, and the rate in the county and Rutland is even lower.
So yes. We either need quite a lot of semi and unskilled migration or we need to have other approaches such as robot slaves.
We won't fight name calling by returning in kind, but we will challenge the cynical burying of debate #CPC15
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQten5lWEAU8NDC.jpg
"The tanks are in the kitchen," observes gloomy Labour source. #cpc15
Technically Ron
Who ever is doing the captions for the Tory party conference no longer gives a shit http://t.co/nFcrph41lT
Ships in Caspian Sea fire rockets to Syria.
They might well do it as well.
Well, that was an audacious bid for the centre ground by David Cameron. Plenty for us to hold him to over this Parliament. #CPC15
That's a VERY interesting reaction.
But so far as I can tell Dave is essentially positioning the Tories at the almost exact same point as the US Democrats ?
Gordon pronounced that it would stop tax fiddles and raise over £100m a year. After several years an FOI appeared.... " FOI data from HMRC, between 02-03 and 07-08 a total of £9.2m in tax has been directly attributed to IR35."
Nice one Gordon ....
☺
Missed all of the speech.
And Corbyn is a *******
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/scindependent3-460x290.jpg
I think it does matter. Didn't the FDP drop out of parliament in Germany when they slipped below 5%?
..........https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/651710053133774848
To repeat also, the extra cost of renewing Trident is about 15 billion, the cost of new subs. The running costs over the lifetime are currently already with us so the immediate extra cost is just 15 bn over 30 years. But the last construction cost of current submarines can be amortised in the same way. In any evenl it is a lie to say the cost of replacing Trident is 100bn.
Cameron: less Britain-bashing, more national pride – our way, the Conservative way, the only way to greater days.
If not, Harper may be back.. for a little while.
Not sure about much of the rest. The Tories are making big promises on immigration, housing and incomes that a decent opposition would be able to hold them to account over. Unfortunately, there isn't one, so the Tories essentially have a free pass.
Once the company found out that it was backing up Hillary's data, it immediately knew it had a problem, and has been fully cooperating since with the Feds.
Still, none of this is a smoking gun. But it keeps the story alive, keeps Hillary on the defensive, and plays into existing negatives. No good news for team Clinton here.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/07/fbi-probe-hillary-clinton-emails-expands-to-second-tech-company/?intcmp=hpbt1
Excellent speech by Cameron. But it made me wonder - what the feck were Labour doing for 13 years that we still have a shopping list of injustice that Cameron needs to remedy...?
It used to be that the expatriate vote leaned Tory. I strongly doubt that is still the case nowadays, given how many people from all walks of life now work in Europe and how much easier in general it is to be an expat.
He also mentioned no ever-closer Union, so presume he's got a paper opt-out from that clause for the UK in any future EU treaty revision. Which will be meaningless.
It's done at least as much damage as the horse-riding saga
It really annoys me how rude some leading Conservatives can be about long-standing, hardworking traditional socially conservative party members who worked very hard for the party for decades, but left because they felt both unloved and unwanted.
Like Ashcroft?
The GOP is where the Tories would be if UKIP had won...
73.3% tell @SkyNews pulse that they are more likely to vote for Cameron. Wow.
David Cameron is now the leader of the British left.
So that sounds about right.
My map showing the seats which will change hands in 2020 as a DIRECT result of that speech (highlighted in red):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQtuZlaW8AAVotz.png
Meanwhile, the landgrab of the rest of the speech has gone largely unnoticed.
@GuidoFawkes - PM's spokesman just briefed the Lobby that Blairite MPs "Should listen to the speech"...
But of course the point is sort of statisitcal; most events have less difference than we think they will.