Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In the past 6 weeks EU referendum polls have ranged from a

SystemSystem Posts: 12,220
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In the past 6 weeks EU referendum polls have ranged from a 3% LEAVE lead to a 19% REMAIN one

The chart above is based on the difference between the REMAIN and LEAVE figures, before netting off the don’t knows, in all the EU referendum polls since the beginning of September.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    First, glorious first!
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    One explanation for the wild swings in polling returns might be that no-one outside of us policy nerds has really focused on the issue and the public are broadly ambivalent about membership, thus the day's latest EU news (blunder or smaller snafu) can be having a large but temporary affect on how the public responds to the polling questions.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    MTimT said:

    One explanation for the wild swings in polling returns might be that no-one outside of us policy nerds has really focused on the issue and the public are broadly ambivalent about membership, thus the day's latest EU news (blunder or smaller snafu) can be having a large but temporary affect on how the public responds to the polling questions.

    I think there's a lot of truth in that:

    Greece and/or migrant crisis = Leave...
    All quiet on the Eurozone front = Stay...
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    Possibly true but I think the turnout will be relatively high either way - this is not like the AV referendum :)

    On another topi the Spanish GE polling very interesting with Ciudadanos as king-makers - which way will they swing? Hopefully with the PP provided they clean up their act because the ir economic policies have in fact begun to work.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040
    That graph reminds me very much of the sort of graphs we saw in the run up to the GE with a whole series of polls indicating that there was basically a tie and the odd, obviously rogue, poll showing a big tory lead. I think we have yet to have an adequate or even vaguely coherent explanation of that from the pollsters themselves so they are selling wares of very dubious quality and provenance.

    All that said this is a genuinely difficult question in which neither the remain or the leave options are even close to being adequately defined as yet. Whether they ever will be in moot but right now this policy geek is probably a don't know.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    felix said:

    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    Possibly true but I think the turnout will be relatively high either way - this is not like the AV referendum :)

    On another topi the Spanish GE polling very interesting with Ciudadanos as king-makers - which way will they swing? Hopefully with the PP provided they clean up their act because the ir economic policies have in fact begun to work.
    My feeling is that Citizen's are regarded as centre-right and not corrupt. I also suspect that they will go with whichever of the PP and PSOE ends up on top, which will almost certainly be the PP. (The last 10 opinion polls range from a 9% PP lead to a 0.1% PSOE lead.)

    It's nice that the Spanish electorate seem to have given up on the nutters Podemos.
  • DavidL said:

    That graph reminds me very much of the sort of graphs we saw in the run up to the GE with a whole series of polls indicating that there was basically a tie and the odd, obviously rogue, poll showing a big tory lead. I think we have yet to have an adequate or even vaguely coherent explanation of that from the pollsters themselves so they are selling wares of very dubious quality and provenance.

    All that said this is a genuinely difficult question in which neither the remain or the leave options are even close to being adequately defined as yet. Whether they ever will be in moot but right now this policy geek is probably a don't know.

    Moi aussi

    Mind you, if I think that STAY has a 3:2 lead come the referendum itself, I'll probably take that as a free pass to QUIT.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    ICM Online is pretty stable.

    Status Quo will win.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news

    Has this been mentioned here?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994
    MTimT said:

    One explanation for the wild swings in polling returns might be that no-one outside of us policy nerds has really focused on the issue and the public are broadly ambivalent about membership, thus the day's latest EU news (blunder or smaller snafu) can be having a large but temporary affect on how the public responds to the polling questions.

    Even within this group of policy nerds, there is a considerable degree of Leave but Stay but Leave but.... Heart says Leave, head says mebbe......
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,988
    edited October 2015
    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8
  • DavidL said:

    That graph reminds me very much of the sort of graphs we saw in the run up to the GE with a whole series of polls indicating that there was basically a tie and the odd, obviously rogue, poll showing a big tory lead. I think we have yet to have an adequate or even vaguely coherent explanation of that from the pollsters themselves so they are selling wares of very dubious quality and provenance.

    All that said this is a genuinely difficult question in which neither the remain or the leave options are even close to being adequately defined as yet. Whether they ever will be in moot but right now this policy geek is probably a don't know.

    Moi aussi

    Mind you, if I think that STAY has a 3:2 lead come the referendum itself, I'll probably take that as a free pass to QUIT.

    Prime Minister Miliband approves of your basing the vote on polling.

    ;-)
  • rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    Possibly true but I think the turnout will be relatively high either way - this is not like the AV referendum :)

    On another topi the Spanish GE polling very interesting with Ciudadanos as king-makers - which way will they swing? Hopefully with the PP provided they clean up their act because the ir economic policies have in fact begun to work.
    My feeling is that Citizen's are regarded as centre-right and not corrupt. I also suspect that they will go with whichever of the PP and PSOE ends up on top, which will almost certainly be the PP. (The last 10 opinion polls range from a 9% PP lead to a 0.1% PSOE lead.)

    It's nice that the Spanish electorate seem to have given up on the nutters Podemos.

    On constitutional and social issues Ciudadanos is far closer to PSOE. Economically they are closer to PP. it's always worth remembering the party has its roots in Catalonia and there the PP is regarded, quite rightly, as a major impediment to getting the changes needed to resolve the current stand-off. PP has also said that the continuation of Rajoy as Spanish PM in a coalition is a non-negotiable.

    PP has lost a huge amount of support since the last GE and to stay in power will have to compromise hugely. It's never given the impression of being able or willing to do that - especially when it comes to its Spanish nationalism.

    Post-December will be a big test for C's. And for the PP. Spain needs a stable government, it desparately needs to put its constitutional issues to bed, there is corruption on the left and right to tackle, and the recovery has to be maintained. A deal is possible, but will need PP to be grown-up in a way that it often struggles to be.

  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Despite England crashing out of the World Cup some very good news at last. Englishman wins major international tournament .

    Must be a front runner for SPOTY ( do your own research etc)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-34486280
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Good morning, everyone.

    I still hold the view that In will won by a fairly comfortable margin (I previously thought the margin would be larger, but Merkel's doing her best to help Out).
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,341
    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.



  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.

    The "rich" countries in the Gulf, the US and UK protectorates created the IS problem. An organisation does not come out of nowhere and occupy a third of an entire country. It needs resources to begin with.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,341
    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.

    The "rich" countries in the Gulf, the US and UK protectorates created the IS problem. An organisation does not come out of nowhere and occupy a third of an entire country. It needs resources to begin with.

    That may well be so. But that does not mean that Britain has an obligation to let people into this country. My point was that the person being interviewed seemed to think that this was primarily Britain's problem to resolve and that we were not doing our "fair" share without really explaining how she was determining what was "fair".
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    I think that's right. I'm also not sure this polling will be particularly valuable until the renegotiation deal is on the table with Cameron's endorsement.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.



    So, in other words, she offered nothing new.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. Royale, not sure I agree. The negotiated deal (assuming we don't have the surprise of Cameron going for Out, which I think very unlikely) will be seen through the prism that's been created by the debate up to that point.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    I thought judges were supposed to be impartial. How old fashioned I am.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,988
    Cyclefree

    "There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more."

    She was a British retired judge. Why on earth should she be talking about what other countries should do? That's what Farage does.

    Passing humanitarian responsibilities to others is not actually very humanitarian
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    I think that's right. I'm also not sure this polling will be particularly valuable until the renegotiation deal is on the table with Cameron's endorsement.
    Until the proximity of the ballot paper is imminent I would be sceptical of the polling. While there is a certain weariness with Europe, this is a country much more at ease with European cultures and peoples than it was 40 years ago. The prospect of stag weekends in Talinn or Hen weekends in Barcelona would have seemed absurd then, but are unremarkeable now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    rcs1000 said:

    MTimT said:

    One explanation for the wild swings in polling returns might be that no-one outside of us policy nerds has really focused on the issue and the public are broadly ambivalent about membership, thus the day's latest EU news (blunder or smaller snafu) can be having a large but temporary affect on how the public responds to the polling questions.

    I think there's a lot of truth in that:

    Greece and/or migrant crisis = Leave...
    All quiet on the Eurozone front = Stay...
    There is a strong natural default to Remain amongst floating voters. Because the economy is doing ok, it will be easy to produce a list attributing the threat to that if we leave the EU (although I disagree) - conversely, Leave is a many headed beast and it will be hard to paint a clear picture of the alternative. Instead, there will be several, and Remain will try and exploit that as unclear and risky.

    The best bet for Leave is to paint Remain as more risky by showing what we are really voting for down the road if we do stay, and the EU's record - its past "form" - towards the UK on promises, including the language used.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    I think that's right. I'm also not sure this polling will be particularly valuable until the renegotiation deal is on the table with Cameron's endorsement.

    I agree totally with Mr Royale. If Mr Cameron comes up with a deal that satisfies his hard-line Tories, he will put me firmly into the LEAVE column.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728

    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    I think that's right. I'm also not sure this polling will be particularly valuable until the renegotiation deal is on the table with Cameron's endorsement.
    Until the proximity of the ballot paper is imminent I would be sceptical of the polling. While there is a certain weariness with Europe, this is a country much more at ease with European cultures and peoples than it was 40 years ago. The prospect of stag weekends in Talinn or Hen weekends in Barcelona would have seemed absurd then, but are unremarkeable now.
    The idea that euroscepticism is based on an ignorance or xenophobia towards European countries and cultures is a fallacy IMHO, and the language of the Eurocrats.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728

    Mr. Royale, not sure I agree. The negotiated deal (assuming we don't have the surprise of Cameron going for Out, which I think very unlikely) will be seen through the prism that's been created by the debate up to that point.

    Indeed, but it's only then that people will be offering a voting opinion based on the facts.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited October 2015
    Cyclefree said:

    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.

    The "rich" countries in the Gulf, the US and UK protectorates created the IS problem. An organisation does not come out of nowhere and occupy a third of an entire country. It needs resources to begin with.

    That may well be so. But that does not mean that Britain has an obligation to let people into this country. My point was that the person being interviewed seemed to think that this was primarily Britain's problem to resolve and that we were not doing our "fair" share without really explaining how she was determining what was "fair".
    At the same time, is it the interviewee's business to decide who should take the refugees ? Why not Argentina or, dare I say, Australia ? There, they would be transported shipped to a remote island.
  • surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Er, but on the other hand there's no guarantee that the EU in the future will maintain those rights, or indeed it may continue to extend workers' rights to the extent that it damages the economy.

    In any case, I really hate the argument that "we have X Y Z rights/regulations" (in the environment, employment, consumers, etc) thanks only to the EU and once we leave they'll go. Many of those rights are also enjoyed by - shock horror - Western countries outside the EU, including right-wing countries like Australia.

    The LEAVE campaign needs to spell out exactly that. We enjoy rights which may or may not remain whether we stay in or leave the EU. The difference being with leaving is that what rights exist will be up to our own Parliament. And of course point out that countries outside the EU have similar rights and also that the UK, had it never joined the EU, would in all likelihood also have developed a similar set of rights.

    It's almost up there with the "EU has created European peace" nonsense. Though that really is the cream of nonsense. I'll spell it out for anyone who doesn't get reality: the EU is a product of peace, not the cause of it. Golly...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,419
    edited October 2015
    Comres looks like an outlier.

    Then again....
    Pulpstar said:

    The Comres SW poll showed Con Gain Bath & Yeovil.

    JackW said:

    Not so.
    The ComRes polling was LibDem regional and not individual seat specific and accordingly did not have named candidates.
    PBers need to be more astute when assessing these polls.

    Pulpstar said:

    No incumbency in Bath.
    I could cash out my fiver for a guaranteed profit on the Lib Dems there now, but is it worth it ?

    No.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    rcs1000 said:

    MTimT said:

    One explanation for the wild swings in polling returns might be that no-one outside of us policy nerds has really focused on the issue and the public are broadly ambivalent about membership, thus the day's latest EU news (blunder or smaller snafu) can be having a large but temporary affect on how the public responds to the polling questions.

    I think there's a lot of truth in that:

    Greece and/or migrant crisis = Leave...
    All quiet on the Eurozone front = Stay...
    There is a strong natural default to Remain amongst floating voters. Because the economy is doing ok, it will be easy to produce a list attributing the threat to that if we leave the EU (although I disagree) - conversely, Leave is a many headed beast and it will be hard to paint a clear picture of the alternative. Instead, there will be several, and Remain will try and exploit that as unclear and risky.

    The best bet for Leave is to paint Remain as more risky by showing what we are really voting for down the road if we do stay, and the EU's record - its past "form" - towards the UK on promises, including the language used.
    All we need to REMAIN is for Farage to campaign to LEAVE.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    If a government stripped workers of their rights and did not have widespread support, they would be replaced and the incoming government could reintroduce those rights. It just shows how weak the In side's case is if they have to resort to arguing that outside of the EU we will become a dictatorship.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    rcs1000 said:

    felix said:

    As with the GE I'd suggest that the online polls are more suspect at getting a clear picture - but I doubt if the lead for stay is quite so high as the CD figures. Online polls I think remain problematic in achieving a fair balance of the population as a whole and this may be especially true with single issue polls.

    I think the EU referendum is a very interesting one from a betting perspective. I would estimate that perhaps 10% of the population is fervently in, while 30% is fervently out. In a low turnout scenario, I would reckon out would win it.

    The question is, therefore, whether we have 55% turnout (an "out"), 65% (roughly a tie), or 75% (almost certainly "in").
    I think that's right. I'm also not sure this polling will be particularly valuable until the renegotiation deal is on the table with Cameron's endorsement.
    Until the proximity of the ballot paper is imminent I would be sceptical of the polling. While there is a certain weariness with Europe, this is a country much more at ease with European cultures and peoples than it was 40 years ago. The prospect of stag weekends in Talinn or Hen weekends in Barcelona would have seemed absurd then, but are unremarkeable now.
    The idea that euroscepticism is based on an ignorance or xenophobia towards European countries and cultures is a fallacy IMHO, and the language of the Eurocrats.
    Euroscepticism is not entirely down to xenophobia, but Britain is a very much more European culture than it was in the Seventies. Britons seem to like it that way, but we shall see how they vote. Younger people in particular are far more pro-Europe.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    Pulpstar said:

    Comres looks like an outlier.

    Then again....

    Pulpstar said:

    The Comres SW poll showed Con Gain Bath & Yeovil.

    JackW said:

    Not so.
    The ComRes polling was LibDem regional and not individual seat specific and accordingly did not have named candidates.
    PBers need to be more astute when assessing these polls.

    Pulpstar said:

    No incumbency in Bath.
    I could cash out my fiver for a guaranteed profit on the Lib Dems there now, but is it worth it ?

    No.

    :-) Bath was a nice little earner!
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Could the EU referendum have the same results as the Rugby WC ?

    England OUT
    Scotland IN
    Wales IN
    [ N ] Ireland IN

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    MP_SE said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    If a government stripped workers of their rights and did not have widespread support, they would be replaced and the incoming government could reintroduce those rights. It just shows how weak the In side's case is if they have to resort to arguing that outside of the EU we will become a dictatorship.
    A Tory dictatorship with 37% of the votes.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    surbiton said:

    MP_SE said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    If a government stripped workers of their rights and did not have widespread support, they would be replaced and the incoming government could reintroduce those rights. It just shows how weak the In side's case is if they have to resort to arguing that outside of the EU we will become a dictatorship.
    A Tory dictatorship with 37% of the votes.
    Better than a Labour one with less :D
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. Surbiton, unlike a democratically mandated (and larger) Labour majority on 36%? :p
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,419
    @Casino_Royale :) Thanks for the SW advice indeed...

    Comres might be correct here though. An inconvenient potential truth to BOOers, but just because it is an outlier we shouldn't dismiss it out of hand. The next Comres will be interesting.

    Do they have a methodological difference to the others ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046

    Mr. Surbiton, unlike a democratically mandated (and larger) Labour majority on 36%? :p

    Great minds Mr. D ;)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    MP_SE said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    If a government stripped workers of their rights and did not have widespread support, they would be replaced and the incoming government could reintroduce those rights. It just shows how weak the In side's case is if they have to resort to arguing that outside of the EU we will become a dictatorship.
    A Tory dictatorship with 37% of the votes.
    Better than a Labour one with less :D
    You can insure against that by going for PR.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Has Helen Goodman apologised directly to The Hunts, or is she just apologising because she was caught out on Twitter?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    MP_SE said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    If a government stripped workers of their rights and did not have widespread support, they would be replaced and the incoming government could reintroduce those rights. It just shows how weak the In side's case is if they have to resort to arguing that outside of the EU we will become a dictatorship.
    A Tory dictatorship with 37% of the votes.
    Better than a Labour one with less :D
    You can insure against that by going for PR.
    I'm happy with FPTP.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Er, but on the other hand there's no guarantee that the EU in the future will maintain those rights, or indeed it may continue to extend workers' rights to the extent that it damages the economy.

    In any case, I really hate the argument that "we have X Y Z rights/regulations" (in the environment, employment, consumers, etc) thanks only to the EU and once we leave they'll go. Many of those rights are also enjoyed by - shock horror - Western countries outside the EU, including right-wing countries like Australia.

    The LEAVE campaign needs to spell out exactly that. We enjoy rights which may or may not remain whether we stay in or leave the EU. The difference being with leaving is that what rights exist will be up to our own Parliament. And of course point out that countries outside the EU have similar rights and also that the UK, had it never joined the EU, would in all likelihood also have developed a similar set of rights.

    It's almost up there with the "EU has created European peace" nonsense. Though that really is the cream of nonsense. I'll spell it out for anyone who doesn't get reality: the EU is a product of peace, not the cause of it. Golly...
    Which do you think has the greater probability ?

    1. 27 governments agreeing on something

    2. 1 government deciding

    Even you can work that out, I am sure.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Procrastinating (bit sleepy to get working just yet), and seen Cumberbatch thinks he should have talks with May over immigration.

    .....

    Outrageous. I've been asking to determine Defence policy for far longer, and *I've* never had a meeting.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Er, but on the other hand there's no guarantee that the EU in the future will maintain those rights, or indeed it may continue to extend workers' rights to the extent that it damages the economy.

    In any case, I really hate the argument that "we have X Y Z rights/regulations" (in the environment, employment, consumers, etc) thanks only to the EU and once we leave they'll go. Many of those rights are also enjoyed by - shock horror - Western countries outside the EU, including right-wing countries like Australia.

    The LEAVE campaign needs to spell out exactly that. We enjoy rights which may or may not remain whether we stay in or leave the EU. The difference being with leaving is that what rights exist will be up to our own Parliament. And of course point out that countries outside the EU have similar rights and also that the UK, had it never joined the EU, would in all likelihood also have developed a similar set of rights.

    It's almost up there with the "EU has created European peace" nonsense. Though that really is the cream of nonsense. I'll spell it out for anyone who doesn't get reality: the EU is a product of peace, not the cause of it. Golly...
    Which do you think has the greater probability ?

    1. 27 governments agreeing on something

    2. 1 government deciding

    Even you can work that out, I am sure.
    How many decisions require unanimity? Not many more, I don't think.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited October 2015
    Cumberbatch...an actor..someone who inhabits a fictional,fantasy world...figures..
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    The UnCut piss take on Corbynism is rather funny http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/11/the-a-z-of-corbsplaining/
    Milliband – Previous leader of the Labour party, whose ideas were insufficiently leftist, causing the electorate to vote Conservative in protest.

    Prior diary commitment – What you organise quickly just after the Labour party press office schedule a tricky interview.

    Campaign Group – A group of MPs who do not campaign but do tweet a lot.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Roger said:
    "The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start."

    Great ad. The humour complements one's desire to peel up the gym-slip.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,529
    RobD said:

    Mr. Surbiton, unlike a democratically mandated (and larger) Labour majority on 36%? :p

    Great minds Mr. D ;)
    Rob, could also be the other one , "F***s seldom differ" ;)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    Mr. Surbiton, unlike a democratically mandated (and larger) Labour majority on 36%? :p

    Great minds Mr. D ;)
    Rob, could also be the other one , "F***s seldom differ" ;)
    Try as I might, I could not fit the word "turnip" in that censored word. :D
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'm still struggling to understand what point she was making - it was just bizarre.
    dr_spyn said:

    Has Helen Goodman apologised directly to The Hunts, or is she just apologising because she was caught out on Twitter?

  • The UnCut piss take on Corbynism is rather funny http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/11/the-a-z-of-corbsplaining/

    Milliband – Previous leader of the Labour party, whose ideas were insufficiently leftist, causing the electorate to vote Conservative in protest.

    Prior diary commitment – What you organise quickly just after the Labour party press office schedule a tricky interview.

    Campaign Group – A group of MPs who do not campaign but do tweet a lot.
    ... and that's from Labour ...

    oof
  • The Prime Minister – What the leader of Conservative party is called until at least 2025.

    lol
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    He's so full of himself - I can't stand the chap. I saw him intvd about playing Macbeth, you'd think he'd written it.

    Procrastinating (bit sleepy to get working just yet), and seen Cumberbatch thinks he should have talks with May over immigration.

    .....

    Outrageous. I've been asking to determine Defence policy for far longer, and *I've* never had a meeting.

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,780

    The UnCut piss take on Corbynism is rather funny http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/11/the-a-z-of-corbsplaining/

    Milliband – Previous leader of the Labour party, whose ideas were insufficiently leftist, causing the electorate to vote Conservative in protest.

    Prior diary commitment – What you organise quickly just after the Labour party press office schedule a tricky interview.

    Campaign Group – A group of MPs who do not campaign but do tweet a lot.
    ... and that's from Labour ...

    oof

    Burnhamite – A malleable substance that can bend and merge to form any shape required of it before ultimately imploding.

    I like this one...too true.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I :lol: at that one too.

    The Prime Minister – What the leader of Conservative party is called until at least 2025.

    lol

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Miss Plato, well, quite. Why he thinks he ought to meet the Home Secretary to discuss the migrant crisis is beyond me.

    Perhaps he's becoming akin to Russell Brand.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    At a certain point in an actors climb to fame they begin to believe they are the person the script tells them they are.. and no one tells them they are still just actors..repeating someone else s words
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    runnymede said:
    Whose office should they have used? Clearly there was a lot wrong with the way these and similar allegations were handled but does the room really matter?

    It will be interesting to see if any of the celebrity convictions are reviewed, as some seemed to have more evidence than others, though once the jury has decided, perhaps that is the end of it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. L, why was Watson's office used? The individual's home, or the police station seem the only obvious places for questioning. What's it got to do with the Witchsmeller Pursuivant?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    DecrepitJohn..That is why we don't have the death penalty..
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046

    runnymede said:
    Whose office should they have used? Clearly there was a lot wrong with the way these and similar allegations were handled but does the room really matter?

    It will be interesting to see if any of the celebrity convictions are reviewed, as some seemed to have more evidence than others, though once the jury has decided, perhaps that is the end of it.
    Shouldn't police interviews be held in a police station? Where they can be properly documented/recorded?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Er, but on the other hand there's no guarantee that the EU in the future will maintain those rights, or indeed it may continue to extend workers' rights to the extent that it damages the economy.

    In any case, I really hate the argument that "we have X Y Z rights/regulations" (in the environment, employment, consumers, etc) thanks only to the EU and once we leave they'll go. Many of those rights are also enjoyed by - shock horror - Western countries outside the EU, including right-wing countries like Australia.

    The LEAVE campaign needs to spell out exactly that. We enjoy rights which may or may not remain whether we stay in or leave the EU. The difference being with leaving is that what rights exist will be up to our own Parliament. And of course point out that countries outside the EU have similar rights and also that the UK, had it never joined the EU, would in all likelihood also have developed a similar set of rights.

    It's almost up there with the "EU has created European peace" nonsense. Though that really is the cream of nonsense. I'll spell it out for anyone who doesn't get reality: the EU is a product of peace, not the cause of it. Golly...
    Which do you think has the greater probability ?

    1. 27 governments agreeing on something

    2. 1 government deciding

    Even you can work that out, I am sure.
    How many decisions require unanimity? Not many more, I don't think.
    Er........14 is more than 1. I am sure even you can work that out !
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Isn't it up to the voters of Britain to decide the level of worker protections they want? Why do we need them to be decided by the votes of others?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046
    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Er, but on the other hand there's no guarantee that the EU in the future will maintain those rights, or indeed it may continue to extend workers' rights to the extent that it damages the economy.

    In any case, I really hate the argument that "we have X Y Z rights/regulations" (in the environment, employment, consumers, etc) thanks only to the EU and once we leave they'll go. Many of those rights are also enjoyed by - shock horror - Western countries outside the EU, including right-wing countries like Australia.

    The LEAVE campaign needs to spell out exactly that. We enjoy rights which may or may not remain whether we stay in or leave the EU. The difference being with leaving is that what rights exist will be up to our own Parliament. And of course point out that countries outside the EU have similar rights and also that the UK, had it never joined the EU, would in all likelihood also have developed a similar set of rights.

    It's almost up there with the "EU has created European peace" nonsense. Though that really is the cream of nonsense. I'll spell it out for anyone who doesn't get reality: the EU is a product of peace, not the cause of it. Golly...
    Which do you think has the greater probability ?

    1. 27 governments agreeing on something

    2. 1 government deciding

    Even you can work that out, I am sure.
    How many decisions require unanimity? Not many more, I don't think.
    Er........14 is more than 1. I am sure even you can work that out !
    Getting 14/27 is much, much easier than getting 27/27.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    A great example of that was the bloke who played Josh Lyman in West Wing - I saw him intved and he carried on like he was a White House big shot.

    It was bizarre viewing - I kept thinking You're Just An Actor

    At a certain point in an actors climb to fame they begin to believe they are the person the script tells them they are.. and no one tells them they are still just actors..repeating someone else s words

  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    Isn't it up to the voters of Britain to decide the level of worker protections they want? Why do we need them to be decided by the votes of others?

    Perhaps the EU will make the trains run on time as well
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.



    So, in other words, she offered nothing new.
    She was on the BBC FFS what did you expect - a balanced discussion?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Miss Plato, it reminds of Team America: World Police, and the Film Actors' Guild.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited October 2015
    Re Cumberbatch, he was filming at a hospice recently, and unlike other cast members, he took time to talk to those under the place's care including one of my relatives. A small gesture, but one which was appreciated.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    And free from pressure? I can think of lots of reasons why it's completely inappropriate to conduct statement taking in the office of a campaigning MP.
    RobD said:

    runnymede said:
    Whose office should they have used? Clearly there was a lot wrong with the way these and similar allegations were handled but does the room really matter?

    It will be interesting to see if any of the celebrity convictions are reviewed, as some seemed to have more evidence than others, though once the jury has decided, perhaps that is the end of it.
    Shouldn't police interviews be held in a police station? Where they can be properly documented/recorded?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,553
    Charles said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Isn't it up to the voters of Britain to decide the level of worker protections they want? Why do we need them to be decided by the votes of others?
    The implication is that the UK has a natural right-wing majority, which only the EU can hold in check.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Cyclefree said:

    surbiton said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.

    The "rich" countries in the Gulf, the US and UK protectorates created the IS problem. An organisation does not come out of nowhere and occupy a third of an entire country. It needs resources to begin with.

    That may well be so. But that does not mean that Britain has an obligation to let people into this country. My point was that the person being interviewed seemed to think that this was primarily Britain's problem to resolve and that we were not doing our "fair" share without really explaining how she was determining what was "fair".
    Don't forget that "asylum judge" probably doesn't mean what you think it does.

    Under Labour's reforms immigration panel members are entitled to call themselves "judge" even if they don't have any legal training
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    Miss Plato, it reminds of Team America: World Police, and the Film Actors' Guild.

    Let's hope it ends as messily....
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    The left used to think in 100% opposite terms in the 60s and 70s i.e that the EU would prevent them establishing 'socialism'. While people like Ken Clarke in the 70s favoured the EU as it would make Labour's then policies 'illegal'.

    Can anyone spot the common thread here?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    It seems to me INs biggest problem is that it will be backed foursquare by 'the establishment' and right now the voters are pretty anti-establishment.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    Mr. L, why was Watson's office used? The individual's home, or the police station seem the only obvious places for questioning. What's it got to do with the Witchsmeller Pursuivant?

    It was the only one that had that ultimate tool of the Spanish Inquisition for extracting confessions:

    the Comfy Chair....
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    Sean_F said:

    Charles said:

    surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    Isn't it up to the voters of Britain to decide the level of worker protections they want? Why do we need them to be decided by the votes of others?
    The implication is that the UK has a natural right-wing majority, which only the EU can hold in check.
    Of course, the opposite argument was made by Labour in the 1970s and early 1980s.

    If you're relying on a supernational body to override the democratic wishes of the domestic electorate you will reap the whirlwind in the long-term IMHO.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Dr Spyn That is not unusual..the other cast members were probably not as recogniseable and would let the STAR do all the talking.. I bet the crew members talked to the patients tho..
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. Royale, and that's why there'll be civil strife, or possibly even war, when the EU finally collapses.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    The EU. If it is successful in its aims it will ultimately automatically self destruct, in either a peaceful or violent way.

    If it is unsuccessful (or we depart) we will probably all carry on regardless, until we find some conflict, which may be resolved either peacefully or violently.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    edited October 2015
    Mr Rose is really not giving a good starting impression. Having launched the Remain campaign last week mainly based on scaremongering, he is now branding anyone supporting Leave as "quitters".

    Listen mate, I'm considering voting Leave and if I do, it's not because I'm a Quitter but because a multimillionaire has failed to set out a positive platform for the UK changing the existing dynamic in the EU. Insulting half the electorate generally isn't a good approach.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    The UnCut piss take on Corbynism is rather funny http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/11/the-a-z-of-corbsplaining/

    Milliband – Previous leader of the Labour party, whose ideas were insufficiently leftist, causing the electorate to vote Conservative in protest.

    Prior diary commitment – What you organise quickly just after the Labour party press office schedule a tricky interview.

    Campaign Group – A group of MPs who do not campaign but do tweet a lot.
    ... and that's from Labour ...

    oof

    First they came for those with a sense of humour....

    Now nobody's laughing.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994
    JEO said:

    Mr Rose is really not giving a good starting impression. Having launched the Remain campaign last week mainly based on scaremongering, he is now branding anyone supporting Leave as "quitters".

    Listen mate, I'm considering voting Leave and if I do, it's not because I'm a Quitter but because a multimillionaire has failed to set out a positive platform for the UK changing the existing dynamic in the EU. Insulting half the electorate generally isn't a good approach.

    Better a quitter than a bull-shitter.....
  • weejonnie said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting interview on the Today programme this morning with a retired asylum judge about what Britain is doing re refugees from the Middle East.

    Two initial thoughts: (1) she was assuming that all those who wanted to come were refugees. Not the case and one would have thought that an asylum judge would know the difference between refugees and migrants; and (2) the underlying assumption was that a problem created by civil war in the Middle East was the responsibility of Europe to sort out. There seemed to be no thought that, maybe - just maybe - some of the rich countries in the Middle East which are doing nothing (and there are those countries which are bearing the greatest burden) should also take their proportionate share and do far far more.



    So, in other words, she offered nothing new.
    She was on the BBC FFS what did you expect - a balanced discussion?
    I do. A victory of hope over experience.
  • surbiton said:

    Roger said:

    The benefits of the EU are many but not immediately obvious. I just heard someone on radio try to explain why we should stay in but it all sounded business orientated and not someting that touched most people. The 'stay in' side need to build a shopping list of how it benefits us all.

    Something like a modern version of this very dated Dunlop commercial would be a good start.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NebZb7dnd8

    The 48 hour directive for a start. All those maternity, paternity leave came from the EU. Part-time workers rights [ there are many now ] all enshrined in EU directives. There is no guarantee that an "Out" UK will keep those rights.
    So what? That's up to the Commons and the British electorate to determine.

    The EU serves a very good purpose in breaking down barriers between EU nations. But internal UK only issues like relations between employer and employee can be determined by the British government and the British electorate. The EU is overstretched meddling in those issues.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    JEO said:

    Mr Rose is really not giving a good starting impression. Having launched the Remain campaign last week mainly based on scaremongering, he is now branding anyone supporting Leave as "quitters".

    Listen mate, I'm considering voting Leave and if I do, it's not because I'm a Quitter but because a multimillionaire has failed to set out a positive platform for the UK changing the existing dynamic in the EU. Insulting half the electorate generally isn't a good approach.

    You missed the memo. This week's EU referendum debate is brought to you by the letter Q: quitters and Quislings.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,419
    Why should we particularly listen to Stuart Rose by the way ?

    His performance at M&S looks to have been modest to me.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited October 2015
    The Stay team need to focus on the reasons for staying in.. not denigrate the ones who may consider leaving..enough of the nonsense Rose..the UK population need really good reasons from both teams.. and are completely peed off with the rumour mongers
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Having seen Will Straw on Sky News this morning, the Remain camp need to think about how to engage the heart and not just the head. It's all a bit mechanical.

    Remainers should be focussing on where the EU has been a force for good and where the UK has been an effective force for change within the EU. Numbers leave most of us number.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    The Stay team need to focus on the reasons for staying in.. not denigrate the ones who may consider leaving..enough of the nonsense Rose..the UK population need really good reasons from both teams.. and are completely peed off with the rumour mongers

    Rose said this morning everybody is better off by £450 pa via the EU, I would love to see how he established this scaremongering figure

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    RobD said:

    runnymede said:
    Whose office should they have used? Clearly there was a lot wrong with the way these and similar allegations were handled but does the room really matter?

    It will be interesting to see if any of the celebrity convictions are reviewed, as some seemed to have more evidence than others, though once the jury has decided, perhaps that is the end of it.
    Shouldn't police interviews be held in a police station? Where they can be properly documented/recorded?
    Perhaps when the lawyers sign in later, they can clear this up.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    antifrank said:

    Having seen Will Straw on Sky News this morning, the Remain camp need to think about how to engage the heart and not just the head. It's all a bit mechanical.

    Remainers should be focussing on where the EU has been a force for good and where the UK has been an effective force for change within the EU. Numbers leave most of us number.

    As an IN supporter perhaps you could help us with this?
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    The Stay team need to focus on the reasons for staying in.. not denigrate the ones who may consider leaving..enough of the nonsense Rose..the UK population need really good reasons from both teams.. and are completely peed off with the rumour mongers

    Rose said this morning everybody is better off by £450 pa via the EU, I would love to see how he established this scaremongering figure

    Didn't he claim £3000 just last week?
Sign In or Register to comment.