Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP’s attempt to block the scrapping of roaming ccharges w
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP’s attempt to block the scrapping of roaming ccharges will play badly in the EURef campaign
One of the things which the REMAIN campaign finds hard is giving specific examples of what the EU does for individual voters. One such area now is the decision taken at the end of October, to end all mobile phone roaming charges for use in the EU in 18 months time.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Which tends to suggest that prices will keep moving downwards regardless of remain/leave?
(top trolling tho
http://www.three.co.uk/Discover/Phones/Feel_At_Home
No, I am not a kipper.
This ‘will play badly in the EURef campaign’ – No it won’t, no matter how often it’s trotted out.
But it won't make a blind bit of difference.
(And I'm sure we've had this header before - the punters weren't convinced then, and they don't seem to be so far this time either)
It's not exactly up there with control of the nation's borders or finances....
The article says 'millions of UK smartphone users'. What are the figures?
There are lots of people who rarely travel abroad, and if they do it's a once-in-a-lifetime trip. In this, as is often the case, is PB typical.
Happy Winterval one and all!
Whether or not they'd have happened anyway - either domestically or internationally - is another matter.
Even if they would not have, whether or not a few minor wins compensates for major losses of sovereignty in trade, migration, crime, justice, social and economic policy, financial services, market regulation, local tax inflexibility, agriculture, fisheries, environment and energy for 1/28th of continent-wide 'influence' is quite another again.
I am not sure why we expect businesses to provide services at no extra cost, providing a roaming service costs extra money, why should the users not pay for it? The alternative is the cost is just defrayed across everyone's call charges, including people that never make a foreign call. Why is it that left leaners think that the individuals should pay when they do something they (the left) disapprove of ("the polluter pays" etc) but the rest of the time the individual should not pay for extra services they use.... its this entitlement society that leaves us with people expecting tattoo removal on the NHS.
I travel abroad relatively frequently (not to a country on the Three list) - if I'm away for more than a weekend I get a local SIM.
Domestic rates are far far lower because of the much greater competition. That competition isn't going to go away.
This isn't about rich vs poor. This is about consumers vs telecoms companies.
UKIP's obsessive anti-EU stance makes them do some pretty daft things. Campaigning for telecoms companies to be allowed to continue to rip off customers is right up there.
A large chunk (possibly a majority) of the English population live geographically closer to France than Scotland!
I think the real point of Mike's piece actually points the other way. It is incredibly difficult to make the undoubted benefits of being part of a large and reasonably integrated market real for people. It is an amorphic and theoretical benefit. Once the 3m jobs nonsense is laughed away how do you show an upside to being in such a market? This is one way I suppose although it is pretty peripheral for most people.
Remain do have some work to do to come up with some answers to the question of "what have the
RomansEU ever done for us?"Doesn't mean that the UKIP MEPs who can be bothered to turn up in Brussels are not a bunch of tubes of course.
Only if you're a complete ******* moron.
Felix mentions TV rights, I'm not sure what the current situation is, but I am completely on the side of any pub showing Premier League football via an EU broadcaster. This is what really annoys me about the EU - it's supposed to be a common market, so why the PL think they can restrict trade to their chosen broadcaster in this country I don't know.
The goons at Dover are another bugbear of mine. They think there is some magical amount of booze or tobacco above which you can't bring into the country because it can't possibly be for personal use. Well, sorry, it's for HMRC to prove when someone's ripping them off and not paying duty due on goods sold in this country.
I'm amazed 3 hasn't won as a network with the feel at
Home promotion.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35168696
There's a consensus on here that the electorate aren't engaged in the EU issue, perhaps they will be nearer the date. As a committed Leaver I'm not dreading the day when Cameron says:
If you vote to Leave UKIP will charge you more to watch porn on holiday.
Sorry Mike, must do better.
http://tinyurl.com/pu85chw
I'm not sure what effect the car insurance legislation had, but the suspicion was that rather than cutting the cost of male car insurance, the cost female car insure would increase. If it is the case that women are less likely to claim, then they should be entitled to cheaper car insurance.
Like most people, I do not have £75,000 savings nor take foreign holidays, and I'm the most normal person I know. :-)
If people decide their votes based on this, we may well be entering an Angeli period of decay.
It's like deciding whether to retain the union based on train ticket prices.
I'm worried that I've just said something that could be held against me in court but luckily I'm an unreliable witness.
If anything it could be seen to be anti British banks who deal in the Pound Sterling. One of the things that could be quite interesting during the Referendum is how the City of London is portrayed. Some might like to point out that the City - and bankers - might lose out if we left the EU. Will Jezza want to be associated with this? There could be a few interesting alliances that are not normal bedfellows.
The Remain campaign, such as it is, fascinates me. It started by Clegg claiming it would cost 3m jobs, but that was debunked by the bloke who made the claim. Then it was based around foreign companies leaving, but they won't. Then it moved on to claims that the EU would invade us the day after Brexit. Now it's roaming charges, something 90% of the electorate have never experienced.
It's strange, Remain are short favourites, had an enormous lead and are now reduced to this nonsense.
They don't like it up em Capt Mannering !
@STJamesl: https://t.co/2G4kVTV7JV
They're a pretty open minded bunch these Tories aren't they, I suspect most of them have sex fully clothed in the dark, while sober.
It's crackers. And that's leaving aside the potential problems with cloning (I imagine it's improved a lot since I read a little on it, but the problems were bloody enormous [the worst instance being a cow that was born with its organs on the outside]).
Mr. Meeks, and this is why I think Farage, UKIP and the UKIP-in-all-but-name leave campaign should not be front and centre.
Farage is to Leave what someone who thinks we should join the euro is to In.
No, the point is that the PL sell the British rights to Sky and BT for a huge amount and then sell rights to companies across the EU. Ultimately we're consumers in the EU and pubs should be free to purchase the broadcast from any EU provider.
Right, I've just looked up some figures, According to this survey, 8% of Brits have never been abroad (and others not to the EU). It'd be interesting to see figures for 'regular' travellers as well. I'd say 8% is a 'large chunk', in that it is several million people.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/11/21/british-people-far-more-well-travelled-americans/
It's easy to get the impression from reading posts on here that we're all frequent international travellers: requests for advice about restaurants in Moscow, or SeanT's latest adventures. I'd certainly argue that they are very much one extreme and not the experience of most people.
I'm fairly well-off and mobile, and I've only made three trips to the EU: Germany and Romania for weddings, and northern France for a holiday. I've visited many more non-EU countries.
It'd be good to see some more detailed figures.
edit: see here:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm:77-335111
Doing well. Net minus 41.
Good leader. Net minus 21.
Satisfied. Net minus 17.
Favourable. Net minus 28.
https://t.co/3Mkc82yXJ3
Festive Greetings by the way :-)
As usual UKIP are taking a moral stance on behalf of humanity.
My main point is that the data roaming charges is prominent in the media because the highly-mobile media and chattering classes will gain most from it. To many (most?) people it's essentially be an irrelevance compared to other issues.
Basically: the media are making too much of what is a relatively small and inconsequential, if welcome, alteration.
It's the same reason (that and award-hunting) that broadcast media has been almost entirely unwilling to point out the problems of mass immigration, totally out of tune with public opinion.
For that matter, some on the Barbara Slater F1 thread raised the issue that tennis is sacrosanct because it's (upper) middle class, whereas F1 doesn't hold the BBC's interest in the same way.
I realise that it is very hard for zealots to comprehend but undecided people think quite differently from you. But they are the ones you need to persuade. Both sides in the campaign are doing a terrible job of this. Remain is utterly ineffectual. Leave seems to be seeking actively to deter the undecideds.
The wording of the referendum is:
“Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”
It doesn't mention EEA or any other solution, that is down to the government of the day to propose. It matters not a jot if LEAVE run on an EEA campaign, or a kipperesque "right out" campaign, because that is not what the referendum is on, and they are not the people that have to make that choice. In short, its balderdash.
I haven't been able to find anything on the BBC website, but here's an Indy article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-leading-uk-scientists-warn-against-consequences-of-brexit-a6784886.html
Why interrupt your enemy in a mistake ? Or lots of mistakes?
Leave appear very voter unfriendly and the more the voters see of them...
The undecideds comprise many more people than Navabi and Meeks.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-case-of-the-missing-marginals/
What this shows is, using hard data, is of course what we already know - that Labour are piling up votes in the large English conurbations and South Wales, and losing ground rapidly elsewhere.
What interested me, looking at the map towards the foot of the post, is the very large number of marginal seats located in those areas where Corbyn is leaking votes. The West Midlands, for example, shows a large number of light reds (I make it 14) and Akehurst's data revealed a drop of nearly 11 points in the Labour vote. Meanwhile London, just about the only area where Labour's support has unambiguously risen, has at best three or four seats Labour could hope to take. I also make it about 10 seats in the Lancashire/Cumbria area that could be vulnerable, although the North East looks pretty solid (for Yorkshire, we don't have enough data to make a meaningful guess).
What does this suggest? Well, first of all we can rule out any Blair-style landslides for whatever random person succeeds the current
encumbranceincumbent of No. 10. There are not enough seats that are genuinely vulnerable to make that a practical possibility unless something really dramatic happens - a criminal prosecution of Corbyn or his chief lieutenants being about the only thing I can think of that might do it. What we can also safely rule out however unless something equally dramatic happens on the other side is anything other than a Conservative majority (or the Conservatives to be so big that no other party can form a government, which would amount to much the same thing as we saw after 2010). There are simply not enough places where Labour are winning votes to cause the Conservatives to have a significant net loss of seats.(continued)
Although it is almost certainly true that many Labour voters are probably leaking either to fringe parties or away from politics altogether, rather than to the Conservatives, that is irrelevant - unless there is a direct switch from the Conservatives to Labour, and a very substantial one at that, Labour have no hope of winning more seats than they already hold. This, in itself, reveals the error of the Nick Palmer strategy - vote for Corbyn to stem the Green tide - in brutal relief. Indeed, an average of recent polls suggests that the Green vote has risen slightly (between 3-5%, with more at the top end, rather than the 3.8% they got at the election) which would indicate Labour voters are going to the Greens and not the other way around.
Things could change if Corbyn is forced out by some means next year, very difficult though that would be: and of course the by-election numbers must be treated with caution because they are not a scientifically selected sample (not that the scientific way did too well in May)! But at the moment on the data we have, it's very difficult to see a way back for Labour at either the next election or the one after.
Equally, a winning campaign for 'remain' might be: "Do you trust our future to these eejits?"
Remain's own campaign has been hapless.
Some on here are pretending to be undecided whilst in mortal fear of Cameron recommending Leave, some others are going through an intellectual farce of weighing up the arguments when it's obvious they'll vote Leave.
What is clear is that plenty will vote In rather than see Farage "win", in a democracy that's their right but it's as shallow a position as I can imagine.