@PaulBrandITV: UPDATE: Monitoring the count here it currently looks like there are around twice as many votes to SACK than to BACK @_HenryBolton
Another epic fail for Bolton-backing Farage.....
Haven't then been rumours for awhile of Farage wanting to set up a new party in any case? If that was accurate, then publicly backing a leader who then got sacked by party members would be a good reason to say it was time to set up something new.
Either way round, I think he would have been better advised to keep his views on Bolton to himself. But then, Nigel can't help having an opinion on everything. And letting you know what it is.
Anyway, as one of Farage and UKIP's longest-standing and fiercest critics.....hur hur hur.....!
Homeless former model who died yards from Parliament 'returned to the UK illegally after being jailed for sexually abusing a child and kicked out of the country TWICE'
So is the Daily Mail saying we need to check whether homeless people are here illegally before they are left to freeze to death?
I am going to guess because he was he illegally it was rather harder to get access to the usual safety net that exists for legal individuals. And should we be providing services for convicted child sex criminals here illegally?
@PaulBrandITV: UPDATE: Monitoring the count here it currently looks like there are around twice as many votes to SACK than to BACK @_HenryBolton
Another epic fail for Bolton-backing Farage.....
I don't think Farage has much interest in the UK anymore. Post-Brexit he can get more attention and more cash on Fox in America than he can involved in a poxy British minor party.
I don't think Farage has much interest in the UK anymore. Post-Brexit he can get more attention and more cash on Fox in America than he can involved in a poxy British minor party.
CEOs earn vast amounts of money. One of the areas where they earn that money is crisis management (as in a crisis within their organisation).
Sadly, so many CEOs fail whenever a crisis occurs. I get the impression too many of them are good at shaking hands and going to expensive dinners, rather than effectively actually running an organisation.
I don't think Farage has much interest in the UK anymore. Post-Brexit he can get more attention and more cash on Fox in America than he can involved in a poxy British minor party.
He was on question time (again) this week
And as an "elder statesmen" former leader of UKIP he can get that high profile payday quite regularly whether or not he's involved day-to-day in party politics.
I don't think Farage has much interest in the UK anymore. Post-Brexit he can get more attention and more cash on Fox in America than he can involved in a poxy British minor party.
I don't think Farage has much interest in the UK anymore. Post-Brexit he can get more attention and more cash on Fox in America than he can involved in a poxy British minor party.
Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.
The LibDems main aim must be to simply stay in the game, until fortunes turn again.
I agree. I see and promote the Lib dems as a sensible pragmatic open-minded party that is not wedded to a left or right wing ideology. It doesn't support private good, public bad, or the reverse, but what works. It is down to earth practical (potholes) and opposes Brexit on pragmatic not ideological grounds. Its only ideology is freedom from coercion, ignorance and conformity.
Talk me through limits on numbers of children per child minder then. Or free school meals for middle class children.
LibDems, being pragmatic, are in favour of coercion with regard to all driving on the left of the road.
Free school meals for all children means better nutrition and better ability to concentrate.
There are more difficult points you could have made. Should adult individuals be free to make choices that may harm them and no-one else such as not wearing a seatbelt or smoking pot? On the other hand, smoking cigarettes harms others and so does unlimited numbers of children per child minder.
There is no ideological silver bullet solution to the problem of balancing personal freedom with the common good. But there are common sense pragmatic solutions. Try Amartya Sen - the Idea of Justice.
I have no problem with good nutrition for kids - I am a strong supporter. But I don’t think it is a good use of taxpayers money to subsidise well off people.
How about state pensions for well off people? Or pension tax credits for wealthy people.
Pension contributions are capped. State pensions are s return on NICs
Aren't entitlement to free school meals capped? Don't the parents of "well -off" children who get free school meals pay tax?
Lib Dem policy gave free school meals to all infants.
We are arguing a narrow point but quite important: not that the policy is beneficial but whether all infants should get it free.
In my view tax funding is limited and should be applied as effectively as possible. Clegg’s argument “relieving pressure on budgets” implies that he knows how to spend family money better than they do which is an ideological approach to government not a pragmatic one in my view
I am going to guess because he was he illegally it was rather harder to get access to the usual safety net that exists for legal individuals. And should we be providing services for convicted child sex criminals here illegally?
We shouldn't let anyone in Britain freeze to death if we can avoid it, irrespective of who they are or what they've done. If they are here illegally, we should seek to deport them, not leave them to die.
It's an extreme case of a real wider problem - people who are brought over illegally for whatever reason (refugees, sex workers, or illegal immigration) have very little access to the basic way that the system works and are subject to blackmail, underpayment and mistreatment. Clearly we shouldn't accept evasion of whatever controls we put on immigration, but at the same time we need to work against the development of a whole underclass in this situation.
I am going to guess because he was he illegally it was rather harder to get access to the usual safety net that exists for legal individuals. And should we be providing services for convicted child sex criminals here illegally?
We shouldn't let anyone in Britain freeze to death if we can avoid it, irrespective of who they are or what they've done. If they are here illegally, we should seek to deport them, not leave them to die.
It's an extreme case of a real wider problem - people who are brought over illegally for whatever reason (refugees, sex workers, or illegal immigration) have very little access to the basic way that the system works and are subject to blackmail, underpayment and mistreatment. Clearly we shouldn't accept evasion of whatever controls we put on immigration, but at the same time we need to work against the development of a whole underclass in this situation.
" If they are here illegally, we should seek to deport them, not leave them to die."
On the other hand: we need to make the process quick; the limbo of waiting for court cases and appeals is what contributes to this?
I assume Scott and Will won't be as keen to "share" that Tweet!
Of course the Germans, the Americans, South Koreans, everyone is happy to do bespoke deals.with us. Why wouldn't they? The rules of the Single Market protect us from bespokeness.
Edit and as Merkel says, it will be a good deal. She wouldn't agree to it otherwise.
As we no longer have to take into account the demands of French farmers it should be a good deal all round.
Except for French farmers
Oh we will. Our partners will insist on keeping everything they already have, anything extra is a bonus and of it means we get less, they will live with that. This is what's meant by bespoke deal. And but not j with the EU
The possibility that the UK will do better with alternative trade treaties does seem to be ananthema to you.
Or to describe the current situation in a different way - the UK has had 239 consecutive months of trade deficit.
Is that the record of a country with trade treaties suitable for its needs ?
It's fair to say everyone doing trade deals with us is incentivised to widen the trade gap in their favour.
As the UK would be negotiating trade deals for its benefit and not for that of French farmers there will be 'more cake' for all concerned.
And that's what you're worried about isn't it - the possibility that the UK will do better.
I assume Scott and Will won't be as keen to "share" that Tweet!
Of course the Germans, the Americans, South Koreans, everyone is happy to do bespoke deals.with us. Why wouldn't they? The rules of the Single Market protect us from bespokeness.
Edit and as Merkel says, it will be a good deal. She wouldn't agree to it otherwise.
As we no longer have to take into account the demands of French farmers it should be a good deal all round.
Except for French farmers
Oh we will. Our partners will insist on keeping everything they already have, anything extra is a bonus and of it means we get less, they will live with that. This is what's meant by bespoke deal. And but not j with the EU
The possibility that the UK will do better with alternative trade treaties does seem to be ananthema to you.
Or to describe the current situation in a different way - the UK has had 239 consecutive months of trade deficit.
Is that the record of a country with trade treaties suitable for its needs ?
You position is only internally coherent if you are advocating protectionism, which I don't think you are.
I see you ignore the point and respond with gibberish.
Most countries support elements of protectionism as well as free trade when they think its in their own interests.
That the UK has had 239 consecutive months of trade deficit (plus a corresponding toursim deficit) is always ignored by those claiming that the current trade treaties are optimal.
The US has had a trade deficit every year since 1976. Do you think they've been getting a raw deal from the rest of the world all these years?
The USA also has an enormous tourism surplus - something which the UK has a huge deficit in.
And it should be remembered that living standards for most Americans have been stagnant for decades.
Comments
Anyway, as one of Farage and UKIP's longest-standing and fiercest critics.....hur hur hur.....!
I do think the programme's on its way out. Can't remember the last time I watched a full edition.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/964899843272511490
https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/964846702187474944
https://twitter.com/Nataliefleet/status/964848281057726464
LOL
Lib Dem policy gave free school meals to all infants.
We are arguing a narrow point but quite important: not that the policy is beneficial but whether all infants should get it free.
In my view tax funding is limited and should be applied as effectively as possible. Clegg’s argument “relieving pressure on budgets” implies that he knows how to spend family money better than they do which is an ideological approach to government not a pragmatic one in my view
It's an extreme case of a real wider problem - people who are brought over illegally for whatever reason (refugees, sex workers, or illegal immigration) have very little access to the basic way that the system works and are subject to blackmail, underpayment and mistreatment. Clearly we shouldn't accept evasion of whatever controls we put on immigration, but at the same time we need to work against the development of a whole underclass in this situation.
On the other hand: we need to make the process quick; the limbo of waiting for court cases and appeals is what contributes to this?
And that's what you're worried about isn't it - the possibility that the UK will do better.
And it should be remembered that living standards for most Americans have been stagnant for decades.