politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After the Bashir move from UKIP to CON Marf gives her view
Comments
-
Talking about a bilateral trade agreement is of course totally bogus. And in the context of dealing the the EU we would hardly expect a different deal to Norway and the plain fact is that the Swiss deals are effectively the same.rcs1000 said:
That is true. However, I think you and I both know that if the vote was AV with the options of EU, EEA, and totally outside the European framework, then EEA would win by a landslide.Socrates said:
Norway is in the EEA, a status that UKIP do not advocate. UKIP's position is a bilateral trade agreement, which applies to Switzerland, Mexico, Korea and (soon) Canada. Hence they are the relevant comparisons.rcs1000 said:
Doesn't Norway pay a couple of billion euro?Socrates said:
Switzerland pays, as best as I can tell, about 530 million Swiss Francs a year to the EU budget. This is £415m, or £50 per capita. The UK pays £11bn a year on a net basis, which is about £175 per capita. There is a further £9bn (last time I checked) which we pay in and then get back in EU spending, such as farm subsidies to agrobusiness. That would also be better spent on the NHS.MarkHopkins said:Nigel Farage: "An extra £3bn a year for the NHS, funded out of the fact that we will not be paying daily membership fees to the European Union"
Is this true? Can we just opt out of the EU and use the money for ourselves?
Or will we end up paying as much to be able to trade with the EU?
Or since they need to trade with us just as much, will it not cost us anything to access the EU market?
Non-partisan answers appreciated.
Mexico and South Korea, who also have bilateral trade deals, pay nothing. Canada, as best as I can tell, will pay nothing once that deal is signed.0 -
So your two arguments are:Flightpath said:
Why should you draw that conclusion. Cameron has talked about changing the EU rules.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30224493
We can change rules on benefits for immigrants and send them home if they are out of work so people can recognise they are fair, but the movement of labour is not going to go away even if it can be limited.
But if we are in or out of the EU there will still be significant immigration especially if we have a faster growing economy. The EEA have free movement of labour and a single market in goods. So-called free trade deals include liberal movement of labour. More free trade will mean more movement. We will have our own workers working abroad as well. Its not bad for our economy.
What's bad is our own workers languishing on benefits and not being available - unwilling - for work here or abroad. We can best limit immigration and improve ourselves at the same time by getting our own people off benefits.
a) Benefits tourism is negligible, so the fact Cameron has given up on ending free movement of non-labour doesn't matter
b) Cameron is successfully limiting EU migration by limiting benefits for EU migrants.
Do you really not see the inconsistency here?0 -
Great news in Greece - I hope they screw Germany to the ground, the sanctimonious prigs who have happily exported their unemployment and deflation to the rest of the continent whilst playing the victim.0
-
So totally bogus that several nations in the world already have them with the EU. And if you really think the Norway and Swiss deals are effectively the same, you really are showing your ignorance of the situation. Even on this very thread, we've shown that Switzerland pays a fraction of the membership fees.Flightpath said:
Talking about a bilateral trade agreement is of course totally bogus. And in the context of dealing the the EU we would hardly expect a different deal to Norway and the plain fact is that the Swiss deals are effectively the same.rcs1000 said:
That is true. However, I think you and I both know that if the vote was AV with the options of EU, EEA, and totally outside the European framework, then EEA would win by a landslide.Socrates said:
Norway is in the EEA, a status that UKIP do not advocate. UKIP's position is a bilateral trade agreement, which applies to Switzerland, Mexico, Korea and (soon) Canada. Hence they are the relevant comparisons.rcs1000 said:
Doesn't Norway pay a couple of billion euro?Socrates said:
Switzerland pays, as best as I can tell, about 530 million Swiss Francs a year to the EU budget. This is £415m, or £50 per capita. The UK pays £11bn a year on a net basis, which is about £175 per capita. There is a further £9bn (last time I checked) which we pay in and then get back in EU spending, such as farm subsidies to agrobusiness. That would also be better spent on the NHS.MarkHopkins said:Nigel Farage: "An extra £3bn a year for the NHS, funded out of the fact that we will not be paying daily membership fees to the European Union"
Is this true? Can we just opt out of the EU and use the money for ourselves?
Or will we end up paying as much to be able to trade with the EU?
Or since they need to trade with us just as much, will it not cost us anything to access the EU market?
Non-partisan answers appreciated.
Mexico and South Korea, who also have bilateral trade deals, pay nothing. Canada, as best as I can tell, will pay nothing once that deal is signed.0 -
Don't be silly @Watcher, no one is suggesting that anyone from UKIP would sue Marf. Just the same Marf should take care; others may not be so understanding.TheWatcher said:
Farage taking pb.coms resident cartoonist to Court. That would certainly be interesting.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better take more care. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.Ishmael_X said:
It reminds me of Private Eye's Gerald Scarfe parody: "This is Mrs Thatcher. I hate her." A successful cartoon needs a bit more than that.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.0 -
It does look as if a few Kippers are whining about free speech, and satirical cartoons, doesn't it.LogicalSong said:
Well, they shouldn't cause problems. They generally make a point with an element of truth, sometimes through exaggeration as Marf has done here.GeoffM said:
Good point, well made. Cartoons never cause problems.LogicalSong said:
It's a cartoon.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better watch out. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
I hope you're not condoning anybody causing 'problems' over cartoons.0 -
Exit Polls - ASIPM or should that be landslide PM0
-
Respect deselected him ................MP_SE said:
As I understand it Bashir failed to attend a meeting on the 20th January to explain himself. On the 23rd January he meets with Cameron. The 24th UKIP suspend him and he then defects.Stark_Dawning said:An usually brutal cartoon from Marf. It's curious that UKIP have deviated wildly from the usual approach to handling defections: namely, state that, while you think the defector is misguided, you respect his decision and let's move on. Heaping no end of opprobrium and slander upon the man is unusual. I suspect UKIP, and Farage in particular, were stung considerably by this: if you genuinely think your movement is epochal and worthy of a chapter in the history of civilization, then a defection will shake your understanding of the universality to its core. (If UKIP don't gain many MPs in May then I fear for their psychological well being.)
It looks a case of he jumped before he was pushed.
Michael Green's interview today spoke volumes. Interesting there are no tweets on the Conservative's or Dave's twitter account welcoming him back to the party.
This has the potential to cause further embarrassment to the Tories depending on the outcome of the evidence handed over to the police.
Apparently Respect de-selected him before he joined UKIP over reputational concerns.
http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
UKIP selected him .................
Conservatives welcomed him ..............
Hmmmm. Not sure I'd "welcome" him. Doesn't strike me as a poster boy!0 -
Yes, that's a good point. The cheerleaders and journeymen within the lower echelons of UKIP seem extremely relaxed. But that's easily explained: to their minds, if you turn against Farage you are, of necessity, morally and intellectually degenerate and at once become a non-person. To them, Farage is without enemies - no one worthy of consideration can be his enemy. (It must be a reassuring place to be, but somehow a little strange.)Luckyguy1983 said:
On the contrary, it seems to have upset Conservatives a lot more. I suppose when you think you've got a juicy defection and it turns out you've got a live grenade, you're going to be a little tired and emotional. Perhaps they could try to convince people they have governed well or the past 5 years instead.Stark_Dawning said:An usually brutal cartoon from Marf. It's curious that UKIP have deviated wildly from the usual approach to handling defections: namely, state that, while you think the defector is misguided, you respect his decision and let's move on. Heaping no end of opprobrium and slander upon the man is unusual. I suspect UKIP, and Farage in particular, were stung considerably by this: if you genuinely think your movement is epochal and worthy of a chapter in the history of civilization, then a defection will shake your understanding of the universality to its core. (If UKIP don't gain many MPs in May then I fear for their psychological well being.)
0 -
It all depends I think on what our relationship with the EU would be after we left, the two main positions being as a member of EFTA and therefore of the EEA or being outside the system entirely as an independent trading partner.MarkHopkins said:Nigel Farage: "An extra £3bn a year for the NHS, funded out of the fact that we will not be paying daily membership fees to the European Union"
Is this true? Can we just opt out of the EU and use the money for ourselves?
Or will we end up paying as much to be able to trade with the EU?
Or since they need to trade with us just as much, will it not cost us anything to access the EU market?
Non-partisan answers appreciated.
Our net contribution (after both rebate and whatever we get back in schemes/grants etc) to the EU in the latest figures is £11.3 billion. This is where Charles is wrong in his claims that we would have to find money to replace things like CAP. Even if we replaced every single penny we get back from the EU with money direct from the Treasury and made no changes to any grants etc we would still be £11.3 billion better off on the 2013 figures - which of course will be increasing after the latest claims against us at the end of last year.
But if we were to be a member of the EEA then we would still have to make some form of contribution under the EFTA-EU agreement to pay for the running of the bloc. For Norway this is about £200 million a year. Assuming payment based upon population the UKs contribution would be about £2.4 billion. The EFTA countries also make a contribution to European cohesion programmes. The total payment over the last 20 years for the whole of EFTA has been about £2.5 billion - so an additional £125 million a year.
Of course if we were outside EFTA then those payments would not apply.
But on the face of it, whether we were inside or outside EFTA it is certainly reasonable to suggest that there would be significantly more than the £3 billion that UKIP are quoting available for whatever projects might be flavour of the day.0 -
Not just a cheap shot, but completely untrue and rooted in Squareroot's inability to answer the point.TCPoliticalBetting said:
SquareRoot smearing Isam on here as a bigot is a cheap unfair shot.
One well respected Labour MP stated that the day rates for builders were cut by 50% because of Polish immigrants!
In response to the statement "There has been some impact on wages at the lower end, but it doesn't seem to have been very large."
"Not so, says John Denham, Labour MP for Southampton Itchen, who wants a more active political response to issues around immigration. Day rates in the local construction industry fell by up to 50% initially following the "arrival of a large group prepared to work casually for relatively low wages" in 2004, and fuelled a boom in labour agencies, some geared exclusively to eastern European migrants. "The sense that migration is associated with downward shift in wages is quite widespread," he says. More generally, the addition of around 15,000 people to a city of 200,000 following 2004 "meant a very big and visible change to its fabric and nature"." Guardian
What immigrants contribute is neither here nor there - it's a straightforward point that immigration suppresses wages for many (as Surbiton was happily boasting earlier).
The only thing worse than the lump of labour fallacy is the childish use to it to pretend that the labour market does not respond to a massive injection of supply, in a way which is negative for those already present.0 -
500 cases of female genital mutilation in one month in British hospitals:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/almost-500-cases-of-female-genital-mutilation-identified-in-just-one-month-in-english-hospitals-10001191.html
Isn't it great how immigration enriches our cultural practices?0 -
Gibberish, why should one defection do that? And what does "the universality" mean?Stark_Dawning said:An usually brutal cartoon from Marf. It's curious that UKIP have deviated wildly from the usual approach to handling defections: namely, state that, while you think the defector is misguided, you respect his decision and let's move on. Heaping no end of opprobrium and slander upon the man is unusual. I suspect UKIP, and Farage in particular, were stung considerably by this: if you genuinely think your movement is epochal and worthy of a chapter in the history of civilization, then a defection will shake your understanding of the universality to its core. (If UKIP don't gain many MPs in May then I fear for their psychological well being.)
I have heard much, much more robust rebuttals than what Bashir has come up with. What most surprises me is that this bloke claims he had a meeting with Cameron on Friday, which I hope DC doesn't come to regret.0 -
Farage is the one with the loose tongue - he has said things outside of parliamentary privilege.MikeK said:
Don't be silly @Watcher, no one is suggesting that anyone from UKIP would sue Marf. Just the same Marf should take care; others may not be so understanding.TheWatcher said:
Farage taking pb.coms resident cartoonist to Court. That would certainly be interesting.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better take more care. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.Ishmael_X said:
It reminds me of Private Eye's Gerald Scarfe parody: "This is Mrs Thatcher. I hate her." A successful cartoon needs a bit more than that.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
0 -
http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
??????????TCPoliticalBetting said:
Farage is the one with the loose tongue - he has said things outside of parliamentary privilege.MikeK said:
Don't be silly @Watcher, no one is suggesting that anyone from UKIP would sue Marf. Just the same Marf should take care; others may not be so understanding.TheWatcher said:
Farage taking pb.coms resident cartoonist to Court. That would certainly be interesting.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better take more care. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.Ishmael_X said:
It reminds me of Private Eye's Gerald Scarfe parody: "This is Mrs Thatcher. I hate her." A successful cartoon needs a bit more than that.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.0 -
Yes and nobody listens to you because its a straightforward lie. Most immigrants contribute more to the economy that the bigots you represent.SquareRoot said:
That's what I've been saying on here since 2011isam said:Danny565 said:Very interesting piece in this weekend's Guardian, interviewing various people who've changed allegiances since the 2010 election.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/24/-sp-big-swing-voters-changing-lanes
Labour could do a lot worse than to listen to this Lab->Kipper switcher:Now she is going to vote Ukip, and protest about one issue above all others: immigration. “I’m very concerned about the kids I teach and their futures. When I talk about British kids, the colour of their skin’s got nothing to do with it. I’ve taught in inner-city Manchester, and Oldham, where there’s a large proportion of black and Asian kids – and with second-generation immigrants, they’re often the worst affected by immigration, in terms of job opportunities. They really struggle.”
She barely pauses for breath. “I’ve always been about a fair society, and what really annoys me is metropolitan, elite, north London politicians who haven’t got a clue. They think a fair society is about being nice to ethnic minorities. And yeah, that’s lovely. But what about the working class? Labour just don’t care about the working class any more; they’ve just abandoned them. All they care about is issues: racism, feminism, gay marriage. They should get back to what the party was set up for, which is representing working people.
“Mass immigration is a capitalist tool,” she concludes. “It’s exploitation. It benefits nobody but multinational companies. Why can’t Labour see that?”
if you are a working class tradesman voting labour it's the equivalent of joining a union that offers your job to anyone who'll do it cheaper
Was the late Bob Crow a bigot as well then?0 -
Bigot! How dare you question immigration.Socrates said:500 cases of female genital mutilation in one month in British hospitals:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/almost-500-cases-of-female-genital-mutilation-identified-in-just-one-month-in-english-hospitals-10001191.html
Isn't it great how immigration enriches our cultural practices?
I wonder how many prosections will result from the 500 cases of FGM being identified. Most probably none as everyone is too scared to address the problem. Far easier to go after Page 3.
The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
0 -
Yes, the tories do seem to have been caught with their pants down on this one. Strange for a big mainstream party which is so well run and gaffe free.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
....and how quickly and fiercely Labour and Green Feminists are on the case of FGM.Socrates said:500 cases of female genital mutilation in one month in British hospitals:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/almost-500-cases-of-female-genital-mutilation-identified-in-just-one-month-in-english-hospitals-10001191.html
Isn't it great how immigration enriches our cultural practices?0 -
A two hour meeting apparently, one can only hope it didn't affect his candy crush score too badly.Ishmael_X said:
Gibberish, why should one defection do that? And what does "the universality" mean?Stark_Dawning said:An usually brutal cartoon from Marf. It's curious that UKIP have deviated wildly from the usual approach to handling defections: namely, state that, while you think the defector is misguided, you respect his decision and let's move on. Heaping no end of opprobrium and slander upon the man is unusual. I suspect UKIP, and Farage in particular, were stung considerably by this: if you genuinely think your movement is epochal and worthy of a chapter in the history of civilization, then a defection will shake your understanding of the universality to its core. (If UKIP don't gain many MPs in May then I fear for their psychological well being.)
I have heard much, much more robust rebuttals than what Bashir has come up with. What most surprises me is that this bloke claims he had a meeting with Cameron on Friday, which I hope DC doesn't come to regret.
0 -
TV stations scrolling through constituency results:
http://www.megatv.com/megaekloges2015/default.asp?catid=27270
http://webtv.nerit.gr/nerit1-live/
Official map expected to light up in next 30 mins or so, national % counted is probably about 10.0 -
Nothing reveals someone as being politically thick as when they can't comprehend the support of free speech being consistent with criticising some speech. Marf has every right to make that cartoon, and if people tried to ban her from making it I would stridently defend her. However, that doesn't change the fact that the premise of the cartoon's joke is made on a factual mistake, and she deserves criticism for that.TheWatcher said:
It does look as if a few Kippers are whining about free speech, and satirical cartoons, doesn't it.LogicalSong said:
Well, they shouldn't cause problems. They generally make a point with an element of truth, sometimes through exaggeration as Marf has done here.GeoffM said:
Good point, well made. Cartoons never cause problems.LogicalSong said:
It's a cartoon.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better watch out. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
I hope you're not condoning anybody causing 'problems' over cartoons.0 -
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
0 -
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
Blaming Cameron for another coalition item? Next you will be blaming Farage for the two day handbag tax policy of UKIP.MikeK said:
It doesn't surprise me. It has all the hallmarks of slippery, slimy, Cameron all over it.Alanbrooke said:
The student loans changes were heavily influenced by Vince Cable and other Lib Dems (under the guise of social engineering) along with that twit two brains Willetts who is a social democrat hiding inside the Conservatives. They basically upped the cost and increased the number of people excluded and increased the income level when it kicked in. Guess what? Unless there is major wage inflation the unpaid cost is going to pile up.
0 -
You misunderstood my point: replacing CAP is why we aren't £18bn better off (the gross number, IIRC) but "only" £11bnRichard_Tyndall said:
This is where Charles is wrong in his claims that we would have to find money to replace things like CAP.
I agree.Richard_Tyndall said:
But on the face of it, whether we were inside or outside EFTA it is certainly reasonable to suggest that there would be significantly more than the £3 billion that UKIP are quoting available for whatever projects might be flavour of the day.0 -
I would guess that the Tories are desperate to get one over on UKIP. This has clouded their judgement which they could come to regret. I could picture how excited Dave was at the thought of poaching an MEP. He has demonstrated extraordinarily poor judgement with a number of people now.maaarsh said:
Yes, the tories do seem to have been caught with their pants down on this one. Strange for a big mainstream party which is so well run and gaffe free.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
No doubt this is embarrassing for UKIP but perhaps more so for the Tories.
0 -
'Others' being political or religious zealots?MikeK said:
Don't be silly @Watcher, no one is suggesting that anyone from UKIP would sue Marf. Just the same Marf should take care; others may not be so understanding.TheWatcher said:
Farage taking pb.coms resident cartoonist to Court. That would certainly be interesting.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better take more care. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.Ishmael_X said:
It reminds me of Private Eye's Gerald Scarfe parody: "This is Mrs Thatcher. I hate her." A successful cartoon needs a bit more than that.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.0 -
It is the concept that the coming of UKIP is a historical inevitability, intertwined with the very fabric of human progress, the evolution of civilization and, perhaps, even the ontology of the universe itself. Of course, I'm not saying everyone in UKIP views their party from such a pinnacle, but there are many that do.Ishmael_X said:
And what does "the universality" mean?Stark_Dawning said:An usually brutal cartoon from Marf. It's curious that UKIP have deviated wildly from the usual approach to handling defections: namely, state that, while you think the defector is misguided, you respect his decision and let's move on. Heaping no end of opprobrium and slander upon the man is unusual. I suspect UKIP, and Farage in particular, were stung considerably by this: if you genuinely think your movement is epochal and worthy of a chapter in the history of civilization, then a defection will shake your understanding of the universality to its core. (If UKIP don't gain many MPs in May then I fear for their psychological well being.)
0 -
Extraordinary. If it's true that Cameron personally met with Bashir prior to the defection he must be feeling stupid now.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.0 -
Kind of stating the obvious there Socrates. Flightpath's ignorance of matters relating to the EU is legendary. He has no interest in facts, only in stating opinions as fact when he actually knows nothing about the subject. A classic Europhile in many ways.Socrates said:
So totally bogus that several nations in the world already have them with the EU. And if you really think the Norway and Swiss deals are effectively the same, you really are showing your ignorance of the situation. Even on this very thread, we've shown that Switzerland pays a fraction of the membership fees.Flightpath said:
Talking about a bilateral trade agreement is of course totally bogus. And in the context of dealing the the EU we would hardly expect a different deal to Norway and the plain fact is that the Swiss deals are effectively the same.rcs1000 said:
That is true. However, I think you and I both know that if the vote was AV with the options of EU, EEA, and totally outside the European framework, then EEA would win by a landslide.Socrates said:
Norway is in the EEA, a status that UKIP do not advocate. UKIP's position is a bilateral trade agreement, which applies to Switzerland, Mexico, Korea and (soon) Canada. Hence they are the relevant comparisons.rcs1000 said:
Doesn't Norway pay a couple of billion euro?Socrates said:
Switzerland pays, as best as I can tell, about 530 million Swiss Francs a year to the EU budget. This is £415m, or £50 per capita. The UK pays £11bn a year on a net basis, which is about £175 per capita. There is a further £9bn (last time I checked) which we pay in and then get back in EU spending, such as farm subsidies to agrobusiness. That would also be better spent on the NHS.MarkHopkins said:Nigel Farage: "An extra £3bn a year for the NHS, funded out of the fact that we will not be paying daily membership fees to the European Union"
Is this true? Can we just opt out of the EU and use the money for ourselves?
Or will we end up paying as much to be able to trade with the EU?
Or since they need to trade with us just as much, will it not cost us anything to access the EU market?
Non-partisan answers appreciated.
Mexico and South Korea, who also have bilateral trade deals, pay nothing. Canada, as best as I can tell, will pay nothing once that deal is signed.0 -
Well, the thing about the cartoon is that it isn't satirical, indeed isn't anything very much. And the point it seems to be groping towards making is a complaint about Ukip saying what it wants to say, or in other words exercising the right to free speech. So a spectacular own goal even by your standards.TheWatcher said:
It does look as if a few Kippers are whining about free speech, and satirical cartoons, doesn't it.LogicalSong said:
Well, they shouldn't cause problems. They generally make a point with an element of truth, sometimes through exaggeration as Marf has done here.GeoffM said:
Good point, well made. Cartoons never cause problems.LogicalSong said:
It's a cartoon.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better watch out. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
I hope you're not condoning anybody causing 'problems' over cartoons.
Two hours with Cammo, hey? No potential for embarrassment there, then.
0 -
Apologies Charles. I misunderstood what you were saying.Charles said:
You misunderstood my point: replacing CAP is why we aren't £18bn better off (the gross number, IIRC) but "only" £11bnRichard_Tyndall said:
This is where Charles is wrong in his claims that we would have to find money to replace things like CAP.
I agree.Richard_Tyndall said:
But on the face of it, whether we were inside or outside EFTA it is certainly reasonable to suggest that there would be significantly more than the £3 billion that UKIP are quoting available for whatever projects might be flavour of the day.
0 -
Funny guy.Socrates said:
Nothing reveals someone as being politically thick as when they can't comprehend the support of free speech being consistent with criticising some speech. Marf has every right to make that cartoon, and if people tried to ban her from making it I would stridently defend her. However, that doesn't change the fact that the premise of the cartoon's joke is made on a factual mistake, and she deserves criticism for that.TheWatcher said:
It does look as if a few Kippers are whining about free speech, and satirical cartoons, doesn't it.LogicalSong said:
Well, they shouldn't cause problems. They generally make a point with an element of truth, sometimes through exaggeration as Marf has done here.GeoffM said:
Good point, well made. Cartoons never cause problems.LogicalSong said:
It's a cartoon.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better watch out. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
I hope you're not condoning anybody causing 'problems' over cartoons.
You'd be first off the blocks if a Tory had suggested Marf should 'take care'.0 -
Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?0
-
Well, quite. It is a fascinating thing among Europhiles. Huge swathes of the metropolitan elite - and I'm including your run-of-the-mill intelligent London professional in this - are utterly convinced that the EU is an economic gain to the UK. Yet when you actually get into the details, they're revealed to know virtually nothing about it. They have come to their unshakeable opinion based entirely from hearing arguments from authority, from the likes of Goldman Sachs, Martin Sorell etc.Richard_Tyndall said:
Kind of stating the obvious there Socrates. Flightpath's ignorance of matters relating to the EU is legendary. He has no interest in facts, only in stating opinions as fact when he actually knows nothing about the subject. A classic Europhile in many ways.
I could just about understand the intellectual laziness a decade ago, but now we've got to the point where these people were shown to be completely wrong on the Eurozone, you'd hope people would start thinking for themselves.0 -
Just watching Andrew Neil's interview with Jim Murphy from this morning, interestingly, he refused to confirm that he was standing in GE2015. I think Blair McDougall has been lined up to step in should Murphy decide to pull out so he can focus on Holyrood 2016. Murphy will need to make his mind up soon.0
-
From what I understand of FGM there is no obligation for healthcare professionals to report cases of it to the police. So essentially they will treat the child but avoid reporting them to the police.rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
Surely after the Baby P fiasco there is some sort of requirement for children who have been abused to be reported to social services/police. For example, a child with broken bones consistent with abuse admitted to hospital and treated. It seems almost unbelievable that they could be discharged and no further action taken.
0 -
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
0 -
On Bashir's defection:
Tim Montgomerie ن @montie 3m3 minutes ago
@iainmartin1 i broke the news of his defection to a Tory MP yday, who reacted with: Sh*t, sh*t, sh*t, this won't end well0 -
Yes and nobody listens to you because its a straightforward lie. Most immigrants contribute more to the economy that the bigots you represent.SquareRoot said:
That's what I've been saying on here since 2011isam said:Danny565 said:Very interesting piece in this weekend's Guardian, interviewing various people who've changed allegiances since the 2010 election.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/24/-sp-big-swing-voters-changing-lanes
Labour could do a lot worse than to listen to this Lab->Kipper switcher:Now she is going to vote Ukip, and protest about one issue above all others: immigration. “I’m very concerned about the kids I teach and their futures. When I talk about British kids, the colour of their skin’s got nothing to do with it. I’ve taught in inner-city Manchester, and Oldham, where there’s a large proportion of black and Asian kids – and with second-generation immigrants, they’re often the worst affected by immigration, in terms of job opportunities. They really struggle.”
She barely pauses for breath. “I’ve always been about a fair society, and what really annoys me is metropolitan, elite, north London politicians who haven’t got a clue. They think a fair society is about being nice to ethnic minorities. And yeah, that’s lovely. But what about the working class? Labour just don’t care about the working class any more; they’ve just abandoned them. All they care about is issues: racism, feminism, gay marriage. They should get back to what the party was set up for, which is representing working people.
“Mass immigration is a capitalist tool,” she concludes. “It’s exploitation. It benefits nobody but multinational companies. Why can’t Labour see that?”
if you are a working class tradesman voting labour it's the equivalent of joining a union that offers your job to anyone who'll do it cheaper
What is a lie? English working class wages are ruined by mass immigration, the tax contribution of the immigrants is neither here nor there0 -
Ummm: there are clear long term health benefits to boys to losing their foreskins - less likely to get AIDS or other STDs, for example.JackW said:
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I don't think removing a girl's clitoris brings any such advantages.0 -
maaarsh said:
Great news in Greece - I hope they screw Germany to the ground, the sanctimonious prigs who have happily exported their unemployment and deflation to the rest of the continent whilst playing the victim.
I'm not quite so optimistic, but I think the Greeks have chosen the best of a bad lot.MP_SE said:
Hopefully it is just the start of the collapse of the EU.maaarsh said:Great news in Greece - I hope they screw Germany to the ground, the sanctimonious prigs who have happily exported their unemployment and deflation to the rest of the continent whilst playing the victim.
0 -
Why are there only about two dozen convictions for what's likely more than ten thousand children being systematically street-groomed, tortured and raped?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I'm not trying to be trite here. I know how people react when I mention this. But I just find it stunning that people can be confronted with such a huge elephant in the room, and it not to affect their understanding of how things work.0 -
There are clear health disadvantages too, which is why the NHS recommends against it. Also, the risks you describe can also be entirely avoided simply by good sexual health, which doesn't come with any of the damaging effects.rcs1000 said:
Ummm: there are clear long term health benefits to boys to losing their foreskins - less likely to get AIDS or other STDs, for example.JackW said:
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I don't think removing a girl's clitoris brings any such advantages.
That said, it's ridiculous to compare MGM with FGM. Most FGM removes all sexual function. It's a truly barbaric practice of inferior cultures.0 -
What is a lie? English working class wages are ruined by mass immigration, the tax contribution of the immigrants is neither here nor thereisam said:
Yes and nobody listens to you because its a straightforward lie. Most immigrants contribute more to the economy that the bigots you represent.SquareRoot said:
That's what I've been saying on here since 2011isam said:Danny565 said:Very interesting piece in this weekend's Guardian, interviewing various people who've changed allegiances since the 2010 election.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/24/-sp-big-swing-voters-changing-lanes
Labour could do a lot worse than to listen to this Lab->Kipper switcher:Now she is going to vote Ukip, and protest about one issue above all others: immigration. “I’m very concerned about the kids I teach and their futures. When I talk about British kids, the colour of their skin’s got nothing to do with it. I’ve taught in inner-city Manchester, and Oldham, where there’s a large proportion of black and Asian kids – and with second-generation immigrants, they’re often the worst affected by immigration, in terms of job opportunities. They really struggle.”
She barely pauses for breath. “I’ve always been about a fair society, and what really annoys me is metropolitan, elite, north London politicians who haven’t got a clue. They think a fair society is about being nice to ethnic minorities. And yeah, that’s lovely. But what about the working class? Labour just don’t care about the working class any more; they’ve just abandoned them. All they care about is issues: racism, feminism, gay marriage. They should get back to what the party was set up for, which is representing working people.
“Mass immigration is a capitalist tool,” she concludes. “It’s exploitation. It benefits nobody but multinational companies. Why can’t Labour see that?”
if you are a working class tradesman voting labour it's the equivalent of joining a union that offers your job to anyone who'll do it cheaper
I believe it was Oxford Uni's Migration Observatory who said that whilst immigration has not affected overall wages When you look at the wages of the lowest paid it has adversely affected them. So whilst those who are on middle and high incomes do not notice their salary being squeezed it is the most vulnerable in society who are impacted.0 -
I never thought of you as a complete prick ....rcs1000 said:
Ummm: there are clear long term health benefits to boys to losing their foreskins - less likely to get AIDS or other STDs, for example.JackW said:
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I don't think removing a girl's clitoris brings any such advantages.
................................................................
Off now for Burns Night .... Back by Tuesday .... probably
0 -
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.Socrates said:
Why are there only about two dozen convictions for what's likely more than ten thousand children being systematically street-groomed, tortured and raped?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I'm not trying to be trite here. I know how people react when I mention this. But I just find it stunning that people can be confronted with such a huge elephant in the room, and it not to affect their understanding of how things work.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.0 -
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
0 -
It's just you. Three or four Ukip supporters, all of them with a solid history of reasoned and reasonable political posting here, have made some fair and obvious points in response to the thread subject. No flooding, no kipper-bots (unless you'd like to identify them by posting name?)Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2756331/David-Cameron-s-fingerprints-scaremongering-Alex-Salmond-accuses-Prime-Minister-dirty-tricks-independence-campaign.html#i-6c6e406e3e9cb2de
Dr Spyn
The above link to the Daily Mail will take you to the YouGov survey which showed Salmond judged by far as the most effective campaigner in both Scotland and England.
The fact that it was published in the MAIL would tell you that it was not presented in a way favourable to Salmond. However it is the findings and it is overwhelming.0 -
Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.0 -
I think you missed the sarcasm. I'm not sure, though, because even after reading your response a few times I don't understand what you're getting at - so my apologies.LogicalSong said:
Well, they shouldn't cause problems. They generally make a point with an element of truth, sometimes through exaggeration as Marf has done here.GeoffM said:
Good point, well made. Cartoons never cause problems.LogicalSong said:
It's a cartoon.MikeK said:
I think Marf had better watch out. Nowhere did Farage say that Bashir was a terrorist. He said instead that Bashir had consorted with a well known Pakistani terrorist. A world of difference.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Sense of humour failure?Ishmael_X said:Is that even trying to be funny, or to make any kind of point?
Farage has made so many allegations he better watch out for the lawyers.
I hope you're not condoning anybody causing 'problems' over cartoons.
I'm the anything-goes free speech no restrictions on views at all bloke.0 -
I'd regard not being deprived of the possibility of ever in my life having an orgasm as a pretty clear long term health benefit, too. Extraordinary bit of whataboutery.rcs1000 said:
Ummm: there are clear long term health benefits to boys to losing their foreskins - less likely to get AIDS or other STDs, for example.JackW said:
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
I don't think removing a girl's clitoris brings any such advantages.
0 -
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
0 -
Looks like Syriza are up about 6.3% in Athens B, would imply around 36% of the national vote.
Early days, of course...0 -
UKIP position on Bashir - the guys a wrong 'un, you'd be mad to have him in your party.
Until yesterday he was their small business spokesman, a "senior" MEP from their chosen list and chief spokesman on communities
Just as well they spotted he was a wrong 'un....0 -
Um No. Next question?Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
As an aside, assuming that Bashir is not guilty of any of the accusations made against him - and I have seen no evidence to the contrary at the moment - then UKIPs attitude should be good luck and bon voyage. It is utterly ludicrous for a party whose whole premise is built upon gaining support through defections of voters, councillors and MPs from other parties to start complaining if one of their own politicians decides to go the other way.
Personally I think Bashir is wrong but that is no reason to try and claim he has some sort of 'duty' to remain with a party he no longer agrees with.0 -
Diane Shugart @dianalizia
actual results with 14% ballots counted: syriza 34.9, ND 25.9, xa 6.2, potami 5.6 potami, pasok 5.5, kke 5.3
6:51 PM - 25 Jan 2015
Syriza predicted to be 1 seat short of a majority...
https://twitter.com/publicissue/status/559422632156991489/photo/10 -
Anyone contemplating voting for the Communist Green Party at the forthcoming GE might be well advised to watch today's interview between Andrew Neill, fronting up the Sunday Politics show, and the party's leader Natalie Bennett. This should help those would-be supporters to obtain a better understanding of at least some of the party's major planks in terms of policy commitments.
The interview commences 4 minutes and 20 seconds into the following youtube piece and continues for approximately 17 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dFn8RIXOBE
Do give it a try ...... it might just take your breath away.0 -
In Rotherham, one girl handed a list of 250 men she said were guilty. I think maybe 10 have been convicted, and most got less than five years in prison. In another town (Rochdale I think) one girl gave a list of over 100 men that wasn't followed up upon. Even ignoring convictions, to date, only two towns have had full investigations into the scandal and lack of response, despite this model of abuse happening in at least 30 to date. No equivalent to Yewtree has been set up by central government, and no parliamentary inquiry is happening that focuses on the issue.rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.
I accept that convictions are hard to get in sexual abuses cases, but there's been a huge discrepancy - a HUGE discrepancy - in the difference between these cases and those of Saville et al. People are desperately trying to avoid the obvious conclusion to all this, because it clashes with centre-left orthodoxy. It is, as Al Gore would say, an "inconvenient truth".0 -
The Green position is not unreasonable. They want to decriminalise opinions, however distasteful, but participation in acts of terrorism or their preparation would be illegal. They want to abolish thoughtcrime.MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
0 -
Joining a terrorist organization is not the same as expressing an opinion in agreement with them.foxinsoxuk said:
The Green position is not unreasonable. They want to decriminalise opinions, however distasteful, but participation in acts of terrorism or their preparation would be illegal. They want to abolish thoughtcrime.MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.0 -
Too late:Socrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/25/250B26ED00000578-2925395-Ukip_have_been_rocked_by_the_defection_of_Amjad_Bashir_who-m-45_1422208956948.jpg0 -
Just watched that paragon of leftyness Channel 4 News. Almost celebrating the Greek election outcome with Paul Mason in full flow. No mention that the Greeks are probably more fkd in the short term because of this.
We then move onto a live interview with UKIP MEP Helmer. He states that the "police may become involved". Not that the papers have already been passed to the police.0 -
Welcome davedr_spyn said:
Thanks Nicola.scotslass said:Carnyx 4.39pm
Salmond finished his First Minister period -as he started it - as the most popular leader in the country. The fact that he was subjected to years of character assasination from the Telegraph and the rest of the propaganda press and shrugged it off makes it all the more remarkable, indeed probably unprecedented in modern politics.
In assesment of the referendum campaign Salmond was judged easily the most effective camapigner by people north but even more remarkably south of the border, perhaps influenced by the BBC debate which had a very large audience in England.
I hope (and believe) that the SNP have now managed to have two leaders running of tht sort of quality. However Nicola Sturgeon will come under the same sort of assault as Salmond and will have to be tough - really tough - to withstand it. I hope she will do it as successfully.0 -
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
0 -
Yeah he was rubbish for Ukip too, but the bollock dropped is parading him w Cameron and spinning it as a massive coup because this time next week I reckon your boys will be distancing themselves from him tooTCPoliticalBetting said:
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
I would be in favour. How do you define 'membership'? Is there a subscription? An AGM? Do you get a little plastic card and a badge? A bumper sticker for your tank?MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
If membership is based on what other people guess that you think or believe - then that's a very dangerous thing. People must not be judged guilty based on something they might think. They can only be guilty of actions.0 -
Tory toff shows his coloursJackW said:
Do you think Jewish and other parents will be put off mutilating the genitals of their male children too?rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.0 -
It will be interesting to see the outcome of the Westminster child abuse enquiry. I believe there are currently 3 sitting MPs and 3 Lords implicated in it.TCPoliticalBetting said:
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
0 -
Oh god you really are an insufferable bore.Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.
Let's get to the Greek elections folks. Implications of an outright Syriza victory on the money markets tomorrow? Or do you think they have already factored it in?0 -
That may turn out to be correct. In which case it will be blunders by both parties. Today though the blunder is clearly UKIPs and one they keep on repeating repeating repeating for their MEPs. Usually half are gone in each electoral cycle.isam said:
Yeah he was rubbish for Ukip too, but the bollock dropped is parading him w Cameron and spinning it as a massive coup because this time next week I reckon your boys will be distancing themselves from him tooTCPoliticalBetting said:
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.
0 -
Deselected by Respect - Sweet Jesus.0
-
Good question. What period of grace does the new Govt have?audreyanne said:
Let's get to the Greek elections folks. Implications of an outright Syriza victory on the money markets tomorrow? Or do you think they have already factored it in?Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.
0 -
Funny though how desperate the Tories are to be counting this roaster defecting to them as being positive.TCPoliticalBetting said:
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
Change membership to support. Financial support, promoting the group, recruitment, etc. Someone paying £10 a week to a front group who then funnels the money to the banned organisation would be considered "support".GeoffM said:
I would be in favour. How do you define 'membership'? Is there a subscription? An AGM? Do you get a little plastic card and a badge? A bumper sticker for your tank?MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
If membership is based on what other people guess that you think or believe - then that's a very dangerous thing. People must not be judged guilty based on something they might think. They can only be guilty of actions.
I predict the price of gold increasing due to uncertainty over the EU.audreyanne said:
Oh god you really are an insufferable bore.Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.
Let's get to the Greek elections folks. Implications of an outright Syriza victory on the money markets tomorrow? Or do you think they have already factored it in?0 -
.......and make most of the population work in cottage industries after destroying the large capitalist enterprises. The greens of course will rule us with a rod of iron from Central London, and welcome more millions of immigrants from around the world. Talk about fantasies!foxinsoxuk said:
The Green position is not unreasonable. They want to decriminalise opinions, however distasteful, but participation in acts of terrorism or their preparation would be illegal. They want to abolish thoughtcrime.MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.0 -
A lot of terrorist organisations do have formal induction ceremonies, in the same way that the Mafia does.GeoffM said:
I would be in favour. How do you define 'membership'? Is there a subscription? An AGM? Do you get a little plastic card and a badge? A bumper sticker for your tank?MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
If membership is based on what other people guess that you think or believe - then that's a very dangerous thing. People must not be judged guilty based on something they might think. They can only be guilty of actions.
0 -
I don't actually Have a dog in the UKIP defection fight but according to Sky News earlier Farrage offered him the run at a plum seat as an MP just a few days ago. Now he's always been a rotten one according to resident UKIP posters? Facing both ways at once by the looks.
Mmmmmm....0 -
No, it's not just you. A number of good posters are voting by their absence. t'll be the ruination of pb.com.Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
0 -
Difficult to get evidence "beyond reasonable doubt".rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
Doctors claim it was done for medical reasons. How do you prove otherwise?0 -
Are you're the sort of sick nasty piece of work that just hand waves away the brutal suffering of tens of thousands of children. You're truly disgusting.audreyanne said:
Oh god you really are an insufferable bore.Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.0 -
Tories are getting panickedaudreyanne said:
No, it's not just you. A number of good posters are voting by their absence. t'll be the ruination of pb.com.Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
0 -
A shame you're not one of them.audreyanne said:
No, it's not just you. A number of good posters are voting by their absence. t'll be the ruination of pb.com.Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
0 -
How very Torynigel4england said:
A shame you're not one of them.audreyanne said:
No, it's not just you. A number of good posters are voting by their absence. t'll be the ruination of pb.com.Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
0 -
To be fair, they could have whatever immigration policy they liked. With their economic plans, there wouldn't be many people jumping at the chance to move in.MikeK said:
.......and make most of the population work in cottage industries after destroying the large capitalist enterprises. The greens of course will rule us with a rod of iron from Central London, and welcome more millions of immigrants from around the world. Talk about fantasies!foxinsoxuk said:
The Green position is not unreasonable. They want to decriminalise opinions, however distasteful, but participation in acts of terrorism or their preparation would be illegal. They want to abolish thoughtcrime.MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.0 -
I do find it a little amusing that one of the accusations is there are "irregularities" related to his expenses in the European Parliament.Richard_Tyndall said:
Um No. Next question?Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
As an aside, assuming that Bashir is not guilty of any of the accusations made against him - and I have seen no evidence to the contrary at the moment - then UKIPs attitude should be good luck and bon voyage. It is utterly ludicrous for a party whose whole premise is built upon gaining support through defections of voters, councillors and MPs from other parties to start complaining if one of their own politicians decides to go the other way.
Personally I think Bashir is wrong but that is no reason to try and claim he has some sort of 'duty' to remain with a party he no longer agrees with.
It wasn't so long ago that the Kippers were insisting that they were allowances not expenses and therefore Farage's spending was beyond reproach0 -
Too too predictable a response.nigel4england said:
A shame you're not one of them.audreyanne said:
No, it's not just you. A number of good posters are voting by their absence. t'll be the ruination of pb.com.Stark_Dawning said:Is it just me of have an inordinate amount of Kipper-bots suddenly started flooding this site with posts about Mr Bashir? I can only conclude that Kip-HQ has gone into slam-the-man overdrive. Why?
I shall stick around. Fortunately this place will have an influx of new posters come the election and the kipper clowns will be put in their proper perspective i.e. around 10% give or take.0 -
Well he is all yours now, I hope he is used prominently in the election campaign just to rub our noses in it!TCPoliticalBetting said:
That may turn out to be correct. In which case it will be blunders by both parties. Today though the blunder is clearly UKIPs and one they keep on repeating repeating repeating for their MEPs. Usually half are gone in each electoral cycle.isam said:
Yeah he was rubbish for Ukip too, but the bollock dropped is parading him w Cameron and spinning it as a massive coup because this time next week I reckon your boys will be distancing themselves from him tooTCPoliticalBetting said:
So no mistake by UKIP in selecting the "wrong un" as a suitable person to occupy a UKIP MEP slot? You only lost an MEP through that set of mistakes, but heck whatever.... Any chance of UKIP learning how to select MEPs properly so they do not defect/lie/steal/get jailed?isam said:
They've dropped a proper bollock in their eagerness to get one up on UkipSocrates said:
I wonder if Cameron will start inching away from Bashir in the next few days. What are the chances they won't be photographed together again?Ishmael_X said:
LOL, just the sort of person DC should be having meetings with.MikeK said:http://www.respectparty.org/2015/01/25/bashir-was-de-selected-by-respect/
This is new to me. Bashir has quite a history it seems.0 -
Put the doctor in the dock and ask them precisely what the medical reasons were. Then get other medical experts to tear whatever answer is given apart.Charles said:
Difficult to get evidence "beyond reasonable doubt".rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
Doctors claim it was done for medical reasons. How do you prove otherwise?0 -
Haha no I'm really not but I shan't tell you why. It's just that you are so single-tracked, or rather like a record that's stuck. You are, essentially, just an insufferable old bore. Here's a test for you: spend a week posting 10 topics on which you have never previously commented. It might do you good. And it'll certainly help pb.com.Socrates said:
Are you're the sort of sick nasty piece of work that just hand waves away the brutal suffering of tens of thousands of children. You're truly disgusting.audreyanne said:
Oh god you really are an insufferable bore.Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.0 -
only just catching up. FPT, are Labour really relying on winning Southwark? Blimey!0
-
Wasn't that the reason why the CPS chose not to prosecute that case that hit the headlines six months or so ago?david_herdson said:
Put the doctor in the dock and ask them precisely what the medical reasons were. Then get other medical experts to tear whatever answer is given apart.Charles said:
Difficult to get evidence "beyond reasonable doubt".rcs1000 said:
They are clearly accessories to a crime of ABH/GBH.MP_SE said:The parents should be prosecuted. There is no way that they would be unaware of their child having their genitals mutilated.
Leaving petty political point scoring aside, why are there basically no prosecution for FGM?
I would have thought a relatively small number of prosecutions of parents would rapidly bring the practice to a stop and be electorally popular.
Doctors claim it was done for medical reasons. How do you prove otherwise?0 -
Yes looks like it doesn't it? The overnight markets are already reacting. I guess a lot depends on whether Syriza will gain an outright mandate to go cold turkey on the austerity.MP_SE said:
Change membership to support. Financial support, promoting the group, recruitment, etc. Someone paying £10 a week to a front group who then funnels the money to the banned organisation would be considered "support".GeoffM said:
I would be in favour. How do you define 'membership'? Is there a subscription? An AGM? Do you get a little plastic card and a badge? A bumper sticker for your tank?MP_SE said:
Would make some great campaign material for Labour marginals. "Vote Green if you wish to legalise membership of Al Qaeda and ISIS".Scrapheap_as_was said:Wow - just seen the Green leader's interview with Brillo.
Ouch.
I can't see many being remotely in favour of such a policy.
If membership is based on what other people guess that you think or believe - then that's a very dangerous thing. People must not be judged guilty based on something they might think. They can only be guilty of actions.
I predict the price of gold increasing due to uncertainty over the EU.audreyanne said:
Oh god you really are an insufferable bore.Socrates said:
In Rotherham,rcs1000 said:
I make the point about FGM because it can only happen with the connivance of parents, and therefore they are accessories. It should be a relatively simple matter to bring criminal proceedings against them.
The grooming cases are much harder to prosecute for many, many reasons, which some people find unwilling to accept. Firstly, the law likes to deal with individual crimes happening at definable times. With multiple abusers makes it is much harder. Secondly, many of the victims don't really want to testify, partly because they know that the court will be an arduous experience and quite a few of the victims lived at the margins of society and will have their past sexual experiences brought in as evidence.
That doesn't make the cover ups - and there were cover-ups - acceptable, nor does it make the crimes committed any less terrible. But the nature of the abuse makes it hard to secure convictions in many cases, and makes prosecutors and policemen unwilling to spend time on cases they see as likely losers.
Let's get to the Greek elections folks. Implications of an outright Syriza victory on the money markets tomorrow? Or do you think they have already factored it in?0
