politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest PB/Polling Matters Podcast on Polling Matters –

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. F, what was government approval in Germany before Merkel went mad?

-30-33% in the Summer.

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/df533qk76i/YG-Trackers-Eurotrack.pdf

Mr. F, hmm. A significant but not Earth-shattering decline then. Yet, anyway.

Mr. Surbiton, perhaps they do. Our overseas aid budget is pretty damned large.

Edited extra bit: Mr. F, and thanks for that info.

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Yes: but it is also perfectly possible for EEA members to discriminate against non-nationals, and withhold benefits. So, in Norway - as Richard_Tyndall will attest - you are required to register with the Police, to have visible means of support, and to (IIRC) attend Norwegian lessons.

rcs1000 said:

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Yes: but it is also perfectly possible for EEA members to discriminate against non-nationals, and withhold benefits. So, in Norway - as Richard_Tyndall will attest - you are required to register with the Police, to have visible means of support, and to (IIRC) attend Norwegian lessons.

Now that's an interesting point.

On the whole, it really does look like the EEA status would be more than palatable to most of the UK.

Andy_Cooke said:

rcs1000 said:

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Yes: but it is also perfectly possible for EEA members to discriminate against non-nationals, and withhold benefits. So, in Norway - as Richard_Tyndall will attest - you are required to register with the Police, to have visible means of support, and to (IIRC) attend Norwegian lessons.

Now that's an interesting point.

On the whole, it really does look like the EEA status would be more than palatable to most of the UK.

Ironically, the most palatable option to most Brits is going to be the one that will be withheld by the politicians.

Neither VoteFarageLeave nor BetterInTheBin want EEA to be on the ballot.

Really gutted to not be making what I had hoped to be my first appearance at a PB gathering tonight - the wheels of commerce meant that I had to skip up to Edinburgh for a couple of days unplanned earlier in the week, squeezing all deadlines.

Will there be another before Xmas?

surbiton said:

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Should be in bold. Those who favour the EEA option, a perfectly valid choice, by implication , is also accepting the free movement of people.

And that is why so many of the Leave people are trying to downplay it. It is just as dishonest a position to take as the Cameron position. If they don't like the EEA option because of the implications (or lack thereof) for immigration then they should be honest about it. But because they can't bring themselves to do that they try and pretend it is a bad option with the myths about lack of control or huge payments.

rcs1000 said:

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Yes: but it is also perfectly possible for EEA members to discriminate against non-nationals, and withhold benefits. So, in Norway - as Richard_Tyndall will attest - you are required to register with the Police, to have visible means of support, and to (IIRC) attend Norwegian lessons.

It used to be 300 hours of Norwegian language and history/culture lessons but I believe it has now been doubled to 600 hours.

The Norway rules for EU/EEA migrants are here:

http://www.udi.no/en/want-to-apply/the-registration-scheme-for-eueea-nationals/?nav-veiviser=12896

They are essentially identical to ours. You register once and that's it.

I shall be there later on for a while.

Perhaps we could have a fines system for mentions of Norway?

antifrank said:

I shall be there later on for a while.

Perhaps we could have a fines system for mentions of Norway?

Devomax for Britain !

Golly, that's a great barrier and rewards the committed/integrated

Richard_Tyndall said:

rcs1000 said:

Andy_Cooke said:

runnymede said:

Good post Andy. There's no question that the EEA option is being aggressively and dishonestly rubbished by the Cameron side precisely because it is actually rather an attractive one.

They are desperate to cover up the fact that via EEA membership you essentially get all most Britons want out of 'Europe' at a lower cost and also avoiding dreadful things like the CAP, CFP, and of course the EU's slow motion takeover of our judicial and legal system.

Essentially, an honest appraisal of the EEA versus the EU position shows what a dreadful deal we have got over the years and what a relatively good one these small and supposedly powerless countries have got.

As I said before, this is all about our senior politicians and FO wanting to appear like big cheeses, hob-nobbing with the other major European leaders and looking important. It has zip to do with Britain's interests. The EU is the 'big game in town' and they want to be seen to be in the game even it means losing money hand over fist.

Thanks.
The is, however, one very significant issue - free movement of labour remains a Single Market requirement. The statement that those who want to control migration from the EU would be disappointed is completely true.

Yes: but it is also perfectly possible for EEA members to discriminate against non-nationals, and withhold benefits. So, in Norway - as Richard_Tyndall will attest - you are required to register with the Police, to have visible means of support, and to (IIRC) attend Norwegian lessons.

It used to be 300 hours of Norwegian language and history/culture lessons but I believe it has now been doubled to 600 hours.

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

MTimT said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JEO said:

From a link in the comments in that Carswell article is an interesting snippet I didn't know:

"Exports to the EU now make up just 36 per cent of the UK’s overseas trade, barely more than we sell to the Commonwealth.

Analysis of Government statistics released in October shows the true size of the EU export market is far less than the 44 per cent official total.

That figure includes goods which go via ports in Belgium and the Netherlands, which are counted as exports to the EU despite them being merely in transit and immediately shipped off to other non-EU countries."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/545174/Myth-importance-EU-trade-blown-apart-not-vital-to-Britain-economy

"That figure includes goods which go via ports in Belgium and the Netherlands, which are counted as exports to the EU despite them being merely in transit and immediately shipped off to other non-EU countries."

If the Netherlands put a tariff on goods from the UK, then the fact they were only going via the Netherlands would still be relevant. On the other hands, fewer goods would go via that route - so for comparison purposes the truth is probably between the two.

If they were being transshipped, wouldn't they go through a free port, and hence would be irrelevant to EU exports?

I'm not sure many goods are trans-shipped through Rotterdam; simply the cost of trucking it to Rotterdam would be pretty significant, and the UK has some of the most efficient container ports in the world.

TheScreamingEagles said:

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

Oh you reckon Cameron would stay on if he recommends Remain and we leave?

I think the most popular leader of a British party has a point

TheScreamingEagles said:

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

NF really is the best sleeper agent the Tories have isn't he.....

;-)

Mortimer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

NF really is the best sleeper agent the Tories have isn't he.....

;-)

No. Our top sleeper agent is Agent Corbyn.

Does Dave have a timetable for his renegotiation btw ?

Haven't seen much progress so far on the issue !

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

The Norway rules for EU/EEA migrants are here:

http://www.udi.no/en/want-to-apply/the-registration-scheme-for-eueea-nationals/?nav-veiviser=12896

They are essentially identical to ours. You register once and that's it.

I'm not sure that's true. If you read through the detail, for example, they say that people that come over as self-employed can only spend six months in the country without having a job.

That is just a statement of the EU Directive, which applies equally to EEA countries and EU countries. See a UK summary here:

www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05972.pdf

rcs1000 said:

MTimT said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

JEO said:

From a link in the comments in that Carswell article is an interesting snippet I didn't know:

"Exports to the EU now make up just 36 per cent of the UK’s overseas trade, barely more than we sell to the Commonwealth.

Analysis of Government statistics released in October shows the true size of the EU export market is far less than the 44 per cent official total.

That figure includes goods which go via ports in Belgium and the Netherlands, which are counted as exports to the EU despite them being merely in transit and immediately shipped off to other non-EU countries."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/545174/Myth-importance-EU-trade-blown-apart-not-vital-to-Britain-economy

"That figure includes goods which go via ports in Belgium and the Netherlands, which are counted as exports to the EU despite them being merely in transit and immediately shipped off to other non-EU countries."

If the Netherlands put a tariff on goods from the UK, then the fact they were only going via the Netherlands would still be relevant. On the other hands, fewer goods would go via that route - so for comparison purposes the truth is probably between the two.

If they were being transshipped, wouldn't they go through a free port, and hence would be irrelevant to EU exports?

I'm not sure many goods are trans-shipped through Rotterdam; simply the cost of trucking it to Rotterdam would be pretty significant, and the UK has some of the most efficient container ports in the world.

The ONS estimates it accounts for about 10% of total exports to the EU.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

Bloody stupid. But no more than I have come to expect from him.

I was genuinely amazed at conference how many Tory outers loathe Farage and think he is a hindrance to the cause.

Nearly as much as you.

You mean they loath me more than Farage!!!!???

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

This will get Tories behind Dave. Farage is trying to make the referendum about Dave

A Leave vote will spell the merciful end of the UK’s EU membership – and the end of a Prime Minister obsessed with putting the EU’s interests ahead of our own.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11961604/Britain-will-be-flattened-if-it-stays-in-the-EU.html

Bloody stupid. But no more than I have come to expect from him.

I was genuinely amazed at conference how many Tory outers loathe Farage and think he is a hindrance to the cause.

Nearly as much as you.

You mean they loath me more than Farage!!!!???

No one could ever loathe you Richard.

Leave needs less Farage and more the likes of you and Casino Royale.

Puke!

Dan's back

Rebellion in the House of Lords, muttering from Tory MPS - all of it means nothing as long as Corbyn leads Labour

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11963191/Nothing-George-Osborne-does-about-tax-credits-can-make-Jeremy-Corbyn-prime-minister.html

Haters gonna hate... Farage is the only leader the the general public actually like

Voters have never liked him enough to make him an MP though. I'm not really sure what is behind that.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Is it worth taking the 16/1 on Putin being Time's Person of the Year?

http://bit.ly/1kVyYIV

I'm on him for £10 at 16/1. £10 is the maximum I could get.

I backed him last year at 25/1. He was shortlisted but didn't win. With his grandmaster moves regarding Syria, Iran and Ukraine, running rings round Western leaders, I think he has a good chance. Better than 16/1.

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Larry Sabato has done a very good summary of the GOP field:

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/republicans-2016-oct-28-debate/

Particularly worth reading for anyone thinking of lumping heavily on Rubio.

What price do you make Rubio vs Clinton.

@MalcolmG Have to say I hadn't really heard of any of the stable 5 horses either.

Pulpstar, there were some real donkeys in there

Plato_Says said:

Dan's back

Rebellion in the House of Lords, muttering from Tory MPS - all of it means nothing as long as Corbyn leads Labour

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/11963191/Nothing-George-Osborne-does-about-tax-credits-can-make-Jeremy-Corbyn-prime-minister.html



He is completely correct. Osborne is in trouble over tax credits because of the damage it might do to his leadership hopes, not because it provides an opportunity for Labour. The Tories are currently in a situation where there is almost nothing they can do which will lead them to lose power in 2020.

This is a piece from the Calais camps which was written by someone who I know and trust to be honest - he's idealistic but frank about problems and worrying aspects. Whatever your views on migrants, I think you'll find it an interesting read:

https://beestonia.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/guest-post-from-peter-bone-merci-mission/#comment-5790

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi,

The CBI provide these numbers for Norway's and the UK's contributions for the EU:

Norway: €100 per capita
UK: €180 per capita

http://www.cbi.org.uk/global-future/case_study06_norway.html

It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.

That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)

The argument about whether the UK pays more or less per capita than Norway is indicative of the larger problem: pretty much everything to do with the EU is too damn complicated. There are so many ways of looking the figures that you can prove or disprove pretty much anything you like.

The cynic in me says why Norway? Norway is per capita one of the richest counties in the world. It gets no grants from the EU (other than some research stuff ) but pays a significant "voluntary" contribution to poorer EU areas. The U.K. Per capita income is much lower than Norway and it is very likely that choosing them as a comparator has understated how much money the UK would save by leaving the EU.

On the other hand those who claim that Norway really has any choice about accepting directives are kidding themselves. They have the same sort of choice that Rumsfeld once gave to Pakistan: comply or be bombed back to the Stone Age. In this case it is comply or lose access to the single market. Given the importance of the single market to Norway they have no choice at all, a point demonstrated by the fact that they have never rejected a single piece of EU nonsense.

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

People are shocked that disloyalty has consequences?

While the tax credits row is the focus of attention, the grinding wheels of Government will today get round to exacting their revenge for a previous defeat – namely on Conservative MPs who rebelled against the proposal to restrict the purdah period in the EU referendum.

ConservativeHome can reveal that today three of the rebels – Cheryl Gillan, Sir Edward Leigh and Chris Chope – will be sacked from their posts on the Council of Europe. Their roles as members of the UK delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly are decided by the Prime Minister, so it appears to be a personal punishment for their disloyalty.

http://bit.ly/1jTV3rc

It was not disloyalty. If anyone is being disloyal it is Cameron to his own party and its principles.

I am sure they expected this however. They will be well aware how petty minded and vindictive Cameron can be.

That is in no way disputing they were disloyal. It is arguing that their personal loyalty to their party leader is trumped by a higher loyalty or integrity. That may indeed be reasonable, but that doesn't mean they were not disloyal to their leader.

''Still hard to justify the 'toxic' meme when he tops the leader ratings... Maybe some peeps are in a bubble ''

Indeed. The real strength of support for UKIP in terms of crosses on ballot papers is very difficult to gauge right now.

O/T - Argentina demonstrating almost British student union levels of intolerance to free expression:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11962681/Jeremy-Clarkson-faces-three-years-in-jail-as-Argentina-reopens-Falklands-row-probe.html

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

The other pb takes a look at Call Me Dave:

http://popbitch.com/home/2015/10/29/smear-tactics/

That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.

Reading the account of the party in the newspaper extracts was when I lost any confidence in the value of the book. It seethes with so much innuendo and the suggestion about Samantha Cameron is so transparent. But it obviously is unable to make good on what it would clearly dearly love to claim.

surbiton said:

JEO said:

I'm not sure this is sustainable:

The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.

Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-population-to-rise-by-10-million-in-next-25-years-with-net-migration-accounting-for-50-a6713106.html

Great ! That is why our GDP is likely to surpass Germany's as their population is set to decline rapidly.

"Yeah, but who's gonna fly it, kid? You?"

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

The other pb takes a look at Call Me Dave:

http://popbitch.com/home/2015/10/29/smear-tactics/

That's rather good but I can't help thinking I am going to always be dependent on others having even opened that book, let alone subject it to textual analysis.

The dirt i really want dished is why Cameron ratted on Ashcroft in the first place, if indeed he really did so.

We know when asked Cameron said, "how long have you got?"

What did Ashcroft do?

JEO said:

flightpath01 said:

Barnesian said:

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi,

The CBI provide these numbers for Norway's and the UK's contributions for the EU:

Norway: €100 per capita
UK: €180 per capita

http://www.cbi.org.uk/global-future/case_study06_norway.html

It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.

That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)

The BBC gave some figures for a few years ago which squinting at the graph looked to be close to €60 per head. So you might be right. Will people appologise to Cameron? Norway may have (or had) a nice little earner from north sea oil, but it has a tiny population.
But again there are other ways of looking at it and our net contribution as a percent of income puts us bottom, the lowest contributor to the EU. Not sure how that compares with Norway, they are allegedly wealthy, high income. So on that meausre they might be below us.

People should apologise to Cameron based on your squinting of an unnamed graph from a few years ago?

It is still available if you want to search, i cannot work out how to link it from my phone. I've pointed to it in the past. Allowing for inflation and even Blairs give away it probably still works out less than Norway. Both as per capita and per income we do not come out too badly in relation to other nations.

Good evening, everyone.

Dr. Prasannan, last ever? Has Dirty Dicks been demolished?

Mr. Royale, it takes a special sort of intellectually vacant clown to see a man and his colleagues almost get stoned to death by a mob because of a number plate, and then decide jail time may be an appropriate response. For the crime of having stones flung at him.

Glad the Aussies stuffed the Argies.

JEO said:

Barnesian said:

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi,

The CBI provide these numbers for Norway's and the UK's contributions for the EU:

Norway: €100 per capita
UK: €180 per capita

http://www.cbi.org.uk/global-future/case_study06_norway.html

It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.

That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)

No, it is not gross. That's a net figure. In sterling we pay 11bn net and 19bn gross. If you divide those numbers by our population, you get about 174 pounds net and 300 gross.

Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union

Click on subnote 28 to get the EU budget.
Go to sheet year 2014.

Line 84 gives the EU expenditure on the UK i.e. what we get back. It is €7.0b.
Line 92 gives the UK National Contribution i.e. gross. That is €11.3b.

That leaves €4.3b as our net contribution.
At €1.37 to £, that is roughly £3.2b.
UK population of 64m means our net contribtuion is £50/head.

These are EU original sources. I don't know what sources you are using but I am about to leave for The Shooting Star so I will probably never find out (unless you are planning to be there).

Don't know if any of this article stands up to scrutiny (probably not) but it seems to imply that the introduction of universal credit will result in a big increase in benefit claims. Because the different benefits are being rolled in to one the result will be that every benefit that a recipient is entitled to claim will be automatically paid, whereas now many go unclaimed because the recipient doesn't know they can claim them

https://speye.wordpress.com/2015/10/27/tax-credit-cuts-will-increase-welfare-bill/

Barnesian said:

JEO said:

Barnesian said:

JEO said:

Richard_Nabavi,

The CBI provide these numbers for Norway's and the UK's contributions for the EU:

Norway: €100 per capita
UK: €180 per capita

http://www.cbi.org.uk/global-future/case_study06_norway.html

It seems very clear that Cameron's claim was simply untrue.

That UK figure of €180 per capita is gross. The net figure is nearer €80 per capita. (£60)

No, it is not gross. That's a net figure. In sterling we pay 11bn net and 19bn gross. If you divide those numbers by our population, you get about 174 pounds net and 300 gross.

Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union

Click on subnote 28 to get the EU budget.
Go to sheet year 2014.

Line 84 gives the EU expenditure on the UK i.e. what we get back. It is €7.0b.
Line 92 gives the UK National Contribution i.e. gross. That is €11.3b.

That leaves €4.3b as our net contribution.
At €1.37 to £, that is roughly £3.2b.
UK population of 64m means our net contribtuion is £50/head.

These are EU original sources. I don't know what sources you are using but I am about to leave for The Shooting Star so I will probably never find out (unless you are planning to be there).

The net figures – which take into account the UK’s rebate – show the UK’s contribution to the EU was £2.7bn in 2008, rising to £3.8bn in 2009, £7.2bn in 2010, £7.5bn in 2011, £8.5bn in 2012 and £11.3bn in 2013.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/31/britain-eu-contribution-rise-quadruple-cameron

CNN is reporting the overnights show that 15 million people saw last night's Republican debate. It was on an obscure channel most Americans have never watched and was competing against the World Series game 2. The first 2 debates got about 25 million.

For the record KC leads the Mets 2-0.

One of the moderators - Harwood - was caught in two outright lies during the debate. Firstly he denied having to correct his NY Times article on Rubio's tax plan when Rubio challenged him. After the debate he tweeted a 'correction'. Secondly he claimed the CNBC debate was always going to be 2 hours, when the fact that Trump and Carson initially refused to appear unless it was reduced from 3 to 2 hours was widely reported.

JEO said:

I'm not sure this is sustainable:

The population of Britain is to increase by almost 10 million in the next 25 years, with net migration accounting for more than half that number.

Projections released by the Office for National Statistics showed the UK population is expected to reach 74.3 million by 2039, up from an estimated 64.6 million in imd-2014.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-population-to-rise-by-10-million-in-next-25-years-with-net-migration-accounting-for-50-a6713106.html

Absolutely insane. But exactly where we are heading if we fail to get a grip on migration.