The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
FYI, from Al Jazeera: in exchange for readmitting refugees from Greece to Turkey, Brussels is expected to grant Turkish citizens the right to travel to the EU's Schengen zone without a visa by end of June 2016.
We will have to see the detail I guess. It certainly going to give them an interesting conversation with Cameron after all his recent pro-Turkey flag waving and talking up their EU membership.
"So let me try and understand Mr Cameron, you support our country joining the EU, where our citizens will have freedom of movement across your borders, but you don't want our tourists to have visa free travel to the UK"
"Well, that's not really the question is it, the real question is......"
But even if they did get visa free, it would just be saving them a free tens of pounds. It's not like they are getting work permits.
I agree it's a sideshow, particularly compared to the utter car crash that is going to happen when they try and repatriate thousands of unwilling north africans from Greece to Turkey against their will, and with the world's press looking on, I mean what could possibly go wrong!
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
They will hear visa free movement for 75m people from Turkey though.
Is Europe scared of the potential for free movement of 66 million from the UK?
Now you are edging off into disingenuous nonsense. What is the difference in the standard of living between the UK and say France, not much, and hence roughly the same number of people live in each others countries. Contrast how many from the UK live in Romania, and how many Romanians live in the UK.
On average income Turkey in 28th, the UK is 5th, traffic is going to be mostly one way.
We don't have all of Somalia here, so it's unlikely we will have all of Turkey wouldn't you say, or are you just being an arse.
Tell you what, why don't you go on the doorstep and tell the voters that "only" 1m Turks have arrived in the last few years without a visa, and without the voters getting a say on the matter, see how well it goes down eh ?
Why all the wibble about 75 million Turks flooding the country?
Because no one said anything about all 75m Turks until you pulled it out of your arse to make a straw man.
Apart from here, before you interrupted.
affys said: Do the British people realise that Turkish membership of the EU is being accelerated? That 75 million Turks, and anybody who can get a Turkish passport, will soon be free to roam around Europe? claim benefits? free healthcare?
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
A senior UN official says he is very concerned that a hasty EU deal with Turkey could leave Syrian refugees unprotected and at risk of being sent back to a war zone.
“The collective expulsion of foreigners is prohibited under the European convention of human rights,” he told a news briefing in Geneva.
Just been following the #MichganPrimary tweets and Sanders might not win the vote today but he's certainly got the most fired up social media activists!
Also, virtually no noise at all from any of the GOP stables.
90 year old black women aren't on Twitter. It is Hillary who has the true "silent" majority.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
A senior UN official says he is very concerned that a hasty EU deal with Turkey could leave Syrian refugees unprotected and at risk of being sent back to a war zone.
“The collective expulsion of foreigners is prohibited under the European convention of human rights,” he told a news briefing in Geneva.
The UN, not for the first time, is getting hold of the wrong end of the stick. And that's being generous.
It is perfectly legal to deport people who have entered a country illegally, providing that the point to which they are being deported is safe and appropriate.
If Trump wins it could be very close in Michigan. Though I already envision something like Trump 36 Kasich 30 at the moment as the most likely outcome.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
A senior UN official says he is very concerned that a hasty EU deal with Turkey could leave Syrian refugees unprotected and at risk of being sent back to a war zone.
“The collective expulsion of foreigners is prohibited under the European convention of human rights,” he told a news briefing in Geneva.
How would you suggest that the EU stems the flow of migrants?
They will hear visa free movement for 75m people from Turkey though.
Is Europe scared of the potential for free movement of 66 million from the UK?
Now you are edging off into disingenuous nonsense. What is the difference in the standard of living between the UK and say France, not much, and hence roughly the same number of people live in each others countries. Contrast how many from the UK live in Romania, and how many Romanians live in the UK.
On average income Turkey in 28th, the UK is 5th, traffic is going to be mostly one way.
We don't have all of Somalia here, so it's unlikely we will have all of Turkey wouldn't you say, or are you just being an arse.
Tell you what, why don't you go on the doorstep and tell the voters that "only" 1m Turks have arrived in the last few years without a visa, and without the voters getting a say on the matter, see how well it goes down eh ?
Why all the wibble about 75 million Turks flooding the country?
Because no one said anything about all 75m Turks until you pulled it out of your arse to make a straw man.
Apart from here, before you interrupted.
affys said: Do the British people realise that Turkish membership of the EU is being accelerated? That 75 million Turks, and anybody who can get a Turkish passport, will soon be free to roam around Europe? claim benefits? free healthcare?
"the member states must unanimously agree on granting Turkey membership to the European Union." (Wikipedia)
We don't have all of Somalia here, so it's unlikely we will have all of Turkey wouldn't you say, or are you just being an arse.
Tell you what, why don't you go on the doorstep and tell the voters that "only" 1m Turks have arrived in the last few years without a visa, and without the voters getting a say on the matter, see how well it goes down eh ?
Why all the wibble about 75 million Turks flooding the country?
Because no one said anything about all 75m Turks until you pulled it out of your arse to make a straw man.
Apart from here, before you interrupted.
affys said: Do the British people realise that Turkish membership of the EU is being accelerated? That 75 million Turks, and anybody who can get a Turkish passport, will soon be free to roam around Europe? claim benefits? free healthcare?
Yes. Its completely true. They are free, they have the right. Will they all make use of it ? No. Will enough to make it a political issue ? Probably. Was starting it two weeks before the EU Referendum smart politics ...
It is surely likely, by analogy with this judgment, that the UK will lose its challenge to the Council decision regarding social security for Turkish citizens. Moreover, the Coumcil's decisions relating to social security for other associated third countries, based on Article 79, might even be legally questionable. This is because the Court's judgment today could be understood to mean that the implementation of any specific aspects of the EU's association agreements involve the use of the relevant legal base relating to internal EU law - given that, as the CJEU has always held, all association agreements aim to extend aspects of the EU's internal law to the third country concerned (Case 12/86 Demirel).
They will hear visa free movement for 75m people from Turkey though.
Is Europe scared of the potential for free movement of 66 million from the UK?
Now you are edging off into disingenuous nonsense. What is the difference in the standard of living between the UK and say France, not much, and hence roughly the same number of people live in each others countries. Contrast how many from the UK live in Romania, and how many Romanians live in the UK.
On average income Turkey in 28th, the UK is 5th, traffic is going to be mostly one way.
We don't have all of Somalia here, so it's unlikely we will have all of Turkey wouldn't you say, or are you just being an arse.
Tell you what, why don't you go on the doorstep and tell the voters that "only" 1m Turks have arrived in the last few years without a visa, and without the voters getting a say on the matter, see how well it goes down eh ?
Why all the wibble about 75 million Turks flooding the country?
Because no one said anything about all 75m Turks until you pulled it out of your arse to make a straw man.
Apart from here, before you interrupted.
affys said: Do the British people realise that Turkish membership of the EU is being accelerated? That 75 million Turks, and anybody who can get a Turkish passport, will soon be free to roam around Europe? claim benefits? free healthcare?
"the member states must unanimously agree on granting Turkey membership to the European Union." (Wikipedia)
Not going to happen any day soon.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
A senior UN official says he is very concerned that a hasty EU deal with Turkey could leave Syrian refugees unprotected and at risk of being sent back to a war zone.
“The collective expulsion of foreigners is prohibited under the European convention of human rights,” he told a news briefing in Geneva.
How would you suggest that the EU stems the flow of migrants?
It seems this is the best worst option.
I agree. I just don't see it happening. Too many frit politicians, too many hand wringers, too many cameramen with telephoto lens beaming "agonised" faces into our living rooms.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
I am not sure that was the point. It was more would Turkey get given a large chunk of the benefits of being a member either as bribes or in response to blackmail, without actually ever formally becoming a member, and hence that vote never actually occurring. The usual EU mission creep solution.
Leave is conducting the most lamentable campaign imaginable.
Of course there are risks with Brexit. No course of action is free from risk. The question is whether the advantages outweigh the risks, in the short, medium and long-term.
Moaning about the risks of staying in is necessary but not sufficient, not by a long way, simply because those advocating change must present a case, a good case, for change. People are much more likely to choose inertia by default unless both the push and the pull factors are there.
Someone on the Leave side must see this, surely.......
Would you not concede that when LEAVERS have diametrically opposed views on where we will be re immigration and free trade post BREXIT it is going to be very difficult to improve their campaign, which I agree, is lamentable.
I agree. The campaign needs taking by the scruff of the neck and being given a good shake. But this should have been done months, if not years ago.
Just as the Remain case is making no positive case for staying in the EU - and will therefore do nothing about resolving the long-standing issues between Britain and the EU - the Leave campaign, if it wins will find itself having to reconcile two broad camps: those who want to eave because of immigration and those who have other reasons for leaving and are not primarily motivated by immigration. It will take the wisdom of Solomon to do this and I don't see one on the horizon
I did actually start on the LEAVE side 6 months ago and am now 60-40 REMAIN and that is because LEAVE seems clueless as to what will actually happen if we BREXIT.
I applaud you for acknowledging the problem with the two camps as I think this is the very core of LEAVES' problem but most people sympathetic to LEAVE seem to just want to ignore it or brush it under the carpet.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
Do you really think that they will stop letting them cross the border? The most likely outcome is "we need another €6bn" give it to us now or we will export ISIS terrorists to Europe.
Apparently the drug that drugopova was taking is normally on prescribed for 4-6 weeks of use....oh and it was given to Russian troops to errh boost their endurance...
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would argue that this whole thing is only really about WHEN not WHAT. The EU is going to continue to federalise, and continue to make laws and regulations by QMV that support its federalisation. At some point in probably the next 5 years, certainly 10 years that is going to be incompatible with our status outside the Eurozone. Even if that doesn't happen there will be a new treaty ceding new powers to Brussels and there is no chance that will pass a referendum in the UK. In 5-10 years we will be out anyway. At that time the same arguments will apply, EEA or go it alone etc. So all we are doing at the moment is buying a little time. Cameron has blown his legacy and burned all his credibility and political capital trying to push water up a hill.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would argue that this whole thing is only really about WHEN not WHAT. The EU is going to continue to federalise, and continue to make laws and regulations by QMV that support its federalisation. At some point in probably the next 5 years, certainly 10 years that is going to be incompatible with our status outside the Eurozone. Even if that doesn't happen there will be a new treaty ceding new powers to Brussels and there is no chance that will pass a referendum in the UK. In 5-10 years we will be out anyway. At that time the same arguments will apply, EEA or go it alone etc. So all we are doing at the moment is buying a little time. Cameron has blown his legacy and burned all his credibility and political capital trying to push water up a hill.
What second referendum? Don't kid yourself. There won't be another.
There was no consultation with the British electorate prior to the other treaty agreements being signed.
A Remain outcome in this one, is the green light to eventual full integration.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
I am not sure that was the point. It was more would Turkey get given a large chunk of the benefits of being a member either as bribes or in response to blackmail, without actually ever formally becoming a member, and hence that vote never actually occurring. The usual EU mission creep solution.
Actually Turkey has got a lot in exchange for a deal over immigrants that they are not implementing and probably will never implement.
Remember it was just a few months ago that Turkey got this nice juicy deal from the EU to restrict immigration, of course nothing happened because there is a vested economic interest in both Turkey and Greece to continue ignoring the pleas of the EU.
Illegal immigration is big business in both countries, just think of all the money those immigrants spend in supplies, transport and bribes. I know from my sources that small local tourist agencies in Greece and Turkey have record profits, one told me something like 400 euros a day on average of profits in a small greek island, and they organize the shipments, the bribes and the supplies of refugees from the middle east to the EU. The local governments turn a blind eye because their officials are also involved in the profiteering.
Leave is conducting the most lamentable campaign imaginable.
Of course there are risks with Brexit. No course of action is free from risk. The question is whether the advantages outweigh the risks, in the short, medium and long-term.
Moaning about the risks of staying in is necessary but not sufficient, not by a long way, simply because those advocating change must present a case, a good case, for change. People are much more likely to choose inertia by default unless both the push and the pull factors are there.
Someone on the Leave side must see this, surely.......
Would you not concede that when LEAVERS have diametrically opposed views on where we will be re immigration and free trade post BREXIT it is going to be very difficult to improve their campaign, which I agree, is lamentable.
I agree. The campaign needs taking by the scruff of the neck and being given a good shake. But this should have been done months, if not years ago.
Just as the Remain case is making no positive case for staying in the EU - and will therefore do nothing about resolving the long-standing issues between Britain and the EU - the Leave campaign, if it wins will find itself having to reconcile two broad camps: those who want to eave because of immigration and those who have other reasons for leaving and are not primarily motivated by immigration. It will take the wisdom of Solomon to do this and I don't see one on the horizon
I did actually start on the LEAVE side 6 months ago and am now 60-40 REMAIN and that is because LEAVE seems clueless as to what will actually happen if we BREXIT.
I applaud you for acknowledging the problem with the two camps as I think this is the very core of LEAVES' problem but most people sympathetic to LEAVE seem to just want to ignore it or brush it under the carpet.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would suggest the campaign IS about immigration. See those young guys setting fire to camps, smashing down borders and sexually assaulting women across Europe? We don;t want them in Britain.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Apparently the drug that drugopova was taking is normally on prescribed for 4-6 weeks of use....oh and it was given to Russian troops to errh boost their endurance...
The drug was name-checked in the latest investigative documentary on Russian doping reforms by the German Hajo Seppelt on Sunday. The documentary referred to a 2015 study in which 17% of Russian athletes (724 of 4,316) tested were found to have meldonium in their system. A global study found 2.2% of athletes had it in their system.
Seems unlikely that Russian athletes have 8 times the prevalence of heart disorders compared to athletes as a whole. Especially since the indicated conditions are angina and MIs not what you would expect to find in a top flight athlete.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
I didn't realise the EU were responsible for the Equal Pay 1970... even their legislative wheezes would struggle to pass a law three years before we joined.
Even the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 appears to have been a UK law, not one proposed by Brussels.
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Your comment on Outer London is sadly true. The one thing people in Bromley and Bexley desperately don't want is for their boroughs to go the way of Croydon.
Apparently the drug that drugopova was taking is normally on prescribed for 4-6 weeks of use....oh and it was given to Russian troops to errh boost their endurance...
The drug was name-checked in the latest investigative documentary on Russian doping reforms by the German Hajo Seppelt on Sunday. The documentary referred to a 2015 study in which 17% of Russian athletes (724 of 4,316) tested were found to have meldonium in their system. A global study found 2.2% of athletes had it in their system.
Seems unlikely that Russian athletes have 8 times the prevalence of heart disorders compared to athletes as a whole. Especially since the indicated conditions are angina and MIs not what you would expect to find in a top flight athlete.
Gives us all hope, dodgy ticker, thyroid issues, etc no barrier to becoming world class athlete.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
With all due respect I think Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter is also living in the past, this is the present:
I know I said this before, but Labour seem to be completely and utterly irrelevant and anonymous regarding the whole EUref debate.
You said it before but it bears saying often. Even on eg the DP and such programmes, when they do their fast-cut montage of leavers and remainers there is simply not one Lab person.
I have only ever heard Chuka being interviewed about it.
You seriously think that Labour gets to decide when they're invited to take part? I wish.
All the programmes are essentially branches of the entertainment industry. They think that "Labour says Remain, as usual" is not entertaining, so they don't invite somebody to say it. In the referendum period, they will need to be more even-handed, but at the moment they don't think they need to bother. The Fun Story is Tory vs Tory, so that's where they're at.
You'll find that when we're wrestling over Trident, it'll be hard for the Tories to get air time, because it'll all be Labour vs Labour, and "Tories say keep it, as usual" won't be very newsworthy.
Nick, I think you had gone offline earlier when I said I talk occasionally with an ex-colleague and friend of yours, he was MP for Gloucester until the 2010 GE.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
I am not sure that was the point. It was more would Turkey get given a large chunk of the benefits of being a member either as bribes or in response to blackmail, without actually ever formally becoming a member, and hence that vote never actually occurring. The usual EU mission creep solution.
Actually Turkey has got a lot in exchange for a deal over immigrants that they are not implementing and probably will never implement.
Remember it was just a few months ago that Turkey got this nice juicy deal from the EU to restrict immigration, of course nothing happened because there is a vested economic interest in both Turkey and Greece to continue ignoring the pleas of the EU.
Illegal immigration is big business in both countries, just think of all the money those immigrants spend in supplies, transport and bribes. I know from my sources that small local tourist agencies in Greece and Turkey have record profits, one told me something like 400 euros a day on average of profits in a small greek island, and they organize the shipments, the bribes and the supplies of refugees from the middle east to the EU. The local governments turn a blind eye because their officials are also involved in the profiteering.
This notion that Turkey has "done nothing" to restrict immigration is just utterly fallacious.
Turkey has 2,688,686 Syrian refugees. Germany has 0,484,000 Syrian refugees. The UK has 0,008,792 Syrian refugees.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
I am not sure that was the point. It was more would Turkey get given a large chunk of the benefits of being a member either as bribes or in response to blackmail, without actually ever formally becoming a member, and hence that vote never actually occurring. The usual EU mission creep solution.
Actually Turkey has got a lot in exchange for a deal over immigrants that they are not implementing and probably will never implement.
Remember it was just a few months ago that Turkey got this nice juicy deal from the EU to restrict immigration, of course nothing happened because there is a vested economic interest in both Turkey and Greece to continue ignoring the pleas of the EU.
Illegal immigration is big business in both countries, just think of all the money those immigrants spend in supplies, transport and bribes. I know from my sources that small local tourist agencies in Greece and Turkey have record profits, one told me something like 400 euros a day on average of profits in a small greek island, and they organize the shipments, the bribes and the supplies of refugees from the middle east to the EU. The local governments turn a blind eye because their officials are also involved in the profiteering.
This notion that Turkey has "done nothing" to restrict immigration is just utterly fallacious.
Turkey has 2,688,686 Syrian refugees. Germany has 0,484,000 Syrian refugees. The UK has 0,008,792 Syrian refugees.
And how many non-Syrian "refugees" have Turkey allowed to cross into Europe? The issue isn't Syrians, most would agree that we should help those in need, its the chancers from other countries taking advantage of the situation that are more likely to make the crossing that Turkey are allowing to cross over with impunity.
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Depressing if true. People fleeing Labour run crime-ridden slums but continuing the voting behaviour that causes crime-ridden slums.
I applaud you for acknowledging the problem with the two camps as I think this is the very core of LEAVES' problem but most people sympathetic to LEAVE seem to just want to ignore it or brush it under the carpet.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
It has always seemed to me that some of the issues with immigration e.g. people coming for benefits without making a contribution is stuff that is linked to our welfare system and therefore rather more within our control than we are prepared to admit. Similarly, some of the Swiss rules on illegal working - which @rcs100 has described - would probably help, if we were to adopt and enforce them. There needs to be more honesty on that.
Immigration from outside the EU is more in our control. Immigration from the troubled Middle East through other European countries is a very difficult matter. The various refugee/asylum conventions need tearing up and starting again and, if we are serious about stemming the tide, we need to be utterly hard-hearted about turning people away, rather than making policy up on the basis of TV pictures.
There is certainly some more control over immigration were we to leave, even with full access to the single market, but far far less than some want. The Leave campaign need to be honest about this and should, IMO, be making more of the other advantages which a Brexit might bring Britain.
Given that immigration cannot be stopped completely, the four issues that need addressing (and aren't - by anybody, frankly, as far as I can see) are:-
1. Getting people's consent to the immigration that we do and likely will have. 2. Control over the type (both on an individual and category level) of immigrants we allow in - bluntly, being able to exclude those from communities/countries where we know - from experience - or suspect are the least likely to integrate and the least likely to be a benefit to us. 3. An effective means of getting rid of those who abuse our hospitality. 4. A recognition that (a) there are costs of immigration; (b) those costs are not borne fairly; and (c) those who bear the costs need to be handsomely compensated i.e. there must be effective mitigation so that the burdens as well as the advantages are fairly shared.
Apparently the drug that drugopova was taking is normally on prescribed for 4-6 weeks of use....oh and it was given to Russian troops to errh boost their endurance...
The drug was name-checked in the latest investigative documentary on Russian doping reforms by the German Hajo Seppelt on Sunday. The documentary referred to a 2015 study in which 17% of Russian athletes (724 of 4,316) tested were found to have meldonium in their system. A global study found 2.2% of athletes had it in their system.
Seems unlikely that Russian athletes have 8 times the prevalence of heart disorders compared to athletes as a whole. Especially since the indicated conditions are angina and MIs not what you would expect to find in a top flight athlete.
Gives us all hope, dodgy ticker, thyroid issues, etc no barrier to becoming world class athlete.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
I hate to imagine my great grandchildren being able to speak for me.
Leave is conducting the most lamentable campaign imaginable.
Of course there are risks with Brexit. No course of action is free from risk. The question is whether the advantages outweigh the risks, in the short, medium and long-term.
Moaning about the risks of staying in is necessary but not sufficient, not by a long way, simply because those advocating change must present a case, a good case, for change. People are much more likely to choose inertia by default unless both the push and the pull factors are there.
Someone on the Leave side must see this, surely.......
Would you not concede that when LEAVERS have diametrically opposed views on where we will be re immigration and free trade post BREXIT it is going to be very difficult to improve their campaign, which I agree, is lamentable.
I agree. The campaign needs taking by the scruff of the neck and being given a good shake. But this should have been done months, if not years ago.
Just as the Remain case is making no positive case for staying in the EU - and will therefore do nothing about resolving the long-standing issues between Britain and the EU - the Leave campaign, if it wins will find itself having to reconcile two broad camps: those who want to eave because of immigration and those who have other reasons for leaving and are not primarily motivated by immigration. It will take the wisdom of Solomon to do this and I don't see one on the horizon
I did actually start on the LEAVE side 6 months ago and am now 60-40 REMAIN and that is because LEAVE seems clueless as to what will actually happen if we BREXIT.
I applaud you for acknowledging the problem with the two camps as I think this is the very core of LEAVES' problem but most people sympathetic to LEAVE seem to just want to ignore it or brush it under the carpet.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would suggest the campaign IS about immigration. See those young guys setting fire to camps, smashing down borders and sexually assaulting women across Europe? We don;t want them in Britain.
That is the crux of it.
Those people specifically are unlikely to arrive in the UK I presume you mean you don't want to live near Muslims in general Might be more honest to say so
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
I doubt if Emmeline Pankhurst's great-granddaughter would have a clue what side of the debate her ancestor would have been on. Most UK equality law predates EU Directives, though.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would argue that this whole thing is only really about WHEN not WHAT. The EU is going to continue to federalise, and continue to make laws and regulations by QMV that support its federalisation. At some point in probably the next 5 years, certainly 10 years that is going to be incompatible with our status outside the Eurozone. Even if that doesn't happen there will be a new treaty ceding new powers to Brussels and there is no chance that will pass a referendum in the UK. In 5-10 years we will be out anyway. At that time the same arguments will apply, EEA or go it alone etc. So all we are doing at the moment is buying a little time. Cameron has blown his legacy and burned all his credibility and political capital trying to push water up a hill.
What second referendum? Don't kid yourself. There won't be another.
There was no consultation with the British electorate prior to the other treaty agreements being signed.
A Remain outcome in this one, is the green light to eventual full integration.
Yes I know the referendum-lock is a farce, but we live in hope
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Depressing if true. People fleeing Labour run crime-ridden slums but continuing the voting behaviour that causes crime-ridden slums.
Go on, indulge us, how does having a Labour MP cause crime after six years of Conservative government
'And how many non-Syrian "refugees" have Turkey allowed to cross into Europe? The issue isn't Syrians, most would agree that we should help those in need, its the chancers from other countries taking advantage of the situation that are more likely to make the crossing that Turkey are allowing to cross over with impunity.'
Exactly, in 2015 1.2 million 'asylum' seekers entered the EU of which 29% were from Syria.
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Depressing if true. People fleeing Labour run crime-ridden slums but continuing the voting behaviour that causes crime-ridden slums.
Go on, indulge us, how does having a Labour MP cause crime after six years of Conservative government
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
I doubt if Emmeline Pankhurst's great-granddaughter would have a clue what side of the debate her ancestor would have been on. .
No kidding. A lot of people don't have a clue what side their living relatives might end up on with a particular debate, let alone one they will have had no experience or knowledge of.
And in all honesty, whatever the merits of supporting Remain on that basis, I really don't know why it has more weight coming from a relative that far removed, even if one does accept the idea the child of someone famous saying what their parent would think has some relevance.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
The benign munificence of the EU is a pretty standard centre-left shibboleth.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
Do you really think that they will stop letting them cross the border? The most likely outcome is "we need another €6bn" give it to us now or we will export ISIS terrorists to Europe.
Turkey can do more to bring peace to Syria than our intermittent bombing jaunts. They are in NATO and deserve our support. It is good news that the ceasefire is mostly holding. Peace in Syria is the best hope of stemming the eefugee crisis.
Never going to happen while Cyprus is a member of the EU.
I am not sure that was the point. It was more would Turkey get given a large chunk of the benefits of being a member either as bribes or in response to blackmail, without actually ever formally becoming a member, and hence that vote never actually occurring. The usual EU mission creep solution.
Actually Turkey has got a lot in exchange for a deal over immigrants that they are not implementing and probably will never implement.
Remember it was just a few months ago that Turkey got this nice juicy deal from the EU to restrict immigration, of course nothing happened because there is a vested economic interest in both Turkey and Greece to continue ignoring the pleas of the EU.
Illegal immigration is big business in both countries, just think of all the money those immigrants spend in supplies, transport and bribes. I know from my sources that small local tourist agencies in Greece and Turkey have record profits, one told me something like 400 euros a day on average of profits in a small greek island, and they organize the shipments, the bribes and the supplies of refugees from the middle east to the EU. The local governments turn a blind eye because their officials are also involved in the profiteering.
This notion that Turkey has "done nothing" to restrict immigration is just utterly fallacious.
Turkey has 2,688,686 Syrian refugees. Germany has 0,484,000 Syrian refugees. The UK has 0,008,792 Syrian refugees.
And how many non-Syrian "refugees" have Turkey allowed to cross into Europe? The issue isn't Syrians, most would agree that we should help those in need, its the chancers from other countries taking advantage of the situation that are more likely to make the crossing that Turkey are allowing to cross over with impunity.
No they're not. For one thing just ponder why people are drowning to get into Europe from Turkey when Turkey has a land border with Greece? Why aren't people trying harder to get across by land instead of sea which you'd assume woild be far safer?
Because Turkey are making it hard to get across by land so people are trying to cheat security by going over water instead.
''Those people specifically are unlikely to arrive in the UK I presume you mean you don't want to live near Muslims in general Might be more honest to say so ''
Dahling, your shutting down of debate by screaming Waaayyyyycccciiiissstt is SO last decade.
I am not keen on desperate, uneducated, violent, sexist, criminal young men coming to our country in droves.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
The benign munificence of the EU is a pretty standard centre-left shibboleth.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
Mississippi 1 AM GMT (Trump and Cruz are favourites) Most of Michigan 1 AM GMT, rest at 2 AM GMT (Trump and Kasich are favourites) Most of Idaho at 3 AM GMT, rest at 4 AM GMT (Most likely a Cruz victory) Hawaii from 4 AM to 6 AM GMT (No one knows).
There are exit polls this time for Michigan and Mississippi, but expect the usual leaks starting at around 1 hour before polls close.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
The benign munificence of the EU is a pretty standard centre-left shibboleth.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
Ironic that what the state should do is exactly what it can't do whilst we remain in the EU, whilst it facilitates the state doing ever more of what it should not.
The Turkey deal looks like a desperate, out of touch rotten ruling class trying anything, anything, to preserve itself.
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is about. The EU, including us, pays Turkey to house refugees instead of them turning a blind eye to then crossing their borders.
Do you really think that they will stop letting them cross the border? The most likely outcome is "we need another €6bn" give it to us now or we will export ISIS terrorists to Europe.
Turkey can do more to bring peace to Syria than our intermittent bombing jaunts. They are in NATO and deserve our support. It is good news that the ceasefire is mostly holding. Peace in Syria is the best hope of stemming the eefugee crisis.
Indeed, although I'd add Iraq as well.
IMO one of the biggest missed opportunities in this whole mess was the breakdown of the 'Solution Process' peace deal between various Kurdish groups (AIUI not just the PKK) and the central Turkish government. It held for a couple of years, and according to some reports trust was being gained. Then it broke down, with some on both sides wanting it to break down.
That's already causing problems, and will cause more in the future.
Mississippi 1 AM GMT (Trump and Cruz are favourites) Most of Michigan 1 AM GMT, rest at 2 AM GMT (Trump and Kasich are favourites) Most of Idaho at 3 AM GMT, rest at 4 AM GMT (Most likely a Cruz victory) Hawaii from 4 AM to 6 AM GMT (No one knows).
There are exit polls this time for Michigan and Mississippi, but expect the usual leaks starting at around 1 hour before polls close.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
The National Health Service doesn't, and has never provided for our health. It provides treatment in the instance of sickness. Which is an important thing, but nonetheless the distinction should be made, because the NHS a total misnomer that sums up what has gone wrong with public health in this country.
After WWII, there were severe problems with the national diet, based around the distortion in farming priorities and methods wrought by the 'War ag'. What was needed was a genuine movement toward 'National Health' based on richly mineralised soils and well-husbanded animals on mixed farms. What we got was a bunch of people obsessed with curing all ills with magic bullets. And that's what we've had ever since. That's socialism. Don't make people wealthy, make them dependent on you for handouts. Don't make people healthy, make them dependent on you for treatment of their sickness. As a nation, we have been undermined and destroyed by socialism. They ALWAYS get it wrong, they always ruin people's lives, and they NEVER apologise.
Immigration from outside the EU is more in our control
Yes it's notable the government has really shied away from taking measures that could seriously reduce non-EU immigration.
They can't do a lot about most of it.
There is no way to stop foreign partners/family coming over even if it was desirable on humanitarian grounds, it would fall in seconds on a challenge using Article 8. Current attempt to make it hard are being worked around using the Surinder Singh route which has been confirmed as lawful by the ECJ - so no chance.
We don't want to stop foreign students, they make us lots of money.
We should want to stop failed asylum claimants from staying after their appeals have been exhausted, especially as they mostly come from the sort of places (ie ex-warzones) that would make them a very poor chance to integrate. However our record here is piss-poor, less than 6% of failures in an average year get deported, also by the time the appeals are done they have a wife and probably a kid, and are fireproof again because of Article 8.
Its almost impossible to do anything meaningful about immigration while we are signed up to to the ECHR.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
:shock:
My benefit of the doubt clearly wasn't merited. I guess this is the consequence of top CCHQ people being seconded to BSE.
Vote Leave is meant to be the more professional campaign. Doesn't look good
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
:shock:
My benefit of the doubt clearly wasn't merited. I guess this is the consequence of top CCHQ people being seconded to BSE.
Vote Leave is meant to be the more professional campaign. Doesn't look good
Vote Leave remind me of the early 1990s Alan Sked era UKIP, when it was run by academics who thought the intellectual purity and superiority of their arguments was enough, and that strategy and campaigning was sort of both unnecessary and beneath them.
Mississippi 1 AM GMT (Trump and Cruz are favourites) Most of Michigan 1 AM GMT, rest at 2 AM GMT (Trump and Kasich are favourites) Most of Idaho at 3 AM GMT, rest at 4 AM GMT (Most likely a Cruz victory) Hawaii from 4 AM to 6 AM GMT (No one knows).
There are exit polls this time for Michigan and Mississippi, but expect the usual leaks starting at around 1 hour before polls close.
What about your usual ramping?
Well if the trajectory of Saturday is replicated today , Trump should win Michigan and Mississippi by small margins, but I don't think he beats Cruz in Idaho.
For those betting on Florida, early voting is producing at least some signs:
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
:shock:
My benefit of the doubt clearly wasn't merited. I guess this is the consequence of top CCHQ people being seconded to BSE.
Vote Leave is meant to be the more professional campaign. Doesn't look good
I even suggested to Vote Leave they could explain via a guest thread why they should be the Lead Out campaign.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Vote Leave remind me of the early 1990s Alan Sked era UKIP, when it was run by academics who thought the intellectual purity and superiority of their arguments was enough, and that strategy and campaigning was sort of both unnecessary and beneath them.
Well they always used to win the debate after dinner over port and cigars without campaigning, shouldn't be necessary, or even allowed
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
:shock:
My benefit of the doubt clearly wasn't merited. I guess this is the consequence of top CCHQ people being seconded to BSE.
Vote Leave is meant to be the more professional campaign. Doesn't look good
I even suggested to Vote Leave they could explain via a guest thread why they should be the Lead Out campaign.
Nothing.
Whereas BSE took me out to lunch.
They won't be getting any more of my money unless they sort them-f-ing-selves out.
On the Mayoral poll Khan leads 37% to Zac's 25% in inner London but in Outer London Khan and Zac are tied on 27% each
I don't recall the exact figures, but IIRC the Inner London figures are nothing special but Outer London has swung to Labour. That corresponds with what I've heard, partly for demographic reasons - Labour voters moving out from the centre. A friend in Redbridge tells me he's running a weekly Labour phone bank there and getting good responses.
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Indeed, if Zac is to have a chance he must sweep the suburbs as Boris did not be level pegging with Khan as he is here, especially as Khan has a big lead in inner London
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Yes contacted them via an intermediary who works for them. Nothing there too.
Vote Leave remind me of the early 1990s Alan Sked era UKIP, when it was run by academics who thought the intellectual purity and superiority of their arguments was enough, and that strategy and campaigning was sort of both unnecessary and beneath them.
Well they always used to win the debate after dinner over port and cigars without campaigning, shouldn't be necessary, or even allowed
I did tell Matthew Elliot I thought he'd brought a knife to a gun fight. Perhaps he didn't like that.
The problem for Leave is that they are treating this as an internal Conservative Party election, or at a push, internal to the Conservative Party and those who think they would support the Conservative Party if they hadn't betrayed them on the EU. Effectively they can secure an overwhelming victory among their targeted electorate and still lose the vote. Although the cynic might say that is exactly what they really want.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
The National Health Service doesn't, and has never provided for our health. It provides treatment in the instance of sickness. Which is an important thing, but nonetheless the distinction should be made, because the NHS a total misnomer that sums up what has gone wrong with public health in this country.
After WWII, there were severe problems with the national diet, based around the distortion in farming priorities and methods wrought by the 'War ag'. What was needed was a genuine movement toward 'National Health' based on richly mineralised soils and well-husbanded animals on mixed farms. What we got was a bunch of people obsessed with curing all ills with magic bullets. And that's what we've had ever since. That's socialism. Don't make people wealthy, make them dependent on you for handouts. Don't make people healthy, make them dependent on you for treatment of their sickness. As a nation, we have been undermined and destroyed by socialism. They ALWAYS get it wrong, they always ruin people's lives, and they NEVER apologise.
I'm not sure I agree with that. Many of the public health initiatives such as childhood inoculations, good maternity care have done a great deal to improve the nation's health. Good diet is a part of good health but not the only thing that's needed.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Yes contacted them via an intermediary who works for them. Nothing there too.
Not so much as a Wetherspoons Sunday lunch in a Yorkshire pudding.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Yes contacted them via an intermediary who works for them. Nothing there too.
If you're in Birmingham I'll offer to do the same.
SeanT. Much though I like your writing, there are one or two points in your last posting with which I'd quarrel. The burqi is arguably Muslim, although in my lifetime it was mandatory upon women to wear a hat in Church. FGM isn't; Bangladeshis and Indonesians for example have, I understand, the same view that we ... post Christian westerners .... do. Cousin marriage is Indian subcontinent, Hindus as well as Muslim. I can't think of a cutlure where "endemic rape" is sanctioned. You might, for example, think about what happened in Berlin in 1945.
How's Bhutan? On my bucket list,although I'm not optimistic about getting there.
The problem for Leave is that they are treating this as an internal Conservative Party election, or at a push, internal to the Conservative Party and those who think they would support the Conservative Party if they hadn't betrayed them on the EU. Effectively they can secure an overwhelming victory among their targeted electorate and still lose the vote. Although the cynic might say that is exactly what they really want.
Those who vote Leave will do it in spite of the Leave campaign/campaigns not because of them.
The problem for Leave is that they are treating this as an internal Conservative Party election, or at a push, internal to the Conservative Party and those who think they would support the Conservative Party if they hadn't betrayed them on the EU. Effectively they can secure an overwhelming victory among their targeted electorate and still lose the vote. Although the cynic might say that is exactly what they really want.
Those who vote Leave will do it in spite of the Leave campaign/campaigns not because of them.
Leave is conducting the most lamentable campaign imaginable.
Of course there are risks with Brexit. No course of action is free from risk. The question is whether the advantages outweigh the risks, in the short, medium and long-term.
Moaning about the risks of staying in is necessary but not sufficient, not by a long way, simply because those advocating change must present a case, a good case, for change. People are much more likely to choose inertia by default unless both the push and the pull factors are there.
Someone on the Leave side must see this, surely.......
Would you not concede that when LEAVERS have diametrically opposed views on where we will be re immigration and free trade post BREXIT it is going to be very difficult to improve their campaign, which I agree, is lamentable.
I agree. T immigration and those who have other reasons for leaving and are not primarily motivated by immigration. It will take the wisdom of Solomon to do this and I don't see one on the horizon
I did actuerious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
I would suggest the campaign IS about immigration. See those young guys setting fire to camps, smashing down borders and sexually assaulting women across Europe? We don;t want them in Britain.
That is the crux of it.
Those people specifically are unlikely to arrive in the UK I presume you mean you don't want to live near Muslims in general Might be more honest to say so
Given the fundamentalist psychosis now gripping global Islam, along with all the other social problems attached to Islam, from the burqa to FGM to cousin marriage to endemic rape to anti-west terrorism, it is safe to say Muslim immigration into Europe has been an unqualified disaster.
It should therefore end now. And we should be seeking ways to REVERSE the flow, i.e. to actively reduce Muslim populations in Europe.
If they want to live in the 13th century, then they can go do that, in some flyblown 13th century toilet, east of here.
I do not believe Islam has a future in the West, in its present state of madness. This will either be sorted democratically, or undemocratically. This has nothing to do with race. We are facing a global religion which has reverted to primeval Nazism.
But is it Islam, or is it just what any potent, committed ideology would produce in a weakened and what would have been termed decadent host? Is it the people pushing, or is the open door they're pushing at to be blamed? Personally I think the latter.
The problem for Leave is that they are treating this as an internal Conservative Party election, or at a push, internal to the Conservative Party and those who think they would support the Conservative Party if they hadn't betrayed them on the EU. Effectively they can secure an overwhelming victory among their targeted electorate and still lose the vote. Although the cynic might say that is exactly what they really want.
Those who vote Leave will do it in spite of the Leave campaign/campaigns not because of them.
Yes. Other than the generic sovereignty appeals, I find much of the Leave campaign, such as it is, focusing on things I do not care about, like immigration (though that is understandable) or just pretty crappy as campaigns go.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Yes contacted them via an intermediary who works for them. Nothing there too.
If you're in Birmingham I'll offer to do the same.
@PolhomeEditor: Gloomy pro-Brexit MP: "Without a gamechanger, I think we'll lose by at least 60-40."
I agree.
Someone who is looking for a game-changer needs to think about changing the game himself. Not waiting for something to turn up.
Has he ever thought of having a strategy, perhaps? Instead of sitting around like an extra in Waiting for Godot?
I've made my (our) thoughts known, donated and am signed up as a volunteer and delivering leaflets.
But I've heard *nothing* back and the strategic air war that Leave are fighting is fucking awful.
Casino: rather than whinging about the lack of contact, why don't you call them tomorrow?
I'm talking about Matthew Elliot.
Being brutally honest, he probably shouldn't be spending his time responding to emails from individuals on campaign strategy. If you're lucky some of your comments might resonate and influence his thinking.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
He has invited comments and questions from his donors. I responded to his invitation.
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
To reiterate Casino's point, a few weeks ago I contacted both Vote Leave and BSE for information and for the opportunity for them to contribute to PB via threads and to take part in the podcasts/TV show.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
Have you contacted Leave.Eu? Since neither side yet has the official designation, not to do so would seem to be an omission.
Yes contacted them via an intermediary who works for them. Nothing there too.
I contacted Britain Stronger in Europe and got an email back of welcome saying my details were now on their database but nothing further since, as the campaign heats up I expect there will be requests for leaflet deliveries etc. Though as my ideal result is Remain by the narrowest of margins how much I do depends on how tight the polls are....
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
The benign munificence of the EU is a pretty standard centre-left shibboleth.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
My thoughts precisely. With the additional thought that a separation of society from state is required as a check and balance against the state and for the protection of the individual. Without that separation, the barriers to totalitarianism are significantly reduced.
PS You talked about cultural differences between the Continent and Britain the other day. I think this is one of the big ones, and a reason that democracy is more stable and more deeply rooted in the UK than it is in most of the countries of continental Europe.
Emily Pankhurst's great grand daughter has refuted Patel pretty strongly saying " I believe that my great-grandmother would have been the first to champion what the EU has meant for women, including equal pay and anti-discrimination laws.”
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
The benign munificence of the EU is a pretty standard centre-left shibboleth.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
It's a mindset that thinks that something exists only if the state provides it, as if health, education, human rights could not otherwise exist. The fact that rights - human rights - could have arisen through the common law, as happened in the UK and subsequently in the US (see Locke, Paine et al) is something not really understood in much Continental philosophy and jurisprudence.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
Bravo. This is why I am still voting LEAVE (as things stand) despite being pretty sure it will impact on me (property prices) and on my country (cf Mark Carney) quite badly, in the short-medium term, economically.
In the end the English system is superior to the French, which is why so many Anglophone countries appear in the global rankings, whether you are talking about liveable cities or prosperous countries.
Mark Carney is a Goldman Sachs alum (as are most of the leaders of the world's central banks #justsaying) who has a huge interest in maintaining the status quo. Afaik his record in Canada is not great either. He may as well have internationalist establishment goon tatooed on his forehead, and I'm surprised you're taking him any more seriously than you would Juncker, Cameron, Osborne, Lagarde, Mandelson or any of the other 'regular at Davos/can't actually do their f-ing job' brigade.
SeanT. Much though I like your writing, there are one or two points in your last posting with which I'd quarrel. The burqi is arguably Muslim, although in my lifetime it was mandatory upon women to wear a hat in Church. FGM isn't; Bangladeshis and Indonesians for example have, I understand, the same view that we ... post Christian westerners .... do. Cousin marriage is Indian subcontinent, Hindus as well as Muslim. I can't think of a cutlure where "endemic rape" is sanctioned. You might, for example, think about what happened in Berlin in 1945.
How's Bhutan? On my bucket list,although I'm not optimistic about getting there.
You ask how Bhutan is? I'll tell you. Happy. One reason for this was explained by my perfectly agreeable guide Kuenzang. He said: "We have no Muslims here".
A bigot? Perhaps. Yet he looks at nearby China or India or Thailand or Burma and sees nothing but trouble or strife from Muslims.
Then there's the Malay Hindi manager of my hotel in Punakha. Yesterday. He told me he left Malaysia and says he will never go back "because the Muslims are practising apartheid" - and they are, it's called
He was open in his contempt for Islam, in its modern incarnation.
I could go on. And this is one five day trip. The entire world is reacting against Islam like an organism reacting against an invading and very dangerous cancer which is virulently metastasizing. Most sensible countries are taking severe preventive actions.
Europe, especially Britain, does nothing. This inaction will not last.
Kasich is still in the race, is polling increasingly well, and yet is still being mostly ignored. Could he pull something off in Michigan? Is there any value at the current prices? He certainly seems a bit cheap compared to a fading Rubbio or even a Trump that the RNC would love to block at the convention, or even before if possible. Thoughts?
The referendum is a mess. Leave have all the best arguments but the worst campaign. I suppose the upside is that it means a decent campaig could add ten points to Leave next time around.
Kasich is still in the race, is polling increasingly well, and yet is still being mostly ignored. Could he pull something off in Michigan? Is there any value at the current prices? He certainly seems a bit cheap compared to a fading Rubbio or even a Trump that the RNC would love to block at the convention, or even before if possible. Thoughts?
In terms of providing another twist in this bizarre contest, I hope there's something in it at least.
SeanT. Much though I like your writing, there are one or two points in your last posting with which I'd quarrel. The burqi is arguably Muslim, although in my lifetime it was mandatory upon women to wear a hat in Church. FGM isn't; Bangladeshis and Indonesians for example have, I understand, the same view that we ... post Christian westerners .... do. Cousin marriage is Indian subcontinent, Hindus as well as Muslim. I can't think of a cutlure where "endemic rape" is sanctioned. You might, for example, think about what happened in Berlin in 1945.
How's Bhutan? On my bucket list,although I'm not optimistic about getting there.
Wearing a hat or covering one's hair is not the same as the burqa. The difference is significant.
Rape occurs for lots of reasons and in lots of situations e.g. war etc. But it is unarguable I think that in much of the Middle East, where Islam is the predominant religion and culture, the approach to female sexuality is one which we in the West find distasteful, in part because we have made great strides in moving on from similar attitudes to women held here in the past. That means that there is a clash when the two views collide and it is those who are the most vulnerable - women and young women in particular - who suffer. That is wrong. A state that ignores that and that thinks that is an acceptable price to pay for some other larger goal is quite quite wrong and failing in one of its principal duties. It is entirely fair of us to say to the state: don't just hand out cards and give lessons on sexual ethics to people who are harassing women. Think about whether they should be let into the country at all. Women are not second-class citizens to be sacrificed just so that others can feel good about what they are doing to help the suffering masses. Charity begins at home.
The referendum is a mess. Leave have all the best arguments but the worst campaign. I suppose the upside is that it means a decent campaig could add ten points to Leave next time around.
Mississippi 1 AM GMT (Trump and Cruz are favourites) Most of Michigan 1 AM GMT, rest at 2 AM GMT (Trump and Kasich are favourites) Most of Idaho at 3 AM GMT, rest at 4 AM GMT (Most likely a Cruz victory) Hawaii from 4 AM to 6 AM GMT (No one knows).
There are exit polls this time for Michigan and Mississippi, but expect the usual leaks starting at around 1 hour before polls close.
I'd broadly agree with this. Trump should surely win MS, and probably MI. He may do surprisingly well in HI, with ID bringing up the rear.
If tonight is anything like that, I think Trump will have the nomination wrapped up a week tonight, provided he wins Florida...
Kasich is still in the race, is polling increasingly well, and yet is still being mostly ignored. Could he pull something off in Michigan? Is there any value at the current prices? He certainly seems a bit cheap compared to a fading Rubbio or even a Trump that the RNC would love to block at the convention, or even before if possible. Thoughts?
Comments
Never mind democratic scrutiny. Never mind voters' consent. Never mind the potential for huge social upheaval for the people we are elected to represent, or in some cases not elected to represent. We need to stay in control. We need to keep this going.
affys said:
Do the British people realise that Turkish membership of the EU is being accelerated? That 75 million Turks, and anybody who can get a Turkish passport, will soon be free to roam around Europe? claim benefits? free healthcare?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/08/un-refugee-agency-criticises-quick-fix-eu-turkey-deal
It is perfectly legal to deport people who have entered a country illegally, providing that the point to which they are being deported is safe and appropriate.
If Trump wins it could be very close in Michigan.
Though I already envision something like Trump 36 Kasich 30 at the moment as the most likely outcome.
It seems this is the best worst option.
Not going to happen any day soon.
As regards benefits... not as far fetched as you might assume, case before the ECJ at the moment.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/non-eu-benefit-claimants-and.html
It seems this is the best worst option.
I agree. I just don't see it happening. Too many frit politicians, too many hand wringers, too many cameramen with telephoto lens beaming "agonised" faces into our living rooms.
I applaud you for acknowledging the problem with the two camps as I think this is the very core of LEAVES' problem but most people sympathetic to LEAVE seem to just want to ignore it or brush it under the carpet.
With 3 months to go LEAVE is in danger of sliding into a strident and messy anti-immigrant campaign. Some of the posters on here already do LEAVE no favours IMO. Their best remain hope is that once the lead LEAVE campaign gets appointed that organisation gets a grip and provides a clear indication of what they want to happen post BREXIT. I hope that would be to join EFTA but I have serious doubts whether the UKIP tendency are going to quietly accept no change to immigration.
Germany: AfD expelled from ECR group (source: treffpunkteuropa.de). #AfD #EUCO
assuming a referendum is held. There is no guarantee of that.
Just think, if Major had granted us a referendum in 1992 we would probably not be in this nightmare now.
There was no consultation with the British electorate prior to the other treaty agreements being signed.
A Remain outcome in this one, is the green light to eventual full integration.
Remember it was just a few months ago that Turkey got this nice juicy deal from the EU to restrict immigration, of course nothing happened because there is a vested economic interest in both Turkey and Greece to continue ignoring the pleas of the EU.
Illegal immigration is big business in both countries, just think of all the money those immigrants spend in supplies, transport and bribes.
I know from my sources that small local tourist agencies in Greece and Turkey have record profits, one told me something like 400 euros a day on average of profits in a small greek island, and they organize the shipments, the bribes and the supplies of refugees from the middle east to the EU.
The local governments turn a blind eye because their officials are also involved in the profiteering.
That is the crux of it.
I bet Jenny Watson is itching to nominate GO as the official Leave campaign.
Another stunning success for the LEAVE campaign!
I think Khan is getting some of the apolitical "competent" vote - he looks more serious and focused, while Zac's campaign reminds me a bit of Labour's campaign last year - a bit of this and a bit of that, but no coherent theme.
Even the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 appears to have been a UK law, not one proposed by Brussels.
Gives us all hope, dodgy ticker, thyroid issues, etc no barrier to becoming world class athlete.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3476426/German-swimming-pool-two-migrant-sex-attacks-carried-says-forced-segregate-men-women.html
Turkey has 2,688,686 Syrian refugees.
Germany has 0,484,000 Syrian refugees.
The UK has 0,008,792 Syrian refugees.
People fleeing Labour run crime-ridden slums but continuing the voting behaviour that causes crime-ridden slums.
Immigration from outside the EU is more in our control. Immigration from the troubled Middle East through other European countries is a very difficult matter. The various refugee/asylum conventions need tearing up and starting again and, if we are serious about stemming the tide, we need to be utterly hard-hearted about turning people away, rather than making policy up on the basis of TV pictures.
There is certainly some more control over immigration were we to leave, even with full access to the single market, but far far less than some want. The Leave campaign need to be honest about this and should, IMO, be making more of the other advantages which a Brexit might bring Britain.
Given that immigration cannot be stopped completely, the four issues that need addressing (and aren't - by anybody, frankly, as far as I can see) are:-
1. Getting people's consent to the immigration that we do and likely will have.
2. Control over the type (both on an individual and category level) of immigrants we allow in - bluntly, being able to exclude those from communities/countries where we know - from experience - or suspect are the least likely to integrate and the least likely to be a benefit to us.
3. An effective means of getting rid of those who abuse our hospitality.
4. A recognition that (a) there are costs of immigration; (b) those costs are not borne fairly; and (c) those who bear the costs need to be handsomely compensated i.e. there must be effective mitigation so that the burdens as well as the advantages are fairly shared.
And its Emmeline isnt it??
I presume you mean you don't want to live near Muslims in general
Might be more honest to say so
I get response from MPs and Ministers. They are all busy.
I expect similar timely responses, as a courtesy, from those whom I donate to as well, particularly if they invite such engagement.
A "no response" is usually much less a sign of a busy person, and far more often a sign of a disorganised person.
'And how many non-Syrian "refugees" have Turkey allowed to cross into Europe? The issue isn't Syrians, most would agree that we should help those in need, its the chancers from other countries taking advantage of the situation that are more likely to make the crossing that Turkey are allowing to cross over with impunity.'
Exactly, in 2015 1.2 million 'asylum' seekers entered the EU of which 29% were from Syria.
And in all honesty, whatever the merits of supporting Remain on that basis, I really don't know why it has more weight coming from a relative that far removed, even if one does accept the idea the child of someone famous saying what their parent would think has some relevance.
It's the same sort of thinking that believes the UK had no human rights prior to the 1998 HRA, and no healthcare prior to the founding of the NHS, despite both being manifestly untrue.
Because Turkey are making it hard to get across by land so people are trying to cheat security by going over water instead.
I presume you mean you don't want to live near Muslims in general
Might be more honest to say so ''
Dahling, your shutting down of debate by screaming Waaayyyyycccciiiissstt is SO last decade.
I am not keen on desperate, uneducated, violent, sexist, criminal young men coming to our country in droves.
Of whatever religious persuasion.
It's a mindset which assumes that the state and society are one and the same. And they aren't. The more the state takes over, the greater the risk that it crowds out society and the activities of individuals and of groups who come together voluntarily (the original collective action - and a very good thing IMO).
Not everything that needs doing needs doing by the state. But what the state should do - defence against internal and external threats, control of borders - it should do well.
By doing too much, it does too much of it badly or not at all.
Mississippi 1 AM GMT (Trump and Cruz are favourites)
Most of Michigan 1 AM GMT, rest at 2 AM GMT (Trump and Kasich are favourites)
Most of Idaho at 3 AM GMT, rest at 4 AM GMT (Most likely a Cruz victory)
Hawaii from 4 AM to 6 AM GMT (No one knows).
There are exit polls this time for Michigan and Mississippi, but expect the usual leaks starting at around 1 hour before polls close.
Yes it's notable the government has really shied away from taking measures that could seriously reduce non-EU immigration.
IMO one of the biggest missed opportunities in this whole mess was the breakdown of the 'Solution Process' peace deal between various Kurdish groups (AIUI not just the PKK) and the central Turkish government. It held for a couple of years, and according to some reports trust was being gained. Then it broke down, with some on both sides wanting it to break down.
That's already causing problems, and will cause more in the future.
It was a massively wasted opportunity.
To date only one side replied (within a day) and has been in regular contact since then. The other has yet to reply.
I'll let you guess which side didn't reply.
After WWII, there were severe problems with the national diet, based around the distortion in farming priorities and methods wrought by the 'War ag'. What was needed was a genuine movement toward 'National Health' based on richly mineralised soils and well-husbanded animals on mixed farms. What we got was a bunch of people obsessed with curing all ills with magic bullets. And that's what we've had ever since. That's socialism. Don't make people wealthy, make them dependent on you for handouts. Don't make people healthy, make them dependent on you for treatment of their sickness. As a nation, we have been undermined and destroyed by socialism. They ALWAYS get it wrong, they always ruin people's lives, and they NEVER apologise.
There is no way to stop foreign partners/family coming over even if it was desirable on humanitarian grounds, it would fall in seconds on a challenge using Article 8. Current attempt to make it hard are being worked around using the Surinder Singh route which has been confirmed as lawful by the ECJ - so no chance.
We don't want to stop foreign students, they make us lots of money.
We should want to stop failed asylum claimants from staying after their appeals have been exhausted, especially as they mostly come from the sort of places (ie ex-warzones) that would make them a very poor chance to integrate. However our record here is piss-poor, less than 6% of failures in an average year get deported, also by the time the appeals are done they have a wife and probably a kid, and are fireproof again because of Article 8.
Its almost impossible to do anything meaningful about immigration while we are signed up to to the ECHR.
Vote Leave is meant to be the more professional campaign. Doesn't look good
GOP
Trump 42
Rubio 22
Cruz 17
Kasich 10
Dems
Clinton 61
Sanders 30
General Election
Trump 45
Clinton 44
Clinton 46
Cruz 44
Clinton 45
Rubio 44
http://www.mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/bn9/2016/3/7/exclusive_political__0.html#results
GOP
Trump 32
Cruz 22
Rubio 21
Kasich 18
Dems
Clinton 67
Sanders 25
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-illinois-2016-republican-president-primary-trump-cruz-rubio-kasich-met-0308-20160307-story.html
For those betting on Florida, early voting is producing at least some signs:
https://twitter.com/TheFix/status/707282970713964545
Rubio's strongest area should be Miami with all the cubans there.
Nothing.
Whereas BSE took me out to lunch.
Maybe I should have tried this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPZ6eaL3S2E
Not so much as a Wetherspoons Sunday lunch in a Yorkshire pudding.
Bit crap isn't it.
And won't ask to write a column
The burqi is arguably Muslim, although in my lifetime it was mandatory upon women to wear a hat in Church. FGM isn't; Bangladeshis and Indonesians for example have, I understand, the same view that we ... post Christian westerners .... do. Cousin marriage is Indian subcontinent, Hindus as well as Muslim.
I can't think of a cutlure where "endemic rape" is sanctioned. You might, for example, think about what happened in Berlin in 1945.
How's Bhutan? On my bucket list,although I'm not optimistic about getting there.
PS You talked about cultural differences between the Continent and Britain the other day. I think this is one of the big ones, and a reason that democracy is more stable and more deeply rooted in the UK than it is in most of the countries of continental Europe.
Boris 33%
Gove 20%
Fox 18%
Osborne 11%
May 10%
Javid 5%
Morgan 2%
Hunt 1%
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/03/boris-powers-into-a-double-digit-lead-in-our-next-party-leader-survey.html
Rape occurs for lots of reasons and in lots of situations e.g. war etc. But it is unarguable I think that in much of the Middle East, where Islam is the predominant religion and culture, the approach to female sexuality is one which we in the West find distasteful, in part because we have made great strides in moving on from similar attitudes to women held here in the past. That means that there is a clash when the two views collide and it is those who are the most vulnerable - women and young women in particular - who suffer. That is wrong. A state that ignores that and that thinks that is an acceptable price to pay for some other larger goal is quite quite wrong and failing in one of its principal duties. It is entirely fair of us to say to the state: don't just hand out cards and give lessons on sexual ethics to people who are harassing women. Think about whether they should be let into the country at all. Women are not second-class citizens to be sacrificed just so that others can feel good about what they are doing to help the suffering masses. Charity begins at home.
If tonight is anything like that, I think Trump will have the nomination wrapped up a week tonight, provided he wins Florida...