What's Italian for 'kipper? Anti-migrant stunt goes awry.
Discussion
AJS- said:
10PS
If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Farage has zero chance of wielding power and must be shrewd enough to know that. Being UKIP (because it is in essence a one man band) gives him money and public profile in return for almost no work. Think of the pub bore who now gets to be a well paid professional pub bore. Sweet deal!If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Breadvan72 said:
AJS- said:
10PS
If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Farage has zero chance of wielding power and must be shrewd enough to know that. Being UKIP (because it is in essence a one man band) gives him money and public profile in return for almost no work. Think of the pub bore who now gets to be a well paid professional pub bore. Sweet deal!If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Breadvan72 said:
WinstonWolf said:
So why are you so scared of them?
He isn't, it's just part of a fairly typical UKIP fantasy that he is. Being a 'kipper must at least involve the pleasure of a rich fantasy life, but also the constant embarrassment of having to say "all those hatey homophobes and Bongo Bongo nutters aren't really us". Upsides and downsides, I suppose.Getragdogleg said:
Breadvan72 said:
AJS- said:
10PS
If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Farage has zero chance of wielding power and must be shrewd enough to know that. Being UKIP (because it is in essence a one man band) gives him money and public profile in return for almost no work. Think of the pub bore who now gets to be a well paid professional pub bore. Sweet deal!If he's just after the money, why would he care about directing policy? Heck, join the Lib Dems if you have to. They all get the same expenses, right?
Breadvan72 said:
otolith said:
Breadvan72 said:
My work revolves to a large extent around legislation and regulations. Most of it has nothing to do with the EU, and most of it has nothing to do with Parliament. It's mostly prepared by departmental (UK) civil servants, and often badly (but that's another debate).
We are very badly misgoverned (party in power regardless), but the misgovernment happens mainly in Whitehall and Downing Street, not in Brussels, Luxembourg, or Strasbourg.
In which case, why are you sufficiently concerned about the EU's democratic deficit that you are undecided on how to vote in an in/out referendum?We are very badly misgoverned (party in power regardless), but the misgovernment happens mainly in Whitehall and Downing Street, not in Brussels, Luxembourg, or Strasbourg.
That's why at present I am a Eurofederalist who is a floating voter on whether the UK should stay in the version of the EU currently on offer.
A word on migrancy: A few years ago some Brits were up in arms about asylum seekers and assorted (mostly brown) people coming from various of the World's nasty places. Now those same Brits are up in arms about how unfair it is that (mostly brown) people can't come anymore and only dodgy East Europeans can. They said that there had been uncontrolled non EU migration (this was never true), but now they say that the non EU controls are too tough (sometimes they are) and complain of free movement within the EU, despite the fact that this was openly part of the deal when the UK joined.
A lot of the Eurosceptics complain of the EU doing things that they didn't think that it would do when they voted back in the 1970s, but they must have failed to read the documents at the time - all of the free movement stuff was on the cards from the word go. There has been some new stuff, not all of it good, since then, and some of that is worth complaining about, but free movement should not come as a surprise even to those who say they thought it was all just a trading club.
The Common Market, by the way, has never gone away - most of what the EU does is still about the Common Market.
I'm not worried about migrancy, other than the fact that the UK has different criteria for different people, and the people who could arguably contribute most are often kept out at the cost of those who's skills could and are replicated in the existing, under utilised (and undervalued) workforce. On the whole however I don't buy the UKIP line of unfettered EU migration towards these shores, there are pressure points (we know some people who used to live in Boston, Lincs who have a few tales to tell...) but on the whole we're a welcoming nation and we can accommodate migrants.
The rhetoric from UKIP on immigration really turns me off them.
However, there is an awful lot I dislike about the EU and our part in it.
We pay one of the largest contributions and yet our influence is negligible and falling.
The byzantine nature of the institution hides, I believe a lot of misfeasance, corruption and waste (not to mention the eternally unaudited accounts).
The federalist nature of the institution and the stated aims of it's (unelected and unaccountable, by and large) leaders to expand it's reach and influence and to create a homogenized 'superstate'.
There are many more concerns for me. Most of which UKIP, or rather Farage seems to share, what he says on the EU and the criticisms he levels are, for all their theatricality, accurate. No other party in British politics seems to care about the reach and influence and downright cost to the UK of membership to a club that really doesn't want us (but likes our money and friends).
So I may have to hold my nose and vote UKIP, because the more I look at the EU, the more I see influence in all the areas listed above as 'of more concern to the average voter'.
It's also interesting to me that no-one, even the most committed Europhile on here is satisfies with the EU in it's current form - every single post in support of remaining in is couched with caveats that somehow the institution has to change to be 'right' for the UK.
Newsflash: They won't be changing anytime soon, we accept that and remain, or we reject it and leave.
WinstonWolf said:
Breadvan72 said:
WinstonWolf said:
So why are you so scared of them?
He isn't, it's just part of a fairly typical UKIP fantasy that he is. Being a 'kipper must at least involve the pleasure of a rich fantasy life, but also the constant embarrassment of having to say "all those hatey homophobes and Bongo Bongo nutters aren't really us". Upsides and downsides, I suppose.Joking aside, and re internet debate in general (all pointless, of course) it sometimes makes me just a bit sad to see how ill informed people are about stuff (all stuff, not just politics) when there are so many opportunities to find stuff out. Variety of opinions is a mighty fine thing, but the basic concept of informing yourself before you express an opinion seems to be a vanishing notion. Perhaps I was just lucky in having teachers at a 1970s Compo school and a 1980s (free at the time) university who owned the biggest BS detectors ever invented and gave me a smaller version to keep when I left. It may also be a growing up before the internet thing. I don't know.
Breadvan72 said:
I deliberately said most not all. The EU has a non marginal impact on aspects of UK governance (not nearly the impact that UKIP dishonestly alleges, but an impact nonetheless), and for that reason the democratic deficit and financial inefficiency are worth being concerned about, as are the effects on the developing world of the trade barrier. I'm not worried about migrancy. Can the EU be saved by reform, or is it too late for that? I don't know. Are the economic benefits worth taking the democratic hit for? Again, I don't know.
That's why at present I am a Eurofederalist who is a floating voter on whether the UK should stay in the version of the EU currently on offer.
But not sufficiently concerned to wish to take any action likely to support the arrangement of a referendum?That's why at present I am a Eurofederalist who is a floating voter on whether the UK should stay in the version of the EU currently on offer.
Breadvan72 said:
A word on migrancy: A few years ago some Brits were up in arms about asylum seekers and assorted (mostly brown) people coming from various of the World's nasty places. Now those same Brits are up in arms about how unfair it is that (mostly brown) people can't come anymore and only dodgy East Europeans can. They said that there had been uncontrolled non EU migration (this was never true), but now they say that the non EU controls are too tough (sometimes they are) and complain of free movement within the EU, despite the fact that this was openly part of the deal when the UK joined.
A lot of the Eurosceptics complain of the EU doing things that they didn't think that it would do when they voted back in the 1970s, but they must have failed to read the documents at the time - all of the free movement stuff was on the cards from the word go. There has been some new stuff, not all of it good, since then, and some of that is worth complaining about, but free movement should not come as a surprise even to those who say they thought it was all just a trading club.
The Common Market, by the way, has never gone away - most of what the EU does is still about the Common Market.
Migration is an issue UKIP has latched onto. While it is a perfectly legitimate area of policy, in the sense that it is something which does have material effects on voters and which voters have strong and democratically unrepresented opinions on, it is something of a poisoned chalice in British politics because it has always been associated with racism. There is a knee-jerk reaction that any attempt to control migration stems from a racist or xenophobic impulse, and this is routinely used to stifle any sort of sensible debate. When people don't think that their concerns are being listened to, they don't like it. I have no doubt that there are people with positions on intra-EU migration which are rooted in xenophobia and social conservatism, however they are often also rooted in genuine self-interest. The question of whether the self-interest of UK citizens should override the self-interest of would-be migrants cuts to the core of the whole debate. A lot of the Eurosceptics complain of the EU doing things that they didn't think that it would do when they voted back in the 1970s, but they must have failed to read the documents at the time - all of the free movement stuff was on the cards from the word go. There has been some new stuff, not all of it good, since then, and some of that is worth complaining about, but free movement should not come as a surprise even to those who say they thought it was all just a trading club.
The Common Market, by the way, has never gone away - most of what the EU does is still about the Common Market.
The reason intra-EU migration has become an issue when it previously was not is simply down to enlargement and in particular enlargement into regions with significant economic divergence.
I think the existence of UKIP - and of populist parties in general - is a necessary part of the democratic process. When "populist" is "contrary to the Westminster stitch-up" it is necessary for pressure to be applied, and UKIP is performing that function. I hope they get some seats, but more than that, I hope they push the mainstream parties into listening more and dictating less.
otolith said:
Breadvan72 said:
I deliberately said most not all. The EU has a non marginal impact on aspects of UK governance (not nearly the impact that UKIP dishonestly alleges, but an impact nonetheless), and for that reason the democratic deficit and financial inefficiency are worth being concerned about, as are the effects on the developing world of the trade barrier. I'm not worried about migrancy. Can the EU be saved by reform, or is it too late for that? I don't know. Are the economic benefits worth taking the democratic hit for? Again, I don't know.
That's why at present I am a Eurofederalist who is a floating voter on whether the UK should stay in the version of the EU currently on offer.
But not sufficiently concerned to wish to take any action likely to support the arrangement of a referendum?That's why at present I am a Eurofederalist who is a floating voter on whether the UK should stay in the version of the EU currently on offer.
...
farage wants us to follow the examples of other, similar sized, European countries but outside the EU and therefore outside its influence. For examples:
Iceland;
Norway.
Both these are signatories to the Schengen (spl.?) Agreement, so perhaps not too much like these two. Nor like the latter which pays more per capita to the EU than does the UK. And speaking of Norway, it has implemented 75% of EU laws to keep its status, whilst having no influence on its drafting.
Well, there's Switzerland of course. They have to comply with EU regs of course, but only for those things which they trade with the EU. Not to mention no financial services - not that good for us of course.. All this costs them is £450M pa, which, according to the Swiss, puts them at an economical disadvantage.
So given that these three EEA countries are virtually taxed without any representation, perhaps we don't really want to follow their example.
Whether the UK is in or out of the EU we will have to follow its legislation, so it will be undemocratic in a big way.
So if we follow farage's suggestion will will enter into a group identical to the EU in many ways apart from the fact that if we want to trade with the EU we will have to follow all the regulations.
Win/win or what?
Iceland;
Norway.
Both these are signatories to the Schengen (spl.?) Agreement, so perhaps not too much like these two. Nor like the latter which pays more per capita to the EU than does the UK. And speaking of Norway, it has implemented 75% of EU laws to keep its status, whilst having no influence on its drafting.
Well, there's Switzerland of course. They have to comply with EU regs of course, but only for those things which they trade with the EU. Not to mention no financial services - not that good for us of course.. All this costs them is £450M pa, which, according to the Swiss, puts them at an economical disadvantage.
So given that these three EEA countries are virtually taxed without any representation, perhaps we don't really want to follow their example.
Whether the UK is in or out of the EU we will have to follow its legislation, so it will be undemocratic in a big way.
So if we follow farage's suggestion will will enter into a group identical to the EU in many ways apart from the fact that if we want to trade with the EU we will have to follow all the regulations.
Win/win or what?
Hmm
They say a week is a long time in politics - this thread isn't 2 days old yet and Farage has gone from being a neo fascist threat to western democracy to a glorified benefits scrounger glorying in his own ineffectiveness. I'm sure he's pleased.
So Breadvan and 10PS, are there any politicians who you think are not self interested and egotistical? Are these creatures drawn to and promoted quickly within the main parties?
They say a week is a long time in politics - this thread isn't 2 days old yet and Farage has gone from being a neo fascist threat to western democracy to a glorified benefits scrounger glorying in his own ineffectiveness. I'm sure he's pleased.
So Breadvan and 10PS, are there any politicians who you think are not self interested and egotistical? Are these creatures drawn to and promoted quickly within the main parties?
PS: I think that Cameron will win in 2015 (I don't want him to, but I think he will). I think also that he will hold an in/out referendum. Result? Too close to call. Maybe a narrow margin stay in, but too close to call. I will start the campaign sitting on the fence but with my legs dangling over on the in side, if you see what I mean. That doesn't mean I won't swing them over the other side and jump down, but I want to hear the arguments.
Breadvan72 said:
A word on migrancy: A few years ago some Brits were up in arms about asylum seekers and assorted (mostly brown) people coming from various of the World's nasty places. Now those same Brits are up in arms about how unfair it is that (mostly brown) people can't come anymore and only dodgy East Europeans can. They said that there had been uncontrolled non EU migration (this was never true), but now they say that the non EU controls are too tough (sometimes they are) and complain of free movement within the EU, despite the fact that this was openly part of the deal when the UK joined.
Pointing out the absurdity of the situation between the EU open door and it then having an effect on non-EU immigration numbers because of a natural limit of people that could reasonably come and go in the UK while still being able to cater for those people, is not as you always paint it racist/xenophobic/brown people, but quite sensible and obvious. No one much cared about immigration years ago and you got a steady number of people who came and went and in a manageable number.
Don't be too surprised if what was a golden opportunity to have a sensible number of immigrants from all over the world that could come and live here and be chosen on what they could bring to the country , has now been seen to have been chucked away for an open door to one part of the world with the resulting limitation on the rest because of the practical situation of numbers that could reasonably come and settle.
I didn't vote on that,mainly because I was about 1 year old at the time. You condescending attitude to everyone that doesn't agree with you or wish to vote the same way as you ( whichever way that may , I doubt you'll say ), countered only with the tone of 'it's racist/xenophobic/brown people' driven has become very dull.
Derek Smith said:
farage wants us to follow the examples of other, similar sized, European countries but outside the EU and therefore outside its influence. For examples:
Iceland;
Norway.
In which regard are either Iceland or Norway similar in size to the UK? Iceland;
Norway.
Iceland's per capita GDP is close, but not really comaparable since it only has a population of 300k.
Breadvan72 said:
In a broad democratic sense, no vote is ever wasted, but I wouldn't want to waste a vote on UKIP, and a UKIP vote in 2015 will be a wasted vote.
I've spoiled my ballot before now when I've not felt able to approve of any of the candidates, so that factor wouldn't really bother me.Breadvan72 said:
WinstonWolf said:
Yet you're not intelligent enough to use a browser correctly. Stop using the back button when you submit a form. HTH.
Er, no, that was one of your guys. Look through the sights before pulling the trigger.Breadvan72 said:
My work revolves to a large extent around legislation and regulations. Most of it has nothing to do with the EU, and most of it has nothing to do with Parliament. It's mostly prepared by departmental (UK) civil servants, and often badly (but that's another debate).
We are very badly misgoverned (party in power regardless), but the misgovernment happens mainly in Whitehall and Downing Street, not in Brussels, Luxembourg, or Strasbourg.
'Mats Persson, director of the think-tank Open Europe, said: “This study reveals that putting a number on the percentage of UK laws coming from the EU is almost impossible. But, in any case, it is far more important to measure the actual impact that EU laws have on the economy and individuals on a day-to-day basis. We are very badly misgoverned (party in power regardless), but the misgovernment happens mainly in Whitehall and Downing Street, not in Brussels, Luxembourg, or Strasbourg.
“Our research, based on the Government’s own figures, shows that in 2009, 59 percent of the regulatory costs facing individuals, businesses and the public sector in the UK stemmed from EU legislation. This is a far more useful measure than merely counting individual laws without any sense of their relative importance – and it shows that the EU now has a massive impact on the UK.”
That was a few years ago. Since then the EU has taken over regulation of banks and financial services. So it will be higher now.
So I call BS BV, even the House of Commons believes that the EU has over 50% control of our law.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff