UKIP - The Future - Volume 2
Discussion
Scuffers said:
so, what you're saying is no matter if it's a good or bad idea to be part of the EU, we can't leave anyway cause it's all too hard work?
I'm saying that, if Farage does go for the Article 50 option, pretending that it would be simple and straightforward won't wash. And the more the option is scrutinised the more complex it will look. If these complexities are overlooked, Farage will get skewered; if he admits to their existence, then he'll have to address them in detail. Mr Snap said:
Scuffers said:
so, what you're saying is no matter if it's a good or bad idea to be part of the EU, we can't leave anyway cause it's all too hard work?
I'm saying that, if Farage does go for the Article 50 option, pretending that it would be simple and straightforward won't wash. And the more the option is scrutinised the more complex it will look. If these complexities are overlooked, Farage will get skewered; if he admits to their existence, then he'll have to address them in detail. Looks like Nigel is worried about a possible drop in wages if he wins a seat in the next General election.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/1095...
That's what I call planning ahead. He hasn't decided how to achieve Brexit yet, but he knows how much he wants to pocket while he's doing it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/1095...
That's what I call planning ahead. He hasn't decided how to achieve Brexit yet, but he knows how much he wants to pocket while he's doing it.
Mr Snap said:
I'm saying that, if Farage does go for the Article 50 option, pretending that it would be simple and straightforward won't wash. And the more the option is scrutinised the more complex it will look. If these complexities are overlooked, Farage will get skewered; if he admits to their existence, then he'll have to address them in detail.
So the answer is to address them:http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/BrexitPamphl...
Mr Snap said:
Looks like Nigel is worried about a possible drop in wages if he wins a seat in the next General election.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/1095...
That's what I call planning ahead. He hasn't decided how to achieve Brexit yet, but he knows how much he wants to pocket while he's doing it.
here we go again...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/1095...
That's what I call planning ahead. He hasn't decided how to achieve Brexit yet, but he knows how much he wants to pocket while he's doing it.
just how shallow are you?
you take a soundbite and suddenly make the link to (implied) personal gain above all else?
are you trying for a job at the daily fail?
whilst we are talking MP's pay, if you actually listened to what he said (rather than the reports of it) he's about right, ie, currently they are overpaid for what they don't do (or have responsibility for), however, get out of the EU and regain control of parliament, then £90-100K does not seem at all excessive.
(I would also look to reduce the numbers of MP's back down to ~450)
Mr Snap said:
You say traders want to trade. However it's politicians who set the terms of trading. If we assume that two year guillotine, that's two years to scrutinise every aspect of trading law and to come up with workable solutions; two years to consult groups representing the traders; two years to redraft the trading legislation and put it through parliament (don't forget the Lords); two years to go through the green paper/white paper process; and two years whilst traders live in fear of disruption and unfavourable legislation (on both sides).
You reckon that two years will be plenty of time to work everything out. We'll just put some 'intelligent input' into it. Where is that going to come from? This task alone is going to require the input from hundreds of civil servants and lawyers (and the cost for them alone will be astronomical - Breadvan must be dribbling in anticipation). Which civil servants are you going to remove from the tasks they're already doing or are you going to train up some new ones? Are you going to pay for the best legal advice or are you going to do it on the cheap?
I don't know how much you know about drafting legislation but, as a rule, this stuff usually moves at a glacial speed. Why? Because it's incredibly complex and one minor error could have vast ramifications. Thus far, all we have is a 'back of a fag packet' sketch of how it will all work. The whole thing is a car crash waiting to happen. What's worse for UKIP is the more the Article 50 option is aired and scrutinised, the more frightening it will become
Gosh, I wonder how the hell Switzerland, and all the other countries that agree FTAs with the EU did it. If only we had huge departments with armies of civil servants at the Foreign office and Department of Trade and Industry..... oh wait....You reckon that two years will be plenty of time to work everything out. We'll just put some 'intelligent input' into it. Where is that going to come from? This task alone is going to require the input from hundreds of civil servants and lawyers (and the cost for them alone will be astronomical - Breadvan must be dribbling in anticipation). Which civil servants are you going to remove from the tasks they're already doing or are you going to train up some new ones? Are you going to pay for the best legal advice or are you going to do it on the cheap?
I don't know how much you know about drafting legislation but, as a rule, this stuff usually moves at a glacial speed. Why? Because it's incredibly complex and one minor error could have vast ramifications. Thus far, all we have is a 'back of a fag packet' sketch of how it will all work. The whole thing is a car crash waiting to happen. What's worse for UKIP is the more the Article 50 option is aired and scrutinised, the more frightening it will become
Mrr T said:
A mere 270 odd pages, eh? I do like the bit about holding regular referenda on every aspect of UK legislation through lottery machines. It seems Dr North had his 'irony spotting' gland removed at birth.
Sorry, but if I wanted someone to draft a comprehensive Brexit document, I'd probably ask an eminent constitutional lawyer, not a bloke who knows a lot about dead sheep. I do wonder why UKIP hasn't enlisted such a person to look at the problem. Could it be that, being a bunch of fly-by-nights, they can't be arsed to address the problem properly because they that know it'll eventually scupper them?
Meanwhile, Nigel is more concerned about a drop in salary if he gets into parliament (or will he do both jobs, just to keep that money rolling in?).
s2art said:
Gosh, I wonder how the hell Switzerland, and all the other countries that agree FTAs with the EU did it. If only we had huge departments with armies of civil servants at the Foreign office and Department of Trade and Industry..... oh wait....
You miss my point. The Swiss didn't achieve it all under a two year guillotine. It's been an ongoing process since the original inception of the Common Market 60 odd years ago. In fact negotiations between the Swiss and the EU are permanently ongoing. Oh wait! Nigel has stolen the Tardis….
Scuffers said:
here we go again...
just how shallow are you?
you take a soundbite and suddenly make the link to (implied) personal gain above all else?
are you trying for a job at the daily fail?
whilst we are talking MP's pay, if you actually listened to what he said (rather than the reports of it) he's about right, ie, currently they are overpaid for what they don't do (or have responsibility for), however, get out of the EU and regain control of parliament, then £90-100K does not seem at all excessive.
(I would also look to reduce the numbers of MP's back down to ~450)
S'cuse me. It's UKIP supporters who say repeatedly that all MP's are, money grubbing, expense wasters and that UKIP is 'different'. If you don't believe me read this thread.just how shallow are you?
you take a soundbite and suddenly make the link to (implied) personal gain above all else?
are you trying for a job at the daily fail?
whilst we are talking MP's pay, if you actually listened to what he said (rather than the reports of it) he's about right, ie, currently they are overpaid for what they don't do (or have responsibility for), however, get out of the EU and regain control of parliament, then £90-100K does not seem at all excessive.
(I would also look to reduce the numbers of MP's back down to ~450)
I have no objection to MP's being given proper salaries, I'd do it now to resolve the 'expenses' issue. The interesting point is that Nigel's only interested in it for when he's achieved his wishes. Why not now? Possibly, he might be frightened of the higher calibre people it might attract to oppose him before his dreams come to fruition.
Farage on MP's pay...
"More controversy following an interview I did on LBC earlier this week which led to reports that I called for MPs to get a pay rise to £100,000. Wrong.
What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live.
However, should we leave the EU (which is looking more likely every week), MPs would once again be taking responsibility for the laws governing this country. It would seem right in these circumstances that they are paid the same as a headteacher of a comprehensive school or other senior figures in the community. This wouldn’t be an additional burden on the taxpayer because they wouldn’t have any MEP salaries, staff, offices, regional assemblies or expenses to pay."
"More controversy following an interview I did on LBC earlier this week which led to reports that I called for MPs to get a pay rise to £100,000. Wrong.
What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live.
However, should we leave the EU (which is looking more likely every week), MPs would once again be taking responsibility for the laws governing this country. It would seem right in these circumstances that they are paid the same as a headteacher of a comprehensive school or other senior figures in the community. This wouldn’t be an additional burden on the taxpayer because they wouldn’t have any MEP salaries, staff, offices, regional assemblies or expenses to pay."
"There are 43 aspects of running a country or membership of the EU that will be voted on using QMV from 1st November 2014. These areas of power will no longer reside in Westminster, but instead will be in Brussels.
Quantitative Majority Voting.
No individual country of the 28 member will have a veto in these matters. Thus a positive vote on any of the 43 areas can be imposed on any individual country even against the wishes of it's sovereign parliament.
No law can be enacted that has any bearing on any of the 43 aspects of government without the approval of the EU by majority voting of other members voting for it.
We could be asked to drive on the Right and there is nothing we could do about it. But that is a trivial matter compared what could be pushed our way, against our national interests."
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/withrawal-o...
Quantitative Majority Voting.
No individual country of the 28 member will have a veto in these matters. Thus a positive vote on any of the 43 areas can be imposed on any individual country even against the wishes of it's sovereign parliament.
No law can be enacted that has any bearing on any of the 43 aspects of government without the approval of the EU by majority voting of other members voting for it.
We could be asked to drive on the Right and there is nothing we could do about it. But that is a trivial matter compared what could be pushed our way, against our national interests."
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/withrawal-o...
Mr Snap said:
I'm saying that, if Farage does go for the Article 50 option, pretending that it would be simple and straightforward won't wash. And the more the option is scrutinised the more complex it will look. If these complexities are overlooked, Farage will get skewered; if he admits to their existence, then he'll have to address them in detail.
If the Pro EU camp's only real argument now is that it'll be too complicated, the sceptics have already won.steveT350C said:
Farage on MP's pay...
"What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live."
An excellent argument for his EU salary to be cut, n'est-ce que pas? "What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live."
Mr Snap said:
steveT350C said:
Farage on MP's pay...
"What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live."
An excellent argument for his EU salary to be cut, n'est-ce que pas? "What I have always said is that a greater salary comes with greater responsibility. Given that MPs are essentially some regional council rubber stamping work of the EU, where most of our laws are made, I see no justification for a pay rise of any kind for MPs. Indeed, they should have a pay cut since they are doing less work. Quite why they think they should get an increase shows the kind of self-aggrandisement which have left people with the view that their representatives have no idea how the rest of the country live."
It's an excellent argument for MP's salaries to be cut. Farage wants ALL Europeans salaries eliminated.
Mr Snap said:
A mere 270 odd pages, eh?
Not bad for a single document produced on a crowd source basis with no budget. Mr Snap said:
I do like the bit about holding regular referenda on every aspect of UK legislation through lottery machines. It seems Dr North had his 'irony spotting' gland removed at birth.
That not in the document although Dr North has been involved in other programs about democracy where that has been discussed. With the age of the internet I do not see why it could not happen. Allowing us all to be much more involved in politics. Mr Snap said:
Sorry, but if I wanted someone to draft a comprehensive Brexit document, I'd probably ask an eminent constitutional lawyer, not a bloke who knows a lot about dead sheep. I do wonder why UKIP hasn't enlisted such a person to look at the problem. Could it be that, being a bunch of fly-by-nights, they can't be arsed to address the problem properly because they that know it'll eventually scupper them?
You really are a bit of an idiot. Dr North has long since left the field of food hygiene. He has written and researched widely on defence matters and on the EU. His published books are here:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Richard-North/e/B001HPNQ4Y...
Mr Snap said:
s2art said:
Gosh, I wonder how the hell Switzerland, and all the other countries that agree FTAs with the EU did it. If only we had huge departments with armies of civil servants at the Foreign office and Department of Trade and Industry..... oh wait....
You miss my point. The Swiss didn't achieve it all under a two year guillotine. It's been an ongoing process since the original inception of the Common Market 60 odd years ago. In fact negotiations between the Swiss and the EU are permanently ongoing. Oh wait! Nigel has stolen the Tardis….
Mrr T said:
Mr Snap said:
A mere 270 odd pages, eh?
Not bad for a single document produced on a crowd source basis with no budget. Mr Snap said:
I do like the bit about holding regular referenda on every aspect of UK legislation through lottery machines. It seems Dr North had his 'irony spotting' gland removed at birth.
That not in the document although Dr North has been involved in other programs about democracy where that has been discussed. With the age of the internet I do not see why it could not happen. Allowing us all to be much more involved in politics. Mr Snap said:
Sorry, but if I wanted someone to draft a comprehensive Brexit document, I'd probably ask an eminent constitutional lawyer, not a bloke who knows a lot about dead sheep. I do wonder why UKIP hasn't enlisted such a person to look at the problem. Could it be that, being a bunch of fly-by-nights, they can't be arsed to address the problem properly because they that know it'll eventually scupper them?
You really are a bit of an idiot. Dr North has long since left the field of food hygiene. He has written and researched widely on defence matters and on the EU. His published books are here:http://www.amazon.co.uk/Richard-North/e/B001HPNQ4Y...
Besides, it'd be nigh impossible to run an economy the size of ours when rules are being changed every five minutes. In addition to this, such a swift change would only bring out the nutters - such as the hanging brigade. Much time will be wasted on trivialities and in all likelihood the Murdoch press would end up driving policy. Is that what you want?
I don't care what Dr North has written, he's not a constitutional lawyer. Not one constitutional lawyer was involved in that document and, as you point out, it was done on the cheap. If I wanted to change the constitution, I'd use the best minds going, they don't do it on the cheap for a very good reason.
I too have published books. It doesn't make me any better qualified to solve the most difficult constitutional problem the UK would have faced since the dissolution of the monasteries; that was a bloody revolution too.
If I'm an idiot, so are you.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff