UKIP - The Future - Volume 2

[Zod]

don4l said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Do you foresee difficulties in producing such a plan?

by UKIP? Yes.

[FiF]

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Well perhaps it's best not to ask anyone in England as our batting line up took a real battering down under in the Ashes series and has only partly recovered.

But perhaps you meant battered breath. Scotland for you my man, they like all things coated in batter.

But but but Sir Wombat was most clear that putting any detail on the bones of dealing with the EU was just showing our hand and not at all advisable.

Wish people would make their minds up. Almost as divided as the Tory party.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 14:42

[don4l]

Zod said:

don4l said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Do you foresee difficulties in producing such a plan?

by UKIP? Yes.

I appreciate that UKIP are unlikely to be in a position where they need to produce such a plan. I was wondering why some people think that formulating such a plan would be difficult. What are the problematic areas?

[Wombat3]

FiF said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Well perhaps it's best not to ask anyone in England as our batting line up took a real battering down under in the Ashes series and has only partly recovered.

But perhaps you meant battered breath. Scotland for you my man, they like all things coated in batter.

But but but Sir Wombat was most clear that putting any detail on the bones of dealing with the EU was just showing hour hand and not at all advisable.

Wish people would make their minds up. Almost as divided as the Tory party.

There was some more detail on it in the PM's speech, but only high level stuff as would be expected.

There will be more detail on it that comes out over time, just not yet. Besides, it does not suit the Tories to get into a debate about the detail on it before the election, all it will do is start all sorts of people (i.e those who may be incapable of seeing the bigger picture or just have their own petty political points to score) foaming at the mouth.

Whether you like that approach is fairly irrelevant. Its their choice to do it this way.

Edited by Wombat3 on Thursday 2nd October 14:43

[Wombat3]

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Do you foresee difficulties in producing such a plan?

by UKIP? Yes.

I appreciate that UKIP are unlikely to be in a position where they need to produce such a plan. I was wondering why some people think that formulating such a plan would be difficult. What are the problematic areas?

I would say the biggest problem area for UKIP is the process & specifically whether they would have a referendum on the issue. If they turn up & say they wouldn't then that may cast them as "anti-democratic" unless of course they can muster 325 MP's in parliament first.

If they say they would offer it, well, there's one of those on the table from one of the only two parties actually likely to form the next government (and not even UKIP are openly saying they don't believe that would be delivered).

[don4l]

Wombat3 said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Do you foresee difficulties in producing such a plan?

by UKIP? Yes.

I appreciate that UKIP are unlikely to be in a position where they need to produce such a plan. I was wondering why some people think that formulating such a plan would be difficult. What are the problematic areas?

I would say the biggest problem area for UKIP is the process & specifically whether they would have a referendum on the issue. If they turn up & say they wouldn't then that may cast them as "anti-democratic" unless of course they can muster 325 MP's in parliament first.

If they say they would offer it, well, there's one of those on the table from one of the only two parties actually likely to form the next government (and not even UKIP are openly saying they don't believe that would be delivered).

UKIP aren't going to get more than 325 MP's. However, if they did, then they wouldn't need to have a referendum - they would have a mandate. The truth is that no party would need to have a referendum if they wanted to withdraw from the EU. The UK isn't a "Peoples democracy", it is a "Parliamentary democracy". Once we have voted them in, they can do whatever they like.


I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty.

[Wombat3]

don4l said:

Wombat3 said:

don4l said:

Zod said:

don4l said:

Mrr T said:

I must say I await the UKIP manifesto with batted breath. I am sure it will contain a creditable plan to leave the EU.

Do you foresee difficulties in producing such a plan?

by UKIP? Yes.

I appreciate that UKIP are unlikely to be in a position where they need to produce such a plan. I was wondering why some people think that formulating such a plan would be difficult. What are the problematic areas?

I would say the biggest problem area for UKIP is the process & specifically whether they would have a referendum on the issue. If they turn up & say they wouldn't then that may cast them as "anti-democratic" unless of course they can muster 325 MP's in parliament first.

If they say they would offer it, well, there's one of those on the table from one of the only two parties actually likely to form the next government (and not even UKIP are openly saying they don't believe that would be delivered).

UKIP aren't going to get more than 325 MP's. However, if they did, then they wouldn't need to have a referendum - they would have a mandate. The truth is that no party would need to have a referendum if they wanted to withdraw from the EU. The UK isn't a "Peoples democracy", it is a "Parliamentary democracy". Once we have voted them in, they can do whatever they like.


I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty.

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

[Scuffers]

They don't need a majority, just enough mp's to force a coalition.

Part of the deal would be a referendum.

[Wombat3]

Scuffers said:

They don't need a majority, just enough mp's to force a coalition.

Part of the deal would be a referendum.

The only party they are going to be in coalition with is the Tories.....

......who have already committed to a referendum

[Scuffers]

Wombat3 said:

The only party they are going to be in coalition with is the Tories.....

......who have already committed to a referendum

Like they did last time?

And they have promises to renegotiate, so what do you reckon?

[FiF]

Wombat3 said:

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

Has anybody said it would be easy? Clearly the whole process would be complicated and require a lot of negotiations once notice given. That's why the treaty allows for two years. Is two years sufficient? Debateable though that can be shortened or extended if the parties agree.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 21:05

[Wombat3]

Scuffers said:

Wombat3 said:

The only party they are going to be in coalition with is the Tories.....

......who have already committed to a referendum

Like they did last time?

And they have promises to renegotiate, so what do you reckon?

I reckon not even UKIP central is trying to say that they wouldn't deliver on the referendum if they win in May.

[Wombat3]

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

Has anybody said it would be easy? Clearly the whole process would be complicated and require a lot of negotiations once notice given. That's why the treaty allows for two years. Is two years sufficient? Debateable though that can be shortened or extended if the parties agree.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 21:05

Don asked the question/made the statement.....

"I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty."

[FiF]

Wombat3 said:

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

Has anybody said it would be easy? Clearly the whole process would be complicated and require a lot of negotiations once notice given. That's why the treaty allows for two years. Is two years sufficient? Debateable though that can be shortened or extended if the parties agree.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 21:05

Don asked the question/made the statement.....

"I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty."

There's a difference between formulating a plan, and execution of same. Unless I'm misunderstanding the points from both sides.

Clearly formulating a plan isn't going to be a job for an afternoon with breaks for tea and custard creams, but it's not impossibly complex given the resources.

[Wombat3]

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

Has anybody said it would be easy? Clearly the whole process would be complicated and require a lot of negotiations once notice given. That's why the treaty allows for two years. Is two years sufficient? Debateable though that can be shortened or extended if the parties agree.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 21:05

Don asked the question/made the statement.....

"I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty."

There's a difference between formulating a plan, and execution of same. Unless I'm misunderstanding the points from both sides.

Clearly formulating a plan isn't going to be a job for an afternoon with breaks for tea and custard creams, but it's not impossibly complex given the resources.

No argument. But also little point in formulating an exit plan until the decision to exit is actually made. As you say, not a small job & therefore a highly questionable use of resources to work on it without a decision first

Perhaps if UKIP came up with a plan then they might gain something from that but I don't see why anyone else should be doing it at the moment.

[BGARK]

Wombat3 said:

came up with a plan

I know many people who have spent most of their lives planning things, they didn't actually get much done though..

[jogon]

Halb said:

xjsdriver said:

My problem with UKIP is that only 2 years ago, the party was entertaining the possibility of other extreme far right groups such as BNP, EDL etc etc to come and join the UKIP fold. Now a short two years later, UKIP have announced that they no longer accept those who previously held such extremist links. My question is - how can a political party complete such a total and utter about turn over what views are acceptable and those which are not and remain with any remnants of credibility with the electorate in this country?

Were they? And the word 'other'. Is UKiPs far right?

UKIP is Conservative with a capital 'C', what the tory party used to be before liberal tory lite Dave hit the scene. Europhile through and through who will fight any in and out referendum with all his corporate muscle to push his pro EU agenda.

There will be no real negotiations and he will not provide a fair in/out referendum on the EU. Wake up and see through this fools lies at least Ed, despite been a forgetful and useless , is honest in this matter.

[FiF]

Wombat3 said:

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

FiF said:

Wombat3 said:

Exactly as I said, if they had a majority (and assuming it was part of their manifesto) then they could indeed just force an exit. The reality is that , at best, UKIP might form part of a coalition. Nobody is going to agree to a UKIP demand for a guaranteed EU exit - tail wagging the dog. At best there would be a referendum.

And if the result is to stay in? Does UKIP respect that or does it go all SNP (tt) on us? Perhaps we ought to know what UKIP's position would be on all that and then, if there was an exit, how it would be achieved?

As to the difficulty, whether we like it or not the reality is that we are legally bound and treaty bound with 26 other countries across a range of issues. It will be difficult to extract ourselves from that. Not impossible, but not easy, not quick and would need to be done carefully and in consideration of any and all potential side effects at each step of the way. For example, in some cases it may require that we first draft substitute legislation to replace EU legislation that we might be withdrawing from.

Has anybody said it would be easy? Clearly the whole process would be complicated and require a lot of negotiations once notice given. That's why the treaty allows for two years. Is two years sufficient? Debateable though that can be shortened or extended if the parties agree.

Edited by FiF on Thursday 2nd October 21:05

Don asked the question/made the statement.....

"I'm still at a loss to understand why some people think that formulating an exit plan would be fraught with difficulty."

There's a difference between formulating a plan, and execution of same. Unless I'm misunderstanding the points from both sides.

Clearly formulating a plan isn't going to be a job for an afternoon with breaks for tea and custard creams, but it's not impossibly complex given the resources.

No argument. But also little point in formulating an exit plan until the decision to exit is actually made. As you say, not a small job & therefore a highly questionable use of resources to work on it without a decision first

Perhaps if UKIP came up with a plan then they might gain something from that but I don't see why anyone else should be doing it at the moment.

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree. Part of the decision is understanding what is involved, and part of that is figuring out what would need to be done, and how, and the risks associated, difficulty and likelihood of successfully achieving that element.

To just make a momentous decision like that without having thought it through in reasonable detail is amateurish. It can be an aim to do something without having much more than an outline, but to actually make the decision to go for it without a plan. Really?

If that really is how the current crop think and approach stuff no wonder the country is in the state it is.

[FiF]

btw Local council by election today Westoe ward South Tyneside

Westoe (South Tyneside) result:
UKIP - 40.9% (+40.9)
LAB - 37.9% (+2.2)
CON - 13.3% (+1.6)
GRN - 5.5% (-0.4)
LDEM - 2.5% (-0.2)

[Justayellowbadge]

FiF said:

btw Local council by election today Westoe ward South Tyneside

Westoe (South Tyneside) result:
UKIP - 40.9% (+40.9)
LAB - 37.9% (+2.2)
CON - 13.3% (+1.6)
GRN - 5.5% (-0.4)
LDEM - 2.5% (-0.2)

Where did the 44% or so go?

Were the BNP there before?