UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
JustAnotherLogin said:
mrpurple said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Yes. You may think UKIP should be in power, but it didn't get enough votes.
In this case a council should not be able to change the number of councillors or wards. Otherwise a small majority could jerrymander to give themselves a permanent majority.
That could in certain circumstances be achieved by reducing the number of councillors without changing boundaries.
You want things to change Fine, persuade enough people to agree with you at the next election. But don't do it by illegal acts or pretending that the world is against you when you are raising an illegal motion
You really are something special.In this case a council should not be able to change the number of councillors or wards. Otherwise a small majority could jerrymander to give themselves a permanent majority.
That could in certain circumstances be achieved by reducing the number of councillors without changing boundaries.
You want things to change Fine, persuade enough people to agree with you at the next election. But don't do it by illegal acts or pretending that the world is against you when you are raising an illegal motion
I may be wrong, but I don't think it is up to a council to alter the number of councillors sitting on it - This is law - raising an illegal motion.
So you knew all along you weren't wrong because you knew it's the law after all.
ps I don't need you to tell me what I may, or may not, do or think but thanks for trying.
Lots of people on here trying to tell us that only UKIP have the answers. I'm just redressing the balance with some facts
Wombat3 said:
You clearly think it was possible, so which budgets would you have cut to a total of £130Bn inside one year?
(see http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/oct/... )
ETA - Link fixed
That's a Guardian link. (Aren't you supposed to be pretending to be a Conservative?)(see http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/oct/... )
Edited by Wombat3 on Monday 20th October 18:20
ETA - Link fixed
Edited by Wombat3 on Monday 20th October 19:15
I don't click on Guardian links. Listening to the Today programme on R4 gives me my maximum daily dose of leftyness.
However I think that you want to talk about Government spending.
So, here are some facts. Apologies for all the dots. I don't know how to keep things lined up without them.
...........2007.....2013...%increase
Total(Bn)..£549.....£673...22.5%
Pensions....£94.....£139...50%
Health......£94.7...£124...31%
Education...£73......£87...19%
Defence.....£36.6....£42...15%
Welfare.....£83.5...£114...37%
Overall spending has gone up by 22.5% in a period when inflation has only been 19%.
I don't think that anybody was starving in 2008. In fact life was pretty good. So, if we go back to the standard of life that we had before the crash, we save £19.2 Bn at a stroke.
Health care only was only £66Bn in 2003. We could probably save another £15Bn there without any loss of service.
We have now saved £34Bn.
I don't understand why pensions have gone up so much. Perhaps the government are feeling guilty about the extra 30,000 death that occurred last winter, due to the fact that they couldn't afford to heat their homes.
We could save another £19Bn if we went back to the 2007 levels of welfare benefits. Nobody starved in 2007. Why do they need more?
That is £53Bn of savings.
Do I really need to go on?
JustAnotherLogin said:
mrpurple said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Yes. You may think UKIP should be in power, but it didn't get enough votes.
In this case a council should not be able to change the number of councillors or wards. Otherwise a small majority could jerrymander to give themselves a permanent majority.
That could in certain circumstances be achieved by reducing the number of councillors without changing boundaries.
You want things to change Fine, persuade enough people to agree with you at the next election. But don't do it by illegal acts or pretending that the world is against you when you are raising an illegal motion
You really are something special.In this case a council should not be able to change the number of councillors or wards. Otherwise a small majority could jerrymander to give themselves a permanent majority.
That could in certain circumstances be achieved by reducing the number of councillors without changing boundaries.
You want things to change Fine, persuade enough people to agree with you at the next election. But don't do it by illegal acts or pretending that the world is against you when you are raising an illegal motion
I may be wrong, but I don't think it is up to a council to alter the number of councillors sitting on it - This is law - raising an illegal motion.
So you knew all along you weren't wrong because you knew it's the law after all.
ps I don't need you to tell me what I may, or may not, do or think but thanks for trying.
Lots of people on here trying to tell us that only UKIP have the answers. I'm just redressing the balance with some facts
Mojocvh said:
10 minutes of your time...
...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
We've just been through that. The council does not have the power to cut the number of councillors. That is the responsibility of the local government boundary commission....Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
So it was just a UKIP councillor trying to make some cheap political capital out of an illegal motion
Mojocvh said:
10 minutes of your time...
...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Has been posted above by BGARK, but deserves a repost. ...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Shame the quality is poor, but what does one expect from a labour run council..
brenflys777 said:
Is it actually illegal, or just improper? Or possibly just inconvenient!
If someone actually knows it's illegal they could probably quote the relevant law. Until UKIP won a seat we always had someone offering barista type advice
Are you carzy? Of course it is JAL googled it so it must be.If someone actually knows it's illegal they could probably quote the relevant law. Until UKIP won a seat we always had someone offering barista type advice
Oh.....just fell in on the advice .... dementia setting in
steveT350C said:
Mojocvh said:
10 minutes of your time...
...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Has been posted above by BGARK, but deserves a repost. ...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Shame the quality is poor, but what does one expect from a labour run council..
brenflys777 said:
BGARK said:
These Labour councillors, coming over to UKIP and taking UKIP jobs, with all their racist concerns about immigration. He must be one of those left behinds that cover areas full of those 'sort of people' 
“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country.
“The Labour Party is only for Labour, the Conservatives are only for
rich people but UKIP is
for the whole of Britain.”
Give that man a beer and a bacon sarni!
JustAnotherLogin said:
Mojocvh said:
10 minutes of your time...
...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
We've just been through that. The council does not have the power to cut the number of councillors. That is the responsibility of the local government boundary commission....Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
So it was just a UKIP councillor trying to make some cheap political capital out of an illegal motion
JustAnotherLogin said:
We've just been through that. The council does not have the power to cut the number of councillors. That is the responsibility of the local government boundary commission.
So it was just a UKIP councillor trying to make some cheap political capital out of an illegal motion
What are you on about, the Labour councillors refused to even acknowledge the suggestion that cuts could be made to their own staff. They are the ones acting illegally, can you not read the stills??So it was just a UKIP councillor trying to make some cheap political capital out of an illegal motion
WTF has the UKIP guy done wrong other than putting forward suggestions that would help! They would not actually do anything at that moment in time, that would be for a later date but not if the Labour muppets have just binned the concept of even discussing it!
Why can you not see that, I am astonished that people like you think that what you have seen is somehow wrong?
Mojocvh said:
steveT350C said:
Mojocvh said:
10 minutes of your time...
...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Has been posted above by BGARK, but deserves a repost. ...Derby Council meeting where UKIP's plan to reduce expenditure [by reducing the number of councilors] is batted away by the ruling Labour Councillors supported by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCam0TWhSQE#t=259
Shame the quality is poor, but what does one expect from a labour run council..
Apparently some UKIP song is the number 1 download tune from Amazon. I have not listened to it yet, but having been a house-music dj, I expect I won't like it.
Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
steveT350C said:
Mr Sehmi, an immigrant from India who is now a British citizen, said: “I agree with UKIP over border control.
“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country.
“The Labour Party is only for Labour, the Conservatives are only for
rich people but UKIP is
for the whole of Britain.”
Give that man a beer and a bacon sarni!
I'm not sure that Sikhs will eat bacon sarnies. But they do seem to integrate very well.“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country.
“The Labour Party is only for Labour, the Conservatives are only for
rich people but UKIP is
for the whole of Britain.”
Give that man a beer and a bacon sarni!
They also seem to act very well during periods of civil unrest.
steveT350C said:
Apparently some UKIP song is the number 1 download tune from Amazon. I have not listened to it yet, but having been a house-music dj, I expect I won't like it.
Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-MP3-Downloads...Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
Esseesse said:
steveT350C said:
Apparently some UKIP song is the number 1 download tune from Amazon. I have not listened to it yet, but having been a house-music dj, I expect I won't like it.
Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-MP3-Downloads...Still, any publicity etc.
UKIP, whether you like them or not, are defining current UK politics.
You have to ask yourself...
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
don4l said:
steveT350C said:
Mr Sehmi, an immigrant from India who is now a British citizen, said: “I agree with UKIP over border control.
“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country.
“The Labour Party is only for Labour, the Conservatives are only for
rich people but UKIP is
for the whole of Britain.”
Give that man a beer and a bacon sarni!
I'm not sure that Sikhs will eat bacon sarnies. But they do seem to integrate very well.“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country.
“The Labour Party is only for Labour, the Conservatives are only for
rich people but UKIP is
for the whole of Britain.”
Give that man a beer and a bacon sarni!
They also seem to act very well during periods of civil unrest.
. And I know Monty Panaesar likes a beer
eharding said:
steveT350C said:
Do you want to be a kipper.....
....or a sheep?
I recall another particularly nasty piece of work using those terms to distinguish his movement from the populace as a whole, deeming them to be a 'flock of sheep and blockheads".....or a sheep?
You just can't help yourself, can you?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff