UKIP - The Future - Volume 4

[Scuffers]

JustAnotherLogin said:

But you are still missing the point
Whilst inside we have a much better bargaining position because we have the threat of leaving
Once we have left we have lost that

So why do Kippers think that we will not be able to negotiate successfully before a referendum, but would be able to once we have left?

rubbish

it's way easier to negotiate a deal BEFORE you have handed over the money.

currently, we have nothing to negotiate with, pull out, they will be doing all they can to get some money out of us.

do you not understand what kind of black hole us pulling out will make to the already fubar EU finances?

[FiF]

The cost of Europe. The top 100 costliest EU regulations cost the country 33.3 billion. The apparent benefits outweigh this, but 58 billion of benefits come from just three items which are so overstated as to be works of fiction. So it's costing us money.

So what's the alternative? The Norway model would incur 94% of the costs without having any say in matters.

So it's correct to try and negotiate reform. However unless Cameron makes it clear that he is prepared to take Britain out his negotiations will not achieve anything worthwhile. So far all indications are that he doesn't want to take Britain out. So talk of negotiations are to me empty rhetoric.

1. notvotingConservative

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eurefer...


http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-...

[anonymous-user]

This thread is going through one of its periodic Groundhog Day phases.

[Axionknight]

Gotta get the post count up some how man,

[wc98]

BGARK said:

Negotiate what? what do you think we "need" from the EU (can you explain what the EU actually is other than a name?).

When we leave I will still trade with "customers" both in Europe (the few who have money) and globally, nothing changes.

Remove all politicians, bureaucrats and those in "non-jobs" and the UK will survive and prosper, its creative, extravagant and entrepreneurial people will make that happen.

Maybe a bit of discomfort in the early stages but sovereignty and my children's future mean more to me than anything else. To the point where if forced I would fight for it.

well said ,the apparent increase in people that appear to be unable to function without some higher authority to wipe their arse and tell them how to live their lives these days is a bit worrying.

[WinstonWolf]

JustAnotherLogin said:

Axionknight said:

JustAnotherLogin said:

Like Zod I've done a fair bit of negotiation

UKIP witter on about our trade deficit with the EU and how this means they need us more than we need them. Of course if such a bargaining chip exists, then we have it now for the negotiations with the EU before a referendum.

There are obvious advantages to negotiating now, with the threat of leaving. Anyone care to suggest any way in which we would have a stronger negotiating position AFTER we have left? When we would need to negotiate far far more?

Why does it take a constant carrot on a stick to get this referendum though? Each of the main three parties is guilty of it, and has been for years..... It's almost like they don't want to carry out that promise.

Imagine that.

Show me a manifesto that has ever held that promise (apart from UKiP's obviously)

This time the Tory one (I assume) will

"In future, the British people must have their
say on any transfer of powers to the European
Union. We will amend the 1972 European
Communities Act so that any proposed future
Treaty that transferred areas of power, or
competences, would be subject to a referendum
– a ‘referendum lock’. A Conservative
government would never take the UK into
the Euro. Our amendment to the 1972 Act will
prevent any future government from doing
so without a referendum."

[Esseesse]

WinstonWolf said:

"In future, the British people must have their
say on any transfer of powers to the European
Union. We will amend the 1972 European
Communities Act so that any proposed future
Treaty that transferred areas of power, or
competences, would be subject to a referendum
– a ‘referendum lock’. A Conservative
government would never take the UK into
the Euro. Our amendment to the 1972 Act will
prevent any future government from doing
so without a referendum."

I do recall this, what was the date?

I'm sure there are many other times where they have more subtlety fallen foul of their own promise (in practise), but the most glaring one for me was the mess surrounding the EAW. We had the unusual opportunity to not opt in to it, going by the promise set out above you would think that the Tories would not have done so.

[WinstonWolf]

Esseesse said:

WinstonWolf said:

"In future, the British people must have their
say on any transfer of powers to the European
Union. We will amend the 1972 European
Communities Act so that any proposed future
Treaty that transferred areas of power, or
competences, would be subject to a referendum
– a ‘referendum lock’. A Conservative
government would never take the UK into
the Euro. Our amendment to the 1972 Act will
prevent any future government from doing
so without a referendum."

I do recall this, what was the date?

I'm sure there are many other times where they have more subtlety fallen foul of their own promise (in practise), but the most glaring one for me was the mess surrounding the EAW. We had the unusual opportunity to not opt in to it, going by the promise set out above you would think that the Tories would not have done so.

That's the Tories 2010 manifesto, it manages to sound very pro-referendum with the detail being in the small print.

[Esseesse]

WinstonWolf said:

That's the Tories 2010 manifesto, it manages to sound very pro-referendum with the detail being in the small print.

I think the key is the part that says "proposed future Treaty". I haven't read them but from what I can tell, the last one (constitution) is self-amending so therefore in theory no further treaties are required?

[Einion Yrth]

Esseesse said:

WinstonWolf said:

That's the Tories 2010 manifesto, it manages to sound very pro-referendum with the detail being in the small print.

I think the key is the part the bit that says "proposed future Treaty". I haven't read them but from what I can tell, the last one (constitution) is self-amending so therefore in theory no further treaties are required?

Got it in one, smoke and mirrors.

[don4l]

JustAnotherLogin said:

But you are still missing the point
Whilst inside we have a much better bargaining position because we have the threat of leaving
Once we have left we have lost that

So why do Kippers think that we will not be able to negotiate successfully before a referendum, but would be able to once we have left?

Guernsey and the Isle of Man have successfully negotiated deals from outside the EU. What on Earth makes you think that the UK couldn't?

Your question is preposturous.

Also, it has been covered many times in this thread. If you don't like the answer, then stop asking the question.

Einstein had something to say about this type of behaviour.

Edited to correct idiocy.

Edited by don4l on Monday 30th March 20:07

[NicD]

First UKIP electioneering.

Quite gentle really:

'Today, David Cameron brought these last lost five years to a close. UKIP supporters will know that despite that rose garden moment, claiming that they were coming "together in the national interest" to clear Britain's deficit...
The deficit is STILL running at £90 BILLION per year;
This government has more than DOUBLED the national debt;
Net migration is more than TRIPLE what the Conservative Party promised.
And...

This government's priorities: foreign aid, same-sex marriage, an AV referendum and a Scottish referendum simply haven't reflected what the people of this country think of as governmental priorities...'

[smn159]

Needs more capital letters to be truly effective

[BlackLabel]

brenflys777 said:

Slightly off topic, but Farage still hasn't got any publicly funded protection as far as I know. He has been attacked several times, both physically when he got hit by a placard and recently where someone jumped on his car (a capital offence in my mind...) and intimidated his children in a pub. These are actual attacks and the BBC reports of the time reminded people that this protection would have to be taxpayer funded....

Fast forward and a BBC boss has been threatened by Internet trolls and is apparently getting immediate protection for him and his family. No mention of who is funding it appears on the BBC news reports.

Farage: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31634837

Lord Hall: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32103...

In Lord Hall's case they are private bodyguards however they are obviously still paid for by the tax/license payer. All over a single anonymous email from overseas.

However your wider point is a fair one. Even terrorist sympathisers like Anjem Choudhary and Jihadi John's family have recieved round the clock police protection in the past. Yet nothing for Farage?

[JustAnotherLogin]

Einion Yrth said:

Esseesse said:

WinstonWolf said:

That's the Tories 2010 manifesto, it manages to sound very pro-referendum with the detail being in the small print.

I think the key is the part the bit that says "proposed future Treaty". I haven't read them but from what I can tell, the last one (constitution) is self-amending so therefore in theory no further treaties are required?

Got it in one, smoke and mirrors.

But irrespective of wording, no more competencies or power has passed to the EU. SO that commitment has been met.

[JustAnotherLogin]

don4l said:

Guernsey and the Isle of Man have successfully negotiated deals from outside the EU. What on Earth makes you think that the UK couldn't?

Your question is preposturous.

Also, it has been covered many times in this thread. If you don't like the answer, then stop asking the question.

Einstein had something to say about this type of behaviour.

Edited to correct idiocy.

Edited by don4l on Monday 30th March 20:07

Fair point that no matter what the facts, you won't change your mind. Unfortunately whether or not I post the facts, you still keep posting the idiocy

Indeed, as if by magic

NicD said:

First UKIP electioneering.

Quite gentle really:

'Today, David Cameron brought these last lost five years to a close. UKIP supporters will know that despite that rose garden moment, claiming that they were coming "together in the national interest" to clear Britain's deficit...
The deficit is STILL running at £90 BILLION per year;
This government has more than DOUBLED the national debt;
Net migration is more than TRIPLE what the Conservative Party promised.

Of course Farage has not ever proposed a costed plan for how he would do even as well, let alone better. In fact about his only contribution gas been to say recently that he would follow Osnorne's programme for cutting the deficit. So seems a bit odd of an odd criticism

[TKF]

Kippers really don't like that same sex marriage thing do they?

[BGARK]

TKF said:

Kippers really don't like that same sex marriage thing do they?

WTF has that got to do with anything?

[don4l]

JustAnotherLogin said:

don4l said:

Guernsey and the Isle of Man have successfully negotiated deals from outside the EU. What on Earth makes you think that the UK couldn't?

Your question is preposturous.

Also, it has been covered many times in this thread. If you don't like the answer, then stop asking the question.

Einstein had something to say about this type of behaviour.

Edited to correct idiocy.

Fair point that no matter what the facts, you won't change your mind. Unfortunately whether or not I post the facts, you still keep posting the idiocy

I trust that you have noticed that I am happy to engage in civilised debate.

If you are going to accuse me of posting idiocy, then perhaps you could show me the courtesy of demonstrating my idiocy.

What do you think that I wrote that was idiotic?

Please quote me.

[JustAnotherLogin]

NicD said:

First UKIP electioneering.
This government's priorities: foreign aid, same-sex marriage, an AV referendum and a Scottish referendum simply haven't reflected what the people of this country think of as governmental priorities...'

I bet I could find 100x as many people support those as think that re-opening Manston airport is a priority