The 'No to the EU' campaign Vol 2

[Mr_B]

///ajd said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Today's outright scare story is the forced deportations of legal EU nationals ... utterly fabricated nonsense to outright bullst with no basis on reality.

Yep, no one on the brexit side would threaten to deport EU nationals.

"European Union (EU) migrants should be deported from Britain "after a fixed period" if the UK leaves the economic and political union, Mark Reckless, the UKIP candidate for the Rochester and Strood has suggested. Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukips-mark-reckless-eu-mi...

It's not party policy for Ukip, the Brexit campaign or even his current view. It's the same as saying Vote Remain want to join the Euro because Nick Clegg ( along with all those economists you rely on ) wanted to join the Euro. So which is it ?

Edited by Mr_B on Friday 27th May 21:42

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Today's outright scare story is the forced deportations of legal EU nationals ... utterly fabricated nonsense to outright bullst with no basis on reality.

Yep, no one on the brexit side would threaten to deport EU nationals.

"European Union (EU) migrants should be deported from Britain "after a fixed period" if the UK leaves the economic and political union, Mark Reckless, the UKIP candidate for the Rochester and Strood has suggested. Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukips-mark-reckless-eu-mi...

It's not party policy for Ukip, the Brexit campaign or even his current view. It's the same as saying Vote Remain because Nick Clegg ( along with all those economists you rely on ) wanted to join the Euro. So which is it ?

It isn't quite the same - Mark Reckless, who is a pretty senior member of UKIP, was saying this only 18 months ago.

[PRTVR]

Murph7355 said:

///ajd said:

..."Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."...

I guess it depends which ones he means...I can readily imagine "some" might well warrant being asked to return to their country of origin.

Or if the are not allowed to work and are not allowed benefits they will have no choice.

[wiggy001]

EddieSteadyGo said:

wiggy001 said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Sorry but I'm sick of hearing that the £350m figure is a lie when it is not. Our "fee" for being in the EU IS £350m per week. The fact we get some of this back is irrelevant as we have no control over how much we get back or how it is spent.

To use an analogy for the hard of thinking: how much income tax do you pay? Is it 20/40% of your salary or is it 20/40% of your salary minus the benefit you get for your local library, hospital and lesbian outreach centre, even though you have no say over how that "benefit" is spent? How much is your council tax? Is it £180 a month or is it £180 per month minus the cost of maintaining your streetlights, playing fields and collecting your rubbish?

No one uses the net figure for income tax, so why use it for the EU tax?

I'm afraid your wrong on this one wiggy001.

The claim the Leave campaign make is that "we send £350m per week". That is not correct.

The rebate is deducted from the £350m before it is sent to the EU. So the £350m never leaves 'our' account. The correct figure we do send is about £250m. Still very big, but not £350m

Yes, if you put aside the rebate, some of the £250m contribution we make also does come back to the UK in one form or another. But that isn't the issue with the accuracy of the claim so your comparison with services received from income tax doesn't apply.

The rebate is paid a year in arrears. So it's more akin to the revenue overcharging you on your income tax this year and giving the money back to you next year by adjusting your tax code. Only, they overcharge and repay every single year. And there is no guarantee they will carry on repaying the rebate next year (you have to negotiate that). And, if you do really well at work this year, you'll have to pay a "one off" tax on top.

[danllama]

fk me this whole situation is infuriating

It's just bullst followed by more bullst. Can't they all just shut up until the referendum so people can fking think for themselves?

s.

[Mr_B]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Today's outright scare story is the forced deportations of legal EU nationals ... utterly fabricated nonsense to outright bullst with no basis on reality.

Yep, no one on the brexit side would threaten to deport EU nationals.

"European Union (EU) migrants should be deported from Britain "after a fixed period" if the UK leaves the economic and political union, Mark Reckless, the UKIP candidate for the Rochester and Strood has suggested. Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukips-mark-reckless-eu-mi...

It's not party policy for Ukip, the Brexit campaign or even his current view. It's the same as saying Vote Remain because Nick Clegg ( along with all those economists you rely on ) wanted to join the Euro. So which is it ?

It isn't quite the same - Mark Reckless, who is a pretty senior member of UKIP, was saying this only 18 months ago.

I disagree, but then do I have to dig up quotes from every remain loon who wants total open borders to the whole world, to still join the Euro or half a hundred mad other ideas and hold them up as the currents views and campaign points of Vote Remain ?
We are going to have a Conservative or Labour government. Both of them being liable to uphold various rules and treaties that mean it can't even happen, even if everyone voted Ukip and Reckless was party leader. Can you see how disingenuous it now looks ?
Spreading this around is pure bullst.

[EddieSteadyGo]

wiggy001 said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

wiggy001 said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Sorry but I'm sick of hearing that the £350m figure is a lie when it is not. Our "fee" for being in the EU IS £350m per week. The fact we get some of this back is irrelevant as we have no control over how much we get back or how it is spent.

To use an analogy for the hard of thinking: how much income tax do you pay? Is it 20/40% of your salary or is it 20/40% of your salary minus the benefit you get for your local library, hospital and lesbian outreach centre, even though you have no say over how that "benefit" is spent? How much is your council tax? Is it £180 a month or is it £180 per month minus the cost of maintaining your streetlights, playing fields and collecting your rubbish?

No one uses the net figure for income tax, so why use it for the EU tax?

I'm afraid your wrong on this one wiggy001.

The claim the Leave campaign make is that "we send £350m per week". That is not correct.

The rebate is deducted from the £350m before it is sent to the EU. So the £350m never leaves 'our' account. The correct figure we do send is about £250m. Still very big, but not £350m

Yes, if you put aside the rebate, some of the £250m contribution we make also does come back to the UK in one form or another. But that isn't the issue with the accuracy of the claim so your comparison with services received from income tax doesn't apply.

The rebate is paid a year in arrears. So it's more akin to the revenue overcharging you on your income tax this year and giving the money back to you next year by adjusting your tax code. Only, they overcharge and repay every single year. And there is no guarantee they will carry on repaying the rebate next year (you have to negotiate that). And, if you do really well at work this year, you'll have to pay a "one off" tax on top.

Hmmm,...it doesn't need an analogy to make it clearer.

The abatement sum is calculated using the data from previous year, but we don't "send" the money and then get it back. It never leaves our account.

Furthermore, the Leave campaign say we could choose to spend the £350m on our own priorities e.g NHS.

Except that there isn't £350m to spend, it is £250m.

And that is before you get into the sums which come back anyway, which I would agree is open to debate as to how the money is spent.

[Mr_B]

wiggy001 said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

wiggy001 said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Sorry but I'm sick of hearing that the £350m figure is a lie when it is not. Our "fee" for being in the EU IS £350m per week. The fact we get some of this back is irrelevant as we have no control over how much we get back or how it is spent.

To use an analogy for the hard of thinking: how much income tax do you pay? Is it 20/40% of your salary or is it 20/40% of your salary minus the benefit you get for your local library, hospital and lesbian outreach centre, even though you have no say over how that "benefit" is spent? How much is your council tax? Is it £180 a month or is it £180 per month minus the cost of maintaining your streetlights, playing fields and collecting your rubbish?

No one uses the net figure for income tax, so why use it for the EU tax?

I'm afraid your wrong on this one wiggy001.

The claim the Leave campaign make is that "we send £350m per week". That is not correct.

The rebate is deducted from the £350m before it is sent to the EU. So the £350m never leaves 'our' account. The correct figure we do send is about £250m. Still very big, but not £350m

Yes, if you put aside the rebate, some of the £250m contribution we make also does come back to the UK in one form or another. But that isn't the issue with the accuracy of the claim so your comparison with services received from income tax doesn't apply.

The rebate is paid a year in arrears. So it's more akin to the revenue overcharging you on your income tax this year and giving the money back to you next year by adjusting your tax code. Only, they overcharge and repay every single year. And there is no guarantee they will carry on repaying the rebate next year (you have to negotiate that). And, if you do really well at work this year, you'll have to pay a "one off" tax on top.

They are missing a trick by saying its £350m, reduced to £250m, that has strings attached on spending the rebate part, is up for renegotiation, not guaranteed and typically long-winded on anything involving the EU.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr_B said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Today's outright scare story is the forced deportations of legal EU nationals ... utterly fabricated nonsense to outright bullst with no basis on reality.

Yep, no one on the brexit side would threaten to deport EU nationals.

"European Union (EU) migrants should be deported from Britain "after a fixed period" if the UK leaves the economic and political union, Mark Reckless, the UKIP candidate for the Rochester and Strood has suggested. Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukips-mark-reckless-eu-mi...

It's not party policy for Ukip, the Brexit campaign or even his current view. It's the same as saying Vote Remain because Nick Clegg ( along with all those economists you rely on ) wanted to join the Euro. So which is it ?

It isn't quite the same - Mark Reckless, who is a pretty senior member of UKIP, was saying this only 18 months ago.

I disagree, but then do I have to dig up quotes from every remain loon who wants total open borders to the whole world, to still join the Euro or half a hundred mad other ideas and hold them up as the currents views and campaign points of Vote Remain ?
We are going to have a Conservative or Labour government. Both of them being liable to uphold various rules and treaties that mean it can't even happen, even if everyone voted Ukip and Reckless was party leader. Can you see how disingenuous it now looks ?
Spreading this around is pure bullst.

I was listening to the debate when Mark Reckless made these comments. He wasn't being a loon - he was talking about transitional arrangements and how they might work in practise.

I know it is a bit embarrassing for the Leave campaign, but they are fairly contemporary comments made by an important Leave campaigner. It isn't disingenuous IMO to someone to raise them so they can be discussed and checked into.

[wiggy001]

EddieSteadyGo said:

wiggy001 said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

wiggy001 said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Sorry but I'm sick of hearing that the £350m figure is a lie when it is not. Our "fee" for being in the EU IS £350m per week. The fact we get some of this back is irrelevant as we have no control over how much we get back or how it is spent.

To use an analogy for the hard of thinking: how much income tax do you pay? Is it 20/40% of your salary or is it 20/40% of your salary minus the benefit you get for your local library, hospital and lesbian outreach centre, even though you have no say over how that "benefit" is spent? How much is your council tax? Is it £180 a month or is it £180 per month minus the cost of maintaining your streetlights, playing fields and collecting your rubbish?

No one uses the net figure for income tax, so why use it for the EU tax?

I'm afraid your wrong on this one wiggy001.

The claim the Leave campaign make is that "we send £350m per week". That is not correct.

The rebate is deducted from the £350m before it is sent to the EU. So the £350m never leaves 'our' account. The correct figure we do send is about £250m. Still very big, but not £350m

Yes, if you put aside the rebate, some of the £250m contribution we make also does come back to the UK in one form or another. But that isn't the issue with the accuracy of the claim so your comparison with services received from income tax doesn't apply.

The rebate is paid a year in arrears. So it's more akin to the revenue overcharging you on your income tax this year and giving the money back to you next year by adjusting your tax code. Only, they overcharge and repay every single year. And there is no guarantee they will carry on repaying the rebate next year (you have to negotiate that). And, if you do really well at work this year, you'll have to pay a "one off" tax on top.

Hmmm,...it doesn't need an analogy to make it clearer.

The abatement sum is calculated using the data from previous year, but we don't "send" the money and then get it back. It never leaves our account.

Furthermore, the Leave campaign say we could choose to spend the £350m on our own priorities e.g NHS.

Except that there isn't £350m to spend, it is £250m.

And that is before you get into the sums which come back anyway, which I would agree is open to debate as to how the money is spent.

Ok, let me put it another way: exactly (to the nearest £10m will do) will we physically send to the EU per week in 2020 and 2025? Being part of the "open and honest" EU we should easily be able to work this out, no? Don't forget to take into account random "coke and hookers" payments and "you're doing quite well, give us some more money" charges is your calculations...

At the moment you could argue that we need to account for £350m per week going to the EU as the rebate could be cut. If we left then we could spend all £350m on what we want without worrying that someone in Brussels (or Strasbourg, depending on the day of the month) is going to demand it back.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr_B said:

They are missing a trick by saying its £350m, reduced to £250m, that has strings attached on spending the rebate part, is up for renegotiation, not guaranteed and typically long-winded on anything involving the EU.

There are no "strings attached" to the spending of the debate part. It just isn't sent to the EU.

We do send £250m, which as I keep saying is still a huge amount. And there are strings attached to some of this money which then comes back to the UK.

Also, we have a veto on changes to the rebate. It can only be changed if the UK government agreed.

[Mr_B]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Mr_B said:

///ajd said:

Both campaigns rapped for telling porkies, but "voteleave" porkies are the biggest:

"the committee chairman, Tory MP Andrew Tyrie, said Vote Leave were guilty of "by far the most serious" offence.

He called on them to repaint their battle bus, which has been touring the country with Boris Johnson and carries the slogan: "We send the EU £350 million a week - let's fund our NHS instead."

"That is simply untrue, it is highly misleading and it is deeply troubling that they should be persisting with this," Mr Tyrie told BBC Radio 4's The World at One."

Today's outright scare story is the forced deportations of legal EU nationals ... utterly fabricated nonsense to outright bullst with no basis on reality.

Yep, no one on the brexit side would threaten to deport EU nationals.

"European Union (EU) migrants should be deported from Britain "after a fixed period" if the UK leaves the economic and political union, Mark Reckless, the UKIP candidate for the Rochester and Strood has suggested. Some migrants could be forced to leave the country after a UK exit from the EU."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ukips-mark-reckless-eu-mi...

It's not party policy for Ukip, the Brexit campaign or even his current view. It's the same as saying Vote Remain because Nick Clegg ( along with all those economists you rely on ) wanted to join the Euro. So which is it ?

It isn't quite the same - Mark Reckless, who is a pretty senior member of UKIP, was saying this only 18 months ago.

I disagree, but then do I have to dig up quotes from every remain loon who wants total open borders to the whole world, to still join the Euro or half a hundred mad other ideas and hold them up as the currents views and campaign points of Vote Remain ?
We are going to have a Conservative or Labour government. Both of them being liable to uphold various rules and treaties that mean it can't even happen, even if everyone voted Ukip and Reckless was party leader. Can you see how disingenuous it now looks ?
Spreading this around is pure bullst.

I was listening to the debate when Mark Reckless made these comments. He wasn't being a loon - he was talking about transitional arrangements and how they might work in practise.

I know it is a bit embarrassing for the Leave campaign, but they are fairly contemporary comments made by an important Leave campaigner. It isn't disingenuous IMO to someone to raise them so they can be discussed and checked into.

Ok, so despite it not even being possible to implement legally, it's a fair point to raise them so it can be dismissed ? I'm not totally sure that sets the tone of the debate when you give legitimacy to spouting any old crap that neither side is campaigning on, but saying it anyway.
How many people from the remain side should I listen to who want total open borders and to still join the EU. Would be a bit embarrassing for them I'm sure. It would also be stupid.

[EddieSteadyGo]

wiggy001 said:

...At the moment you could argue that we need to account for £350m per week going to the EU as the rebate could be cut. If we left then we could spend all £350m on what we want without worrying that someone in Brussels (or Strasbourg, depending on the day of the month) is going to demand it back.

The rebate is subject to a UK government veto. Hence it could only be cut if the UK government agreed to it.

Surely the point is that £250m is still a lot of money. That is the correct figure. That is the figure the Leave campaign should be using.

The fact I was replying to originally is we don't sent £350m and we could not choose to spend £350m on other things if we left.

[Mr_B]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

They are missing a trick by saying its £350m, reduced to £250m, that has strings attached on spending the rebate part, is up for renegotiation, not guaranteed and typically long-winded on anything involving the EU.

There are no "strings attached" to the spending of the debate part. It just isn't sent to the EU.

We do send £250m, which as I keep saying is still a huge amount. And there are strings attached to some of this money which then comes back to the UK.

Also, we have a veto on changes to the rebate. It can only be changed if the UK government agreed.

Yes, my bad, I stand corrected on which part does have strings attached to it. The government does indeed have a veto and does deals on trying to get the best deal with the other 27 who want a say. Lets see what happens with the EU in the next 4 years and see if in some way we don't become even more of a net contributor to the EU.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr_B said:

Ok, so despite it not even being possible to implement legally, it's a fair point to raise them so it can be dismissed ? I'm not totally sure that sets the tone of the debate when you give legitimacy to spouting any old crap that neither side is campaigning on, but saying it anyway.
How many people from the remain side should I listen to who want total open borders and to still join the EU. Would be a bit embarrassing for them I'm sure. It would also be stupid.

For me personally, I would say in all probability in the event of a Leave vote, people already here wouldn't be asked to leave.

This would be for the legal reasons you mention, and also the point that it would be just unfair.

But not sure why you get to angry when someone points out an embarrassing quote. It is part of politics. It happens on all sides and it is fair it gets added into the mix so it can be examined (and then dismissed, depending upon your point of view).

[Mr_B]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

Ok, so despite it not even being possible to implement legally, it's a fair point to raise them so it can be dismissed ? I'm not totally sure that sets the tone of the debate when you give legitimacy to spouting any old crap that neither side is campaigning on, but saying it anyway.
How many people from the remain side should I listen to who want total open borders and to still join the EU. Would be a bit embarrassing for them I'm sure. It would also be stupid.

For me personally, I would say in all probability in the event of a Leave vote, people already here wouldn't be asked to leave.

This would be for the legal reasons you mention, and also the point that it would be just unfair.

But not sure why you get to angry when someone points out an embarrassing quote. It is part of politics. It happens on all sides and it is fair it gets added into the mix so it can be examined (and then dismissed, depending upon your point of view).

You don't seem to mind someone causing a stink in this case when it has no basis in reality. The whole thing stemmed from ///ajd saying how bad both sides were at misleading , which in one breath you agree with, but then give legitimacy to in another for a dolt simply talking utter rubbish. I thought we all wanted at clearer case on what both side are campaigning on ?

Tory or Labour will be in power for a long time yet. If you want to look outside of the official campaigns and get a feeling to a post referendum vote, it can be restricted to here. I didn't considering it embarrassing at all as it has zero relevance to Vote Leave. Labour might find it so, given they now seemed to have joined in the Tory fear project.

[macp]

Anybody see this facebook post ?

https://www.facebook.com/georgeyb91/posts/10156954...

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr_B said:

You don't seem to mind someone causing a stink in this case when it has no basis in reality. The whole thing stemmed from ///ajd saying how bad both sides were at misleading , which in one breath you agree with, but then give legitimacy to in another for a dolt simply talking utter rubbish. I thought we all wanted at clearer case on what both side are campaigning on ?

Tory or Labour will be in power for a long time yet. If you want to look outside of the official campaigns and get a feeling to a post referendum vote, it can be restricted to here. I didn't considering it embarrassing at all as it has zero relevance to Vote Leave. Labour might find it so, given they now seemed to have joined in the Tory fear project.

It doesn't bother me, because it is part of the political process.

Take your original comparison with the Euro. Nick Clegg got a bit of a kicking on "This Week' because he had supported the Euro all those years ago. Even though this isn't his current position and he doesn't hold any power in government. Is that fair? Absolutely it is.

Same kind of scrutiny can be applied to all leading politicians including Mark Reckless. As it happens, I think most reasonable people will probably disregard it as being an off the cuff view which he hadn't properly thought through and which he later retracted. Doesn't mean though it can never be mentioned again.

[wiggy001]

macp said:

Anybody see this facebook post ?

https://www.facebook.com/georgeyb91/posts/10156954...

I did. I brilliant example of how you can present something (or 14 somethings) as fact and people will lap it up. It's mostly bks.

[Mr_B]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr_B said:

You don't seem to mind someone causing a stink in this case when it has no basis in reality. The whole thing stemmed from ///ajd saying how bad both sides were at misleading , which in one breath you agree with, but then give legitimacy to in another for a dolt simply talking utter rubbish. I thought we all wanted at clearer case on what both side are campaigning on ?

Tory or Labour will be in power for a long time yet. If you want to look outside of the official campaigns and get a feeling to a post referendum vote, it can be restricted to here. I didn't considering it embarrassing at all as it has zero relevance to Vote Leave. Labour might find it so, given they now seemed to have joined in the Tory fear project.

It doesn't bother me, because it is part of the political process.

Take your original comparison with the Euro. Nick Clegg got a bit of a kicking on "This Week' because he had supported the Euro all those years ago. Even though this isn't his current position and he doesn't hold any power in government. Is that fair? Absolutely it is.

Same kind of scrutiny can be applied to all leading politicians including Mark Reckless. As it happens, I think most reasonable people will probably disregard it as being an off the cuff view which he hadn't properly thought through and which he later retracted. Doesn't mean though it can never be mentioned again.

Of course it can be mentioned, but if you bring it up and not mention Reckless in saying so and try and frame it as part of Brexit when it isn't, and isn't even possible to do, you have to think the person doing so was committing something utterly disingenuous to be utterly laughable if it wasn't so obviously naked fearmongering.
Even some Green party loon turned up today on the Daily Politics to tell Andrew Neil is marriage was at greater risk on a Brexit because EU nationals might face deportation. Its tin foil hat stuff sponsored by Bacofoil.

Cleggers got rubbished because of his economic assessments at the time and because he was proven disastrously wrong , again. Had anyone suggested because of his support back then it had anything to do with remain still wanting the Euro, it would have be disingenuous to the same degree. No one did though.

Edited by Mr_B on Friday 27th May 22:50