Farage in Brussels - a national embarrassment
Discussion
TTwiggy said:
Well, last time I checked it was aging, so I think we will need them. That's not the point though - if you write all over your campaign bus that you'll invest an extra £350m a week in the NHS, I expect to see where that money goes. So, when do I get my new hospital? 
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
mwstewart said:
Ahh.
India accentuates the positive on Brexit
R Chandrasekhar, president of Indian IT industry association Nasscom, said that despite the questions about the feasibility of using the UK as a base for Europe, IT companies saw potential benefits in Brexit too, including the potential for less regulation.
The problem is that the favoured exit plan, for Johnson as well as, one would assume, the remainers, is the Norwegian Options. Less regulation? Yeah, right.India accentuates the positive on Brexit
R Chandrasekhar, president of Indian IT industry association Nasscom, said that despite the questions about the feasibility of using the UK as a base for Europe, IT companies saw potential benefits in Brexit too, including the potential for less regulation.
Some good points, but the fact it was mixed in with thinly veiled insults (however true they might be) arrogance and overconfidence, serves only to rile up the EU.
This, in my opinion doesn't make a great start to what I consider to be the proper way to leave.
Still, entertaining to watch!
This, in my opinion doesn't make a great start to what I consider to be the proper way to leave.
Still, entertaining to watch!
Murph7355 said:
(And please don't whine about the 350 figure. I agree it was a silly number to put up in that way. I don't think anyone denies it's a 3-figure million sum per week though. Which is still a horrendous amount of money in anyone's book).
Yes it's a huge sum to us as individuals, but in the context of £760 billion in annual spending by the govt and a public sector net debt of £1.6 trillion, even if we were to save £5 billion or so per year it is pennies to the country. This decision should not have involved money as we are unlikely to save a single penny by leaving.
sidicks said:
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:
"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
don4l said:
OzzyR1 said:
don4l said:
Meanwhile, I wonder why the queen is looking so happy?
£14 million bonus on the cards this year.Superb value.
You're like an immigrant Irish Mr Bridger
Oh well. Looking forward to an Indy Scotland joining the EU and a load of industry shuffling north to take advantage. It may well yet have done as a favour - I can almost picture us racing our speedboats about the Clyde, pissing champagne like Monegasque bourgeoisie.
sidicks said:
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:
"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
The poster however does make it explicit."We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
FredClogs said:
TTwiggy said:
FredClogs said:
The rectification of a couple of dodgy Tory bar bills and expenses claims isn't going to make Farage any more palatable to the majority of Brits, even those in Essex.
Point of order - Thanet is in Kent.Kent.
55palfers said:
Not wishing to start another EU thread.
Whilst on the subject of national embarrassment, how about Branson effectively saying that the electorate are too stupid to vote as they don't comprehend the consequences and we need another ballot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3663620/We...
Who do these people think they are.
Is that the multi millionaire Richard Branson that has his own island? Beckham must be in a quandary also........ Politics or Football manager - what does he choose?Whilst on the subject of national embarrassment, how about Branson effectively saying that the electorate are too stupid to vote as they don't comprehend the consequences and we need another ballot.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3663620/We...
Who do these people think they are.
sidicks said:
TTwiggy said:
Well, last time I checked it was aging, so I think we will need them. That's not the point though - if you write all over your campaign bus that you'll invest an extra £350m a week in the NHS, I expect to see where that money goes. So, when do I get my new hospital?
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
alfie2244 said:
sidicks said:
TTwiggy said:
Well, last time I checked it was aging, so I think we will need them. That's not the point though - if you write all over your campaign bus that you'll invest an extra £350m a week in the NHS, I expect to see where that money goes. So, when do I get my new hospital?
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
plasticpig said:
sidicks said:
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:
"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
The poster however does make it explicit."We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
lostkiwi said:
alfie2244 said:
sidicks said:
TTwiggy said:
Well, last time I checked it was aging, so I think we will need them. That's not the point though - if you write all over your campaign bus that you'll invest an extra £350m a week in the NHS, I expect to see where that money goes. So, when do I get my new hospital?
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
lostkiwi said:
alfie2244 said:
sidicks said:
TTwiggy said:
Well, last time I checked it was aging, so I think we will need them. That's not the point though - if you write all over your campaign bus that you'll invest an extra £350m a week in the NHS, I expect to see where that money goes. So, when do I get my new hospital?
If you're going to make such a fuss about this, you might want to acknowledge what the message actually said:"We send the EU £350m a week, let's fund our NHS instead."
There is nothing explicit in that stament that says that all £350m will be spent on the NHS, just that more money would be available for the NHS if we weren't sending it to the EU.
Maybe the intention was for the public to link the two issues directly, but given that's not what the statement says, calling it a lie is blatantly wrong.
plasticpig said:
alfie2244 said:
Farage had nowt to do with this poster or the Leave campaign
I agree that he was not on the board of the official campaign appointed by the Electoral Commission but that does not mean he was not part of the campaign to leave the EU.Vote Leave Campaign Committee http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/campaign
The Vote Leave Campaign Committee is the governing body that will meet weekly to set the campaign strategy for Vote Leave
Rt Hon Michael Gove MP (Co-Convener) *
Rt Hon Gisela Stuart MP (Co-Convener) *
Matthew Elliott (Chief Executive) *
Dominic Cummings (Campaign Director) *
Steve Baker MP
Ian Davidson *
Nigel Dodds MP
Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP
Rt Hon Frank Field MP
Lord Forsyth
Rt Hon Liam Fox MP
Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP
Dan Hannan MEP
Boris Johnson MP *
Paul Keetch
Lord Lawson
Andrea Leadsom MP
John Longworth
Lord Owen
Rt Hon Priti Patel MP
Dominic Raab MP
Graham Stringer MP
Rt Hon Theresa Villiers MP
Rt Hon John Whittingdale MP
- Denotes the core group which will coordinate between campaign committee meetings and meet on a daily basis.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff