The 'No to the EU' campaign
Discussion
NicD said:
Just read this on a Guardian comments thread, quite humorous:
'The Times is read by the people that run the country.
The Guardian by the people that want another country to run the country and the Telegraph by the people that believe it already is.'
The 1970s rang - they want their joke back.'The Times is read by the people that run the country.
The Guardian by the people that want another country to run the country and the Telegraph by the people that believe it already is.'
The full script was actually used, and was at least 15 years old then, in Yes Minister:
http://www.comedy.co.uk/guide/tv/yes_prime_ministe...
script said:
Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers. The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country, and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.
turbobloke said:
mph1977 said:
...what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly...
Apart from the fact that from around 2002 Ghosn has been threatening to pull Nissan if the UK didn't join the EZ. We didn't join, the EZ started melting, Nissan is still here, and Ghosn shut his mouth - at least for a while. Whenever it opens again, it's same old.The thing about scaremongering is that for continued effect, any at all, it has to escalate, and given it had little credibility at the outset this just makes things more obvious and actually dilutes the impact.
while the market might swallow the costs on a Jag or Range rover it isn;t going to swallow them on a Qashqai or Civic... equally is Ellesmere Port going to be an attractive location for Adam Opel AG to build vehicles , ditto Luton to build vans for various people ...
s2art said:
I dont consider our negotiating position weak at all.
I didn't say it was. I said adding more things you need out of a negotiation makes your position weaker. Damage to your financial services sector is a huge risk of an exit. You can't just imagine it will all be taken care of and dismiss it, even the risk of an exit is going to damage the UK in the run up to the referendum as firms put investment on hold.fblm said:
s2art said:
I dont consider our negotiating position weak at all.
I didn't say it was. I said adding more things you need out of a negotiation makes your position weaker. Damage to your financial services sector is a huge risk of an exit. You can't just imagine it will all be taken care of and dismiss it, even the risk of an exit is going to damage the UK in the run up to the referendum as firms put investment on hold.turbobloke said:
fblm said:
s2art said:
I dont consider our negotiating position weak at all.
I didn't say it was. I said adding more things you need out of a negotiation makes your position weaker. Damage to your financial services sector is a huge risk of an exit. You can't just imagine it will all be taken care of and dismiss it, even the risk of an exit is going to damage the UK in the run up to the referendum as firms put investment on hold.Wishfull thinking I'm afraid.Cameron will be sidelined with friendly banter and understanding by the European leaders from Germany and France.Italy and Greece should have never been allowed to join the E.U.Financial basket cases.People from East Europe where always going to look for opportunities abroad as soon they joined the E.U.
The referendum should be here in 2016 and let's get this over once and for all.Before everybody switches off.
Foppo said:
turbobloke said:
fblm said:
s2art said:
I dont consider our negotiating position weak at all.
I didn't say it was. I said adding more things you need out of a negotiation makes your position weaker. Damage to your financial services sector is a huge risk of an exit. You can't just imagine it will all be taken care of and dismiss it, even the risk of an exit is going to damage the UK in the run up to the referendum as firms put investment on hold.Foppo said:
The referendum should be here in 2016 and let's get this over once and for all.Before everybody switches off.
The sooner the better.NicD said:
But he doesn't say why to stop at 16, why not let Scots of all ages vote? Surely this facile argument applies to all ages, new born to dying
16 is fairly significant in terms of responsibilities and opportunity. At 16 you can work full-time - effectively you'll potentially pay income tax from then (under 16s are liable but limited in hours effectively removing them from taxation). You can server in the Army from 16.Other than the general liklihood that younger voters are more likely to be left-leaning I can't see a good reason 16+ isn't the voting age and barring voters because they'll vote a specific way isn't great!
IainT said:
NicD said:
But he doesn't say why to stop at 16, why not let Scots of all ages vote? Surely this facile argument applies to all ages, new born to dying
16 is fairly significant in terms of responsibilities and opportunity. At 16 you can work full-time - effectively you'll potentially pay income tax from then (under 16s are liable but limited in hours effectively removing them from taxation). You can server in the Army from 16.Other than the general liklihood that younger voters are more likely to be left-leaning I can't see a good reason 16+ isn't the voting age and barring voters because they'll vote a specific way isn't great!
There's no official talk of barring people from voting because they'll vote a specific way, but by the same token allowing youngsters to vote because they won't vote a specific way is no better.
turbobloke said:
Barring them because they lack sufficient maturity has been the way of things for a very long time and for good reason.
There's no official talk of barring people from voting because they'll vote a specific way, but by the same token allowing youngsters to vote because they won't vote a specific way is no better.
I'm not suggesting there is a movement to bar people based on how they might vote but I fail to see how your 'maturity' argument isn't very close to that. We don't apply any form of cognitive or capability testing to the right to vote post 16 so it's clearly not the main reason.There's no official talk of barring people from voting because they'll vote a specific way, but by the same token allowing youngsters to vote because they won't vote a specific way is no better.
Looking at things that impact people's ability to reach decisions and turning it around a bit...
So what maximum voting age should we institute or how should we test for dementia or other issues affecting cognitive ability? What minimum voting IQ should we have?
Foppo said:
Wishfull thinking I'm afraid.Cameron will be sidelined with friendly banter and understanding by the European leaders from Germany and France.Italy and Greece should have never been allowed to join the E.U.Financial basket cases.People from East Europe where always going to look for opportunities abroad as soon they joined the E.U.
The referendum should be here in 2016 and let's get this over once and for all.Before everybody switches off.
Italy is a founder member! It was the treaty of Rome after all.The referendum should be here in 2016 and let's get this over once and for all.Before everybody switches off.
Things are not looking good for the EU if the original members can be called 'basket cases'. In fact, it seems like only Germany and Luxemburg out of the original members are doing any good at all.
turbobloke said:
If so, then so be it. After Labour spent the country onto its knees the spending had to stop, that meant (rocket science moment ahead) less growth in central spending for a while, as the bloated public sector got trimmed down while the private sector ramped up. The position now is significantly healthier. The EU represents bloat, a costly incompetent supranational layer of bossy bureaucracy that wasn't needed before it existed and continues now for the ego of its "leaders" with the impoverishment of several of its nation states to the benefit of a few others. All the more reason to get shot of it when we can and resume on a path of self-determination.
Nail, on head. I see people are getting the excuses in early.
1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
2. And if that doesn't work by saying the electorate will be too scared about change.
It's a referendum - accept the will of the British people and shut up whatever the result.
1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
2. And if that doesn't work by saying the electorate will be too scared about change.
It's a referendum - accept the will of the British people and shut up whatever the result.
oyster said:
I see people are getting the excuses in early.
1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
If you look at the last Irish referendum that's exactly what happened. First vote was 'No' [to ratify treaty]. EU heavily funded pro-campaign. Second vote [with poorly worded question] - 'Yes'.1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
The Beeb has already showed its blatant bias with the 'Great European Disaster Movie'.
oyster said:
I see people are getting the excuses in early.
1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
2. And if that doesn't work by saying the electorate will be too scared about change.
It's a referendum - accept the will of the British people and shut up whatever the result.
how is any of that an excuse?1. Saying that the 'in' campaign have all the big parties and the cash.
2. And if that doesn't work by saying the electorate will be too scared about change.
It's a referendum - accept the will of the British people and shut up whatever the result.
it's stating the simple facts, the LibLabCons will all be canvassing for staying in the EU, along with the BBC, most of the red-tops, etc. and will probably out-spend the No camp by a factor >10.
the second part - see SNP fear in the GE for an example of scared.
Cameron humiliated as France and Germany tighten grip on Europe with secret No Thanks pact against Britain
- Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande agree deal to tighten political union
- Franco-German pact shores up Eurozone without EU treaty change
- PM has vowed to use treaty change to enact string of key demands
- Came as PM held talks with EU chief Jean-Claude Juncker at Chequers
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff