241 replies to this topic

[Northern Sol]

To leave would be economic suicide especially for the parts of the UK outside the M25. Our regions rely heavily on EU grants for capital development. Do you really think a London centric government would re-direct the saved EU money away from the capital and into the regions such as the north? If we were to leave the EU and an independent (if the vote goes that way) Scotland were to stay in things would become very interesting.

Maybe the north of England could join an independent Scotland, we could be better off.?

I think that the London-centric government would cut taxes across the UK - this being good for all parts of the UK.

[Steve May]

Quite right, there are other issues. Let's talk about immigration, the percentage of crime caused by ethnic minorities, the Afghan War, the lack of state-school-educated men and women in the cabinet and MP's expenses. Oh, and how much did the Olympics cost?

Okay then.

Off you go.

*opens popcorn, waits for the thinnest of thin UKIP veneer to slip silently to the ground*

[Northern Sol]

Okay then.

Off you go.

*opens popcorn, waits for the thinnest of thin UKIP veneer to slip silently to the ground*

Perhaps another thread would be a good idea. It'll only get locked anyway.

[Wolford6]

I don't know what the percentage is. Like most of my friends, I can only draw inference from the relative numbers of newspaper court-reports and crime reports.

The point is, I'm damned sure that it doesn't suit national or local government bodies to let us know. I'm more than willing to be surprised by documented proof that my inferences are unfounded.

[John Drake]

Cameron's playing for time. What use is a promise of a referendum some time in the next seven years, but only if the Tories win the next election. He might as well promise to have a referendum some time in the next seven years to bring back the death penalty, but only if the Tories win the next election.

In both cases, in a referendum, the public are likely to give the response he doesn't want. Neither does Miliband think any differently.

It's an empty political gesture and a fudge to prevent the electorate from having a fair say on whether or not to stay in.


At that election, vote UKIP and force the issue.

How would voting UKIP force the issue? It would take a massive and wholly improbably vote shift for them to get a single MP in Parliament in 2015 under our electoral system, let alone enough MPs to hold any kind of influence after the election. That may not be fair (it isn't), but it is the reality of the situation. They may win enough votes in some areas to cause a few Tory MPs to lose their seats, but given the Tories are the only party offering a referendum anyway, that's a self defeating outcome if a referendum is what you're truly after.

David Cameron's biggest problem here is what would actually happen if he did win the next election on the back of this referendum promise. The new influx of MPs that would give him his majority are likely to be on the right and anti-EU, adding to the sizeable number of such MPs already on his backbenches. Yet he has said he would personally campaign fiercely to stay in the EU when his referendum is held. Whatever the outcome of that referendum, he therefore cannot avoid splitting his party asunder and destroying his own premiership. If the result is to stay in, his rightwingers will blame him for their 'defeat' on the issue and seek to undermine him at every opportunity thus destabilising his government, as they did to John Major. If the vote is to leave, his leadership will be shorn of all credibility anyway and the battle for the succession will eclipse any kind of sensible policy making for the remainder of the Parliament.

[JohnM]

He certainly is.




It has nothing to do with preventing the electorate having a fair say on anything. He wants to kill this as a focus of sedition and mutiny on his backbenches and take the wind out of UKIPs sails. You are quite correct though, that it is an empty political gesture.



I'd rather cut my balls off with pinking shears than vote UKIP.

Me too. I'd rather cut your balls off with pinking shears than vote UKIP.

OK, so I'm not quite on the left side of politics by there is no way I'd vote UKIP. I like Farage but only because he makes the main parties sweat.

However, it is interesting to see the French reaction as Cameron's approach is exactly that of the French trades unions when they are negotiating with the French govt.

[Wolford6]

How would voting UKIP force the issue? It would take a massive and wholly improbably vote shift for them to get a single MP in Parliament in 2015 under our electoral system, let alone enough MPs to hold any kind of influence after the election. That may not be fair (it isn't), but it is the reality of the situation. They may win enough votes in some areas to cause a few Tory MPs to lose their seats, but given the Tories are the only party offering a referendum anyway, that's a self defeating outcome if a referendum is what you're truly after.

I reckon:

At the next election, half the Libdem vote will pass to Labour and not many to the Tories. A significant proportion of the Tory and Labour vote will pass to UKIP. As the current constituency boundaries will remain, Labour has an inbuilt edge over the Tories.

I suspect that three or four Tory MP's will defect to UKIP as a combination of being anti-EU, anti-immigration and being really keen to hold on to their seats.

The crunch will come if UKIP gains significant seats(5? 10?). Cameron could then be obliged to form a coalition of Tory, Unionist and UKIP members. A pact with Farage will not come cheap.

[Saintslass]

Walking out of the door won't stop its influence on the UK but it will prevent the UK having any influence on what it does. That would be madness, IMO.

That's exactly what some were saying about us not joining the Euro. Joining the Euro would have been a disaster though and frankly I can't say us not having any influence (if indeed we haven't had any influence) has made a smidgen's worth of difference to our own financial situation. However, not being a part of the Eurozone has probably enabled us to stay free of financial calamity and years of externally imposed sanctions.

[Steve May]

That's exactly what some were saying about us not joining the Euro. Joining the Euro would have been a disaster though and frankly I can't say us not having any influence (if indeed we haven't had any influence) has made a smidgen's worth of difference to our own financial situation. However, not being a part of the Eurozone has probably enabled us to stay free of financial calamity and years of externally imposed sanctions.

Thanks Gordon. You'll be proved right in the end...

[Shadow]

That's exactly what some were saying about us not joining the Euro. Joining the Euro would have been a disaster though and frankly I can't say us not having any influence (if indeed we haven't had any influence) has made a smidgen's worth of difference to our own financial situation. However, not being a part of the Eurozone has probably enabled us to stay free of financial calamity and years of externally imposed sanctions.

And you know this to be true because.......?

[tonyXIII]

I can't really see that a referendum will make much difference. It will be worded so carefully that, whichever way we vote, the government will claim they have been given a mandate to do exactly what they were going to do anyway.

[gingerjon]

enabled us to stay free of financial calamity

This did make me laugh.

[Saintslass]

This did make me laugh.

If you think what we have been through since the banking crash is a financial calamity then you either are too young, under-educated or ill informed (or a combination of the three).

Greece is a financial calamity. But even Greece looks like a lottery winner to, say, England in the 1930s.

[Saintslass]

And you know this to be true because.......?

Because we can still decide for ourselves how to deal with the economic downturn (if indeed that is what it still is) within the context of our own country (its strengths and weaknesses) and we can do so without other countries determining what should be our standard, beyond the usual trading fluctuations.

Edited by Saintslass, 23 January 2013 - 09:28 PM.

[longboard]

I predict UKIP to be successful in the next European Parliament Elections.

They do ok when not many people vote.

[longboard]

Because we can still decide for ourselves how to deal with the economic downturn (if indeed that is what it still is) within the context of our own country (its strengths and weaknesses) and we can do so without other countries determining what should be our standard, beyond the usual trading fluctuations.

Do you think we are deciding for ourselves?

[longboard]

I've just been having a boozy lunch with a member of the Labour party about this. Well, it was about something else but after a few glasses we got on to Farage.

We agreed that - despite wanting to punch Cameron in the nuts repeatedly until he howls - the Tories are playing a good game here. They're neutralising why vote Ukip with the referendum whilst also getting the golf club bores to sound forth on topics other than Europe. Ukip may get 10+% in the election but they won't get an MP and then afterwards they will become the Veritas Party they were always destined to be.

Jon, stop being a wind-up merchant. Let it rest.

[John Drake]

I reckon:

At the next election, half the Libdem vote will pass to Labour and not many to the Tories. A significant proportion of the Tory and Labour vote will pass to UKIP. As the current constituency boundaries will remain, Labour has an inbuilt edge over the Tories.

I suspect that three or four Tory MP's will defect to UKIP as a combination of being anti-EU, anti-immigration and being really keen to hold on to their seats.

The crunch will come if UKIP gains significant seats(5? 10?). Cameron could then be obliged to form a coalition of Tory, Unionist and UKIP members. A pact with Farage will not come cheap.

It'll be a judgement on the economy that determines the outcome of the next election. Who do people trust (or least distrust, perhaps) to create jobs and keep them in employment with a roof over their head. That's always the key issue. Europe will be a footnote to the campaign. Recall William Hague's doomed 2001 Tory campaign slogan: 'Only 7 days to save the Pound". It made zero impression on the public or the result, regardless of the degree to which it obsessed certain sections of the Tory Party and the media.

I'll make a prediction that UKIP will not only fail to win a single seat in Parliament in 2015, but that they won't even come close to overtaking the Lib Dems in vote share, regardless of the latter's current unpopularity. They are doing well in by-elections (though still not well enough to actually win one) at the moment due to being the latest recepticle for protest voters to dump their vote on. They will do much better in the Euro Elections because of the PR electoral system and low turnout - only the rabid and the politically dedicated bother to vote in those - which tells you all you need to know about how much of a key issue the EU won't be when the General Election rolls round. That won't stop pundits extrapolating those results and making wild predictions of sweeping UKIP gains at Westminster in 2015 because that's what they do to fill airtime. It doesn't mean it'll happen.

[metallithrax]

OK, can someone give me a good reason why I shouldn't vote UKIP?

And, can someone give me good reason why we shouldn't be in the EU, as against why we should.

[Saintslass]

Do you think we are deciding for ourselves?

When compared to those in the eurozone? Yes. When compared to those in, say, the USA? No.

Edited by Saintslass, 23 January 2013 - 10:34 PM.