Not like the rest at all ?

[Beef Oven!]

He's admitted taking the money. What more do you want?

Fingers in the till? You are accusing him of stealing?

[MrGongGong]

He's admitted taking the money. What more do you want?

He is also guilty of lying

(75% ring a bell ?)

Not honest
Not trustworthy
Not ethical
So refreshingly different .................................. not

[Beef Oven!]

He is also guilty of lying

(75% ring a bell ?)

Not honest
Not trustworthy
Not ethical
So refreshingly different .................................. not

Nigel has registered the barn, every year since 2001 - declared in his European Parliament Register of Interests. He has the use of a rent-free office in the barn from J Longhurst Ltd. The barn has been used as his MEP office so he registered it with the European Parliamentary register, every year, for the last 13 years!

He's hardly hiding anything!

The Election Commission says he should have told them, too. If this is the only dirt that the establishment can dig up, I think Nigel won't be losing much sleep!

It is certainly not stealing, no 'fingers in the till'.

[MrGongGong]

He lied and continues to do so about the role of Brussels in UK lawmaking

So different from all the rest my ar*e

[teamsaint]

Well I don't find the National Front, it's initials, applying it to people who you don't agree with, funny. And how are they 'oddly coincidental'?

I'd be happy to discuss the other points with you, if you can desist from stupid irrelevant remarks.

Some people might see them as oddly coincidental.
Some people equate the UKIP with parties like the NF.
I don't, but I was a bit surprised when I recognised the initials that I have never seen it commented on before. It is the sort of thing that opponents might pick up on or use.
That is all.

[teamsaint]

The point of this part of the discussion is that Nigel Farage has been caught with his fingers in the till.

This is not a directly political issue, but it is highly relevant to any claim that he is an honest man.

No-one has yet offered an answer to this:

This has been a very wide ranging discussion about all aspects of Farage and the UKIP.
I didn't realise it had been divided into sub sections.

[Beef Oven!]

Some people might see them as oddly coincidental.
Some people equate the UKIP with parties like the NF.
I don't, but I was a bit surprised when I recognised the initials that I have never seen it commented on before. It is the sort of thing that opponents might pick up on or use.
That is all.

Ed Balls has a very funny surname too. Keep going.

[Beef Oven!]

He lied and continues to do so about the role of Brussels in UK lawmaking

So different from all the rest my ar*e

Truth about the EU is too painful, innit?

Keep pretending.

[MrGongGong]

Truth about the EU is too painful, innit?

Keep pretending.

It's a lie
not the truth
but you seem to be taken in by it
sad sad sad

What about the 40 mile zone round the UK that doesn't include France ?
Or the "dress up for the theatre" law ?
Lies lies lies

[teamsaint]

Ed Balls has a very funny surname too. Keep going.

well there will be room for some more fifth form humour if he ever gets sacked. So good news.

Incidentally, what is the track record for multi national superstates, I wonder?

lets see.........mixed, at best?

[Richard Barrett]

Your 'questions' actually contain your own answers. Why ask me to respond, when you've already provided your answers?

Your points all seem rhetorical, to me.

I'm asking you to respond because presumably you'd have some kind of counterargument against these points.

So, what do you think about the fact that the difference between the UK being in or out of the EU is not that some proportion of regulations affecting the UK are drawn up in Brussels, but that the UK government would no longer have any influence over these regulations, because the fact of their affecting the UK would remain more or less the same, just as EU regulations affect European countries which aren't in the EU such as Norway or Iceland or Serbia?

And I hope that you also accept the easily-checked facts that 75% of "our" laws are in fact not made in Brussels and that immigration from Europe doesn't add to unemployment in the UK, so what do you think about the fact that "honest" Farage is constantly repeating these untruths? His political programme (if you can call it that), based as it is on this kind of obfuscation, from someone who at the very least has a "creative" attitude towards expenses claims, seems to me in no way different from what the major parties come up with. I don't see how an intelligent person can swallow all that; you must have your reasons I guess but like Farage himself you seem strangely coy about tackling any substantive questions.

[MrGongGong]

I'm asking you to respond because presumably you'd have some kind of counterargument against these points.

I think the "argument" goes along the lines of
Nige is a good egg, he bought me a pint and knows some good jokes......

[Anna]

So, what do you think about the fact that the difference between the UK being in or out of the EU is not that some proportion of regulations affecting the UK are drawn up in Brussels, but that the UK government would no longer have any influence over these regulations, because the fact of their affecting the UK would remain more or less the same, just as EU regulations affect European countries which aren't in the EU such as Norway or Iceland or Serbia?

I'm glad you raised that point. UKIP seem to think an exit from Europe would mean EU Directives, regulations, etc., would just be discarded/ignored. As one example in their election manifesto it was stated that the EU directive on landfill and waste wouldn't be adhered to thereby going back to landfill and reducing council tax for all (their words, not mine), a step so retrograde it's unbelievable. Ditto they'd repeal (their words) the Human Rights Act, all the Common Agricultural Policy, etc., etc. Don't they realise they are living in cuckoo land.

As for Kipper MEPs being honest - on News Night, just after the election, the newly elected (he replaced someone who stood down) Member for Wales was asked if he'd now fight for Welsh jobs, money, etc., in Brussels. He replied that he wouldn't as Brussels was just another layer of bureaucracy and nothing could be achieved. So he was asked why bother to turn up, why not donate his salary to a Welsh charity? He replied that he was donating a percentage of the salary to The Party to fight on, that all MEPs were pledged to do this (he also omitted pre-election to mention he was a Mormon and a percentage of his salary would go to the Church of the Latter Day Saints) He rather graciously also stated that they had changedf their minds and would not now abolish the Welsh Assembly. I see now from various Twitter feeds that they intend to target 6 seats in the Senedd and destroy it from within and restore Wales to the bosom of England.

Farage said he'd got rid of the fruitcakes and loonies but I don't think so. In January their Education Spokesman, Derek Clark, again said that the teaching of climate change linked to CO2 emissions would be banned in schools.

[Richard Barrett]

Farage said he'd got rid of the fruitcakes and loonies but I don't think so.

Every few weeks another one pops up. I don't think he'd have much of a party if he got rid of all of them.

[Beef Oven!]

I'm asking you to respond because presumably you'd have some kind of counterargument against these points.

So, what do you think about the fact that the difference between the UK being in or out of the EU is not that some proportion of regulations affecting the UK are drawn up in Brussels, but that the UK government would no longer have any influence over these regulations, because the fact of their affecting the UK would remain more or less the same, just as EU regulations affect European countries which aren't in the EU such as Norway or Iceland or Serbia?

And I hope that you also accept the easily-checked facts that 75% of "our" laws are in fact not made in Brussels and that immigration from Europe doesn't add to unemployment in the UK, so what do you think about the fact that "honest" Farage is constantly repeating these untruths? His political programme (if you can call it that), based as it is on this kind of obfuscation, from someone who at the very least has a "creative" attitude towards expenses claims, seems to me in no way different from what the major parties come up with. I don't see how an intelligent person can swallow all that; you must have your reasons I guess but like Farage himself you seem strangely coy about tackling any substantive questions.

Your points are without merit and reactionary, which surprises me.

Do I really need to waste time telling you that Norway, Iceleand and Serbia can sign up to any stupid deal, if they want to and it doesn't mean the UK has to?

I'm also surprised to hear you making the immigration case for the corporate business men, who can tell a good deal when they see it.