Not like the rest at all ?

[Beef Oven!]

But you do accept that 'our' laws would have to incorporate, where necessary, various EU regulations? I'm thinking for example of exports.

Also, I cannot see anywhere whether UKIP have said they would wish the UK to join the EEA or EFTA, or both? In which case the UK would still be subject to EU regulations and directives (and of course pay into the EU) or whether UKIP would intend to entirely go it alone.

I personally do not envisage much change anyway, should the UK leave the EU, both ways around. UK law will be pretty much as is, and BMW, Mercedes Audi etc will be aggressively pursuing the UK market and selling us squillions of German cars.

The changes will be more on a going forward basis.

[jean]

I don't see it as a 'primary reason to have nothing to do with a political party'. I see it as a challenge.

You mean selecting from everything on offer the party with the nastiest set of policies, and trying to reform them from within?

With one MP, a slight MEP presence and not much else, [the Greens] like a challenge!

It's the sort of challenge I, for one, find far more hopeful.

[Beef Oven!]

You mean selecting from everything on offer the party with the nastiest set of policies, and trying to reform them from within?

No, I see it as an challenge to my thinking. But that's me. You might see it differently.

[jean]

You mean you do not currently hold these noxious views, but that you might be persuaded?

[Beef Oven!]

You mean you do not currently hold these noxious views, but that you might be persuaded?

Which noxious views are you thinking of? I think your question lost something because you are taking the piss.

Clarify and I'll happily answer, if I can.

[jean]

Which noxious views are you thinking of?

The ones Richard outlines here, in response to you:

You have to be realistic. Any right-wing political party will attract its fair share of people who have an irrational approach to race. It goes with the territory.

And this as far as I'm concerned would be a primary reason to have nothing to do with any right-wing political party. As you say, it (bigotry, divisiveness, lack of respect for fellow humans etc.) goes with the territory (greed, profiteering, institutionalised inequality etc.).

And then you said:

I don't see it as a 'primary reason to have nothing to do with a political party'. I see it as a challenge. The world's not perfect.

I can (just about) understand that you might want to reform such a party from within, which was my first interpretation of the 'challenge' you were responding to.

But then you said:

No, I see it as an challenge to my thinking...

So I did my best with that one. But you thought I was taking the piss.

.

[Beef Oven!]

I'm happy to converse with you Jean, but are you honestly asking me if I am giving consideration to finessing irrational views on race, into my thinking?

"You mean you do not currently hold these noxious views, but that you might be persuaded?"

Is this a serious question, or are you just taking the piss?

[ahinton]

When you say 'try this for size' I was expecting something of substance. Sounds like the EU are saying 'we didn't know about this trifling legislation and it's no use to us - as you were'.

Whoopee! The EU isn't interested in one obscure law, that nobody had heard of anyway!

Btw, if that law ever contradicted any EU dictate on immigration, banking, car insurance, protectionist business measures etc, you can expect them to become interested in it, and we'd have to change our laws!

Wrong on several counts.

If the passage and implementation of a law that includes a clause that effectively denies genuine and successful litigants the right to sue an organisation that has done quantifiable damage isn't "something of substance", I would be very surprised, not least because this kind of immunity contravenes provisions not only in the UK Human Rights Act but also in the European ditto, the Univeral Declaration of Human rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to all of which the UK Government is a signatory; these provisions include the rights of citizens to equal treatment under the law in general and by the Courts in particular, neither of which is fully possible when litigants are entitled to sue for damages only in cases where the defendant has not been granted statutory immunity therefrom.

It does not sound as though EU is saying anything like what you suggest; it sounds precisely as I described it, namely that EC defers all responsibility for decision making on the granting of statutory immunity to each individual EU member state's government and does not interfere therein.

I was not in any case referring to just one UK law; I was writing about broadly similar clauses in several such laws that prescribe the same or similar immunity. That none of these laws is obscure, still less unheard of, may be deduced from that fact that they include those that govern the conduct, remit and responsibilities of such organisations as the Takover Panel, the Legal Services Board, the Bank of England and the possibly soon to be privatised Land Registry.

To your assertion that "if that law [meaning "those laws"] ever contradicted any EU dictate on immigration, banking, car insurance, protectionist business measures etc, you can expect them to become interested in it, and we'd have to change our laws!", I argue that, if any of them contradict European Human Rights legislation (as seems to be the case), EC ought to be just as interested as you assert that it would be were they to contradict any "EU dictate on" the various measures that you mention - unless, of course, EC has one rule for treatment of breaches of European human rights legislation and another for treatment of all other EU member states' breaches of statute.

Since you do not appear even to know which particular UK law/s I was referring to, may I humbly suggest that you consider doing a little homework before making unfounded statements such as the above?

[jean]

I'm happy to converse with you Jean, but are you honestly asking me if I am giving consideration to finessing irrational views on race, into my thinking?

I am asking you if you can make clear to me the nature of the 'challenge' you are rising to.

(I've added another couple of quotes to my previous post to make the course of the conversation clearer.)

.

[Beef Oven!]

I am asking you if you can make clear to me the nature of the 'challenge' you are rising to.

(I've added another quote to my previous post to make the course of the conversation clearer.)

.

Then you should have said that, rather than being stupid and asking me if I could be persuaded to take on racist attitudes.

Now, what I mean, is that it is a challenge to my thinking and voting behaviour.

I am a passionate believer in the 'individual' and abhor state intervention into our lives, save for a minimum set of essential things to maintain the body politic. There are many other political matters that are important to me, but this is the most important. Therefore the EU is anathema.

The UKIP is the only party that is a) classical liberal and b) for getting us right out of the EU. So they get my vote.

The challenge is that as someone who, for various reasons, has placed a premium on diversity, both in my personal and professional life, the UKIP falls short for me on that matter. It is my belief that the party is addressing the issue, and for now I have a voting watching-brief.

The other matter that could cause me not to vote for the UKIP, is while I whole-heartedly endorse free-market entrepreneurial capitalism, I do not believe in a free-market 'free-for all'. And I'm not sure where the UKIP stands on that.

[Flosshilde]

The challenge is that as someone who, for various reasons, has placed a premium on diversity, both in my personal and professional life, the UKIP falls short for me on that matter. It is my belief that the party is addressing the issue,

No, it isn't. When a member is found out & their racism etc is publicised they deal with that specific member. The party doesn't deal with the policies which encourage such people to join them. The issue isn't (a few?) members, but the party's policies.

[Beef Oven!]

No, it isn't. When a member is found out & their racism etc is publicised they deal with that specific member. The party doesn't deal with the policies which encourage such people to join them.

Definitely a point to be considered. No point dealing with the symptoms - what are the specific policies that you are referring to, specifically?

[Richard Barrett]

The anti-immigration policieis of UKIP, which are clearly based on xenophobia since there is no economic argument for the kind of restrictions they suggest, are the policies that attract racists, I would have thought that was obvious. If I see that Farage has said he wouldn't like a bunch of Romanians to move in next door that makes me regard him as a nasty piece of work, whereas a racist would see it as something highly encouraging about UKIP.

And by the way I am no fan of the EU myself: it is an undemocratic bosses' club which promotes neoliberal ideology, its austerity measures continue to drive large numbers of people further into poverty while protecting the financial institutions which make themselves richer on the back of a "crisis" they created, its policies have eroded workers' rights and promoted privatisation of public services, and so on. But wild horses wouldn't make me vote for a party like UKIP. It clearly makes its appeal by means of lies, smears and brutal simplifications; and while it may not at this point in time be a fascist organisation, it will in this way certainly attract those who would be attracted to such an organisation if there were one in the UK with any kind of profile, which thankfully at present there isn't.

[jean]

UKIP...clearly makes its appeal by means of lies, smears and brutal simplifications; and while it may not at this point in time be a fascist organisation, it will in this way certainly attract those who would be attracted to such an organisation if there were one in the UK with any kind of profile, which thankfully at present there isn't.

I haven't studied the local election results across the whole country, but the fact is that in this city the wards where UKIP did best this time were those where the BNP have recorded the most votes in previous years.

[jean]

The challenge is that as someone who, for various reasons, has placed a premium on diversity, both in my personal and professional life, the UKIP falls short for me on that matter. It is my belief that the party is addressing the issue, and for now I have a voting watching-brief.

...I see it as an challenge to my thinking...

Your explanation above does not really help me to see how your thinking is being challenged.

.