State of the parties as 2015 General Election looms.

[MrGongGong]

At leat there was a referendum, which suggests to me that the process was reasonably democratic -

I think the kippers (and many others) seem to think that the 1970's referendum was only about trade deals
if you read the text of the leaflet sent to every house you will find that the first aim was

To bring together the peoples of Europe.

So to say that it was somehow a "trick" is simply wrong

And this

To help the poorest regions of Europe and the rest of the world.

Is reasonably clear IMV

TO HELP people doesn't mean allow then to drown in the sea

[Beef Oven!]

At leat there was a referendum, which suggests to me that the process was reasonably democratic - and in any case one can only hold a referendum about something that applies at the time; the implication that the 1970s referendum was flawed or undemocratic because it didn't take on board how and to what extent the union of states might develop over the following decades simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In any case, UKIP appears to want to pull UK out of EU without any referendum, which would surely be well less democratic a procedure than what occurred just over four decades ago!

Nonsense. There have been fundamental changes to the common market and constitutional basis of the EU, that required a referendum - e.g. The Lisbon treaty.

[Flosshilde]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-29845021

The two polls referred to give the SNP 54 or 47 seats in Westminster after the general election next year. I think that's reather more than either UKIP or the LibDems are expecting to get.

The SNP seems to be in a very healthy state, compared to other parties in the UK; I think it will be even healthier when Nicola Sturgeon gets into stride as leader.

[Beef Oven!]

I think the kippers (and many others) seem to think that the 1970's referendum was only about trade deals
if you read the text of the leaflet sent to every house you will find that the first aim was



So to say that it was somehow a "trick" is simply wrong

And this



Is reasonably clear IMV

TO HELP people doesn't mean allow then to drown in the sea

Don't have any problem with that - it's just that you don't need an anti-undemocratic, jobs-for-the-boys club to effect those things.

The trouble with British people is that they've had bad domestic government since the war, and are only too easily accepting of bad government in the form of the EU.

And read post #212 to see why people believe it is a trick.

[Serial_Apologist]

The two polls referred to give the SNP 54 or 47 seats in Westminster after the general election next year. I think that's reather more than either UKIP or the LibDems are expecting to get.

The SNP seems to be in a very healthy state, compared to other parties in the UK

Or the Scottish labour Party, to judge by the mess they now appear to be in with their deputy leader now resigning and a new EC needed.

[MrGongGong]

Don't have any problem with that - it's just that you don't need an anti-undemocratic, jobs-for-the-boys club to effect those things.

The trouble with British people is that they've had bad domestic government since the war, and are only too easily accepting of bad government in the form of the EU.

And read post #212 to see why people believe it is a trick.

We have an "undemocratic" government anyway
so complaining that the EU is somehow "undemocratic" is a bit "Pot, Kettle, Black"


Joining a one man band run by a comedy ex commodities broker is hardly going to change anything for the better is it?
And forming alliances with nasty racist parties doesn't bode well
I'd go with Pete Moser if you want a one man band :-)

So if you don't have any problem with what people were voting for in the 1970's WHY do you, and your kipper mates (and lots of others), Insist that the 1970's referendum was only to do with trade ?

And anyway if the kippers (and the rest of them) really gave a toss about "democracy" they would be actively campaigning for the abolition of the monarchy and getting rid of the House of Lords.

[ahinton]

Nonsense. There have been fundamental changes to the common market and constitutional basis of the EU, that required a referendum - e.g. The Lisbon treaty.

Of course there have been many such changes - but it is NOT nonsense! As I wrote, any referendum (and I refer here specifically to that which enabled UK entry into what's now EU) can only be held on the basis of what pertains at the time, not what might pertain decades hence!

If UKIP believes (and I'm not suggesting that it necessarily does) that Britain joining what it did in the 1970s was OK but Britain remaining a member state of what that has since become is unacceptable, it ought surely to have as part of its manifesto an undertaking to hold a similar referendum to take Britain out of it as was held in the 1970s to take it into what it was then! That would at least have a semblance of democratic procedure, whereas secession without one would not.

[Richard Barrett]

The political elite and liberal types have ignored any concerns about immigration in the last 50 years, so the chicken has come home to roost. They should have had a sensible approach down the years

... that is to say they should have countered (and should still counter) the paranoia with facts, for example the fact that 26% of NHS doctors were born abroad so the system would basically collapse without immigrants (not that the Tories and kippers would be particularly bothered about this of course), or the fact that between 1995 and 2011 immigrants made a net contribution to the British economy of £8.8 billion. There is no convincing economic argument against immigration. Which of course leaves prejudice and small-mindedness, which the kippers and their bandwaggon-jumpers (ie. most of the rest of the "political elite") are only too happy to feed if they think there's an advantage in it for them. Remember all that embarrassing "I agree with Nick" nonsense before the last election. Happily, nobody agrees with "Nick" any more, although agreeing with a strutting popinjay like Farage but being afraid to say so is really no improvement at all.

[Beef Oven!]

We have an "undemocratic" government anyway
so complaining that the EU is somehow "undemocratic" is a bit "Pot, Kettle, Black"

Two wrongs make a right is the cliche you're looking for.

Joining a one man band run by a comedy ex commodities broker is hardly going to change anything for the better is it?
And forming alliances with nasty racist parties doesn't bode well
I'd go with Pete Moser if you want a one man band :-)

Will make a profound change.

So if you don't have any problem with what people were voting for in the 1970's WHY do you, and your kipper mates (and lots of others), Insist that the 1970's referendum was only to do with trade ?

It was about a common market, trade. The other things were aspirational and did not require an unelected, undemocratic European dictatorship.

And anyway if the kippers (and the rest of them) really gave a toss about "democracy" they would be actively campaigning for the abolition of the monarchy and getting rid of the House of Lords.

A low voltage issue.

[Risorgimento]

.....or the fact that between 1995 and 2011 immigrants made a net contribution to the British economy of £8.8 billion. ....

This would suggest that you are wrong. Either that or wishful thinking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25880373

[Beef Oven!]

... that is to say they should have countered (and should still counter) the paranoia with facts, for example the fact that 26% of NHS doctors were born abroad so the system would basically collapse without immigrants (not that the Tories and kippers would be particularly bothered about this of course), or the fact that between 1995 and 2011 immigrants made a net contribution to the British economy of £8.8 billion. There is no convincing economic argument against immigration. Which of course leaves prejudice and small-mindedness, which the kippers and their bandwaggon-jumpers (ie. most of the rest of the "political elite") are only too happy to feed if they think there's an advantage in it for them. Remember all that embarrassing "I agree with Nick" nonsense before the last election. Happily, nobody agrees with "Nick" any more, although agreeing with a strutting popinjay like Farage but being afraid to say so is really no improvement at all.

A sensible immigration policy is required, not 'no immigration'.

[Beef Oven!]

The Think Tank, Migration Watch's most recent study states the cost to Britain, regarding immigration, is £140 billion.

[MrGongGong]

It was about a common market, trade. The other things were aspirational and did not require an unelected, undemocratic European dictatorship.

It was about this

http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/eur...hlet.htm#front

Which is NOT what your mates insist
I guess an "unelected, undemocratic " house of Lords and Monarchy are OK though?

A low voltage issue.

So we only care about "democracy" when it suits
how principled and radically "different" my arse

The Think Tank, Migration Watch

"Think Tank" HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Rightwing campaign group more like

[Beef Oven!]

It was about this

Not Found

The requested URL /eur...hlet.htm was not found on this server.

Apache/2.4.9 (Unix) Server at www.harvard-digital.co.uk Port 80

http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/eur...hlet.htm#front

So we only care about "democracy" when it suits
how principled and radically "different" my arse

It needs to be dealt with, but other issues are more pressing.

"Think Tank" HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Rightwing campaign group more like

It's an excellent piece of work by a seriously good Think Tank

[MrGongGong]

IT was about this

http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm#13

Which isn't what the Kippers pretend at all

But I guess if you repeat lies enough (75% of laws?) people will believe any old shite