Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Does anyone think that the Tories refusal to cut taxes if in power, after 9 years of Labour tax rises, is right? They have even said tax rises are not inconceivable. Osborne is Shadow Chancellor, and it's a more important issue than the silliness over the autism comments!

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

they haven't refused to cut taxes - they have just stated that they will not commit to that agenda until they have seen the books.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

The books are pretty open for all to see. And I have seen the Labour style high tax and spend ethos behind Cameron's thinking even if he hasn't supplied policies to go with them.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Makes sense to me. Is a political party going to make promises that it can keep?

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Are you a "Tory Mole", and is that how you have seen these "ethos" - or are you just going on what you have read in the papers?

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

what theyve said is economic stability is more important than pledging tax cuts. personally i think cameron is trying to establish a new identity for toryism and tax is one of the key ways of doing so. tebbit clearly took the bait judging by his tax slashing europhobic rant at a fringe meeting yesterday. so all the aged thatcherites will bleat on and cameron can claim to be distinct from that old style toryism with which voters no longer connect. its another lesson taken from the blair's big book of political tricks - its the tories clause 4 moment.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Why would anyone read newspaper reports (journalists are not exactly full of investigative zeal are they?) when there are several unadorned and recent speeches available for analysis?

I read about the need for economic stability and it is without doubt very important. But Cameron's "Let the Sunshine win the day" Tories sound like Labour clones, and after 9 years of Labour tax rises they should be downright embarrassed not to be able to promise tax cuts.

Can you be more specific about why you disagreed with Tebbit's speech yesterday? To call it a europhobic rant isn't adding much to the debate.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

tebbitt demanded tax cuts and said one way to pay for them was to pull out of the eu.

ok, im against tax cuts for a number of reasons - education (can't even pay for proper school meals, reliant on pfi for new build schools, charging for higher education etc), youth services (grossly underfunded), social services (grossly underfunded), pensions (gaping hole and minimal state support).... etc etc.

im for a fairer tax regime which would include reversing many of the indirect taxes levied by labour which disadvantage the poor and ensuring higher earners (and in particular the highest) pay their way by ensuring loopholes are closed and that a new higher rate band kicks in. hope thats enough explanation.... sure to arouse the passions of a few here i should think ;-)

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

No disagreement from anyone there I think

Hmmm not quite as convinced of that one, I'm don't see why anyone who is successful should be penalised for it, all that will happen is that many will sod off abroad and earn the money elsewhere instead. Many high earners generate more growth and indirect revenue for the economy than they would pay in taxes so why force them out :shrug:

I seem to recall something daubed by the press of the time as the Brain Drain happening in the 70s.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Of course, why would anyone want to put any more back into the system that has provided so well for them? That would be so unjust :rolleyes:

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Hardly suggestive of a 'europhobic rant'. However, leaving the EU, and with it the CAP which hits the poor a lot harder than it does the rich, would certainly help, but there are other ways a country run properly for the benefit of its inhabitants could make changes. Making real changes would mean leaving the EU, because most of our laws (at least 70%) now come from its institutions, and we mostly follow EU approved policies.

So you are against tax cuts for the traditional socialist reasons? OK fair enough, I can respect that although not being a socialist I don't see things the same way. I disagree with PFIs for hospital and schools funding too. Did you know that PFIs were introduced in 1992 to comply with the EU's convergence criteria, a requirement of the Maastricht Treaty? I also disagree with higher education charges (and this is a personal issue for me as I have 4 children). And imo many public services are grossly underfunded because they are grossly overused partly as a result of crap government policies. As you have found such faults with the present system, I take it you are not a Labour voter any more than you are a Tory one ...?

I'm also for a fairer tax regime, but what is 'fair' is a political issue. Some people having to contribute close to half (or more) of their earnings to the state, whilst other perfectly capable people are allowed to sit back and do nothing on the flimsiest of excuses, is obscene. That is not to say that I want the weak or vulnerable to be harrassed into working, or the sick to have to wait months for hospital treatment either, etc, etc.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

"Traditional socialist reasons" - I would call them common-sense reasons, myself, and I have voted Tory all my life. It's just like running your household - you work out your income, calculate your outgoings, and anything left over, you have to make decisions on what to do with it. You could just go down the pub (tax-cuts), or you could save up the money and invest it in your house, thus investing in the future.

If we must have tax-cuts, they should be focussed on the less well paid, and we should raise the tax threshold, and lower the bottom rates of tax to distribute the money to those who need it most - lower-paid working people (you should like this, as the "work-shy scroungers" don't benefit).

Let's look at the figures -
The first £5,035 of income is the Personal Allowance and is therefore taxfree.

• Starting rate of 10% on income up to £2,090;
• Basic rate of 22% on income between £2,091 and £32,400; and
• Higher rate of 40% on income over £32,400.

Bearing in mind that these income tax rates are applied to the income after deducting the tax-free Personal Allowance, it follows for example that, say, an employed person with no other income could receive (£32,400 + £5,035) = £37,435 this tax year before paying higher rate tax.
The actual tax due would be calculated as follows:
The first £5,035 of income is the Personal Allowance and is therefore taxfree.
The next £2,090 is taxed at 10% (tax of £209). The next band of income between £2,091 and £32,400 is taxed at 22% (tax of £6,668). The total tax payable would therefore be £6,877 (£209 plus £6,668). So for someone earning nearly twice the national average wage, his income tax would be under 20% of his salary (I know you have to take off NI of 11% as well).

If we dropped the higher-rate tax to 35%, that means (roughly) someone earning over £37k pa would be £1 per week better off for every thousand pounds they earned over £37k, so if they earned £45k a year, they would be £8 per week better off. Don't you agree this £8 per week would be more useful to someone earning the minimum wage of £5 per hour, £10k per year - it would make a big difference to them, and (usually) only a small difference to someone on £47k pa.

Before I was made redundant, I earned a reasonable amount of money (well over the higher rate threshold, with company car, fuel, etc) - my monthly total "tax" bill (income tax and NI) was not above 38%, so it would be interesting to see where your "close to half" figure comes from.

I also fail to see your connection between tax cuts and people "scrounging off the state" - if there is an issue with "scroungers", get it sorted out, then if there are cost-savings because of this, then decide how these should be allocated. Standard household budgeting rules (or they should be, imho) - don't spend the money before you have earned/saved it.

btw, 12% of tax-payers pay the higher rate of income tax, and when I am working, I am one of them, and proud of it; I see it as paying for the future, for my children, and other's children - I wish sometimes it was spent more wisely, but with rising expectations of the electorate, and short-termism the name of the game in politics and business, that won't be easy to change.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

that was a rather good post foreverwar :-) cant rep you for it which means you must have made sense elsewhere recently ;-)

im a higher rate tax payer and dont begrudge it. but i watch friends struggle by on minimum wage, or wading through tax credit forms, or battling with the csa to try scrape cash together to support their kids. im ashamed that our country, one of the world's richest, allows such a shabby state of affairs.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Excellent post Foreverwar...

To put the debate into perspective, Tax levels in the UK are not high compared to the continent (cost of living is though). I used to pay 50% (inc NI) on any earnings over ~25k (this was a few years back). In return for these higher levels of taxation, you get properly funded public services. If the British public want public services comparable to those in many countries on the continent, you know how to get it: pay for it through taxation. What many Brits seem to want is continental levels of public service at US levels of taxation. Guess what: It aint gonna work.

I am very much in favour of (as foreverwar suggests), increasing the higher threshold for the starting rate (thus making it more attractive for low wage earners to work, as opposed to claiming benefits, and increasing taxation on higher earners by either increasing the higher tax rate, or lowering the threshold for the higher rate. This will mean I will be paying more tax, but I will be quite happy to do so if it means better public services.

Now someone will undoubtedly claim that public services will work better by cutting waste/bureacracy. This is probably true. However, unless you're willing to accept that the Brits are simply more wasteful/bureaucratic than the rest of Europe, it still seems there is a funding gap.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Good post Foreverwar, but just for the sake of accuracy and at the risk of being pedantic, the current Personal Tax Allowance for 06/07 is £5035, and National Insurance is now 11%. :)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Thanks for the update :D

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Tax levels in this country are too high, and tax cuts will be possible with proper management of public services.

Once we stop pouring billions into the NHS and get it properly managed we will save millions.

Once we stop spending millions on PFI , schools, hospitals etc that we can't afford to run.

Labour, as usual, have gone doolally spending public money with (generally) no results.

The NHS is no better off. They have put in record investment into the NHS yet 18,000 redundancies and ward closures are the result.

No public transport initiative

They've built new schools that local authorities can't afford to run.

Hopefully, the tories will get into power look at the books and get public services managed properly.

Perhaps if we're lucky we can reduce our council tax by getting rid of "Lifestyle Consultants" out of the Local Authority and other non-jobs there seems to be plenty of that we pay for.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

If you think socialist tax policies are common sense I am surprised you have voted Tory all your life, although I suppose it depends on how long a life you have had.
Of course.

Of course, but do you think "work shy scroungers" (your words, not mine) should benefit?

Yes, and nor do I disagree with the figures you quoted.

I was actually thinking of the Labour party under Neil Kinnock who wanted a top tax rate of 50%, and government spending always goes up, never down, and as the Tory Party has said it might put taxes up, I am not confident that in the future it will not reach those dizzy heights! In 2003 total public spending was £456 billion and this year £552 billion, and it is projected to rise to £610 billion for 2008 - 2009.

I would have thought the connection between taxes and benefits fairly obvious. Benefits are paid by tax payers. Less claimants = a lower tax burden. The government's benefits system is now so enormously complicated that even the staff are making millions of pounds worth of mistakes every year. And there are other problems too.

Turnouts at the last two elections have been pitifully low (just 61% in 2005) so it seems to me that a great number of voters have given up expecting anything at all. So given that no mainstream party is even trying to change it, I hope you will carry on being proud to pay you tax bill.


So should employers be forced to pay lower wage earners more? The tax credit system is a scandal, and the CSA has failed miserably. What's the answer?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

It depends on your viewpoint - I believe the tax rates are reasonable at the moment - I would like to pay less, but I believe in social justice - helping those who are less able.

I would turn that around - once we get it properly managed, we could possibly save money (by the way, the private health system in the US costs much more, percentage wise, to run than MediCare)

I don't agree with PFI, but how else would you fund the building of new infrastructure?

mmmmm - emotive statement ;) . More people are being treated by the NHS, and more people are going to university.

Because (imho) of short-termism - they are being given conflicting targets to achieve, overspend to meet them, and are then punished. I think you will find that there have been more than 18000 new staff in the NHS since 1997, so to put it coldly, the 18000 is offset by the gains (not that that helps the 18000).

Totally agree with you there - unfortunately, the UK (along with a lot of countries) has a love affair with the car - major investment would be needed to provide a proper public transport system, which I guess you would not be keen on (major investment, not the transport system).

Please see my PFI comment above.

Good luck (and that is speaking as a Tory) - how do you manage rising expectations of choice and service, and reduce costs; tricky one.

Whilst there may be some waste, and it should be cut, using examples that use up 0.000001% of the Council Budget doesn't help the argument (imho).

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

higher rate tax band? :-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

49 (nearly 50) years, of which I have paid tax for nearly 32 years (including the six I spent in the Royal Air Force).
You know, you remind me of the US Republican party - using a mantra of "socialist tax policies" to ram a point home - if being a socialist means believing in equality of opportunity, wanting to help those less able/well off than myself, and not being selfish and greedy at the expense of others, well call me a socialist and paint me red, mother (although, that might surprise all the members of the Conservative Party I used to work with in the 80's and 90's, at local and national level). :dozey:


No, but than again, I don't think we should tar all unemployed/disabled people with the same derogatory label - the majority shouldn't suffer for the few, the few should be sorted out.

Oh, and there was I thinking you were quoting an actual figure, rather than those from a leader who didn't get into power. I agree with you about the complexity of the state benefit system, but like all complex systems, it is easier to complain about than to fix.

I am, thank you - and it cheers me up knowing you are making your contributions too.:D

I agree with you about the tax credit system and the CSA - it needed to be kept simple, such as with the Tax Credit system proposed by the TRG (Tory Reform Group) in the 80's. Why don't we cut employer's wage bills even more, and bring back indenture? Do you actually think it is easy to live on £5.35 per hour?

---------- Post added at 11:57 ---------- Previous post was at 11:56 ----------

B*gger off, I wasn't talking to you, commie pinko bed-wetter! ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

right! wheres that report post button? i was cured of that bed wetting problem weeks ago! :-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Mostly :p: - hbtm, you need to get that problem "sorted out" fully, before you put your electric blankie on your bed for the cold winter nights.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I think having a big public sector and good public services is really good but you have to keep in mind that we need to keep our economy competitive. There is now a global economy, businesses are deciding where to locate. If you tax businesses to death, they will not locate in this country, and may relocate abroad if they are already here. With China and India emerging as big powers and offering a more skilled and cheap labour there are less reasons to locate into this country, so higher taxes are generally worse for the economy in the longer term. I think if the Tories get in they will definitely bring in tax cuts, it's what Tories do, this is one of the reasons why they are supported by big business. They have been hinting on 'making the economy more competitive', I don't know how they can do that without tax cuts. I just hope they don't do it so it becomes unfair for people.

I think the Lib Dems have got the right idea on tax - they want to reduce overall direct taxation and then introduce green taxes onto things to discourage activity which is harmful for the environment, and also abolish all taxation for those earning less than £10,000 a year. It's a shame they're unelectable lol

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

i dont really understand the lib dems tax position because if green taxes work in encouraging people to be environmentally friendly then tax revenues will fall. how do they plug the gap. and if they dont work, whats the point?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Good question I've no idea! I think it's a good idea in theory though.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Yes for the following reasons.

1 - You cant decide economic policy years before knowing what state the economy will be in.

2 - The tories have been promising tax cuts for the last 3 elections and it didnt win them the election.

3 - The proposed cuts are on income tax and corporate tax in other words to benefit the richest people the most, proper cuts would be reducing it where labour raised it.

If the economy in 4 years was in the same state as it is now I would propose something like this.

Raise the tax threshold for not paying income tax at all to benefit lower earners.
Raise the top rate of income tax to tax those more who can afford it and close the gap between rich and poor.
Raise the inheritance tax threshold so doesnt affect so many people but also raise the rate to make up for the shortfall, again passing the burden onto the richest people.
Replace council tax with local income tax.
Stop the mass privatisation which always leads to short term gains and long term problems.
Hand over power back to local councils from central government.
Do a corporate tax hit on wholesale electricity/gas providers or give them an alternative of reducing prices.
Give help to low income people on electricity/gas bills.
Pay for this by taxing the fuel suppliers that raise prices above inflation.

Benefits shouldnt be cut because their are some scroungers since their are people who have no choice and need these to survive but as someone else suggested lower paid jobs can be made more worthwhile motivating people to work and the beenfits system can be changed to allow ill people to try working without been penalised so much.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Can't see myself voting Tory after the shenanigans of the last few days, I'll I saw was a room full of very smug individuals having a jolly, they say it's to early to tell the public a policy but obviously it's not to early to arrogantly toast victory.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I propose to abolish income tax completely and instead just have a windfall tax on hot air. So all political party confrences will be taxed to the hilt and pay for everything else.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Well on that basis, I'm a socialist too. And you remind me of a left wing friend (so left wing he seriously thinks Kinnock sold out to Thatcherism) who thinks I want republican style "right to work" style policies simply because I don't agree with the EU's cap on the hours workers might choose to work. And I'm not ramming anything, this is just political debate.

Sorry to disappoint you. And no I don't think living on minimum wage is "easy". (There are soldiers serving in Afghanistan earning half that per hour.) I think it is a failing of our political system that no mainstream party offers a low tax regime which, properly managed, could be fairer to all sections of society. It could hardly be said that the poorly paid are better off now after the huge public spending increases could it? Elective dictatorship anyone? But I understand you are satisfied with what is on offer so this doesn't concern you! (And the return of indenture would be extreme, don't you think?)

All we can do is complain about the benefits system because none of our politicians has shown much of an inclination to fix it. You are entitled to your faith in the Tories, but I don't share it.

So when can you decide? Were we supposed to take the Tories on trust at the last GE? Are voters in by-elections (like Bromley and Chiselhurst) supposed to take the Tories on trust? And who is proposing tax cuts?

I didn't vote Tory at the last two elections, and the lack of tax cuts was not my main concern. I doubt they lost the election because of tax cutting noises they might have made. And they didn't propose tax cuts at the last election anyway as far as I know.


Some of this I agree with, assuming it's not a squeeze the rich kind manifesto, but I don't think you have factored the EU's considerable influence into your thinking. (At least 70% of our laws are now made under the QMV system, meaning that policies are agreed on an EU wide basis.)

I don't want benefits for genuine claimants cut, and no one really knows what proportion are genuine. But I do know a lot of the non-genuine variety. Women who get pregnant and proudly declare that they'll never have to work again for instance, at the same time as declaring that they don't want anything to do with their babies fathers because they want to be "independant"! I also know other people who are in very genuine need (one with crippling arthritus who still works taking telephone messages) and such people damn well ought to be looked after better. Even official figures suggest that £1.5 billion is lost every year to fraudulent claims. But apologies to you if you are not a Tory.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

and how much lost to tax avoidance? benefit fraudsters get a tonne of bricks upon them, tax dodgers a cosy chat with inland revenue and easy payment options, often which see a reduction in the money owed. organised benefit fraudsters should be clamped on from a great height but many people are so poor because of the benefits system and its many anomalies that they have little choice but to bend the rules in order to survive.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Great post, tax avoiders cost us much more and it's not illegal

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

I don't think its a case of not wanting to put back into the system, but tax bands are always a very unfair system. But to be fair and if I was to put myself in the position of a high earner who had achieved success through hard work, I would say

"The system provides better for the ones who are not high earners"

So saying "The system has provided well for them" is possibly a contradiction in many cases, especially those who have been through private education provided by parents able to afford it.

I am not in that class at all, but on the other hand there is no sour grapes on my part and I think it is wrong to have high tax rates to penalise people who have possibly got of their backsides and worked hard to achieve their status.

I was actually shocked in a previous job how much I was actually payiong in tax every month. My salary was about £2k more than my current salary, but due to the company car I ended up paying almost £1300 a month in tax and NI. The net result was quite a few hundred pounds a month less than I get now.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

tax dodgers cost nearer 10billion a year and is around 10 times the amount of benefit fraudsters, of course we all know which is the easiest target and vote winner.

vat dodging was recently on panaroma and I believe that alone was over 3 billion a year.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

personally i think anyone earning, say, over £100k, can afford to pay a few more bob to help those less fortunate. dont forget tax bands only kick in on earnings over the threshold so a 50p rate only on earnings over £100k is hardly likely to leave someone wanting, but could help significantly improve the lives of those living below, on, or not much above the minimum wage.

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 17:59 ----------

there you go then :-)

a lot of recent vat dodging has ben carouseling by organised gangs rather than your traditional tax avoidance - but yep, clamp down because it hits us all. vats a nasty tax though - scattergun.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

It can be swings and roundabouts though, many high earners are in a better position to give larger amounts to charity, sure there are the greedy ones who wouldn't.

If I was in that situation and the government started messing about with the tax bands costing me a lot of money, the charity payments would stop.

At the end of the day, if we both got on a bus and the driver charged me 40pence and charged you 50 pence because you earned more it wouldn't be fair.

I'm not saying I'm totally against the principle, but anything other than a standard tax band with the exception of a lower band for low earners is an unfair system. This country did loose a lot of people due to the brain drain in the 70's, and I'm sure business would possibly take whats left of their factories elsewhere.

We have another issue along similar lines in Wales, I will start a thread to ask views on that one.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

we wouldnt need charity if we had an equitable tax regime. i hate that businesses give to charity angle. apart from the tax benefit angles the first people they call are their pr people so they can tell the world how great they are. i prefer those companies, like funnily enough, ernst and young, whose staff actually get involved in projects with the disadvantaged because that demand real commitment.

well actually the unemployed, elderly and young do pay less on buses soooo..... :-)

businesses will move to cheap labour zones regardless of the tax regime that affects its executives. as for brain drain, we still lose a lot of qualified people who have been through what was once our free higher education system, got their degree or whatever and buggered off. i'd much prefer a free education system but one which ensures graduates must spend X working years in the following 10 or whatever contributing to the uk inland revenue.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

Swings and roundabouts - I had a company car (it went back today); before I accepted the company car, I calculated that the taxable benefit was worth more than buying and maintaining my own car - I was getting an Audi A4 Avant, with all servicing and maintenance and fuel, for £266 per month (40% of taxable benefit value of £8000) - so a brand new £25k Audi estate cost me approx £9600 over three years; if I had bought a new one, it would have depreciated more than that.

Re: Osborne in autism jibe
 

As you say swings and roundabouts, when I had choice of company car upto approx £22K I found I was spending so much time in the bl**dy thing it was no pleasure so didn't care what I had. In fact I would of been quite happy keeping the hire car they provided me when I started.

Many companies have also started charging employees for personal fuel in cases where it was provided. Actually the only reason I didn't buy my own car and claim the £500 a month allowance in that job, was due to other doing the same and being fed up of getting thier cars broken into whilst in hotel car parks, I guess that was one of the benefits of a company car ie: not my problem.

Company car tax is a shambles, and in many ways has become more and more unfair for those who need it for their job and have one through no choice of their own, other than getting another job.

Now I run a car for a lot less than I was paying in company car tax, I dont care a damn what I drive to and from work as long as it gets me there and back home. I refuse to go any distance in it for company business, if I need to go to the airport they provide me a driver to and from it. I spend my money on classic cars instead of losing it on modern ones.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Both lab and tories wont be raising the top rate of income tax anytime soon wont want to upset the people funding them.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Tax avoidance is not illegal although tax dodging is, and the 'rich' are involved in both. No illegal activity should be acceptable. A system which would deal with it would be a vote winner, but our mainstream politicians are patently obviously not interested in such vote winning policies. Another recent radio news report said that illegal workers cost the economy another £3bn a year. (Don't you just love these nicely rounded figures.) And there is no indication that that will change either.

Mainstream politicians support the enlargement of the EU, next in line is Romania and Bulgaria and their 29 million citizens, and even Turkey with its 69 million, 99% of whom are Muslim. All these people will have the right to live anywhere in the EU. What will that do to the our lives, not least the lives of the poor here?

Many people in other EU states are bitterly opposed to Turkey's membership and blame the British for supporting it. :dozey:

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Your point is?

btw
http://www.turkeytravelplanner.com/Religion/index.html
"Because the Turkish Republic is a staunchly secular state, all religious activity is supervised by the government. Citizens are free to worship as they wish, but proselytization is not permitted.
The heads of the major religious communities�t he Chief Mufti, the Chief Rabbi and the Ecumenical Orthodox Patriarch�are officially government employees. Pious endowments (vakif, wakf) are administered by the government, as is all religious real property. Wearing religious garb is permitted in places of worship but prohibited in public areas."

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Foreverwar

I'm not sure of your point in posting that information. However, my point is that allowing access to the EU of 69 million citizens, 99% of whom are Muslim, in addition to the citizens of Bulgaria and Romania, will not help the poor of the UK or the poor of the rest of the member states of the EU. It won't help any of the people for that matter, and it certainly will not help race relations. These countries have many millions of poor citizens.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

My point was - why were you highlighting the fact that 99% of Turks were Muslim, when it is a secular society? I was curious as to the relevance of this point. You seem to have clarified it (slightly) with your point re "race relations".

All the Polish Catholics over here don't seem to have caused any problems. :D

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Turkey is a secular society. The Church of England is losing its relevance in our society and the EU is secular in its approach. So what? Turkey is still 99% muslim. Will the influx of more immigrants, especially muslim ones, help the British people in any way?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I am confused, freezin - why should the fact they are Muslim make any difference?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Here we F**king go again.

Once, just once, it would be nice to have a discussion where muslims are not mentioned.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Huge difference in culture perhaps? Honour killings and arranged marriages, race riots between ethnic groups, the growth in religious fundamentalism, and even suicide bombers. Muslims can, and the majority do, live in peaceful co-existence with their neighbours, but those who don't are a problem now, and I can't see how this would improve when Turkey's population is given free access. Clear enough?
Will it?

I apologise if this discussion is boring you Pierre, but I don't recall contributing to such a debate in the past, although I am sure there have been many! I want to know if the supporters of mainstream political parties can justify all this.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Why don't you ask the Germans?
They've lived with a large internal Turkish population for many many years.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

interesting to see that the issues which have defined and destroyed toryism in the past, and which cameron is thyerefore rapidly distancing himself from, are resurfacing here ;-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I don't know any Germans to ask. I do know lots of French and Dutch people who quite definitely do not want Turkey in the EU. Turkey taking on the EU's acquis communautaire is bound to cause conflict. There is a growing European people's movement trying to stop its accession. I don't think they will succeed.

http://www.voiceforeurope.org/

---------- Post added at 10:12 ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 ----------

And you think Cameron is going to make the party?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Turkey is moderate muslim country. I've been there many times and had a great time every time.

I think the inclusion of Turkey in the EU is essential to help our relations with other muslim countrys.

An islamic country included in the European Union I think is a good thing and it would show that the EU is not a christians only club.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Nice open organisataion, the voiceforeurope -
Contacts page
http://www.voiceforeurope.org/info/info/contacts/
Contacts
c/o: Boris Blauth
info@voiceforeurope.org
telephone:
address:

About us
http://www.voiceforeurope.org/info/info/about_us/
"Today’s Europe has its roots in the rationalism of ancient Greece, in the notion of law of ancient Rome and in the tradition of Judaistic and Christian culture. Humanism, Reformation and Enlightenment have contributed to accomplishing the freedoms we enjoy today.

The European civilization and its values have developed through thousands of years therefore it is worth protecting and cultivating this heritage. Countries not supporting European values should not be invited to join the EU."

Sort of misses the point about the Moorish influences on "European" culture, doesn't it? So basically if your not Judeo-Christian, or Humanist, you can b*gger off? Nice!:dozey:




Doing a lot better than the Eurobashing, let's bring back Maggie & Tebbit, fiscally unsound (let's cut taxes and work out how we can afford it later) crowd. ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

i think the tories now have a far better chance of winning. hes clever and personable.

heres what i think is going on. cameron is looking at the tory brand and reinventing it so it has market appeal (the old tory brand having failed to keep up with market trends). so hes using marketing practice and first determining what the brand's values are upon which he will base the product range - policies. he has three years to finalise that product range but he wants to establish what the brand stands for and should mean to people first.

i say this as someone who is definitely not a tory supporter.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

:clap:

---------- Post added at 10:35 ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 ----------

You sure?

I thought I saw in yesterday's paper, that George Osborne said you and Ed Balls had been members of the Tory Party whilst at University. ;) :Sprint: :dig:

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

i went to poly. would never get near a position of power in either party ;-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

They're all Universities now ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

bet theyre not actually seen as such by the ruling oxbridge set though eh? ;-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I don't believe it's as bad as it used to be - quite a number of parents of pupils in my daughter's sixth form convinced their kidults not to apply to Oxbridge, as while the cachet is still there, quite a few of the courses aren't up to scratch. They were convinced to apply for LSE, Durham, York, Newcastle, Leeds, etc.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

The tories will win I can see it a mile off, its governments that lose elections not opossitions winning them.

I would like to see our elections modernised so its not a first past the post system so we get a mixture of policies brought into play, no one party is perfect and its putting young voters off due to the nature of how it works.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I don't know - John Major was no scholar:

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Major)

If you ask me we could do with more "men of the people" like John Major, and fewer of the "ivory tower" brigade that seem to rule Westminster.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

He [Cameron] is definitely clever and personable, but you wouldn't vote for him, I wouldn't vote for him. I can't see that the millions who didn't vote for Michael Howard would see anything in him to vote for either. He was credited with a huge influence over the last Tory manifesto. But we will see.

Turkey is one of the more moderate muslim countries. But not all Turks are moderates and terrorism is on the rise there. Turkey also shares its borders with several unstable Arab states. Borders which on accession would be the EU's borders, putting British forces in possible conflict as part of EU forces. IMO we are better off with Turkey as a buffer state.

Yes it does, fair point, and Muslim scholars whose ideas were not popular in their own countries also played a large part in bringing about European reformation, but Voice for Europe also raises valid points, like this:

"Despite the fact that the Republic of Turkey was authoritatively built upon the principle of laicism after the end of World War One, the secularisation process has not been successfully completed. On the contrary, since the 1960's, when the article forbidding Islamists parties was abolished, Islam has been gaining an ever more significant place in public life. Progressive Islamisation is especially evident on the political scene, in the influence of Islamic orders and organisations, the rise of Islamic educational system and certain elements of lifestyle. Turkish government supports thousands of mosques and around 90,000 of imams whereas the Christian religious foundations in Turkey still cannot collect donations. Furthermore, existing churches are condemned by the state through a law which enables local authorities to decline new people entering Christian foundations. These foundations are required by law to carry the churches. As soon as all remaining foundation members have passed away, the church automatically becomes state property. Moreover, municipal authorities still torment new Christian church building projects. Through this constant suppression and the rise of Muslims, Christian population has fallen from 25% to 0.3% within the last century. "

As Turkey has been trying to enter the "Europe" since the 1960s, can we really be confident that it would remain secular once entry has been gained? Turkey's human rights record is not up to scratch either.

I don't want Thatcher or Tebbit back, though Tebbit's fringe speech was met with a lot more enthusiasm than any of the Tories in the main conference hall (and nor do I want a squeeze the workers until the pips squeak attitude either). But at least they knew how to win elections, unlike modern Tories. The Tories don't do euro bashing very well at all, and never have done. Our political elite's refusal to be honest about the EU and its intentions is as deceitful today as it has ever been. Any politician who thinks "Europe" isn't worth political debate is either an outright liar or a naive fool.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

well as long as they're not tories, yes :-)

i agree that the biggest problem with modern politics is how out of touch politicians are with us plebs. once they climb the political ladder they gain wealth and prestige that all too often divorces them from everyday reality. its like with bands. oasis come out with a cracking debut from burnage poverty, earn a few bob, buy a tudor mansion, snort some coke and churn out some over-produced tosh ;-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

The look on the faces of some of the delegates at the Tory conference during Cameron's speech when he was talking about civil partnerships is for me one of the television highlights of the year.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

John Major might have been brought up with the common folk, but he wasn't a man of the people at all! :Yikes:

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Would you like to clarify, please? :)

I am confused how a man, brought up in Brixton, left school at 16, worked as a clerk at the LEB, took correspondence courses and worked his way up the ladder at a bank, became a Lambeth councillor at 21, is not "a man of the people".

I met him quite a few times, and he was one of the most decent and honourable (low baseline, to be fair) politicians I ever met - he actually was trying to make things better for all, not just a section of society. His government was torn apart by "my way or no way" Eurosceptics.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Come on he was a yes man, in that respect you could say he brown nosed his way to the top and was then lost. He showed zero leadership skills and little initiative tbh imo it's a sad lookout for Britain if he is held up as an example to emulate. You should succeed through talent, if you manage to through anything else you will be found out.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Major

"Paddy Ashdown, the leader of the Liberal Democrats during Major's term of office, once described him in the House of Commons as a "decent and honourable man". Few observers doubted that he was an honest man, or that he made sincere and sometimes successful attempts to improve life in Britain and to unite his deeply divided party."

"Since leaving office Major has, unlike Margaret Thatcher, tended to take a low profile and has stayed out of front-line politics"

"Major has so far declined the customary peerage offered to former Prime Ministers on standing down from Parliament"

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page125.asp
"Early into his term, he announced the abolition of the poll tax which had caused so much controversy during Thatcher's final years in office.
A particular personal initiative was the Citizens Charter, a code designed to introduce greater accountability to public services and to drive up standards of service. The Charter has been built on by the present Labour Government and copied around the world.
Major's style was radically different from his predecessor. His unassuming and down-to-earth manner was considered a breath of fresh air, and a contrast to Margaret Thatcher's forcefulness.
He established the Northern Ireland Peace Process in the early 1990s and agreed the 'Downing Street Declaration' and 'Joint Frameworks Document' with successive Irish Premiers. These formed the necessary building blocks for the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.
John Major also established the National Lottery as a personal initiative which has provided billions of pounds for good causes."

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Whether or not he was decent and honourable shouldn't be in question, those that seek public office should have integrity and whilst I don't think you should be publicaly judged on one incident, I wonder if his wife believes him to be decent and honourable.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

John Major ... decent and honourable, you have to be joking! His government consisted of only about half a dozen true eurosceptics, who he called the "*******s" who objected to the party's dealings with the EU. The Maastricht treaty handed over great swathes of power in addition to what Thatcher had conceded without ever explaining what that meant, never mind asking for the people's opinions. And for what? And that's without even talking about all his moralising at the same time as he was carrying on an affair with Edwina Currie. As a man of the people, he sucks! The "people" might not have been aware of his European dealings, but they did the right thing in rejecting him. Shame the alternative was Blair.

http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtext.html

If you are still confused, I can provide more details later, or you can tell me why I am wrong in my thinking. :)

The swearing filter in action :D. Major referred to the sceptics as being fatherless.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

No need to wonder - she is still with him.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Or she could be a door mat either way we don't know what goes on behind closed doors

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

half a dozen true Eurosceptics??? errr, try again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels
"In the politics of the United Kingdom, the Maastricht Rebels were MPs of the then governing Conservative Party who refused to support the government of John Major in a House of Commons vote to secure ratification by the United Kingdom of the Maastricht treaty (Treaty on European Union). This was particularly devastating, as there were 22 rebels as of the second reading of the European Communities (Amendment) Bill in May 1992, and the government's majority was only 18."

The Maastritch bill was passed by the House of Commons - or do you only believe in Democracy when it coincides with your beliefs and views?

As for the affair with Edwina Currie, I think that was inappropriate (as is all infidelity).

And yes, thanks for providing a link to a Eurosceptic's site to back up your argument :dozey:
http://www.europeanfoundation.org/docs/April%202005.pdf page 25
"The choice of material in the foreword alerts the reader to the author’s fundamentally British Eurosceptic view of the Constitution, whilst the legal and constitutional analysis reflects the thinking of Bill Cash and the European Foundation"

As I said earlier, I can only go on personal experiences of meeting with the man, and discussions with others who had also met him - not just on reports from the newspapers, and Spitting Image/Steve Bell parodies of him - can you say the same?

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

No we don't, so wondering what she thinks can never be answered ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

This statement says it all. What chance do we have of getting good people into government if they know that details of their private lives might well make front page news, and be gossiped about by busybodies in internet forums?

Get a life!

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

You might like being lied to, I don't, if they can deceive the one's they love the most they can deceive anyone and when they are found out they should be named and shamed.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

fair point but you have to question the judgement of someone who chooses to have relations with EDWINA CURRIE!!! yuck!!!!

:nutter:

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

So you have never lied to anyone close to you? Not a leading question, but I am a great believer in a few aphorisms -

Let he/she who is without sin, cast the first stone.
To err is human, to forgive divine.
Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness

I have noticed there is a tendency to equalise things - to say that a lot of good things done over a period of time can be negated by one small (in the overall scheme of thing, but I think infidelity is unforgivable) thing.

I think that speeding is bad, but I do not instantly then doubt all the good things the speeding offender has done (a local member of the clergy was done for speeding on the motorway - the congregation did not ask for his resignation).

I believe it was right that John Major was taken to task for deceiving his wife, but I do not then equate that with "he must have lied about everything else".

But, as the saying goes, to each their own.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

I am not an elected official, if I were I can guarantee you I would not lie, is it to much to ask for our politicians to tell the truth.

Did I say that he must have lied about everything, what I said was if he can deceive her he can deceive anyone and therefore everything he say's is clouded in doubt

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Where is it written that elected officials have to be saints?

Can you name a public figure (politician or otherwise) who is beyond reproach?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

The Dalai Lama

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

No wonder there is electoral apathy and there are plenty of people who go through their lives political and other wise without lying and cheating, no one said they have to be saints just honest

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

politicians private lives ae of no interest to me unless they expose hypocrisy. like i said before, but perhaps should clarify, politically i think he was a genuine and honourable man. the exception would be the back to basics vs currie copulation. even then i find it hard to be too bothered. not a tory, not a majorite, but i do think he was less divisive and destructive than many leaders we've had, especially that woman - what was her name again? :-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

haaaaaaalelujah
halelujah
halelujah
ha-a-a-a-le-luuuuu-jah

a blinding light pierces through the gloom of 70's socialism
Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiit's ............................Maggieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee !

"Where there is discord, may we bring harmony.
Where there is error, may we bring truth.
Where there is doubt, may we bring faith.
And where there is despair, may we bring hope."

Not long afterwards, astronomers noticed a wobble in Earth's orbit, caused by precession from the spinning in St Frances of Assisi's grave.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

you been on the crazy juice again? :-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Your figures are correct, but only true eurosceptics really had the guts to truly stand up to Major and the whips (one of whom was David Davis) and only 9 went far enough to have the whip withdrawn. I don't know how many of them would have voted against the treaty had the pressure on them not been so immense. Their job wasn't to keep Major in power! (The *******s were actually members of his own cabinet so called in 1993; who were opposed to him, but not enough to risk their own seats. My mistake earlier, and my apologies.)

Oh no Foreverwar, I'm a supporter of democracy all right. If you can show me how John Major's Tories were elected on a ticket of giving great swathes of sovereign power to undemocratic EU institutions, with all that that implies, I'll be happy to concede that Major acted as a decent and honourable man. It is the British mainstream political parties, but particularly the hierarachy, that don't support democracy. Many, many years ago they admitted that they would never win the argument for European union in a democratic debate - so they have never had one. This is now known now because official papers were released under the 30 year rule confirming it.

Which link? The last one I provided was a link to the Maastricht Treaty on an EU site. The opinions of the European Foundation are europhile to put it mildly. They still revere Robin Cook and Ted Heath!

Edit: Sorry I was thinking of the European Movement, not Foundation. I hadn't come across the organisation in your link. I'm really confused. Why did you provide its link?

I never had the pleasure of meeting Major, and you are entitled to your opinion of him. But I don't base my opinion of him on your other suggested sources. The treaties themselves are enough (including those that preceded Maastricht) and his naive desire ["My aim for Britain in the Community can be simply stated. I want us to be where we belong. At the very heart of Europe"]. I said earlier that I don't rate the press as a reliable source.

Have you met any of the Maastricht Rebels?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Ooops :erm:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenzin_...4th_Dalai_Lama
"In October 1998, The Dalai Lama's administration acknowledged that it received $1.7 million a year in the 1960's from the U.S. Government through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)[15], and also trained a resistance movement in Colorado (USA). [16] When asked by CIA officer John Kenneth Knaus in 1995 whether the organization did a good or bad thing in providing its support, the Dalai Lama replied that though it helped the morale of those resisting the Chinese, "thousands of lives were lost in the resistance" and further, that "the U.S. Government had involved itself in his country's affairs not to help Tibet but only as a Cold War tactic to challenge the Chinese."[17]
British journalist Christopher Hitchens wrote a scathing criticism [18] of the Dalai Lama in 1998, which questioned his alleged support for India's nuclear weapons testing, the "selling of indulgences" to Hollywood celebrities like Richard Gere, and his statements condoning prostitution.
The Dalai Lama is sometimes criticized for modifying his message to be as palatable as possible to his audience, sometimes changing viewpoints according to the situation. He is also sometimes reproached for taking one side of an issue at one time and changing it later on, usually in response to criticism. This tendency has led opposing sides of an issue to believe that the Dalai Lama supports their cause, e.g. homosexuality[19], abortion, the Iraq war, Kashmiri independence, nuclear weapons, etc"

---------- Post added at 22:05 ---------- Previous post was at 21:49 ----------

Above is the link you quoted

and

my link was pointing out the site you had quoted was run by this man -Anthony Cowgill - well, his name was at the bottom of the web-page above, and this was one of the (very few) review(s) I could find of his book.
mmmmm - not very Europhile, eh? ;)


I've met, at various party conferences, elections and by-elections, and at the House, when I used to do research for, and visit, my MP there -
Liam Fox
David Willetts
Tony Marlow
Teresa Gorman
Teddy Taylor
James Cran
Michael Spicer
Rupert Allason
Bill Cash
Nicholas Winterton
Ian Duncan Smith
George Gardiner

Have you met any of the Maastricht rebels?

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

OK, how about this one from the EU itself:
http://europa.eu/scadplus/treaties/maastricht_en.htm

Or this one:
http://www.essex.ac.uk/info/Maastricht.html

The text is the same in all three.


Maybe you missed my edit. ;)

So you presumably know what their problems with the Maastricht Treaty were, and yet you still say that Major was a decent honourable man? :dozey:

Yes, though not as half as as many as you. Most of them have now crossed over to the dark side or retired now.

Well can you? You apparently have all the right connections. :dozey:

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Anyone got a copy of the Tory manefesto from back then?
I don't remember them having "we won't give great swathes of sovereign power to undemocratic EU institutions" listed as an election pledge (remember Major saying he loved the NHS because of his mother), but I may be wrong...

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Must have :p: - didn't realise you had changed your story/sources. :D

I respected their viewpoints, even though I disagreed with them - they were (mostly) honourable people, using what (I and others thought) inappropriate tactics - some of them were as mad as a box of frogs, though ;) . Back to the point of democracy - a majority in the House voted to pass the bill, but the "rebels" were determined to get their "payback" for being defeated, so continued to undermine the government of which they were a part. It was very amusing to watch (and somewhat painful), as in the 80's the Tory Reform Group had to take a sustained barrage of "traitors", "left-wing pinkos", and "you'll let Labour in if you don't show full support for the Government". As soon as it was the other way around, all bets were off - fairly hypocritical, imho. The Maastricht Rebels were the "Militant Tendency" of the Conservative Party.


He acted in what he believed was the best interests of the country - and your vitriol is why I left politics in the early 90's; I entered politics to try and help people, and if I disagreed with some of them, that was my (and their) right. It was all about trying to go forward - unfortunately, some people just want to go back.

Unfortunately, some extremists (in all parties) are of the opinion that, if you don't agree with them, you are the enemy, and must be destroyed; they would rather be defeated than "compromise their principles", and they are happy to take others down with them. I decided to focus on my family and job, and (imho) much happier because of it.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

And what about the *******s, members of John Major's own cabinet. Were they part of this 'militant tendency' too? Should they all have kept quiet to keep the Tories in power when they believed he was not acting in the best interests of the country?

The deceit might just have been acceptable had things turned out well. But Major as one of the main supporters of Britain's entry to the ERM has very little to be proud of. He should have put his proposals for transfering sovereignty to the EU to the British people in a general election or a referendum. That would have been the democratic thing to do. And whatever makes you think I want to go back? You must think the only way forward is with the EU. Your party will not justify this. Can you? I didn't know you until about a week or so ago, so I didn't influence your decision to leave politics. And I have said nothing vitriolic; maybe you just can't take the heat of political debate. Joining politics to "try to help people" is very honourable but if helping them means selling them out to the EU, I'll pass, thanks.

What is extreme about not wanting rule from the EU? And what compromises did Major offer?

You didn't answer my question ... "If you can show me how John Major's Tories were elected on a ticket of giving great swathes of sovereign power ...". We both know that no attempt was made to put the case to the people. Rather important for his decent, honourable, man of the people credentials, I would have thought.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Cabinet *******ds
Collective responsibility???
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_responsibility
"Cabinet collective responsibility is constitutional convention in the states that use the Westminster System. It means that members of the Cabinet must publicly support all governmental decisions made in Cabinet, even if they do not privately agree with them."
It was strange that the same people who used to shout "Collective Responsibility" in the 80's, were able to ignore it in the 90's. :dozey:

You say deceit - I say democratic government; and never the twain shall meet. I loved your point about "I have said nothing vitriolic", and then in the next line state "if helping them means selling out to the EU, I'll pass" - lmao. I say vitriol, you say reasoned discussion.

Your statement "You didn't answer my question ... "If you can show me how John Major's Tories were elected on a ticket of giving great swathes of sovereign power ...". Which of the other bills that were passed in his (re-elected) government, and which of the bills in Margaret Thatcher's government, were "put to the people"? Or do only the ones you disagree with count? He and his party were elected to govern in a representative manner, not a delegated manner - no government could rule in that manner.

It appears to me (imho) that you have re-justified to me the reasons I left politics - I accept that you have a viewpoint, and that you are entitled to put it, but it seems that others are not allowed to disagree with you; were you in the Federation of Conservative Students, perchance?

But in the end, your viewpoint was not that of the majority of the elected representatives in Government, and your viewpoint did not prevail. John Major's government were elected to govern, not to run back to the country everytime some right-wing loony got upset. I don't remember Maggie putting the Poll Tax to the country?

re vitriol - some quotes from your posts -
- If you think socialist tax policies are common sense I am surprised you have voted Tory all your life, although I suppose it depends on how long a life you have had.
- I hope you will carry on being proud to pay your tax bill
- Elective dictatorship anyone? But I understand you are satisfied with what is on offer so this doesn't concern you!
- Mainstream politicians support the enlargement of the EU, next in line is Romania and Bulgaria and their 29 million citizens, and even Turkey with its 69 million, 99% of whom are Muslim.
- Will the influx of more immigrants, especially muslim ones, help the British people in any way?
- Huge difference in culture perhaps? Honour killings and arranged marriages, race riots between ethnic groups, the growth in religious fundamentalism, and even suicide bombers.
- Our political elite's refusal to be honest about the EU and its intentions is as deceitful today as it has ever been. Any politician who thinks "Europe" isn't worth political debate is either an outright liar or a naive fool.
- John Major ... decent and honourable, you have to be joking!
- As a man of the people, he sucks!
- The deceit might just have been acceptable had things turned out well
- Most of them have now crossed over to the dark side

So, in summary -
An elected government, with Collective Cabinet Responsibility, passed a bill that you disagreed with - get over it. :D

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

So anyone selling their country out can hide behind a principle developed in the 18th century long before we became involved in the EU? No sorry I don't agree with that. Collective responsiblity when the public are being deceived about who governs them is wrong.

So how would you describe the actions of government in giving up sovereignty over the last 30 odd years? Do tell.

Any bill giving up sovereignty to a entity as undemocratic as the EU should have been put to the people, unless the issue had already been properly identified in an election campaign. Politicians (including Thatcher) were too deceitful for that so it the issue was never discussed. Comparing this kind of bill with the poll tax is not valid; the poll tax was within an incoming British government's power to repeal. Nothing we have agreed to in the EU is. A power, or competence, once handed over to the EU becomes part of its sacred acquis communautaire and is never returned. Do you see the difference?

Of course you and anyone else is allowed to disagree, but you haven't satisfactorily justified the deceit imo, just as your party refuses to justify its actions. Can you say why membership of the EU is good for the British people? Also I am not particularly sorry to have 're-justified' your opinion given your view that John Major was in the right.

If the public had been properly informed of the government's plans, do you think they would have won the election? The Tories were obviously not confident enough to ask. John Major's government was not elected to hand over sovreignty. And you might like to explain why debate on the EU should be considered a "right wing looney" issue. Do a good job and you triumph, ok?

You are entitled to see honestly stated, and imo thoroughly deserved opinions (which I stand by), as vitriolic if you wish. On your scale the treatment meted out to the Maastricht rebels by Major and his whips must have been downright malevolent.

When politicians start being a damn sight more honest, I'll be more than happy to. Until then, forget it. :D

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Sorry, freezin, took me a while - didn't click till now.



UKIP alert, UKIP alert, UKIP alert (or is it Vanitas, sorry, Veritas?)

How is Bobby K-S, or has he moved on/founded another party yet? ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

am i allowed to say ukip are europhobic? ;-)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Hatedbythemail, you can say whatever you want to, but opinions carry more weight with a little detail. :)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

Hope this helps ;)

article by ex-researcher of UKIP
http://www.newstatesman.com/nssubsfi...N=200406140013

Independent
http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=396
"Similarly, UKIP's claim to reject xenophobia and seek friendly relations with our European neighbours does not seem to match the evidence. Their website links to a guide called "European Union myths and follies", which cites Winston Churchill, speaking in 1918. "Once the apparatus of power is in the hands of The Brotherhood, all opposition, all contrary opinion must be extinguished by death ... You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." Churchill was talking about the Bolsheviks (and supported the idea of European Union) - but what's a few gulags when you're panic-mongering?"

http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200...b8aca98ca5.htm
"Newly elected MEPs from the anti-EU UK Independence Party have arrived in Brussels to hold their first press conference in the European Parliament.
Speaking on behalf of the group, ahead of his second term as an MEP, Nigel Farage said he was seeking an “amicable divorce” from the rest of Europe.
“We are not anti-European” he stressed, “we want to be friends with them,” but he made it clear that full withdrawal from the EU was his party’s top priority."

Is this a kind of "tough love"?

ps as for the UKIP (if in fact you are a member/supporter of it, and not Vanitas), it's like the 1990's in the Tory party all over again.
http://www.ukiphome.com/comments.asp?sid=608
"ANTHONY BUTCHER: BACK OUR NEW LEADER OR RESIGN FROM THE NEC
It's time to put up or shut up Anthony. Are you with us or against us?
We cannot move forward with NEC members pursuing an agenda that does not support our new leader who was elected with a comfortable majority."

and lo and behold
http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/about14375.html
"Please accept this letter as a formal resignation of my position on the UKIP NEC and of my party membership.

I believe that any new party leader should be given 6-12 months of absolute support to run things his way and stamp his vision on a party, but I do not feel that I am in a position to offer Nigel that support.

As an NEC member it is my responsibility to ensure that truth, democracy, legitimacy and professionalism are adhered to by the party leadership, on behalf of the members who elected me. Unfortunately, I do not feel that my standards are in any way compatible with the new leadership’s and will only result in more friction. Since I cannot see a way to support the new leader and also retain the integrity of my position, I have chosen to resign. I am not willing to put up with four more years of unnecessary arguments, personal abuse, lies and having common sense ideas ignored. "

Anthony Butcher was the UKIP PPC for Woodspring in 2005
http://www.anthony-butcher.co.uk/

It's deja vu all over again.

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

well, like tebbit, theyre not exactly fans of the eu are they. or am i missing pretty much the whole point of their existence?

---------- Post added at 13:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:01 ----------

this is their summary of themselves: "Libertarian, non-racist party seeking Britain's withdrawal from the European Union." so i stick by my europhobic comment (but you can remove the 'r' and 'o' if you so please ;- )

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

[quote=hatedbythemail;34130943...snip... so i stick by my europhobic comment (but you can remove the 'r' and 'o' if you so please ;- )[/quote]

What?

euphbic????? Is that a cross between a musical instrument and a biro? ;)

Re: Tory economic policy (or lack of?)
 

just the removal of the one 'o' blue smarty pants :-)