"Of course, Britain could survive outside the EU...We could probably get access to the single market as Norway and Switzerland do..."
This is Tony Blair speaking in Ghent on February 23 2000.
Since 1973, the EU has sold us goods and services to the tune of £200 billion MORE than we have sold them. Talk about `millions of jobs relying on Britain's membership of the EU!'
And I leave this note with another bit of Labour flavour:
Former Brussels Commissioner and one-time Labour party leader, Neil Kinnock, stated that no trade tariffs would be imposed if Britain left the EU.
So what are we waiting for?
More to come!
In the meantime, want to know more? Go to www.ukip.org
Tony Blair on life outside of the EU: You may be surprised!
Reality check - there is no life outside this country without EU membership, other than the lap dog of a rapidly declining US. Note that there are now more Fortune 500 companies based in Europe than the US. Europe has massive economic and social potential - why else do you think even the Tories are backing away from endorsing your policies? With US power on the wane, the scene is set for a united Europe to take centre stage. It is better that we are inside arguing our corner than outside, as narrow minded bigots like you would prefer, shouting to no one in particular.
Can 2.6 million people be bigots, Newman?
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
The B word is used now. It means to be obstinate and intolerant in one's own beliefs. Does that apply to those who cast personal insults against people making points on issues? Funny that.
"shouting to no one in particular", Newman?
Consider the facts:
In June 2004, 2.6 million people voted for UKIP in the European Parliamentary elections, beating the Lib Dems into fourth place, and earning UKIP the biggest adjusted gains in seats of ALL parties.
Another mainstream party, the Conservatives, also experienced defeat behind UKIP in Hartlepoole in the Autumn of 2004.
"No life outside this country without EU membership", Newman?
Consider the facts:
The UK is the world's 3rd biggest trading economy, after the US and Germany but ahead of Japan - and the world's 4th biggest economy.
The amount of UK jobs involved in exporting to the EU-14 (pre-May 2004 EU nations) was just 10%.
Britain's expensive `access' (4% of Britain's GDP per year) to EU-25's population of 455 million is only 7% of a declining portion of the world population. The other 93% (5.7 billion and growing) is available at no cost.
Free trade with the EU is available to 22 non-EU nations including Norway, Switzerland and Mexico via Free Trade Agreements.
The Tories are fearful of self-destructing over Europe, not because our policies are abhorrent but they lack the leadership to be focused. This shows in many non-EU matters that affect them. Witness the nonsense over Howard Swift.
US power on the wane? It sells more to the EU than Britain, without paying the EU anything. Without a Free Trade Agreement. It is 3,000 miles away from Europe and its economy is six times bigger than Britain's. Hmmm.
Argue our corner inside? What? With the French and Germans stitching us up over the Common Agricultural Policy? You want the Euro Army? Gee thanks Nato for preserving us from harm for over 50 years and the US dollars that made it so. Now piss off and let us defend our shores with the Euro Fighter! Dream on! With friends like these...
How on earth did a free trade agreement become a political state in all but name with TWO parliament buildings, an anthem, a flag, a currency, a planned Euro Army and a planned Foreign Affairs ministry?
Not for us. Not for the UK.
Vote UKIP.
Want to know more? Go to www.ukip.org
The B word is used now. It means to be obstinate and intolerant in one's own beliefs. Does that apply to those who cast personal insults against people making points on issues? Funny that.
"shouting to no one in particular", Newman?
Consider the facts:
In June 2004, 2.6 million people voted for UKIP in the European Parliamentary elections, beating the Lib Dems into fourth place, and earning UKIP the biggest adjusted gains in seats of ALL parties.
Another mainstream party, the Conservatives, also experienced defeat behind UKIP in Hartlepoole in the Autumn of 2004.
"No life outside this country without EU membership", Newman?
Consider the facts:
The UK is the world's 3rd biggest trading economy, after the US and Germany but ahead of Japan - and the world's 4th biggest economy.
The amount of UK jobs involved in exporting to the EU-14 (pre-May 2004 EU nations) was just 10%.
Britain's expensive `access' (4% of Britain's GDP per year) to EU-25's population of 455 million is only 7% of a declining portion of the world population. The other 93% (5.7 billion and growing) is available at no cost.
Free trade with the EU is available to 22 non-EU nations including Norway, Switzerland and Mexico via Free Trade Agreements.
The Tories are fearful of self-destructing over Europe, not because our policies are abhorrent but they lack the leadership to be focused. This shows in many non-EU matters that affect them. Witness the nonsense over Howard Swift.
US power on the wane? It sells more to the EU than Britain, without paying the EU anything. Without a Free Trade Agreement. It is 3,000 miles away from Europe and its economy is six times bigger than Britain's. Hmmm.
Argue our corner inside? What? With the French and Germans stitching us up over the Common Agricultural Policy? You want the Euro Army? Gee thanks Nato for preserving us from harm for over 50 years and the US dollars that made it so. Now piss off and let us defend our shores with the Euro Fighter! Dream on! With friends like these...
How on earth did a free trade agreement become a political state in all but name with TWO parliament buildings, an anthem, a flag, a currency, a planned Euro Army and a planned Foreign Affairs ministry?
Not for us. Not for the UK.
Vote UKIP.
Want to know more? Go to www.ukip.org
-
Paddy Pantsdown
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 1 Oct 2004 10:04
- Location: Venner Road
I'll bet £10 you don't beat the LibDems in this rather more important election. Are you game? Proceeds to a mutually agreed charity.Lewkip wrote:In June 2004, 2.6 million people voted for UKIP in the European Parliamentary elections, beating the Lib Dems into fourth place, and earning UKIP the biggest adjusted gains in seats of ALL parties.
If you do come a poor fourth behind the pro-EU LibDems will that be an indication that the UK people (although uneasy about the EU) do not see quitting as a major election issue?
Why I won't accept your bet, Paddy
Ah! nice move Paddy!
But I won't accept your proposition. UKIP accepts it is the fourth biggest party in the UK. Unlike the Lib-Dems, we have no MPs. Unlike the Lib-Dems, we have no recourse to a joint political history that stretches beyond the SDP breakaway of the early 1980s to the heydays of David Lloyd George.
We are, by comparison, a very young party. Are you so perturbed by our success of 2004 that you cynically propose an upset scenario for 2005? You obviously take us seriously so I guess we are making inroads.
Let us be clear. We do not expect to form the next Government. We may not even get an MP in. But we will fight as hard as possible to do so. We are not expecting universal support but then who can?
What we can say is that over 2.5 million people came out for us when we asked them last year. And you can't dismiss that easily. Will British democracy be threatened with a group of token UKIP MPs? No. Will it mark a turning point? Yes.
And with that hope, that faith, we will build on our successes and one day, possibly not in this election or even the next, you may be surprised...
Want to know more? Go to www.ukip.org
But I won't accept your proposition. UKIP accepts it is the fourth biggest party in the UK. Unlike the Lib-Dems, we have no MPs. Unlike the Lib-Dems, we have no recourse to a joint political history that stretches beyond the SDP breakaway of the early 1980s to the heydays of David Lloyd George.
We are, by comparison, a very young party. Are you so perturbed by our success of 2004 that you cynically propose an upset scenario for 2005? You obviously take us seriously so I guess we are making inroads.
Let us be clear. We do not expect to form the next Government. We may not even get an MP in. But we will fight as hard as possible to do so. We are not expecting universal support but then who can?
What we can say is that over 2.5 million people came out for us when we asked them last year. And you can't dismiss that easily. Will British democracy be threatened with a group of token UKIP MPs? No. Will it mark a turning point? Yes.
And with that hope, that faith, we will build on our successes and one day, possibly not in this election or even the next, you may be surprised...
Want to know more? Go to www.ukip.org
-
Paddy Pantsdown
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 1 Oct 2004 10:04
- Location: Venner Road
Re: Why I won't accept your bet, Paddy
You caught me out. I never bet on less than a certaintyLewkip wrote:Ah! nice move Paddy!
Which would imply your last election result was a mid term protest rather than a solid and growing endorsement of your EU policy. If you weight the support for the parties and the general perception:
Labour weakly pro-EU
LibDem strongly pro-EU
Tory anti-EU
UKIP extremely anti-EU
Will the election result show either a reluctance by the majority of the British electorate to vote for anti-EU parties or do they not see EU membership as a major issue in this election?
As Jeremy Paxton might say "YES or NO" please.
Just the kind of language and intellect that you want from someone standing for election! Next you'll be mumbling on about Germany rolling through Europe in their tanks like that fool in the Kilroy Silk programme. As I mentioned, I'm by no means 100 per cent pro-Europe, but I really can't be bothered debating the issue of Europe with you - you're an extremist and I've never seen the point of talking politics with extremists, whether left or right.Lewkip wrote:Now piss off and let us defend our shores with the Euro Fighter! Dream on!
My final word on the subject, anyone who is not up to speed on the whole Kilroy Silk/UKIP debacle, should check out the following link, which highlights why, contrary to comments on this site of a growing membership etc, this party and its scaremongering is going nowhere fast.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4189537.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4189537.stm
Can I just add to this thread that all users agreed not to use abusive language. I don't want to judge now whether anybody overstepped that line because I do not want to censor posts.
Freedom to comment politically does paradoxically here carry the restraint of not posting abusively no matter what the provocation. Otherwise it just degenerates into a brawling session. Please take care.
BTW it is sad to have only had one party's view so far....
--
Site Admin
Freedom to comment politically does paradoxically here carry the restraint of not posting abusively no matter what the provocation. Otherwise it just degenerates into a brawling session. Please take care.
BTW it is sad to have only had one party's view so far....
--
Site Admin
Blimey, does this Ukip chappy actually want to be our MP ? He doesnt seem to be going about it in a very good way. I think he would do a lot better on a town forum website for, say, Tonbridge, half of which probably thinks we are still at war anyway.
I have corresponded several times with Jim Dowd, our present Member for Parliament, on a number of issues, both local and national, and I have found that he could not have done more to help me.
Coupled with the fact that the Tories are a spent force, which is becoming more and more knee-jerk (I see the dark hand of Lord Saatchi behind their poster campaign - Is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking) and the other alternatives, Ukip included, are not worth a cross, I shall continue to support Mr Dowd.
I would like to think that the deafening silence which first greeted Ukips attempt to get responses from the members of this forum, tells him more than a million words could.
I have corresponded several times with Jim Dowd, our present Member for Parliament, on a number of issues, both local and national, and I have found that he could not have done more to help me.
Coupled with the fact that the Tories are a spent force, which is becoming more and more knee-jerk (I see the dark hand of Lord Saatchi behind their poster campaign - Is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking) and the other alternatives, Ukip included, are not worth a cross, I shall continue to support Mr Dowd.
I would like to think that the deafening silence which first greeted Ukips attempt to get responses from the members of this forum, tells him more than a million words could.
-
Paddy Pantsdown
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 1 Oct 2004 10:04
- Location: Venner Road
Funny you should post that. I stopped at the traffic lights at Bell Green today I was musing on a Tory poster which asked "How would you feel if your daughter was attacked by someone on early release".fishcox wrote:Coupled with the fact that the Tories are a spent force, which is becoming more and more knee-jerk (I see the dark hand of Lord Saatchi behind their poster campaign
Not happy thought I with two teenage daughters. So is the poster suggesting we would expect the Tories to end early release? (or parole as I probably erroneously think of it).
That would imply all prisoners serve the same length sentence ie the one given by the courts. Now does that mean:
a) Are we going to raise millions (billions?) of tax to build prisons to hold the increased number of prisoners - approaching double I should think?
b) Or will sentences be shortened to an average that fits the existing capacity?
The latter is surely frightening. Parole is about letting the less worse criminal out first. Are we going to get the very worst criminals released earlier? Will these not have the worst recidivist rates so increasing my daughter's chances of being attacked.
Parole I thought was one way prisons managed their prisoners giving them an incentive to behave, learn and better equip themselves for life outside. Take that away and not only my daughter will be at increased risk but so will the prison officers. I don't want to see them attacked either.
Now the Tories want me to vote for them (and I will not be voting for the party I voted for last time). I think I am not especially thick but the message is very confusing. What is the actual policy behind this?
Is this simplistic advertising (which I'm sure will be matched by the other parties) going to get thinking opinion behind them. Or will it just turn people off?
Can I add that Jim Dowd's predecessor John Maples was an excellent constituency MP to us. There does seem to be a gulf between the articulate part of the Tory party and that poster. Perhaps a local Tory could help us out here?
Appearing on a message board to bombard people with eurosceptic propaganda and make 'watch your step' type threats when they dare disagree...it's all terribly unBritish, isn't it?Quite mild actually. Michael Howard goes a step further with people who disagree with him. No parole eitherNewman wrote:The UKIP bloke's name is Jens Winton. Appearing on a message board to bombard people with eurosceptic propaganda and make 'watch your step' type threats when they dare disagree...it's all terribly unBritish, isn't it?
I get your point on the posters Paddy.
What the Tories are doing is just frightening us, without actually giving any solutions. Its all about taxes, gypsies, crime and immigration - and its all done in Daily Mail rhetoric - and in a childlike (or foreign exchange dealers) handwriting.
The man behind it, along with Saatchi, is Lynton Crosby, an Australian spin doctor, who did the same in Australia, for the Australian Liberal Party (who aren't). When he was in Aus, he ran a storyline about refugees from Iraq, trying to get into Aus, throwing their babies into the ocean so that the Aussie navy had to fish them out, and thus give them asylum. It was only after the election was won, that the story was revealed to be a lie. A bit like the Daily Mail and the Zinoviev Letter of 1924.
I know the Labour Government are far from perfect, but if the Tories ever get back in, I shall be contributing to this website from somewhere in France.
What the Tories are doing is just frightening us, without actually giving any solutions. Its all about taxes, gypsies, crime and immigration - and its all done in Daily Mail rhetoric - and in a childlike (or foreign exchange dealers) handwriting.
The man behind it, along with Saatchi, is Lynton Crosby, an Australian spin doctor, who did the same in Australia, for the Australian Liberal Party (who aren't). When he was in Aus, he ran a storyline about refugees from Iraq, trying to get into Aus, throwing their babies into the ocean so that the Aussie navy had to fish them out, and thus give them asylum. It was only after the election was won, that the story was revealed to be a lie. A bit like the Daily Mail and the Zinoviev Letter of 1924.
I know the Labour Government are far from perfect, but if the Tories ever get back in, I shall be contributing to this website from somewhere in France.
Just a few words to clarify!
I think it might be useful to respond in this post to some of the comments posted in the past few days while I have been away:
Newman's post of April 2 08:18
I must apologise to all affected posters and the administrator of this site if my use of profanity was upsetting. It was not intentional. I am genuinely affected by the current talk of doing away with Nato and replacing it with a Euro army. In this 60th anniversary of World War 2, we have enjoyed unparalled security due to Nato, which has been largely paid for by America. I do not bang the gong for every US policy but there is something of the feeding hand being bitten that is a little unsettling for me. Hence, my skeptic take on the Euro fighter.
As someone who is half-German, I am more than sensitive to any jibes of supposed resurgence of a Fourth Reich. Germany has moved on and I would not support what Kilroy said. Yes, he was a UKIP member but then you have persons of widely differing views co-existing in the major parties. Are we to be so different from this as well?
Newman's post of April 2 08:37
The BBC website page at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4189537.stm is an old story that plays true to form to the side effects of any disgruntled departure: Accusations and counter-accusations. We have seen this in other parties over the years. As for any doubts over UKIP to draw interest, I merely need to point you in the direction of last year's 2.6 million turnout at the Euro elections, and us putting the Conservatives into fourth place in Peter Mandelson's old constituency.
Fishcox's post of April 3 15:06
I am fully conscious that I have a combative tone on this forum. I am deliberately trying to stir up debate, and yes, it was out of recognition that my first post drew no answers. But then my first post was deliberately simple and non-provocative. My posts afterwards now...
But I want readers and posters to know that this combative tone is not a by-product of some delerium nor an end to itself. I am serious about my beliefs and I want prospective voters to know that I will be equally serious when it comes to their concerns. In a perfect world, I would love to be on everyone's nice side and avoid any contention. Unfortunately, as we are too aware, life is not like that. If you want a diplomat who will keep up the status quo and not rock the boat, then don't vote for me. If you want drive and vision (and yes, there is more about what I would like to offer Lewisham West than the traditional UKIP anti-EU line) then do please engage with me.
Newman's post of April 3 15:41
Let me be clear. UKIP and especially myself are not going to be called borderline racists without challenging it. If people are too lazy to distinguish us from the BNP then be prepared to be challenged. It has nothing to do with my real name nor whether I act in an `unBritish' way (whatever that means). My admonition to be careful was not some veiled threat against Newman. It was more a call to be circumspect with our emotions and focus on the issues. I have apologised for my using unfortunate language in relation to another of my posts where the Euro Army was concerned. Will Newman offer a similar apology?
Newman's post of April 2 08:18
I must apologise to all affected posters and the administrator of this site if my use of profanity was upsetting. It was not intentional. I am genuinely affected by the current talk of doing away with Nato and replacing it with a Euro army. In this 60th anniversary of World War 2, we have enjoyed unparalled security due to Nato, which has been largely paid for by America. I do not bang the gong for every US policy but there is something of the feeding hand being bitten that is a little unsettling for me. Hence, my skeptic take on the Euro fighter.
As someone who is half-German, I am more than sensitive to any jibes of supposed resurgence of a Fourth Reich. Germany has moved on and I would not support what Kilroy said. Yes, he was a UKIP member but then you have persons of widely differing views co-existing in the major parties. Are we to be so different from this as well?
Newman's post of April 2 08:37
The BBC website page at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4189537.stm is an old story that plays true to form to the side effects of any disgruntled departure: Accusations and counter-accusations. We have seen this in other parties over the years. As for any doubts over UKIP to draw interest, I merely need to point you in the direction of last year's 2.6 million turnout at the Euro elections, and us putting the Conservatives into fourth place in Peter Mandelson's old constituency.
Fishcox's post of April 3 15:06
I am fully conscious that I have a combative tone on this forum. I am deliberately trying to stir up debate, and yes, it was out of recognition that my first post drew no answers. But then my first post was deliberately simple and non-provocative. My posts afterwards now...
But I want readers and posters to know that this combative tone is not a by-product of some delerium nor an end to itself. I am serious about my beliefs and I want prospective voters to know that I will be equally serious when it comes to their concerns. In a perfect world, I would love to be on everyone's nice side and avoid any contention. Unfortunately, as we are too aware, life is not like that. If you want a diplomat who will keep up the status quo and not rock the boat, then don't vote for me. If you want drive and vision (and yes, there is more about what I would like to offer Lewisham West than the traditional UKIP anti-EU line) then do please engage with me.
Newman's post of April 3 15:41
Let me be clear. UKIP and especially myself are not going to be called borderline racists without challenging it. If people are too lazy to distinguish us from the BNP then be prepared to be challenged. It has nothing to do with my real name nor whether I act in an `unBritish' way (whatever that means). My admonition to be careful was not some veiled threat against Newman. It was more a call to be circumspect with our emotions and focus on the issues. I have apologised for my using unfortunate language in relation to another of my posts where the Euro Army was concerned. Will Newman offer a similar apology?