"Hemp Smart Gummies Australia...
Home & Garden4 mins ago
Tory Plot !
No pressure then, Dave.
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by tonyav. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"But the MPs behind the initiative warn that unless the Prime Minister achieves truly radical changes, they will urge the British public to vote to withdraw from the EU in the referendum..."
Fortuitous, then, that there some MPs with the conscience. The Conservative Manifesto stated that a referendum would be held only after renegotiation with the EU had been completed. It said nothing about the aims and objectives of those negotiations. These MPs have stated that there are two "red lines" which must be achieved. These are
- Sovereignty over national laws must be returned to Parliament from Brussels.
- Britain should seize back control over immigration
Mr Cameron knows he has not a cat in hell's chance of achieving these aims (or indeed much else of any significance) but he has in mind gaining a few minor concessions and putting these to the electorate as major achievements along with a recommendation to vote "Yes".
Hopefully pressure from these MPs will change that by persuading the electorate that no fundamental change to the EU is possible and their best course of action would be to vote "No".
Fortuitous, then, that there some MPs with the conscience. The Conservative Manifesto stated that a referendum would be held only after renegotiation with the EU had been completed. It said nothing about the aims and objectives of those negotiations. These MPs have stated that there are two "red lines" which must be achieved. These are
- Sovereignty over national laws must be returned to Parliament from Brussels.
- Britain should seize back control over immigration
Mr Cameron knows he has not a cat in hell's chance of achieving these aims (or indeed much else of any significance) but he has in mind gaining a few minor concessions and putting these to the electorate as major achievements along with a recommendation to vote "Yes".
Hopefully pressure from these MPs will change that by persuading the electorate that no fundamental change to the EU is possible and their best course of action would be to vote "No".
NJ...I always admire MP's with a conscience, even if they happen to be Tories, but these conscientious colleagues of daves may well prove to be his undoing, as John Major found to his cost.
He should beware enemies within, not the ones on the opposite benches !
Didn't LBJ make a remark about urination and tents ?
He should beware enemies within, not the ones on the opposite benches !
Didn't LBJ make a remark about urination and tents ?
So are you saying that Labour are now saying we should have a referendum because they realise it is a vote winner but don't really want an out vote but will take the risk in any case.
If the AB in/out vote is an indication it would seem that there are a lot more than just UKIP, BNP and 50 Tory MPs who want out of Europe. Not quite over 50% on AB alone so far. I think that would give me a better view as how the wind blows rather than relying on YouGov polls etc. They prove totally unreliable at the final analysis so it seems.
If the AB in/out vote is an indication it would seem that there are a lot more than just UKIP, BNP and 50 Tory MPs who want out of Europe. Not quite over 50% on AB alone so far. I think that would give me a better view as how the wind blows rather than relying on YouGov polls etc. They prove totally unreliable at the final analysis so it seems.
Seven out of ten people who voted didn't vote for Labour.
http://
http://
The difficulty with this issue has been adequately recognised by the 50 “mavericks”) is quite straightforward. The Conservative Manifesto pledged this:
“We will negotiate new rules with the EU, so that people will have to be earning here for a number of years before they can claim benefits, including the tax credits that top up low wages. Instead of something-for-nothing, we will build a system based on the principle of something-for-something. We will then put these changes to the British people in a straight in-out referendum on our membership of the European Union by the end of 2017.”
It then goes on in some detail about how that overall aim will be achieved. Some of the salient points:
“Changes to welfare to cut EU migration will be an absolute requirement in the renegotiation”
“We will introduce a new residency requirement for social housing, so that EU
migrants cannot even be considered for a council house unless they have been living in an area for at least four years”
“If an EU migrant’s child is living abroad, then they should receive no child benefit or child tax credit, no matter how long they have worked in the UK and
no matter how much tax they have paid”
“To reduce the numbers of EU migrants coming to Britain, we will end
the ability of EU jobseekers to claim any job-seeking benefits at all. And if jobseekers have not found a job within six months, they will be required to leave”
If Mr Cameron was honest he would accept that he has absolutely no chance of all (if indeed any) of these goals being achieved. These changes strike at the fundamental principles of the European Project. They will be resisted fiercely by many of the members (especially those who citizens are main beneficiaries of the UK’s largesse).
The danger is that he will return from negotiations with a few scraps of paper perhaps agreeing “in principle” to one or two of them, campaign for a resounding “Yes” vote on that basis only to see those principles shot down in flames in European Courts shortly afterwards. That’s the danger that the Fifty recognise and it would be worthy of them to stick to their guns. If it tears the Tories apart so be it. Far rather that than the electorate be fooled into voting to remain shackled to a moribund, corrupt, declining bloc for evermore.
“We will negotiate new rules with the EU, so that people will have to be earning here for a number of years before they can claim benefits, including the tax credits that top up low wages. Instead of something-for-nothing, we will build a system based on the principle of something-for-something. We will then put these changes to the British people in a straight in-out referendum on our membership of the European Union by the end of 2017.”
It then goes on in some detail about how that overall aim will be achieved. Some of the salient points:
“Changes to welfare to cut EU migration will be an absolute requirement in the renegotiation”
“We will introduce a new residency requirement for social housing, so that EU
migrants cannot even be considered for a council house unless they have been living in an area for at least four years”
“If an EU migrant’s child is living abroad, then they should receive no child benefit or child tax credit, no matter how long they have worked in the UK and
no matter how much tax they have paid”
“To reduce the numbers of EU migrants coming to Britain, we will end
the ability of EU jobseekers to claim any job-seeking benefits at all. And if jobseekers have not found a job within six months, they will be required to leave”
If Mr Cameron was honest he would accept that he has absolutely no chance of all (if indeed any) of these goals being achieved. These changes strike at the fundamental principles of the European Project. They will be resisted fiercely by many of the members (especially those who citizens are main beneficiaries of the UK’s largesse).
The danger is that he will return from negotiations with a few scraps of paper perhaps agreeing “in principle” to one or two of them, campaign for a resounding “Yes” vote on that basis only to see those principles shot down in flames in European Courts shortly afterwards. That’s the danger that the Fifty recognise and it would be worthy of them to stick to their guns. If it tears the Tories apart so be it. Far rather that than the electorate be fooled into voting to remain shackled to a moribund, corrupt, declining bloc for evermore.
The danger is that he will return from negotiations with a few scraps of paper perhaps agreeing “in principle” to one or two of them, campaign for a resounding “Yes” vote on that basis only to see those principles shot down in flames in European Courts shortly afterwards. That’s the danger that the Fifty recognise and it would be worthy of them to stick to their guns. If it tears the Tories apart so be it. Far rather that than the electorate be fooled into voting to remain shackled to a moribund, corrupt, declining bloc for evermore.
I agree NJ. Obama says that he would like us to stay in the EU.
http://
I agree NJ. Obama says that he would like us to stay in the EU.
http://
The "bit of paper" that Cameron will wave on his return from negotiations bears close resemblance to that which Chamberlain waved in 1938 - and look how that turned out !
Incidentally, the rebel 50 have their counterparts in the Labour Party so it is hardly appropriate for us (Labour supporters) to crow about it.
Incidentally, the rebel 50 have their counterparts in the Labour Party so it is hardly appropriate for us (Labour supporters) to crow about it.
Certainly another good reason to get out then, tony.
I doubt many Americans (including the President) have much idea what EU membership means for the UK. Imagine Mr Obama being told (and having to sell the idea to his voters) that the USA will be compelled to accept migrants from 27 other nations, many of which have economies which provide wages at about 10% to 20% of those enjoyed in the US. Furthermore that those migrants will be immediately eligible for a full range of benefits (including payments for dependents abroad), housing and free healthcare as soon as they set foot on US soil.
Let's see how that grabs them!
I doubt many Americans (including the President) have much idea what EU membership means for the UK. Imagine Mr Obama being told (and having to sell the idea to his voters) that the USA will be compelled to accept migrants from 27 other nations, many of which have economies which provide wages at about 10% to 20% of those enjoyed in the US. Furthermore that those migrants will be immediately eligible for a full range of benefits (including payments for dependents abroad), housing and free healthcare as soon as they set foot on US soil.
Let's see how that grabs them!
It now seems Dave was "misinterpreted" apparently :::
http://
So, all the journalists that were present at the german summit were wrong, and he was right ?
He is making a complete dogs dinner of this, within his own Party, and the sooner he sorts out the "misinterpretation" the better for everybody.
Is he going to give his Party a free vote on this issue, as Wilson did in 1975, or will he have to sack some of his own people ? We need to know !
http://
So, all the journalists that were present at the german summit were wrong, and he was right ?
He is making a complete dogs dinner of this, within his own Party, and the sooner he sorts out the "misinterpretation" the better for everybody.
Is he going to give his Party a free vote on this issue, as Wilson did in 1975, or will he have to sack some of his own people ? We need to know !
Latest Posts
News8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Businesses Warn Of Job Losses Threat As...
News58 mins ago
News61 mins ago
