Tuesday, 17 December 2013

European Elections survey update, ramble

First the results of last week’s survey.

HOW WILL YOU VOTE IN THE 2014 EUROPEAN ELECTIONS ON MAY 22?

Conservative 45 (35%)

Labour 13 (10%)

UKIP 56 (43%)

Other 4 (3%)

I won’t bother to vote 10 (7%)

There were 128 votes, as I didn’t know what to expect I don’t know what to say about the numbers who voted, I didn’t myself as I haven’t really got much of a clue.

Next are the results of the previous election, I didn’t bother with the parties that got less than 1%

European Parliamentary Electoral Region: South East Region Thanet District Council Area - Thursday, 4th June, 2009

 Election results by party
 Party name                 Votes   % of votes
 Conservative Party    9716            30%
 UKIP                          7804    24%
 The Labour Party    4478            14%
 The Green Party    3001            9%
 Liberal Democrats            2482            8%
 British National Party            1762            5%
 English Democrats:            879            3%
 No2EU: Yes to Democracy            529            2%
 Christian Party            490            2%
 Socialist Labour Party            333            1%

Turnout:                        35%

I do hope this table is right I got it from TDC’s website at http://democracy.thanet.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=25&RPID=6086652 and it has a link to Southampton City Council on the page, I assume the TDC offers had difficulty writing the page so took the election results page from Southampton council’s website and modified it.

The MEPs who actually got elected are










   

Excuse me publishing this well before I have finished the post, blogger don’t like tables and I wanted to know how they appear before writing anything else. 


There are some complex issues with this election In total, 72 Members of the European Parliament were elected from the United Kingdom using proportional representation. (This figure would have been 73 if the Lisbon Treaty had entered into force by June 2009.) England, Scotland and Wales used the D'Hondt method of PR, whilstNorthern Ireland used Single Transferable Vote (STV). Owing to the expansion of the European Union, the number of members elected for the United Kingdom was fewer than in 2004. This is because the total number of MEPs increased temporarily with the accession of Bulgaria andRomania in 2007, but was subsequently reduced again in accordance with the Treaty of Nice. The number of members elected from each region was modified by the Boundary Commission and Electoral Commission, based on the size of the electorate in each region.

I think this means that your vote isn’t wasted if you say vote for Labour or the Lib Dems although there doesn’t seem much chance of any of their representatives standing in Thanet getting in one of each of their members in the southeast got in/will probably get in. it� a n @A� � s tial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Boundary Commission and Electoral Commission, based on the size of the electorate in each region.


Goodness knows what happened there I guess that will teach me not to paste directly from Wikipedia.

There is, I think an issue with PR is that if you want to get a representative from your area, in this case someone who lives in Thanet then you would probably do best to vote for a local candidate who is most likely to get elected.

Is this right? Well it may be, perhaps someone will say.  


With the whole Europe business, you know the in out thing, where it looks as though there will – eventually – some day be a referendum I do wish they would get on with it.

I am not entirely sure if I want to get out of the EU the EEC seemed like a good idea at the time, but well I suppose you know how it is, or perhaps you don’t, I thought the Conservatives promised there would be a referendum if they got elected, before the last parliamentary elections. Now they seem to be saying the same thing again, or are they?    


On to the ramble now.

Sorry I haven’t posted since Saturday, there didn’t seem to be much going on and therefore not much to say. Comment on the last post descended into lots of anonymous spam comments, which I spammed and as I was busy with the Bookshop and keeping up with the demand for Christmas presents I turned anonymous comments off.

I have removed the tunnels map from this post and from sale at the request of a member of the tunnels group.  

I would think that anonymous comment will probably go off pretty soon as there has already been one about terrorism and one about 0% since I started writing this post.

I guess the individuals involve couldn’t understand the content of the post so thought spamming their boring repetitive agendas here would be easier that trying to relate to what I or anyone else was saying.

Where was I, oh the interruption seems to have given me a senior moment, what on earth was I writing about?

85 comments:

  1. I genuinely don't know what the outcome of a vote on EU membership would be. I would like to vote to remain part of a trading block but to retain national control of our laws and borders. If that isn't an option, I think I'd vote to leave. I would prefer to be out of it altogether than to be relegated to the status of Alabama in the U.S. However, I think the real issue here is not whether we are in or out, but whether we ever had a say in it. Throughout my adult life we have moved closer and closer to Europe and have never been given a vote on the issue. It's great for those people who want closer union and who believe that they benefit from belonging to the EU. But for those who do not believe this, where is the democracy? Unless they were fortunate enough to live in a constituency with a Eurosceptic candidate from either of the main parties, they had no choice at election time. Now that a referendum has been promised, I think it is vital that we move forward to holding it ASAP. Mr Cameron's attempts to say that we ought to wait until he has attempted to renegotiate the terms of our membership are just a scarcely disguised attempt to kick this issue into the long grass. If he really wanted to renegotiate terms he would hold the referendum first, so that he could negotiate from a much stronger position ("If you don't give us x, y and z the people of Britain have authorised me to withdraw our country from the club.")

    ReplyDelete
  2. Firstly, let's get the facts straight on the referendum issue. Before the 2010 election the Conservatives said that they would offer the people a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if Labour had not already signed up to it. By the time of the election Gordon Brown already had and, in any event, the Conservatives did not emerge from that election with a majority a had to go into a coalition with the Lib/Dems. The Lib/Dems are opposed to a referendum.

    Now the Conservatives are saying that if they are elected they will endeavour to renegotiate our relationship with the EU and then offer the people a referendum on whether we remain in the EU by 2017. UKIP would also support a referendum, but currently neither Labour or the Lib/Dems do. With polls showing the British people overwhelmingly in favour of a referendum, in my view the Labour and Lib/Dem stance is a denial of democracy.

    It seems to me a bit ironic that we can have a referendum about breaking up the UK, and giving the Scots the right to self determination, but Labour would deny the same rights to the British people as a whole over Europe.

    As for this poll, it serves to show that even on a small cross section, Nigel Farage's recent statement that in the marginal, UKIP take more votes from Labour, is about right. One normally expects a close fight between Labour and Conservatives, but here we have the right of centre parties taking almost 80% of the votes and Labour down at the sort of level more associated with the Lib/Dems. If the EU remains a major issue come the general election in 2015 the outcome could be interesting although I would expect Labour to come round to the need for a referendum by then, unless they have a death wish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe that Labour plans to announce a referendum on the brink of the election.

      Delete
    2. The Tory sudden decision on a referendum and delayed until after the election is desperate scrabbling around after the UKIP surge. UKIP will fall away and the Tories will convulse into yet another meaningless debate that nobody except Farage particularly cares about. Britain's problems are down to Britain not the bogeyman of the EU.

      Delete
    3. Having watched the TDC council broadcast one can only say what tedious old farts doing nothing and relying on secrecy. They are shit.

      Delete
    4. why are they still pretending the public cannot film?

      Delete
  3. Strange formatting Michael

    My take is people need to be empowered to vote by feeling that their vote will make a difference, something that doesn't happen currently in any elections.
    Other than Farage no one on the list you put up has made any impact in Kent so why should anybody vote for nonentitys who earn their money from the EU but do nothing for Thanet!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Daniel Hannan, who is a Kent MEP, has made probably an event greater impact in Brussels than Farage and some of his speeches have massive followings on Youtube. Who could ever forget his classic when Brown addressed the EU in Brussels. Was a bit like watching a brilliant orator and a gasping goldfish, Brown being the latter.

      By the way, Barry, what exactly has Farage done for Thanet?

      Delete
    2. Daniel Hannan is superb. I follow him on YouTube and he has me hanging on his every word.

      Delete
    3. interesting William your take on what I said. To clarify impact has several meaning one of which is who has heard of any of the others. Sounds to me and others is Farage is a better publicist than any of the others.

      Delete
    4. My point really was, Barry, that whilst Farage may be the best known, as leader of his party, does he do anything for Thanet? I would agree that apart from Nigel Farage and Daniel Hannan the others are relative unknowns and, strangely enough, Farage and Hannan are united in their contempt for the EU and their desire to see the UK out. A vote for UKIP or the Conservatives as such is a vote for a referendum on coming out whereas a vote for any other party is to send some unknown to Brussels and to stay in.

      Delete
    5. Fair point: Farage and Hannan are irrelevant to Thanet after years of being in office and Farage standing in Thanet and being soundly defeated a few years ago.

      Which MEP candidate will focus on East Kent? These two haven't and the UK is unlikley to leave the EU.

      Delete
    6. what is a fair point was made by Michael a while ago when he asked that prospective candidates engage with the people of Thanet.
      Both you William and John Holyer state they follow Daniel but it is patently obvious none of the above have any following in the minds of Thanetians.
      If they want to engage with the electorate here on the Isle they need to make an effort to visit and really engage.

      Delete
    7. Think, Anon, you are confusing European and general elections, for Farage gets elected as an MEP, but did not when he stood for Thanet South in the general election of 2005. He did, however, substantially increase the UKIP vote and handed the election on a plate to Ladyman in consequence.

      East Kent has actually done quite well on EU grants, so to be gracious maybe some of the MEPs had an influence, but, since as a nation we contribute far more to the EU coffers than we get out, are they really giving us anything?

      Don't hold your breath on staying in the EU. If it goes to a referendum it could be a pretty close call.

      Delete
    8. So if Hannan and Farage are irrelevant to Thanet except when there's an election who are the MEP candidates and choices?

      Delete
    9. What EU grants has TDC received?

      Delete
    10. Most recently, £161, 000 for the Port of Ramsgate. Anyway, it is all a matter of record so look it up for yourself, 7:53.

      Delete
    11. £161k and that is it? But that's only the last month? Tells us the last 5 years worth Cllr Epps. You said Thanet did really well on EU grants. £161k is stuff all.

      Delete
    12. Anon, I did not post the comment about the grant for Port of Ramsgate, but it is just the latest of a number of grants to Thanet by the EU. There is really no point labouring this though because you, or anyone else who is interested, only has to look it up on line. That said, I reiterate that, as a country, we give the EU far more than it gives us back.

      Delete
  4. In my view Churchill said it perfectly, "We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed."

    I would welcome free trade with Europe; but we should be permitted to establish our own bilateral trade deals outside Europe, especially with Australia, Canada, New zealand, India and the rest of the Commonwealth. Our natural home is within the Anglosphere; which after all we founded.

    We cannot thrive within the EU straightjacket. Leaving the EU may create problems for us; but it may also give us the kick up the backside we desparately need.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At least half out exports are with the EU and much of the rest with USA. There is no great trade issue of being out of EU and possibly a disadvantage.

      Now only Norway, Switzerland and Serbia are not in EU. All of them have considered joining and Serbia undoubtedly will along with Turkey and probably Russia eventually.

      Being in or out of EU is either an issue of reform of EU waste. Or a racist fear of foreigners. Much of EU law is actually better than UK law eg food safety or pollution or working hours.

      Delete
    2. Anon, just where do you draw the line on countries not in the EU. There are many other east European and Balkan states not in the EU, there are some who are in who may well leave, and the French belong but take no notice of any of the rules. Whether EU law is better is open to discussion, but does one law for all nations really work. Even US states have law variations, but the EU does not permit that. As for racist fear of foreigners, by far the greatest proportion of immigrants living in the UK originate from Commonwealth countries, not the EU.

      Delete
    3. Not true 7:19. Serbia is the last main Balkan nation about to join and Turkey has been in that position for a decade.

      Ukraine is currently emphasising its desire to join the EU, and Russia will no doubt eventually join.

      By all means correct me but Belarus as a dictatorship is the only European nation actively opposing the EU. Every European nation has parties that oppose the EU to some extent.

      They are all part of Europe aren't they? My personal view is that the Caucasus nations will join ie Georgia, and then looser agreements with the Levant nations ie Israel, and North Africa.

      The EU has law variations just as England and Scotland do - and the EU allows.

      You've ignored the economic benefit of the EU and racist tone of being swamped with Bulgarians etc - just as with the Commonwealth immigration before.

      Delete
    4. You, Anon, are smudging the issue with the racist label, so often used to stifle real debate, talk of economic benefit without quantifying that, when many economists are now taking the opposite view, and ignoring the difference between a common market which the British people signed up to and the federal system it has become.

      Delete
    5. You give no details again 7:38. Richard Branson and dozens of prominent businessmen signed a letter urging the UK to remain in EU a month or so ago for business reasons.

      Of course race is a factor for UKIP and the EU debate - the talk of 30M Bulgarians arriving which is the whole population is racist rivers of blood scare tactics.

      We now have a common market across Europe with Romania etc. There is no federal system other than successive governments have agreed to - and other nations want to join. You ignored the point on Scotland and English law that the EU supposedly quashes.

      Delete
    6. Anon 7:11 pm,

      You have got it wrong. The UK is the EU's largest export market. They need us more than we need them. You are conflating nationality with race. English Common Law is superior to any other kind. Which explains why it was adopted by the USA, Australia, Canada' New Zealand, India and many more. Oh, why do I bother; your are spouting nothing more than uninformed, vacuous , leftie knee jerk propaganda.

      Delete
    7. If I might butt in here, I think you should stick to real facts, 7:32. There are currently 28 members of the EU and some trade agreements exist with other nations. There are, however, even without counting those nations on the southern side of Russia more in Asia than Europe, 17 European nation states who are not members of the EU. Most Balkan states still remain outside the EU or were you confusing their entry into the Eurovision Song contest?

      Delete
    8. The facts are correct. Holyer agrees the EU is the UK's main trade market. Epps waffles but provides no detail: only Serbia is the last main Balkan nation not in the EU and is eager to join.

      Detail the 17 European nations and population not in EU.

      Delete
    9. 8:01, Look up EU members and EU non members on line. On the waffle front, it is you that is making sweeping statements without detail.

      Delete
    10. John Holyer, looks like we are debating with the usual suspect so I suggest we cease.

      Delete
    11. Tell us the 17 EU nations you claim are not in the EU William. No good calling on your stooge Holyer, you're making it up aren't you? Include Andorra if you must.

      Delete
    12. Anon 8:01 pm,

      You would not recognise a fact if it jumped up and bit you in the ar..

      I said that there is a trade gap in that the other EU countries sell more to us than we sell to them. Consequently, they need is more than we need them. Furthermore, we sell more to countries outside the EU than to countries within it.

      You played the race card and that marks you as a scoundrel.

      Delete
    13. William,

      You are right. I was taken by surprise. I did not realise they knew where Europe was - perhaps they don't.

      Delete
    14. Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Georgia, Liechenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Norway, Kosovo, Russia, Serbia & Montenegro, San Marino, Ukraine, Turkey spring to mind as not current members of the EU and there are probably a couple of others I have missed. Not that it matters for the EU will not last.

      Delete
    15. Anon 12:07,

      There is also Switzerland.

      The Germans are growing increasingly resentful at being heavily taxed to support the failing Southern European countries.

      Delete
    16. Spot on, John, and I suppose we should not forget Monaco and Vatican, each being independent nations. Add the move towards more framentisation as opposed to federalism in a number of members states, including UK, and one has to wonder whether such unions can ever work beyond free trade agreements.

      Delete
    17. William, In my view it cannot work beyond free trade agreements and neither should it. The EEC was about trade whereas the EU is about power.

      Delete
    18. We said Norway and Switzerland previously as not in. And Serbia. We gave you Andorra (that's already in). Russia ws included with Turkey as the future- and Ukraine and Belarus maybe. Epps himself ruled out South Asia such as Georgia etc.

      So much for the 17 European nations not in EU.

      So that leaves San Marino - about the population of Broadstairs. What a ridiculous twot.

      Delete
    19. Anon 9:05 pm,

      What's with the 'we'?

      If you believe that Russia will join the EU then you are clearly ignorant of current events in Ukraine.

      Furthermore, do you really see Putin dancing to the tune of the European Commission and the ECHR.

      Delete
    20. Georgia is located in the Caucasus or Eurasia where Europe meets Asia by the Black Sea. It is a member of the Council of Europe, but not the EU. Not very well informed are you, 9:05?

      When considering European union one should note that several countries have regions seeking independence whose, like Scotland's, ongoing membership would be questionable. Bavarians do not really consider themselves Germans and don't call Catalonians Spanish. Humans are tribal by nature and do not take kindly to domination by other tribes. They can co-operate, but union is much harder to achieve and maintain. Look at the UK where Scots, Irish, Welsh and even Cornish see themselves as different and seek some sort of autonomy.

      The chances of the EU falling apart are far greater than it holding together.

      Delete
  5. Are the Ramsgate Tunnels opening next year? They are still derelict aren't they? What happened to the Lottery money from a few years ago to open them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An interesting Twitter thread on the head of Margate Town Team:

      https://twitter.com/ZoeMurphyDesign/status/412896626290995200

      I said on this blog's Tesco thread that I didn't like the man, even though (like Ian Watkins) I was only near him for a few seconds and he never even spoke to me! Again, simply bad vibes...

      Delete
    2. Anon you obviously haven’t been to Ramsgate for a while where there is a very strong Tunnels group who have been using the grant funding and are opening the tunnels in June of next year click here for their website.

      Delete
    3. I live in Ramsgate but have seen no work on the Tunnels. Maybe you have Michael? Have they been repaired? What was the money spent on - there was an asbestos survey? Pleasurama still looks a mess.

      Delete
    4. Anon 7:33 pm.

      Presumably you have seen no work on the tunnels for reaon that they are underground.

      Delete
    5. Ah anon, well I guess you wouldn’t have seen much unless you have been down the tunnels, as I said look at their website I put the link in my last comment. On the asbestos front the short answer is yes, the survey has been done and much of the remedial work too. Last time I asked they had just bought an electric vehicle able to work in the narrower tunnels. You have to appreciate that the whole system extends for about 5 miles and only part of it will be opened initially.

      Pleasurama I guess the council are waiting until February when the completion deadline runs out as this would put them in a strong position to reclaim the site on the grounds that the developer has failed to comply with the development agreement.

      I would think it unlikely they would do anything before that time as it would put them a legal disadvantage that could be expensive for local taxpayers.

      Delete
    6. No I haven't been down the tunnels. have you? Only part of them are being opened? The asbestos has been removed? What is the electric vehicle?

      TDC were working with the developer to open Pleasurama this year with Poole and Hart. Now they are not and have left the site derelict for a year - and will take back the site in February? Nothing will be built in c.45 days after years of delay. Then what?

      Delete
    7. Anon in TDC's defence they are bound by a development agreement signed in 2006 and amended in 2009 which runs out on the 28/2/2014. So they haven't been "working with" the developer they are handling a difficult situation albeit in a confidential way.
      The current situation is another plea (delaying tactic) from the developer to have the agreement amended (NO WAY) which they have to take legal advice over.
      Will anything be built (I doubt it)? Will there be a legal fight (almost certainly)? Who is at fault for this situation (The developer most definitely)?

      Delete
    8. I thought they were working with the developer. Poole and Hart a year ago was urging the site to be developed. You're talking nonsense Baz.

      The site must be closed and cleared or the padlocks broken and the public will do it.

      Delete
    9. anon you obviously don't read what is in front of you

      Delete
    10. How do you mean Baz? Provide some detail for your random view.

      Delete
    11. Anon 8:55 & 9:06

      Who is Baz?

      Delete
    12. Baz = Barry, a man who learnt a couple of things from me today (ie that you can see a Facebook page without being a Facebook subscriber, and that you can find Facebook pages on Google).

      Delete
    13. Peter when did you decide that you should be a spokesperson for an anon, and use it as an opportunity to show your sarcastic side. grow up Peter

      Delete
    14. And when did you start commenting anonymously Baz?

      Delete
    15. Peter, I'm not Barry I'm his spokesperson.

      Delete
    16. Baz is too big for his boots.

      Delete
    17. And for his trousers!

      Delete
    18. What a load of drivel this post is turning into. Peter why are you interacting with Garbled speech from an anon

      Delete
    19. Tim is defending you? Why would he do that Barry?

      Delete
    20. Barry, I'm still totally confused over this. Are you seriously claiming that the 9:43 comment came from Tim?

      Delete
    21. why are you asking me? I do not post anon comments. You should direct your confusion to someone else.

      Delete
    22. Ok, please clarify the comment you made @ 9:54: "Peter why are you interacting with Garbled speech from an anon".

      Which anon comment was you referring to?

      And who do you think made the anonymous statement at 9:43 defending you? You must have at least a vague idea, as I'm sure there's not many people who would jump in and defend you anonymously.

      Delete
    23. Peter why do you think I don't have friends on here?

      Delete
    24. Where did I say you don't have friends here?

      And why can't you clarify what you meant when you said to me "Peter why are you interacting with Garbled speech from an anon". It's a simple enough question. Or are you saying that Tim defended you?

      Delete
  6. I guess I am fairly ignorant about the EU and this election particularly in the sense of how my vote would count, obviously unlike the parliamentary elections where there is an in out aspect, it wouldn’t for instance make any difference to the in out situation if all of the UK’s MEPs were UKIP, would it? But taking this a step further I find I am very unclear just what differences of having a different political makeup of UK MEPs would make to me. I wonder does anyone else, by this I mean there are different senses of direction that I can see with the UK parliament or even in local government if we have a majority of either Conservatives of Labour members and differences between a working majority with either party or a government formed with different coalitions. What I can’t visualise however if or how this makes any real difference at EU level either to the country as a whole or to the local area.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Michael, indirectly you have posed the question many of us wonder about, do the MEPs actually serve any purpose for us. With increasing numbers of them being UKIP or Tory Eurosceptics, they are more there to try and rock the boat than to in any way govern Europe.

      What is of more interest, is how the European question will impact on the general election which is just a year after the European one.

      Delete
    2. Certainly there is a need for reform at the EU: shifting to Strasbourg every month is waste. As is being based in the expensive parts of Western Europe now the EU is truly pan-European now. NATO seems waste. The Russians won't invade and the Afghan war is over.

      Delete
    3. William do they even manage to rock the boat? I have to admit that while I would vote UKIP or Conservative if I wanted out of Europe in the parliamentary elections, although in practice as I don’t really know whether out or in would be more beneficial either locally or nationally it isn’t an issue that impacts how I vote. In the MEP election I guess I would probably vote for pro EU candidates with a mandate to get the best benefits from Europe, both for the UK and this area. I guess to do otherwise would be like voting to try and get an MP who wanted to abolish the UK’s democracy.

      Further down this line of reasoning I am very unclear about how UKIP and the eurosceptics see a future out of the EU. I guess my main reservations abut the EU is that where they are the legislative body in some area this doesn’t seem to stop the same area being covered politically and bureaucratically within UK government, meaning effectively we pay for the ministry of silly walks twice.

      Delete
    4. Surely democracy, Michael, is about having a choice and, at the moment, the pro European parties are denying the British people that choice. A referendum is a campaign in itself when all the 'fors' and 'againsts' can be put to the people. That is democracy and may enable us to make an informed choice.

      This is a good debate but can you get rid of that Manston, Epps and Holyer rubbish further down. Thank you.

      Delete
    5. Tell us the 17 European nations not in the EU William. And TDC's EU grants. You seem to be simply making things up as you go along which is hardly a good debate. It's mere bollix.

      The Manston debate is interesting too especially given your fanatical and incoherent support of pollution and banned flights there. Something Roger Gale is again ignoring.

      Delete
    6. This is a good debate but please could you get rid of the Epps rubbish (above). It is certainly true that Tony Blair denied the British people a choice when he was Prime Minister. Now the Tories are in office and it is David Cameron who is denying us choice. Talk of a referendum after the election is just a delaying tactic. In essence, Cameron hopes to win the election with a large majority, allowing him to renege on the promise of a referendum. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and Tory MP's won't vote to defeat the government, even if it has duped the electorate. It is undemocratic for pro-Europeans with vested business interests to deny the rest of us a say on this issue.

      Delete
  7. Manston, Lydd and Boris Island rejected by Davies Commission today. Those bullshatters Buchanan and Gale see this as great potential for the future(!).

    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/news/kent-grounded-by-davies-10314

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Thames Estuary option has not been rejected rather the decision on it has been postponed to a later date.

      Delete
    2. Totally off topic comment, 7:48. Leave it out of a sensible discussion on European elections.

      Delete
    3. Manston and UK aviation will feature in the EU elections and breaking news is worth debating.

      Delete
    4. Holyer and Epps will sort out Manston.

      Delete
  8. Utter bollix indeed from Epps as detailed at 8:24. He seems to be some sort of Tory propagandist and blog policeman now resorting to ever more desperate lies.

    I do not fully understand what a referendum on the EU will achieve? If we stay in it's much as now. If we leave what are the benefits? Better trade deals with the EU is unlikely and probably worse - and easier to implement as an island nation. Less EU regulation? We'd probably adopt the best legislation anyway. Reduced costs? OK but the EU is less than 1% of our GDP. Tighter borders? We're an island and that's down the the Border Agency and Police anyway: it must be more of a problem in other EU nations with land borders.

    Surely the EU debate (certainly for the 2014 election) should be about reform: the value and costs of the EU? Clarity on its future as a federation or not? Clear accession timetables for Turkey etc? Reform/restrictions of the institutions?

    No candidate has announced any policies at all except to be elected. What will they do in the EU and for East Kent?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would like to give you the courtesy of a reply but I cannot do so; for reason that your remarks ramble to the point of incoherence. However, I do not fret bearing in mind that it all probably makes sense to you.

      Delete
    2. Be quiet Holyer you are at best a fool and at worst Epps' boy. Provide detail on the EU or Manston not your stupid insults.

      Delete
    3. Read it again you fool Holyer it is very clear.

      Delete
    4. Anon 9:48 pm,

      Look I know who you are and you know that I know. I will leave you alone now because I pity you. I hope you have enjoyed the exchanges today.

      Delete
  9. Machetes in Ramsgate, why are the police allowing these knives to be sold?

    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/thanet_extra/news/machete-raid-10333

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great post. Got excited by 84 responses. Then I saw them. Got bored. Michael - can you turn off anon comments for good, please? Anons tend to take the direction of the debate down blind alleys.

    ReplyDelete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.