Nigel Farage launches the Brexit party

Well if dumb ass May leaves and an election is called my money if on Farage.
Like the last election it's mostly a protest vote because people are just pissed off.

a reply to: UKWO1Phot



Bring back the Dude dressed as a Dolphin is my thinking on the matter.

a reply to: andy06shake

Only people who have a PROBLEM with immigrants are MUPPETS who harbor latent racial hatred

Is that so? Then why don’t all countries just have open borders then?

Immigrants come from all races and so it’s not a racial issue as you know so quit pretending otherwise. What many people are concerned about is uncontrolled mass immigration and rightly so.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I live on an island mate, it's not exactly open borders over here. LoL

Ile quite the pretense when we stop calling them Immigrants and accept them for the people that they are.

There is no uncontrolled mass immigration into the UK, and there is not lightly to be anytime soon.

Like i said, without immigrants, and the much needed and required skills they bring to this nation, the UK would be on its arse even more so than it already is.

That's no pretense.

originally posted by: PsychoEmperor
a reply to: eletheia
What are the chances the UK will hold another election? I know it's not scheduled till May 5, 2022, but could they be pressured to hold an early election?

You've done this to me before ..... and again your guess is as good as mine

but I'll tell you what I think....

If there is another election or referendum the resulting mess will be worse

than anything at present. Tories will loose and labour will have a small

majority so it will be a status quo. If May doesn't do Brexit now the EU

elections will give her (as if she doesn't already know) The peoples wrath.


A recent poll I saw placing Tories for PM in an order of preference, and including

Farrage in the mix, put Boris Johnson in the lead and Farrage only a few points

behind??


T.May is on the way out, its the damage she leaves behind as her legacy that

is frightening.

a reply to: andy06shake

Not sure what you’re saying there, are you suggesting we stop calling immigrants immigrants?

There is a hell of a lot of immigration to the U.K. both illegal and otherwise, I live in West Yorkshire near Bradford and I’ve literally seen the demographics change with my own eyes around these parts. We have 4 high street shops in my town that sell exclusively EU food and drink opened up in the last 5 years while other businesses flounder. They cater for Polish Czech and other EU natives that we’ve always had but never in the current numbers. We have hand car washing businesses that used to be petrol stations and the people who work there are all recent Asian immigrants working for a pittance. We have criminal gangs that exploit these immigrants who came here to better there lives and even gave their life savings over to said gangs to get here in the first place, that or they are in debt to the gangs.

It’s the immigrants I feel sorry for, not all of them, many are doing well enough, but many aren’t. Also we have waiting lists and overcrowding at schools and hospitals and a government who won’t invest in essential infrastructure with austerity being shoved down our throats. These are the issues that people are concerned about.

In say 15 plus years we will see the well off living in gated communities with there own private security (there are a number of these already) while the rest of us find ourselves living in a third world country even though we haven’t gone anywhere.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I'm quite simply suggesting immigrants are people first before we label them as immigrants.

A simple distinction really, but one that can be rather skewed these days.

See the person, not the immigrant pretty much.

Good and bad folks in all walks of life, some even from different nations.

Aye, the gated communities are already there, third world nation indeed, because first world ones should not have food banks and austerity in spades.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: surfer_soul

I'm quite simply suggesting immigrants are people first before we label them as immigrants.

A simple distinction really, but one that can be rather skewed these days.

See the person, not the immigrant pretty much.

In a smaller context do you take into your home everyone who is homeless

and hungry who is on or comes to your door step.

IF you would or do ...... will you limit how many will fit in with your family

and how much space you have in your home? or will you just overcrowd

your own family?


These immigrant/people presumably had been homed 'somewhere' before

they decided to land uninvited and without any preparation on another

country.

a reply to: eletheia

I simply treat people how i find them, its simpler that way.

It's not the smaller context we need to concern ourselves with but the bigger picture.

Our ancestors presumably were homed somewhere before they arrived on our shores.

From my own perspective that would be somewhere around Scandinavia or Sweden.

We are all immigrants eletheia, just as we are all people.

a reply to: andy06shake


Brexit is about being control of our own borders and stopping illegal imigration or people who would cause problems it's that simple.

We have celebs etc taking the moral high ground with this because it looks good for their image look what happened with Lilly Allen.

Lily Allen is mocked after moaning that she'll be homeless at Christmas because tenants are refusing to leave her luxury flat - as she is branded a 'hypocrite' for going back on pledge to take in refugees

I know a women who is constantly verblly abused going to work in a city in Central Scotland, the police said they could do nothing as they will play the race card unfortunately for them some locals heard them, I don't think they will do it again.

Scotland housed 400 migrants/refugees recntly where did the houses come from what about my own people on housing waiting lists again politicians using this to look good

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: eletheia

It's not the smaller context we need to concern ourselves with but the bigger picture.

So I take it the answer is no?.......


The bigger picture is the same as the smaller one only on a larger scale?

We pay taxes ( equated to board/housekeeping) to be taken care of eg.

Communal buildings, roads, cleansing,transport, infrastructure, health

education housing (for the poorer) etc.

So the government housekeeping pot is not infinite..... which in my book

means family first

Our ancestors presumably were homed somewhere before they arrived on our shores.

At a time of nomads and before civilisation and the implementation of

governments who have to answer to us on how they spend our money?


Just because you prefer someone elses home and standards doesn't mean you

can just palm yourself off on them.

a reply to: wmd_2008
Jesus Christ on a pogo stick. I'll put it in biggie letters so you can see it.
THE UK HAS NEVER, EVER LOST CONTROL OF IT'S BORDERS. In fact the UK has expanded it's borders onto mainland France.
THE EU HAS NEVER FORCED ANY LAWS ONTO THE UK. The UK has either agreed to them or refused them. 2 instances. If the Eu could force the UK then why didn't it force the UK to sign the Schengen agreement. The UK refused and did not sign. The other why didn't the EU force the UK into the single currency. It didn't, the UK refused.
NO IMMIGRATION POLICY WAS FORCED ONTO THE UK FROM THE EU. All immigration matters were the result of UK policy not the EUs.
As for the Brexit party you've all got the wrong end of the stick. Farage has started the party to win EU seats not UK government seats.
So the question for you all is "just what are they going to achieve in winning the EU seats. They can't affect the brexit process, so why do they want the EU seats.

a reply to: crayzeed

THE EU HAS NEVER FORCED ANY LAWS ONTO THE UK

Complete bollocks.

One example is " The Working Time Directive " This was opposed by The UK Government because it restricted the hours that people could work. One being Junior Doctors.

The UK was forced to implement it.

a reply to: alldaylong
Please read the legal pack that comes with it.
A DIRECTIVE is not a law but a directive that allows every EU state to set up and achieve it's own methods to achieve the end goal. The UK disliked the maximum hours curtailment but they still accepted it. Not forced.

You say a Directive is not a law ?


Yes it is.

The Working Time Regulations (1998) implement the European Working Time Directive into GB law.
[/quote

www.hse.gov.uk...

David Cameron wanted The UK to opt out. The EU told him he couldn't.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

www.theguardian.com...

Like all EU directives, the Working Time Directive is an instrument which requires all member states to enact its requirements in national law.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Do you still want to say that no EU Law has been forced onto the UK ?

edit on 27-4-2019 by alldaylong because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: crayzeed
A DIRECTIVE is not a law but a directive that allows every EU state to set up and achieve it's own methods to achieve the end goal. The UK disliked the maximum hours curtailment but they still accepted it. Not forced.

A Directive from the EU is an instruction, thus "forced". A Directive is an instruction for a member state to set up the dictated objective of the Directive in domestic law, which is as you say.

The democratic deficit here is that national governments have no ability to debate such Directives and must legislate, only the detail of implementation is up for discussion.

a reply to: crayzeed

Please extract your head from your backside

If you count all EU regulations, EU-related Acts of Parliament, and EU-related Statutory Instruments, about 62% of laws introduced between 1993 and 2014 that apply in the UK implemented EU obligations.[/eu]

EU regulations automatically have binding legal force in every EU member country.

Ah, you must have fetched that little snippet out of the brexiter frightening camp.
EU regulations automatically have binding legal force in every member country. But you forgat the most important part 2of the countries that accept it".
Please look up what a "VETO" is then come back with your frighteners.
The UK have always had the power of veto over all EU directives. You do know what that means don't you?

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: wmd_2008
Farage has started the party to win EU seats not UK government seats.
So the question for you all is "just what are they going to achieve in winning the EU seats. They can't affect the brexit process, so why do they want the EU seats.

I am sure of one thing like you, Farage is only doing this to line his pockets, its been shown many a time by him, he loves his MEP money, and this new party is just a vehicle for him to eat from the trough again, I voted out to stop ALL MEPs from eating from that trough, he will happily still claim that money all why pretending to be against it, with little outbursts which have no affect on anything other than tomorrows fish and chips paper.

He will achive nothing other than a bigger bank balance. If anyone who voted Brxit then votes for him in the Euro elections I am at a complete loss as to the sense that makes, we voted out of the EU, yet people want to vote in the EU elections, I wont and certainly not for a proven expenses cheat.

a reply to: crayzeed

I think we've only had the red card, veto and referendum powers on EU directives since 2010/11 thanks to William Hague. People had the power to pass or reject new laws via referendum - problem was the government never used them and people were unaware.

- Provides for a referendum throughout the United Kingdom on any proposed EU treaty or Treaty change which would transfer powers from the UK to the EU
- Ensures that an Act of Parliament would have to be passed before a ‘ratchet clause’ or a passerelle (bridging clause) in the European Union Treaty could be used. In addition, if the passerelle involved a transfer of power or competence from the UK to the EU, this would also be subject to a referendum before the Government could agree to its use
- Enables the UK to ratify a Protocol to allow additional European Parliament seats for the UK and 11 other Member States during the current European Parliament term, and to legislate for the extra UK seat
- Provides for a clause that affirms that EU law takes effect in the UK only because Parliament wills that it should. This confirms the principle that Parliament is sovereign.


services.parliament.uk...