Farage comes to region and declares himself a Thatcherite

Nigel Farage pours himself a pint in the Black Bull, Yarm

Nigel Farage pours himself a pint in the Black Bull, Yarm

First published in News
Last updated
Darlington and Stockton Times: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter (Stockton/Hartlepool)

NIGEL Farage came the region and declared himself as the heir to Margaret Thatcher today.
Speaking over a pint in a Yarm pub the Ukip leader, in the region to campaign ahead of next month’s European Union elections, said he supported the free-market, anti-union reforms of the 1980s.
He acknowledged that unemployment, which rose dramatically in the North-East iduring the Thatcher period, was still a major problem in the region but argued that identity issues were as important as economics in appealing to the North-East electorate.
And he said the Labour Party, traditionally the party which wins most support in the region, “no longer represented the interests of working-class people in the North-East.”
He said: “I think we as a party understand them (working class people) far more than the other parties...polls here show this is the most patriotic part of England...It is also the most eurosceptic part of England.”
Mr Farage also rebutted criticism surrounding the employment of his German wife as an assistant, instead of someone born in the UK, and defended a Ukip poster campaign warning that unemployed Europeans were ''after'' people's jobs in this country.

Comments (59)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:19pm Wed 23 Apr 14

Robert_ says...

I can't believe people actually want to vote for this clown. Can you imagine if he was PM?!
I can't believe people actually want to vote for this clown. Can you imagine if he was PM?! Robert_
  • Score: 11

7:26pm Wed 23 Apr 14

Lawman3 says...

He is getting far too much publicity, considering his party has less MPs than the Green party.
He is getting far too much publicity, considering his party has less MPs than the Green party. Lawman3
  • Score: 2

7:42pm Wed 23 Apr 14

happyguy says...

I know but some people who have right wing rants hero worship him and regularly contribite to this page.
I know but some people who have right wing rants hero worship him and regularly contribite to this page. happyguy
  • Score: 0

7:43pm Wed 23 Apr 14

capt manners says...

He had my vote until he mentioned thatcher!
He had my vote until he mentioned thatcher! capt manners
  • Score: 0

8:33pm Wed 23 Apr 14

MSG says...

Lawman3 wrote:
He is getting far too much publicity, considering his party has less MPs than the Green party.
Nick Clegg opened the door for him to receive all the publicity. I wish he did not mention Thatcher but he will get my vote as I am white working class and detest the LIBLABCON.

Better UKIP than the now American influenced Labour Party !
[quote][p][bold]Lawman3[/bold] wrote: He is getting far too much publicity, considering his party has less MPs than the Green party.[/p][/quote]Nick Clegg opened the door for him to receive all the publicity. I wish he did not mention Thatcher but he will get my vote as I am white working class and detest the LIBLABCON. Better UKIP than the now American influenced Labour Party ! MSG
  • Score: 6

9:02pm Wed 23 Apr 14

MagicAlf says...

People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters.
People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters. MagicAlf
  • Score: 9

6:20am Thu 24 Apr 14

darloboss says...

what a ferkin plonker
but crustybutterballs and crazy lacey worsip him
what a ferkin plonker but crustybutterballs and crazy lacey worsip him darloboss
  • Score: 2

7:58am Thu 24 Apr 14

Ron Carter-Bonsteel says...

ALL political parties are a waste of space they always promise voters this that and another but lie through there back teeth. Too many parties now cut from the same cloth. Have you noticed when MP's stand for election they are all well to do people from professional backgrounds or civil servants whatever happened to Labour grass roots and working classes getting a vote? At least they would know what my concerns would be and that of others
No party will make anyone's life better as they still going to go ahead with the austerity cuts more people on food banks,more people getting sanctioned by benefits and like members of my family and many others we know working 30 hours a week for £2.68 a hour apprenticeship allowances for six months then whatever happened to minimum wage? Cheap Labour for the masses.
So depressing for our people but this is the future people led by our rich political masters. Apologies for my rant.
ALL political parties are a waste of space they always promise voters this that and another but lie through there back teeth. Too many parties now cut from the same cloth. Have you noticed when MP's stand for election they are all well to do people from professional backgrounds or civil servants whatever happened to Labour grass roots and working classes getting a vote? At least they would know what my concerns would be and that of others No party will make anyone's life better as they still going to go ahead with the austerity cuts more people on food banks,more people getting sanctioned by benefits and like members of my family and many others we know working 30 hours a week for £2.68 a hour apprenticeship allowances for six months then whatever happened to minimum wage? Cheap Labour for the masses. So depressing for our people but this is the future people led by our rich political masters. Apologies for my rant. Ron Carter-Bonsteel
  • Score: 10

9:53am Thu 24 Apr 14

behonest says...

capt manners wrote:
He had my vote until he mentioned thatcher!
And the anti-UKIP press made sure 'Thatcher' and 'Farage' were in the headline together, knowing this would be a negative in this Region. And the usual Labour loonies on here fall for it every time.
[quote][p][bold]capt manners[/bold] wrote: He had my vote until he mentioned thatcher![/p][/quote]And the anti-UKIP press made sure 'Thatcher' and 'Farage' were in the headline together, knowing this would be a negative in this Region. And the usual Labour loonies on here fall for it every time. behonest
  • Score: 7

2:11pm Thu 24 Apr 14

MartinMo says...

MagicAlf wrote:
People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters.
If you mean by the interest of the rich that there will be less money benefits pot (poor peoples purse) because it stays in the hands of the workings then thats a good thing. His policies would be devasting to whom exactly, this country needs a political party willing to stamp serverely on the nanny state benefit culture of this country.
[quote][p][bold]MagicAlf[/bold] wrote: People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters.[/p][/quote]If you mean by the interest of the rich that there will be less money benefits pot (poor peoples purse) because it stays in the hands of the workings then thats a good thing. His policies would be devasting to whom exactly, this country needs a political party willing to stamp serverely on the nanny state benefit culture of this country. MartinMo
  • Score: -8

4:11pm Thu 24 Apr 14

RealLivin says...

For those slagging him off I suggest you look at the issues on the UKIP site, Many of these are very big issues, however there is difference between making good promises on key issues and actually delevering on them, but then again can any one name a government that has actually done this yet? The European Market has great potential, but it is run by idiots, mainly the Germans with the French frantically hanging on to their coat tails.

The problems come when we can vote our idiots out every 4/5 years but we cannot vote the euro idiots out, its bad enough having London policies rolled out across the country ie bedroom tax but polices to fix ex eastern block countries are impacting on us, we are paying to fix there economies while they are over here taking our benefits and our jobs.

I dont think Nigel Farage has a working plan to fix Britain, but the more he becomes popular the more he speaks out, the more likely the Tories and Labour will do something right to regain their own popularity. The only bad thing about the north east is its labour heritage, "we vote labour because our fathers did and our grand fathers did". ALL political parties are a waste of space, I vote for a person who has good ideas, plans and the capability to run with them, but the chances of a north east MP actually making it good for us up here is minimal, how much better off were we when Tony Blair was PM.

If Scotlands independance works may be the north east should follow suite we couldnt be any worse off
For those slagging him off I suggest you look at the issues on the UKIP site, Many of these are very big issues, however there is difference between making good promises on key issues and actually delevering on them, but then again can any one name a government that has actually done this yet? The European Market has great potential, but it is run by idiots, mainly the Germans with the French frantically hanging on to their coat tails. The problems come when we can vote our idiots out every 4/5 years but we cannot vote the euro idiots out, its bad enough having London policies rolled out across the country ie bedroom tax but polices to fix ex eastern block countries are impacting on us, we are paying to fix there economies while they are over here taking our benefits and our jobs. I dont think Nigel Farage has a working plan to fix Britain, but the more he becomes popular the more he speaks out, the more likely the Tories and Labour will do something right to regain their own popularity. The only bad thing about the north east is its labour heritage, "we vote labour because our fathers did and our grand fathers did". ALL political parties are a waste of space, I vote for a person who has good ideas, plans and the capability to run with them, but the chances of a north east MP actually making it good for us up here is minimal, how much better off were we when Tony Blair was PM. If Scotlands independance works may be the north east should follow suite we couldnt be any worse off RealLivin
  • Score: 1

5:39pm Thu 24 Apr 14

hippyjohn says...

anyone standing for mp should have at least 10 years working in a real job for a firm not controlled by family or friends
anyone standing for mp should have at least 10 years working in a real job for a firm not controlled by family or friends hippyjohn
  • Score: 8

6:31pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Jackaranda says...

MagicAlf wrote:
People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters.
Eh? Shirley if he's a Thatcherite we'll be welcoming another Nissan success story. I prefer him to be a Thatcherite than a Blairite!!
[quote][p][bold]MagicAlf[/bold] wrote: People will see through him before long, when they realise that he represents the interests of the super-rich more than anyone else. His policies would be devastating for the North East, we would wave goodbye to Nissan for starters.[/p][/quote]Eh? Shirley if he's a Thatcherite we'll be welcoming another Nissan success story. I prefer him to be a Thatcherite than a Blairite!! Jackaranda
  • Score: -4

7:22pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Traser says...

Yet another UKIPper in the news for making xenophobic and bigoted tweets.

The BNP in suits........
Yet another UKIPper in the news for making xenophobic and bigoted tweets. The BNP in suits........ Traser
  • Score: 0

8:44pm Thu 24 Apr 14

behonest says...

Traser wrote:
Yet another UKIPper in the news for making xenophobic and bigoted tweets. The BNP in suits........
The media are certainly out to get UKIP. It must be close to an election...
[quote][p][bold]Traser[/bold] wrote: Yet another UKIPper in the news for making xenophobic and bigoted tweets. The BNP in suits........[/p][/quote]The media are certainly out to get UKIP. It must be close to an election... behonest
  • Score: 4

8:48am Fri 25 Apr 14

RealLivin says...

hippyjohn wrote:
anyone standing for mp should have at least 10 years working in a real job for a firm not controlled by family or friends
Damm right and to add to that they should have been living and working in the area they are standing for not being moved in because they lost their seat in some home counties election and were a push over to get them re-elected again. As for others what is bigoted about stopping immigration, stopping benefit cheats and preventing euro idiots from imposing there will on us to our detriment? And as for Nissan yes great for the north east but they are only here because it suits them, they have had grants, employment is low so plenty of workers looking for lower paid jobs, once the north east is prosperous again and wages rise they will pack up and move to and eastern European country or Africa where wages are lower. The private sectors motivation is profit, if that starts going down they will move or cut costs, Nissan may be one of the better companies but its still profit motivated and will not hesitate to move once that profit is going down.
[quote][p][bold]hippyjohn[/bold] wrote: anyone standing for mp should have at least 10 years working in a real job for a firm not controlled by family or friends[/p][/quote]Damm right and to add to that they should have been living and working in the area they are standing for not being moved in because they lost their seat in some home counties election and were a push over to get them re-elected again. As for others what is bigoted about stopping immigration, stopping benefit cheats and preventing euro idiots from imposing there will on us to our detriment? And as for Nissan yes great for the north east but they are only here because it suits them, they have had grants, employment is low so plenty of workers looking for lower paid jobs, once the north east is prosperous again and wages rise they will pack up and move to and eastern European country or Africa where wages are lower. The private sectors motivation is profit, if that starts going down they will move or cut costs, Nissan may be one of the better companies but its still profit motivated and will not hesitate to move once that profit is going down. RealLivin
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Fri 25 Apr 14

MSG says...

UKIP have the LIBLABCON rattled, they simply don't know what to do. I cant wait to vote UKIP on the historic day of 22nd May when we get our country back !!
UKIP have the LIBLABCON rattled, they simply don't know what to do. I cant wait to vote UKIP on the historic day of 22nd May when we get our country back !! MSG
  • Score: -3

2:39pm Fri 25 Apr 14

johnny_p says...

Hello. I was born in the North east and raised up here. My dad told me I must always support Labour because they are the good party who support all us working class folk, and all us people who are on benefits but still call ourselves working class. My dad also told me that the Tories are all evil people, who are all super rich and that I must always criticise them and only ever vote for people who wear red ties and who pretend that they didn't go to Eton.

And now we have the UPIK Party. Ha! I don't really know who they are, or what their policies are but I can't vote for them now because the headline in the Northern Echo said Mr Farage is a Thatcherite, and my dad said they were a bad party to vote for.

Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote Labour........
Hello. I was born in the North east and raised up here. My dad told me I must always support Labour because they are the good party who support all us working class folk, and all us people who are on benefits but still call ourselves working class. My dad also told me that the Tories are all evil people, who are all super rich and that I must always criticise them and only ever vote for people who wear red ties and who pretend that they didn't go to Eton. And now we have the UPIK Party. Ha! I don't really know who they are, or what their policies are but I can't vote for them now because the headline in the Northern Echo said Mr Farage is a Thatcherite, and my dad said they were a bad party to vote for. Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote Labour........ johnny_p
  • Score: 1

3:06pm Fri 25 Apr 14

John Durham says...

johnny_p wrote:
Hello. I was born in the North east and raised up here. My dad told me I must always support Labour because they are the good party who support all us working class folk, and all us people who are on benefits but still call ourselves working class. My dad also told me that the Tories are all evil people, who are all super rich and that I must always criticise them and only ever vote for people who wear red ties and who pretend that they didn't go to Eton.

And now we have the UPIK Party. Ha! I don't really know who they are, or what their policies are but I can't vote for them now because the headline in the Northern Echo said Mr Farage is a Thatcherite, and my dad said they were a bad party to vote for.

Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote Labour........
You should always listen to your parents.
[quote][p][bold]johnny_p[/bold] wrote: Hello. I was born in the North east and raised up here. My dad told me I must always support Labour because they are the good party who support all us working class folk, and all us people who are on benefits but still call ourselves working class. My dad also told me that the Tories are all evil people, who are all super rich and that I must always criticise them and only ever vote for people who wear red ties and who pretend that they didn't go to Eton. And now we have the UPIK Party. Ha! I don't really know who they are, or what their policies are but I can't vote for them now because the headline in the Northern Echo said Mr Farage is a Thatcherite, and my dad said they were a bad party to vote for. Vote Labour, Vote Labour, Vote Labour........[/p][/quote]You should always listen to your parents. John Durham
  • Score: -1

4:10pm Fri 25 Apr 14

BMD says...

The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote.

If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote.

Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU. BMD
  • Score: 5

4:34pm Fri 25 Apr 14

John Durham says...

BMD wrote:
The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote.

If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote.

Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
[quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario. John Durham
  • Score: 1

9:15pm Fri 25 Apr 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

I'd sooner vote UKIP and take a punt on them that have the usual suspects voted in again. They've had more than enough chances and have continually made a huge mess of things..

We need a change - and a radical one at that.

Vote UKIP
I'd sooner vote UKIP and take a punt on them that have the usual suspects voted in again. They've had more than enough chances and have continually made a huge mess of things.. We need a change - and a radical one at that. Vote UKIP thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: -2

10:34pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Red rose lad says...

I agree completely that Farage is a clown but the only reason he is rising in the polls is that we have not been allowed a reasonable debate on immigration and people are fed up with the European gravy train. The more the usual crew keep trotting out the bigot line, then the more the clown will keep getting support. Remember Gordon with his bigoted old woman line. They just don't learn. Lets have a reasonable debate. Being concerned over a rising population and the pressure it puts on essential services doesn't make you a bigot. Europe has also provided most of the Kinnock family with a nice living and provided twice-sacked Mandelson with a way back to respectability. It's the biggest meal ticket in town and rehab for incompetents.
I agree completely that Farage is a clown but the only reason he is rising in the polls is that we have not been allowed a reasonable debate on immigration and people are fed up with the European gravy train. The more the usual crew keep trotting out the bigot line, then the more the clown will keep getting support. Remember Gordon with his bigoted old woman line. They just don't learn. Lets have a reasonable debate. Being concerned over a rising population and the pressure it puts on essential services doesn't make you a bigot. Europe has also provided most of the Kinnock family with a nice living and provided twice-sacked Mandelson with a way back to respectability. It's the biggest meal ticket in town and rehab for incompetents. Red rose lad
  • Score: -3

11:11pm Fri 25 Apr 14

behonest says...

I disagree that Farage is a clown. Farage definitely wants what is best for Britain, so in my book that makes him more of a patriot than most.
He's certainly more of a patriot than the last Labour lot, who added a further 2 million immigrants to this country, resulting in the highest youth unemployment figures we've ever seen.
I disagree that Farage is a clown. Farage definitely wants what is best for Britain, so in my book that makes him more of a patriot than most. He's certainly more of a patriot than the last Labour lot, who added a further 2 million immigrants to this country, resulting in the highest youth unemployment figures we've ever seen. behonest
  • Score: -3

1:01am Sat 26 Apr 14

John Durham says...

I don't think Farage is a clown - but he certainly isn't what he purports to be either - a man for working people or for that matter a true patriot. Patriotism isn't about waving a flag or wanting to take Britain back to some fanciful idea of what Britain never was.
Patriotism is about inclusiveness not divisiveness - its about Britain taking its place in the world not shrinking from it. Its about recognising the strength of unity both at home and in Europe so that everyone is better off not just some.
UKIP doesn't represent what's best about Britain - British people have never in their history shrunk from the world, or hid behind borders. No longer intolerant of different religions, races or even nationalities.
UKIP represents the voice of fear - it demeans the British people. Being a patriot I think the British are better than UKIP believes we are.
For the future of our country I hope we are and send UKIP packing.
I don't think Farage is a clown - but he certainly isn't what he purports to be either - a man for working people or for that matter a true patriot. Patriotism isn't about waving a flag or wanting to take Britain back to some fanciful idea of what Britain never was. Patriotism is about inclusiveness not divisiveness - its about Britain taking its place in the world not shrinking from it. Its about recognising the strength of unity both at home and in Europe so that everyone is better off not just some. UKIP doesn't represent what's best about Britain - British people have never in their history shrunk from the world, or hid behind borders. No longer intolerant of different religions, races or even nationalities. UKIP represents the voice of fear - it demeans the British people. Being a patriot I think the British are better than UKIP believes we are. For the future of our country I hope we are and send UKIP packing. John Durham
  • Score: 0

5:51am Sat 26 Apr 14

BMD says...

John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
[quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots") BMD
  • Score: -1

11:03am Sat 26 Apr 14

John Durham says...

BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy.
Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave.
And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.
[quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")[/p][/quote]The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate. John Durham
  • Score: 5

1:11pm Sat 26 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

Mr D continues to twist the truth. We DO send Brussels £55m a day. We get some of it back - perhaps as much as 50% - but the repayments are conditional. For example ERDF requires matched funding (half of the cost of a qualifying project has to be supplied by the UK sponsor). So the net payment is in the order of £25m a day. Why? Can that fact be answered rationally?
.
As for the ridiculous comment about 26 million Romanians and Bulgarians, the truth is they CAN come here as can another 250m Europeans. We can't stop them. Obviously they won't, but they are free to do so. Why? Is that what we want? Were we consulted?
Mr D continues to twist the truth. We DO send Brussels £55m a day. We get some of it back - perhaps as much as 50% - but the repayments are conditional. For example ERDF requires matched funding (half of the cost of a qualifying project has to be supplied by the UK sponsor). So the net payment is in the order of £25m a day. Why? Can that fact be answered rationally? . As for the ridiculous comment about 26 million Romanians and Bulgarians, the truth is they CAN come here as can another 250m Europeans. We can't stop them. Obviously they won't, but they are free to do so. Why? Is that what we want? Were we consulted? David Lacey
  • Score: -1

1:33pm Sat 26 Apr 14

BMD says...

John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.
Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote?

Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?
[quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")[/p][/quote]The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.[/p][/quote]Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots? BMD
  • Score: 0

2:34pm Sat 26 Apr 14

John Durham says...

BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.
Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote?

Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?
Think I've answered that point BMD.
[quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")[/p][/quote]The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.[/p][/quote]Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?[/p][/quote]Think I've answered that point BMD. John Durham
  • Score: -2

4:34pm Sat 26 Apr 14

BMD says...

John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.
Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?
Think I've answered that point BMD.
I am afraid you haven’t.

The Labour dilemma is they want to be seen a forward thinking liberals in an all-encompassing international community at any cost to the tax-payer.

When in reality, Labour is fully aware the electorate would vote to withdraw from the EU.

Do Labour pursue their own ideology and egotism or do Labour aspire to serve the electorate? - Now that could be classed as an internal conflict.
[quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")[/p][/quote]The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.[/p][/quote]Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?[/p][/quote]Think I've answered that point BMD.[/p][/quote]I am afraid you haven’t. The Labour dilemma is they want to be seen a forward thinking liberals in an all-encompassing international community at any cost to the tax-payer. When in reality, Labour is fully aware the electorate would vote to withdraw from the EU. Do Labour pursue their own ideology and egotism or do Labour aspire to serve the electorate? - Now that could be classed as an internal conflict. BMD
  • Score: -3

7:53pm Sat 26 Apr 14

bambara says...

Got to laugh - "And the anti-UKIP press made sure 'Thatcher' and 'Farage' were in the headline together, knowing this would be a negative in this Region. And the usual Labour loonies on here fall for it every time."

The press are publicising the facts.
Highlighting that Farage is a Thatcherite. It is a fact that he has himself stated.
But the fact that it is being reported is in some way suprising, or even wrong. The press are actually supposed to report the facts, OK it is unusual to actually see the tory rags, owned by the rich and spouting propoganda for the benefit of the rich actually reporting the truth, but while it may be unusual, it isn't something to complain about.
The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives, the person who chose to destroy the countries industrial base, and did so with no plans or even interest in how it would be replaced is a simple matter of history.

That Farage has self identified as a Thatcherite says everything. UKIP would be another Thatcherite disaster, a destruction of the industry and trade of the country in the name of an extreme right wing ideology that regards peoples lives and livelyhoods as secondary (at best) to the economic advancement of the privilidged few.
Got to laugh - "And the anti-UKIP press made sure 'Thatcher' and 'Farage' were in the headline together, knowing this would be a negative in this Region. And the usual Labour loonies on here fall for it every time." The press are publicising the facts. Highlighting that Farage is a Thatcherite. It is a fact that he has himself stated. But the fact that it is being reported is in some way suprising, or even wrong. The press are actually supposed to report the facts, OK it is unusual to actually see the tory rags, owned by the rich and spouting propoganda for the benefit of the rich actually reporting the truth, but while it may be unusual, it isn't something to complain about. The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives, the person who chose to destroy the countries industrial base, and did so with no plans or even interest in how it would be replaced is a simple matter of history. That Farage has self identified as a Thatcherite says everything. UKIP would be another Thatcherite disaster, a destruction of the industry and trade of the country in the name of an extreme right wing ideology that regards peoples lives and livelyhoods as secondary (at best) to the economic advancement of the privilidged few. bambara
  • Score: 4

8:07pm Sat 26 Apr 14

John Durham says...

BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote:
John Durham wrote:
BMD wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.
Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.
You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")
The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.
Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?
Think I've answered that point BMD.
I am afraid you haven’t.

The Labour dilemma is they want to be seen a forward thinking liberals in an all-encompassing international community at any cost to the tax-payer.

When in reality, Labour is fully aware the electorate would vote to withdraw from the EU.

Do Labour pursue their own ideology and egotism or do Labour aspire to serve the electorate? - Now that could be classed as an internal conflict.
If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out.
If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU.
Seems obvious to me.
[quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BMD[/bold] wrote: The EU elections are predicted to favour UKIP, hopefully they put a huge dent in the Lab / Lib / Con vote. If this scenario comes to fruition, it may sway the major political parties into incorporating an EU referendum in their general election manifesto, thus allowing the UK public a vote. Although I predict Clegg and Milliband would still not allow the public to express an opinion on the EU.[/p][/quote]Its likely that Labour and UKIP will come out with most seats but that the actual vote will strongly favour Labour. I don't see why Labour would feel the need to change their stated policy based on that scenario.[/p][/quote]You posting clearly indicates Labours attitude - don’t give the electorate a voice on the biggest financial drain on the UK. (Because in Gordon Brown's words – The voter’s are "Bigots")[/p][/quote]The electorate do get a choice though. Labour have stated their policy of no referendum except for major treaty change. So if people vote for Labour MEPs and vote in a Labour government in 2015 then it is surely tacit acceptance from the electorate of that policy. Personally I believe whichever we government we have in 2015 should press for some changes or possible reform of the EU. But I do not believe it is in our interests to leave. And UKIP's lies - such as the £55 million a day one and 75% of our laws are made in EU - and their scare stories about 26 million unemployed coming for our jobs are an insult to the intelligence of the British electorate.[/p][/quote]Why are Labour refusing to trust in public with a EU vote? Do Labour class Joe Public as Bigots?[/p][/quote]Think I've answered that point BMD.[/p][/quote]I am afraid you haven’t. The Labour dilemma is they want to be seen a forward thinking liberals in an all-encompassing international community at any cost to the tax-payer. When in reality, Labour is fully aware the electorate would vote to withdraw from the EU. Do Labour pursue their own ideology and egotism or do Labour aspire to serve the electorate? - Now that could be classed as an internal conflict.[/p][/quote]If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out. If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU. Seems obvious to me. John Durham
  • Score: 2

9:27pm Sat 26 Apr 14

behonest says...

Got to laugh - 'The press are publicising the facts.'

Like the Daily Mirror's constant pro-Labour bias is all 'facts'. Like the Telegraph's pro-Tory bias is all 'facts'. Like the Echo's one-sided reporting of the minimum price of alcohol tax is all 'facts'.

Dream on.

And 'fact' even finds its way into 'The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives'. But these 'facts' are only 'facts' if you think they are 'facts', in fact.
Got to laugh - 'The press are publicising the facts.' Like the Daily Mirror's constant pro-Labour bias is all 'facts'. Like the Telegraph's pro-Tory bias is all 'facts'. Like the Echo's one-sided reporting of the minimum price of alcohol tax is all 'facts'. Dream on. And 'fact' even finds its way into 'The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives'. But these 'facts' are only 'facts' if you think they are 'facts', in fact. behonest
  • Score: 2

9:41pm Sat 26 Apr 14

behonest says...

John Durham says:
"If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out.
If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU."

This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters.

I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway.
John Durham says: "If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out. If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU." This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters. I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway. behonest
  • Score: -2

11:56pm Sat 26 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
John Durham says:
"If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out.
If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU."

This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters.

I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway.
You seem to be saying voting for UKIP is a protest vote done for a laugh. Sort of similar to those who formerly voted Monster Raving Loony Party then?
It becomes clearer to me now. Its why UKippers seem so confused on here - some can't stand the party but want to vote for it, some welcome the idle rich French but are against EU immigration, some think UKIP is a working man's party but won't defend the rights of workers, some think EU workers take British jobs but defend the head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German instead of a good old Brit , some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military and cut pensioners benefits.
Supporting UKIP seems to me to be very hard work - and for absolutely no gain - they can't deliver the referendum, they can't possibly win more than a handful of seats, if that, at a general election.
A pointless exercise indeed.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: John Durham says: "If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out. If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU." This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters. I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway.[/p][/quote]You seem to be saying voting for UKIP is a protest vote done for a laugh. Sort of similar to those who formerly voted Monster Raving Loony Party then? It becomes clearer to me now. Its why UKippers seem so confused on here - some can't stand the party but want to vote for it, some welcome the idle rich French but are against EU immigration, some think UKIP is a working man's party but won't defend the rights of workers, some think EU workers take British jobs but defend the head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German instead of a good old Brit , some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military and cut pensioners benefits. Supporting UKIP seems to me to be very hard work - and for absolutely no gain - they can't deliver the referendum, they can't possibly win more than a handful of seats, if that, at a general election. A pointless exercise indeed. John Durham
  • Score: 4

12:36am Sun 27 Apr 14

behonest says...

Very hard work? Supporting UKIP, like supporting any party, is very easy - it's simply a tick in a box.

You may think a vote for UKIP is pointless, but let's remember that voting in another Labour government would be disastrous.

Perhaps UKIP can't deliver an EU referendum, but at least they are passionate about trying to do so. Unlike the Labour Party, who refuse to even allow ordinary British people to have a say.
Very hard work? Supporting UKIP, like supporting any party, is very easy - it's simply a tick in a box. You may think a vote for UKIP is pointless, but let's remember that voting in another Labour government would be disastrous. Perhaps UKIP can't deliver an EU referendum, but at least they are passionate about trying to do so. Unlike the Labour Party, who refuse to even allow ordinary British people to have a say. behonest
  • Score: -6

6:22am Sun 27 Apr 14

BMD says...

John Durham wrote:
behonest wrote: John Durham says: "If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out. If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU." This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters. I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway.
You seem to be saying voting for UKIP is a protest vote done for a laugh. Sort of similar to those who formerly voted Monster Raving Loony Party then? It becomes clearer to me now. Its why UKippers seem so confused on here - some can't stand the party but want to vote for it, some welcome the idle rich French but are against EU immigration, some think UKIP is a working man's party but won't defend the rights of workers, some think EU workers take British jobs but defend the head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German instead of a good old Brit , some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military and cut pensioners benefits. Supporting UKIP seems to me to be very hard work - and for absolutely no gain - they can't deliver the referendum, they can't possibly win more than a handful of seats, if that, at a general election. A pointless exercise indeed.
You are either blind or blinded,
Idle rich French – Answered your own question: they won’t be claiming benefits and will be employing people. (Should be welcomed with open arms)

Some think EU workers take British jobs – Consider asking the 5 million Eastrn Europeans who are employed in unskilled and semi-skilled positions within the UK.

Head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German – The German happens to be his wife, whom is paid through the EU (I think Germany may be part of that organisation) But would you prefer to introduce a law against all family businesses?

Some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military. – Unlike Labour’s Tony Blair, I would prefer to see the Middle Eastern countries determine their own future, without any sort of aid from the UK. The military also trains nurses, logistics, engineers, etc.

Cut pensioners benefits – I believe this was for the extremely wealthy (A policy pursued by all Labour Union officials)

The most frightening outcome of the next General election, after 4 years of austerity, would be handing Labour back in control of the economy. But if Scotland gains independence, Labour will be probably level with UKIP in the polls.
[quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: John Durham says: "If the electorate want to withdraw from the EU as you claim then they will vote Tory in 2015 to get the referendum which allows them to vote out. If they vote in a Labour government then the assumption must be they prefer to stay in the EU." This seems to suggest that votes cast in this way will be by those who consider the EU issue the most important issue at the next election. I'm sure this will be the case for some, but I'm not sure it is the most important issue for many voters. I suspect a lot of support for UKIP comes not only from eurosceptics, but from many people, like myself, who are fed up with the Lab/Tory Establishment and who would like to see a few 'safe' MPs dumped out on their ar5es at the next election. Even if only for a laugh, 'cos it won't matter to us in the slightest, anyway.[/p][/quote]You seem to be saying voting for UKIP is a protest vote done for a laugh. Sort of similar to those who formerly voted Monster Raving Loony Party then? It becomes clearer to me now. Its why UKippers seem so confused on here - some can't stand the party but want to vote for it, some welcome the idle rich French but are against EU immigration, some think UKIP is a working man's party but won't defend the rights of workers, some think EU workers take British jobs but defend the head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German instead of a good old Brit , some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military and cut pensioners benefits. Supporting UKIP seems to me to be very hard work - and for absolutely no gain - they can't deliver the referendum, they can't possibly win more than a handful of seats, if that, at a general election. A pointless exercise indeed.[/p][/quote]You are either blind or blinded, Idle rich French – Answered your own question: they won’t be claiming benefits and will be employing people. (Should be welcomed with open arms) Some think EU workers take British jobs – Consider asking the 5 million Eastrn Europeans who are employed in unskilled and semi-skilled positions within the UK. Head of UKIP who gave a tax-paid job to a German – The German happens to be his wife, whom is paid through the EU (I think Germany may be part of that organisation) But would you prefer to introduce a law against all family businesses? Some want us to keep out of foreign wars but support a party which wants to increase spending on the military. – Unlike Labour’s Tony Blair, I would prefer to see the Middle Eastern countries determine their own future, without any sort of aid from the UK. The military also trains nurses, logistics, engineers, etc. Cut pensioners benefits – I believe this was for the extremely wealthy (A policy pursued by all Labour Union officials) The most frightening outcome of the next General election, after 4 years of austerity, would be handing Labour back in control of the economy. But if Scotland gains independence, Labour will be probably level with UKIP in the polls. BMD
  • Score: -5

3:04pm Sun 27 Apr 14

MSG says...

Great that UKIP are ahead in the polls after all the crap the lefty press and the LibLabCon busted flush has thrown at them. The people have seen through it and UKIP's rise just can not be stopped.

The Labour supporters on here have much more to worry about. Should Scotland vote to leave the UK the Labour Party loses around 45 seats at Westminster. So, even if they win the 2015 general election these Scottish MP's leave Westminster around 9 months later meaning we will probably get a new government made up of new UKIP MP's, remaining Tories and Ulster's Unionist MP's. What a dismal outlook for Labour Ha Ha Ha !!!

Vote UKIP !
Great that UKIP are ahead in the polls after all the crap the lefty press and the LibLabCon busted flush has thrown at them. The people have seen through it and UKIP's rise just can not be stopped. The Labour supporters on here have much more to worry about. Should Scotland vote to leave the UK the Labour Party loses around 45 seats at Westminster. So, even if they win the 2015 general election these Scottish MP's leave Westminster around 9 months later meaning we will probably get a new government made up of new UKIP MP's, remaining Tories and Ulster's Unionist MP's. What a dismal outlook for Labour Ha Ha Ha !!! Vote UKIP ! MSG
  • Score: -2

4:46pm Sun 27 Apr 14

John Durham says...

Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions.
Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think?
Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions. Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think? John Durham
  • Score: 2

5:46pm Sun 27 Apr 14

behonest says...

John Durham wrote:
Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions.
Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think?
Yarm clearly has local issues, which the Yarm Residents Association candidates gained from. Although I'm happy to be corrected, if you can tell me that the Labour candidates were elected?
[quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions. Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think?[/p][/quote]Yarm clearly has local issues, which the Yarm Residents Association candidates gained from. Although I'm happy to be corrected, if you can tell me that the Labour candidates were elected? behonest
  • Score: 1

9:34am Mon 28 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

The silence is deafening.
The silence is deafening. David Lacey
  • Score: -1

1:07pm Mon 28 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
John Durham wrote:
Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions.
Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think?
Yarm clearly has local issues, which the Yarm Residents Association candidates gained from. Although I'm happy to be corrected, if you can tell me that the Labour candidates were elected?
No candidates stood for any of the three main political parties as far as I know. Not sure why you mention Labour specifically.
UKIP decided to put up candidates and get their leader to come along to give support - and they got wiped out.
Farage claimed the North was an area where UKIP would make an impact - but it turned out not to be so in Yarm at least.
But at least UKIP supporters have learnt how to make excuses for their party's failures. In time no doubt we will see more excuses will need to be found.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]John Durham[/bold] wrote: Farage's visit to Yarm obviously made a big difference - all three UKIP candidates failed to win a seat and in fact came in the three last positions. Perhaps UKIP don't have the appeal some on here think?[/p][/quote]Yarm clearly has local issues, which the Yarm Residents Association candidates gained from. Although I'm happy to be corrected, if you can tell me that the Labour candidates were elected?[/p][/quote]No candidates stood for any of the three main political parties as far as I know. Not sure why you mention Labour specifically. UKIP decided to put up candidates and get their leader to come along to give support - and they got wiped out. Farage claimed the North was an area where UKIP would make an impact - but it turned out not to be so in Yarm at least. But at least UKIP supporters have learnt how to make excuses for their party's failures. In time no doubt we will see more excuses will need to be found. John Durham
  • Score: -2

2:16pm Mon 28 Apr 14

behonest says...

That's right, the main parties knew they'd get hammered, so they ran off. At least UKIP gave it a go, and I admire them for it - given the particular challenge they faced in Yarm, with known local issues. But as the Yarm vote was an unusual situation I wouldn't take it as a barometer of how UKIP will do in 3 weeks time. I suspect quite a few votes will go to UKIP from the North.
That's right, the main parties knew they'd get hammered, so they ran off. At least UKIP gave it a go, and I admire them for it - given the particular challenge they faced in Yarm, with known local issues. But as the Yarm vote was an unusual situation I wouldn't take it as a barometer of how UKIP will do in 3 weeks time. I suspect quite a few votes will go to UKIP from the North. behonest
  • Score: -2

3:24pm Mon 28 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

But Mr D you DO know why Labour was mentioned "specifically". Because you are a dyed in the wool Labour supporter. As for Yarm, the residents association is trying to extricate their lovely town from Labour controlled Stockton BC and join Conservative controlled Hambleton DC - where there isn't a single Labour councillor and the council tax is much lower. Who can blame them? A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking.
.
UKIP made a mistake putting up candidates. But as far as 22/05/14 is concerned they now have a lead in the opinion polls. And I should love to see the results for Yarm. I predict a UKIP landslide there.
But Mr D you DO know why Labour was mentioned "specifically". Because you are a dyed in the wool Labour supporter. As for Yarm, the residents association is trying to extricate their lovely town from Labour controlled Stockton BC and join Conservative controlled Hambleton DC - where there isn't a single Labour councillor and the council tax is much lower. Who can blame them? A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking. . UKIP made a mistake putting up candidates. But as far as 22/05/14 is concerned they now have a lead in the opinion polls. And I should love to see the results for Yarm. I predict a UKIP landslide there. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

5:03pm Mon 28 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
That's right, the main parties knew they'd get hammered, so they ran off. At least UKIP gave it a go, and I admire them for it - given the particular challenge they faced in Yarm, with known local issues. But as the Yarm vote was an unusual situation I wouldn't take it as a barometer of how UKIP will do in 3 weeks time. I suspect quite a few votes will go to UKIP from the North.
I think you may be right Behonest - Euro-elections are always a good way to beat up the main parties and the proportional voting system encourages people to vote for minor parties.
2015 will be another matter. And then I think many people who want a referendum should vote Tory not UKIP - only real chance they have of getting it any time soon.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: That's right, the main parties knew they'd get hammered, so they ran off. At least UKIP gave it a go, and I admire them for it - given the particular challenge they faced in Yarm, with known local issues. But as the Yarm vote was an unusual situation I wouldn't take it as a barometer of how UKIP will do in 3 weeks time. I suspect quite a few votes will go to UKIP from the North.[/p][/quote]I think you may be right Behonest - Euro-elections are always a good way to beat up the main parties and the proportional voting system encourages people to vote for minor parties. 2015 will be another matter. And then I think many people who want a referendum should vote Tory not UKIP - only real chance they have of getting it any time soon. John Durham
  • Score: -2

5:01pm Tue 29 Apr 14

bambara says...

"You may think a vote for UKIP is pointless, but let's remember that voting in another Labour government would be disastrous."

Tory propoganda.

We had a labour government for 10 years, was far too right wing and that was the problem with it. Tory Blair acting as an American lackey getting us involved in the USA's wars, and failing to put strong regulation in charge of the banks. The two serious mistakes labour made, both of which were as a result of moving too far to the right.

The failures of the banks was not caused by labour, it was a result of capitalistism and corrupt bankers. You know all those Eton and Harrow old boys at the head of the banks. Old school chums of Cameron and Osbourne.
They destroyed the economy and then got their dreams come true a government that is run purely for the benefit of the rich.
"You may think a vote for UKIP is pointless, but let's remember that voting in another Labour government would be disastrous." Tory propoganda. We had a labour government for 10 years, was far too right wing and that was the problem with it. Tory Blair acting as an American lackey getting us involved in the USA's wars, and failing to put strong regulation in charge of the banks. The two serious mistakes labour made, both of which were as a result of moving too far to the right. The failures of the banks was not caused by labour, it was a result of capitalistism and corrupt bankers. You know all those Eton and Harrow old boys at the head of the banks. Old school chums of Cameron and Osbourne. They destroyed the economy and then got their dreams come true a government that is run purely for the benefit of the rich. bambara
  • Score: 2

5:24pm Tue 29 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

Quite right bambi. Labour should move sharply to the left. Just dig out Michael Foot's manifesto, tart it up a bit and reprint it in 2015. Another "longest suicide note" is exactly what we need.
Quite right bambi. Labour should move sharply to the left. Just dig out Michael Foot's manifesto, tart it up a bit and reprint it in 2015. Another "longest suicide note" is exactly what we need. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

5:27pm Tue 29 Apr 14

bambara says...

From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking."

More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing.
Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses.
1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m,
1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m.
So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income.
Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on.
Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils.

"thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David.
From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking." More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing. Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses. 1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m, 1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m. So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income. Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on. Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils. "thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David. bambara
  • Score: 3

7:06pm Tue 29 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

Perhaps you failed to notice that Hambleton is essentially rural and as a result it is faced with the problems peculiar to the countryside. All I see are nasty little left wing bully boys and I see through their lies and the propaganda they spout bambi.
Perhaps you failed to notice that Hambleton is essentially rural and as a result it is faced with the problems peculiar to the countryside. All I see are nasty little left wing bully boys and I see through their lies and the propaganda they spout bambi. David Lacey
  • Score: -4

10:19pm Tue 29 Apr 14

behonest says...

bambara wrote:
From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking." More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing. Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses. 1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m, 1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m. So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income. Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on. Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils. "thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David.
Leftie theory and spin, without any specifics or facts. What we do know is that all our council tax bills doubled under the last Labour government. And Darlington Labour council are still increasing our tax by as much as they can, even today.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking." More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing. Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses. 1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m, 1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m. So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income. Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on. Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils. "thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David.[/p][/quote]Leftie theory and spin, without any specifics or facts. What we do know is that all our council tax bills doubled under the last Labour government. And Darlington Labour council are still increasing our tax by as much as they can, even today. behonest
  • Score: -3

1:42am Wed 30 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
bambara wrote:
From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking." More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing. Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses. 1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m, 1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m. So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income. Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on. Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils. "thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David.
Leftie theory and spin, without any specifics or facts. What we do know is that all our council tax bills doubled under the last Labour government. And Darlington Labour council are still increasing our tax by as much as they can, even today.
Of course we don't all know that because it isn't true. After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%. And there were good reasons for the rises across the country.
But if you look at this more closely you will find that the councils which raised council tax the most were in fact Conservative ones. The top 5 increases during the Labour period in office were in Tory areas.
So was that the fault of the Labour Government despite them being Tory councils - and if so aren't the rises in Labour and Tory councils now the fault of the current government. Since N Yorks is Tory and increasing its council tax this year just as Darlington and Durham are.
Seems there's a bit of anti-Labour bias creeping in to your comment there Behonest.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: From Tory propoganda merchant David Lacey - " A triple whammy - they save cash, get better services and don't have a bunch of thicko Labourites dictating to them on matters such as parking." More tory propoganda from the Sociopathic right wing. Lets be clear here, a Labour council with a higher number of low value houses in lower council tax bands will have a hgher council tax level to achieve the same income as a Tory council with high tax band houses. 1000 x Band A houses @ £1000 pa = £1m, 1000 x Band F houses @ £1000 pa = £1m. So if you have more big posh houses in your area you can charge a lower council tax level for a given band to achieve the same income. Double whammy, if you have more big posh houses in your area, you also have proportionally fewer poor people in need of assistance and the associated services that goes with that so you have less that you need to spend on. Triple whammy, the Socciopathic Tory government has skewed the formula used to calculate the portion of the funding provided to local councils from central government to be heavily biased towards Tory councils. "thicko Labourites" - Still bright enough to identify nasty little sociopathic right wing bully boys, and to see through the lies and propoganda they spout David.[/p][/quote]Leftie theory and spin, without any specifics or facts. What we do know is that all our council tax bills doubled under the last Labour government. And Darlington Labour council are still increasing our tax by as much as they can, even today.[/p][/quote]Of course we don't all know that because it isn't true. After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%. And there were good reasons for the rises across the country. But if you look at this more closely you will find that the councils which raised council tax the most were in fact Conservative ones. The top 5 increases during the Labour period in office were in Tory areas. So was that the fault of the Labour Government despite them being Tory councils - and if so aren't the rises in Labour and Tory councils now the fault of the current government. Since N Yorks is Tory and increasing its council tax this year just as Darlington and Durham are. Seems there's a bit of anti-Labour bias creeping in to your comment there Behonest. John Durham
  • Score: 1

11:52am Wed 30 Apr 14

behonest says...

John Durham says:
"After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%."

Of course, this is not true. Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent, while inflation over the same period rose by 19.1 per cent, according to government statistics. This excludes 1998, 2009 and 2010 increases, all decided whilst Labour were in power.

Another report states: "The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent. When measured as the Band D average, another common indicator, bills have increased from £688 in 1997-98 to £1,439 in 2010-11, a rise of 109 per cent."

It's all very well trying to talk it down due to 'inflation' theory, but if councils are increasing council tax bills so sharply, whilst workers are not receiving wage increases in line with inflation, then this is of little comfort when faced with having to pay an actual council tax bill that did double under the last Labour government.
John Durham says: "After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%." Of course, this is not true. Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent, while inflation over the same period rose by 19.1 per cent, according to government statistics. This excludes 1998, 2009 and 2010 increases, all decided whilst Labour were in power. Another report states: "The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent. When measured as the Band D average, another common indicator, bills have increased from £688 in 1997-98 to £1,439 in 2010-11, a rise of 109 per cent." It's all very well trying to talk it down due to 'inflation' theory, but if councils are increasing council tax bills so sharply, whilst workers are not receiving wage increases in line with inflation, then this is of little comfort when faced with having to pay an actual council tax bill that did double under the last Labour government. behonest
  • Score: -2

12:12pm Wed 30 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
John Durham says:
"After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%."

Of course, this is not true. Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent, while inflation over the same period rose by 19.1 per cent, according to government statistics. This excludes 1998, 2009 and 2010 increases, all decided whilst Labour were in power.

Another report states: "The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent. When measured as the Band D average, another common indicator, bills have increased from £688 in 1997-98 to £1,439 in 2010-11, a rise of 109 per cent."

It's all very well trying to talk it down due to 'inflation' theory, but if councils are increasing council tax bills so sharply, whilst workers are not receiving wage increases in line with inflation, then this is of little comfort when faced with having to pay an actual council tax bill that did double under the last Labour government.
I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band. Then you compare to RPI (inflation) but then talk about wages. Perhaps you need a different comparator on that basis.
You then quote actual increases again rather than taking any account of inflation so repeat your original error.
But no mention of the Tory rises or whether the rises today are the fault of the current government changing their financial calculations to take away needed support from northern authorities (run by all parties including Tory) toward those in the southern Tory heartlands.
Fairness surely dictates that if you are blaming a Labour government for rises by Tory authorities then you must blame this government for forcing increases made by both Labour and Tory councils in the North.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: John Durham says: "After accounting for inflation the rise was about 40%." Of course, this is not true. Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent, while inflation over the same period rose by 19.1 per cent, according to government statistics. This excludes 1998, 2009 and 2010 increases, all decided whilst Labour were in power. Another report states: "The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent. When measured as the Band D average, another common indicator, bills have increased from £688 in 1997-98 to £1,439 in 2010-11, a rise of 109 per cent." It's all very well trying to talk it down due to 'inflation' theory, but if councils are increasing council tax bills so sharply, whilst workers are not receiving wage increases in line with inflation, then this is of little comfort when faced with having to pay an actual council tax bill that did double under the last Labour government.[/p][/quote]I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band. Then you compare to RPI (inflation) but then talk about wages. Perhaps you need a different comparator on that basis. You then quote actual increases again rather than taking any account of inflation so repeat your original error. But no mention of the Tory rises or whether the rises today are the fault of the current government changing their financial calculations to take away needed support from northern authorities (run by all parties including Tory) toward those in the southern Tory heartlands. Fairness surely dictates that if you are blaming a Labour government for rises by Tory authorities then you must blame this government for forcing increases made by both Labour and Tory councils in the North. John Durham
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Wed 30 Apr 14

behonest says...

behonest said:
"Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent," and also said ""The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent."

To which John Durham replied: "I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band" Eh? I'm afraid you're not reading correctly, 'average per dwelling' and 'average per property' is not one specific band!

And I specifically mentioned your flaw in trying to reduce the increases by using inflation, when workers have clearly not had inflationary increases to their wages, whilst councils have used 'inflation' as an excuse to increase our tax bills.
behonest said: "Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent," and also said ""The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent." To which John Durham replied: "I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band" Eh? I'm afraid you're not reading correctly, 'average per dwelling' and 'average per property' is not one specific band! And I specifically mentioned your flaw in trying to reduce the increases by using inflation, when workers have clearly not had inflationary increases to their wages, whilst councils have used 'inflation' as an excuse to increase our tax bills. behonest
  • Score: 0

2:25pm Wed 30 Apr 14

David Lacey says...

You won't get a straight answer. Your figures will be twisted and denied even when they are correct. Why? Because any criticism of Labour must be resisted even if it involves outright fallacies. By the way, Tory councils tend to have much lower council taxes so a 50% increase in (say) £500 is obviously much less in monetary terms than 50% of £1,000. And because Tory run councils are usually in richer areas, residents in the less fortunate Labour run areas find it harder to pay their bills (except of course those who only pay a proportion of it).
.
Remember Mr D is a dyed in the wool Labour person. That infliction is impossible to overcome.
You won't get a straight answer. Your figures will be twisted and denied even when they are correct. Why? Because any criticism of Labour must be resisted even if it involves outright fallacies. By the way, Tory councils tend to have much lower council taxes so a 50% increase in (say) £500 is obviously much less in monetary terms than 50% of £1,000. And because Tory run councils are usually in richer areas, residents in the less fortunate Labour run areas find it harder to pay their bills (except of course those who only pay a proportion of it). . Remember Mr D is a dyed in the wool Labour person. That infliction is impossible to overcome. David Lacey
  • Score: -5

5:36pm Wed 30 Apr 14

John Durham says...

behonest wrote:
behonest said:
"Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent," and also said ""The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent."

To which John Durham replied: "I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band" Eh? I'm afraid you're not reading correctly, 'average per dwelling' and 'average per property' is not one specific band!

And I specifically mentioned your flaw in trying to reduce the increases by using inflation, when workers have clearly not had inflationary increases to their wages, whilst councils have used 'inflation' as an excuse to increase our tax bills.
I took this off the DCLG's own website:
' Since 2010, the government has worked with local authorities to reduce Council Tax. This has cut average bills in England over 4 years by over 11% in real-terms. In contrast the period between 1997 and 2010 saw Council Tax increase in real-terms by 47%'.
Source: DCLG/National Statistics

Admittedly I took the figure off memory as 40% in my original comment. I had seen it quoted elsewhere in the past and obviously mis-remembered the precise figure. But even the current government are not claiming the level doubled in real terms so I hope you will accept that it did not 'double'.

It would also be necessary to look at why large increases in council expenditure occurred in only a very few years between 2001-2004. My theory would be that council responsibilities changed substantially coupled with the massive change brought about by new technology around that time.

I notice you avoided my final question again.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: behonest said: "Since March 1999 the average council tax per property rose by 74.7 per cent," and also said ""The average council tax paid per dwelling has risen from £564 in 1997-98 to £1,195 in 2010-11, an increase of 112 per cent." To which John Durham replied: "I'm afraid you are not quoting the average rise across all bands but one specific band" Eh? I'm afraid you're not reading correctly, 'average per dwelling' and 'average per property' is not one specific band! And I specifically mentioned your flaw in trying to reduce the increases by using inflation, when workers have clearly not had inflationary increases to their wages, whilst councils have used 'inflation' as an excuse to increase our tax bills.[/p][/quote]I took this off the DCLG's own website: ' Since 2010, the government has worked with local authorities to reduce Council Tax. This has cut average bills in England over 4 years by over 11% in real-terms. In contrast the period between 1997 and 2010 saw Council Tax increase in real-terms by 47%'. Source: DCLG/National Statistics Admittedly I took the figure off memory as 40% in my original comment. I had seen it quoted elsewhere in the past and obviously mis-remembered the precise figure. But even the current government are not claiming the level doubled in real terms so I hope you will accept that it did not 'double'. It would also be necessary to look at why large increases in council expenditure occurred in only a very few years between 2001-2004. My theory would be that council responsibilities changed substantially coupled with the massive change brought about by new technology around that time. I notice you avoided my final question again. John Durham
  • Score: 0

6:39pm Wed 30 Apr 14

bambara says...

Talking of figures being twisted David...

"Tory councils tend to have much lower council taxes so a 50% increase in (say) £500 is obviously much less in monetary terms than 50% of £1,000. And because Tory run councils are usually in richer areas, residents in the less fortunate Labour run areas find it harder to pay their bills (except of course those who only pay a proportion of it"

Tory areas have more houses in higher bands.
Band D charge is at 100%, but the labour areas will have a higher portion of low band properties, and tory areas will have more high band properties.
Also labour areas will have more people in need of support, more disabled, etc... as these are the people with least resources and the ones most likely to live in poor areas.
Band A = 67%
Band H = 200%
So areas full of posh houses pay 3 x the council tax headline compared to the poor houses.
Labour area £1000 x 67% = £670
Tory area £500 x 200% = £1000

Of course not all properties in a labour area are band A and not all properties in a Tory area are band H, but it shows that the headline figure based on a band D property is meaningless for calculating how well the council is run, or how much money is wasted.

And because Tory run councils are in richer areas, the changes made to the central funding by this Tory government, which removes funding from deprived areas and gives it to wealthy areas directly impacts labour councils and further impacts the council tax levels in labour supporting areas.

Fundiing cuts resulting from Tory changes to the funding formula - On average councils in the ten most deprived areas will have cuts of 25% but councils in the ten richest areas will only lose 2.5%

NOW THAT IS TWISTING FIGURES, That is the tories twisting the truth of how funding works so that the headline figures give the false appearance of efficiency.
Talking of figures being twisted David... "Tory councils tend to have much lower council taxes so a 50% increase in (say) £500 is obviously much less in monetary terms than 50% of £1,000. And because Tory run councils are usually in richer areas, residents in the less fortunate Labour run areas find it harder to pay their bills (except of course those who only pay a proportion of it" Tory areas have more houses in higher bands. Band D charge is at 100%, but the labour areas will have a higher portion of low band properties, and tory areas will have more high band properties. Also labour areas will have more people in need of support, more disabled, etc... as these are the people with least resources and the ones most likely to live in poor areas. Band A = 67% Band H = 200% So areas full of posh houses pay 3 x the council tax headline compared to the poor houses. Labour area £1000 x 67% = £670 Tory area £500 x 200% = £1000 Of course not all properties in a labour area are band A and not all properties in a Tory area are band H, but it shows that the headline figure based on a band D property is meaningless for calculating how well the council is run, or how much money is wasted. And because Tory run councils are in richer areas, the changes made to the central funding by this Tory government, which removes funding from deprived areas and gives it to wealthy areas directly impacts labour councils and further impacts the council tax levels in labour supporting areas. Fundiing cuts resulting from Tory changes to the funding formula - On average councils in the ten most deprived areas will have cuts of 25% but councils in the ten richest areas will only lose 2.5% NOW THAT IS TWISTING FIGURES, That is the tories twisting the truth of how funding works so that the headline figures give the false appearance of efficiency. bambara
  • Score: 1

8:35pm Wed 30 Apr 14

bambara says...

behonest wrote:
Got to laugh - 'The press are publicising the facts.' Like the Daily Mirror's constant pro-Labour bias is all 'facts'. Like the Telegraph's pro-Tory bias is all 'facts'. Like the Echo's one-sided reporting of the minimum price of alcohol tax is all 'facts'. Dream on. And 'fact' even finds its way into 'The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives'. But these 'facts' are only 'facts' if you think they are 'facts', in fact.
Let look at that shall we.

The press are publicising the facts - in that Farage has himself confirmed that he is a Thatcherite. Are you saying that he has not in fact stated that he is a thatcherite? I think you will find he has, therefore that is a FACT.

Thatcher is reviled in the Northeast, - Do you actually believe otherwise?
Are you actually so oblivious to the people around you as to think that there are not a very significant number of them in the region who absolutely do Revile Thatcher?
There are still a lot of people around in the Northeast who had their lives destroyed by her policies, people who saw every person in their family thrown onto the unemployment scrapheap. So yes she is reviled in the region, she is reviled for the reasons I stated, perhaps not by everyone, but she is reviled, and yes that is a FACT.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: Got to laugh - 'The press are publicising the facts.' Like the Daily Mirror's constant pro-Labour bias is all 'facts'. Like the Telegraph's pro-Tory bias is all 'facts'. Like the Echo's one-sided reporting of the minimum price of alcohol tax is all 'facts'. Dream on. And 'fact' even finds its way into 'The fact that Thatcher is rightly reviled in the region as a sociopathic destroyer of peoples lives'. But these 'facts' are only 'facts' if you think they are 'facts', in fact.[/p][/quote]Let look at that shall we. The press are publicising the facts - in that Farage has himself confirmed that he is a Thatcherite. Are you saying that he has not in fact stated that he is a thatcherite? I think you will find he has, therefore that is a FACT. Thatcher is reviled in the Northeast, - Do you actually believe otherwise? Are you actually so oblivious to the people around you as to think that there are not a very significant number of them in the region who absolutely do Revile Thatcher? There are still a lot of people around in the Northeast who had their lives destroyed by her policies, people who saw every person in their family thrown onto the unemployment scrapheap. So yes she is reviled in the region, she is reviled for the reasons I stated, perhaps not by everyone, but she is reviled, and yes that is a FACT. bambara
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree