The ArgusLabour and Green's top Brighton and Hove EU poll but Ukip favourite for South East (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Labour and Green's top Brighton and Hove EU poll but Ukip favourite for South East

THE Labour Party's hopes of making gains in next years general and local elections in Brighton and Hove received a massive boost tonight after coming first in the city in the 2014 EU elections.

But the result will come as bitter sweet for the party with Ukip looking likely to win overall in the South East.

With voting taking place across Europe for the past four days the world's media gathered at Southampton's Civic Centre to find out if Ukip's prediction that it would cause a "political earthquake" would actually come true.

But while the party looks set to take the South East it is the city's Labour Party that has been buoyed by the latest result, adding to a solid performance in the local elections when they took back control of Crawley Borough Council and added to their majority in the South East.

With voter turn out up on 2009 at 38% in Brighton and Hove, this result will prove a massive boost for Labour's prospects in 2015.

Annaliese Dodds, a current Labour MEP, said the party had made a good showing across the region: "Overall our results have been good but we're delighted to have topped the poll in Brighton and Hove," she said. "It's fantastic, we've been doing a lot of campaigning in Brighton and Hove and it's clear that our policies in particular areas are striking a chord with people."

The Green Party were also buoyed by their showing.

After saying they had ended their South East campaign with cautious optimism the party managed to take second place in the city with 18,586 going someway to dispelling the thought that have lost support in the city.

Alexandra Phillips, MEP candidate and current Brighton and Hove councillor, said: "We've got a very strong voter base in Brighton and Hove which bodes well for next year, and that result includes the whole of Brighton and Hove. We're really pleased."

But while both Labour and the Green Party are celebrating their local success polls still suggest Ukip will top the South East poll with some sources suggesting they could have as many as 5 MEPs by the end of the night with the Conservatives finishing close behind.

Comments (96)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:12am Mon 26 May 14

Warren Morgan says...

Don't forget that the Greens finished over 10,000 votes ahead of Labour in 2009, and Labour has beaten them by 1,400 votes tonight. Of course in the General and local elections Labour more than doubled it's 2009 European vote in the city, so this bodes very well for both polls next May. If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit.
Don't forget that the Greens finished over 10,000 votes ahead of Labour in 2009, and Labour has beaten them by 1,400 votes tonight. Of course in the General and local elections Labour more than doubled it's 2009 European vote in the city, so this bodes very well for both polls next May. If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit. Warren Morgan
  • Score: 10

12:35am Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -49

12:58am Mon 26 May 14

Warren Morgan says...

Green vote down 2.5% on 2009 in the South East - from 11.6% to 9.1%, so no second MEP for the Greens. Labour vote up by 6.5%, beating the Lib Dems 2009 vote that won them two MEPs, but no second seat given.
Green vote down 2.5% on 2009 in the South East - from 11.6% to 9.1%, so no second MEP for the Greens. Labour vote up by 6.5%, beating the Lib Dems 2009 vote that won them two MEPs, but no second seat given. Warren Morgan
  • Score: 8

1:02am Mon 26 May 14

Fercri Sakes says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense. Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 37

1:27am Mon 26 May 14

Zeta Function says...

It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order.

No surprises if many don't turn up.

Keeping in contact with constituents is also important.

People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.
It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order. No surprises if many don't turn up. Keeping in contact with constituents is also important. People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families. Zeta Function
  • Score: 16

1:30am Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.
So being a patriot is 'nonsense'?

Wanting to govern one's own country is 'nonsense'?

India manages it. China manages it, as does the USA, Iceland, Malawi, Iran, Venezuela and even Russia.

How on Earth do they manage it without Barosso and Van Rompuy telling them what to do??
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.[/p][/quote]So being a patriot is 'nonsense'? Wanting to govern one's own country is 'nonsense'? India manages it. China manages it, as does the USA, Iceland, Malawi, Iran, Venezuela and even Russia. How on Earth do they manage it without Barosso and Van Rompuy telling them what to do?? ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -2

1:30am Mon 26 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Gratifying to see that Green Party is being cut back.

Clearly they are now in retreat and their day is up.
Thank goodness for that.

But I still want to know when my rubbish is going to be collected.
Is there any hope of that?
Gratifying to see that Green Party is being cut back. Clearly they are now in retreat and their day is up. Thank goodness for that. But I still want to know when my rubbish is going to be collected. Is there any hope of that? Martha Gunn
  • Score: 76

1:31am Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

Zeta Function wrote:
It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order.

No surprises if many don't turn up.

Keeping in contact with constituents is also important.

People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.
You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are.
[quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order. No surprises if many don't turn up. Keeping in contact with constituents is also important. People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.[/p][/quote]You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -25

1:52am Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

If anyone has the intelligence to explain why they are happy for Malawi to govern itself but not for the UK to have the same, they are free to step forward.

Otherwise, I shall just accept that I'm right as usual and that the idiots who read my posts will simply vote my posts down.

Over to you, morons ;-)
If anyone has the intelligence to explain why they are happy for Malawi to govern itself but not for the UK to have the same, they are free to step forward. Otherwise, I shall just accept that I'm right as usual and that the idiots who read my posts will simply vote my posts down. Over to you, morons ;-) ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -17

3:58am Mon 26 May 14

Gribbet says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.
So being a patriot is 'nonsense'?

Wanting to govern one's own country is 'nonsense'?

India manages it. China manages it, as does the USA, Iceland, Malawi, Iran, Venezuela and even Russia.

How on Earth do they manage it without Barosso and Van Rompuy telling them what to do??
Yes, being a 'patriot' is definitely nonsense.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.[/p][/quote]So being a patriot is 'nonsense'? Wanting to govern one's own country is 'nonsense'? India manages it. China manages it, as does the USA, Iceland, Malawi, Iran, Venezuela and even Russia. How on Earth do they manage it without Barosso and Van Rompuy telling them what to do??[/p][/quote]Yes, being a 'patriot' is definitely nonsense. Gribbet
  • Score: 22

4:01am Mon 26 May 14

Gribbet says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Zeta Function wrote:
It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order.

No surprises if many don't turn up.

Keeping in contact with constituents is also important.

People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.
You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are.
Even UKIP don't really have a clue what they themselves are.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order. No surprises if many don't turn up. Keeping in contact with constituents is also important. People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.[/p][/quote]You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are.[/p][/quote]Even UKIP don't really have a clue what they themselves are. Gribbet
  • Score: 17

4:04am Mon 26 May 14

Gribbet says...

"Green's"

Nice use of the apostrophe there Argus.
"Green's" Nice use of the apostrophe there Argus. Gribbet
  • Score: 16

5:38am Mon 26 May 14

Quiterie says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Zeta Function wrote:
It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order.

No surprises if many don't turn up.

Keeping in contact with constituents is also important.

People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.
You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are.
Given that your own party leader has called your last manifesto 'drivel' you can see why people might struggle to understand what UKIP actually stand for........
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order. No surprises if many don't turn up. Keeping in contact with constituents is also important. People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.[/p][/quote]You clearly haven't a f*cking clue what UKIP and the EU are.[/p][/quote]Given that your own party leader has called your last manifesto 'drivel' you can see why people might struggle to understand what UKIP actually stand for........ Quiterie
  • Score: 27

5:47am Mon 26 May 14

Quiterie says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
If anyone has the intelligence to explain why they are happy for Malawi to govern itself but not for the UK to have the same, they are free to step forward.

Otherwise, I shall just accept that I'm right as usual and that the idiots who read my posts will simply vote my posts down.

Over to you, morons ;-)
You've got me there my friend. I have absolutely no idea why Malawi should be allowed to govern itself. Have you considered becoming a politician yourself? Your knowledge and colourful use of language would be an asset to the party.......
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: If anyone has the intelligence to explain why they are happy for Malawi to govern itself but not for the UK to have the same, they are free to step forward. Otherwise, I shall just accept that I'm right as usual and that the idiots who read my posts will simply vote my posts down. Over to you, morons ;-)[/p][/quote]You've got me there my friend. I have absolutely no idea why Malawi should be allowed to govern itself. Have you considered becoming a politician yourself? Your knowledge and colourful use of language would be an asset to the party....... Quiterie
  • Score: 35

6:05am Mon 26 May 14

We love Red Billy says...

At least we won't have to put up with Alex Phillips being even more smug. The downside is that there will not be a by election in her ward.
At least we won't have to put up with Alex Phillips being even more smug. The downside is that there will not be a by election in her ward. We love Red Billy
  • Score: 9

6:51am Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

Here's a quick summary of the percentage scores for the Brighton & Hove European Election result yesterday:

>> Labour 26.94%
>> Green 24.53%
>> Conservative 20.62%
>> UKIP 18.74%
>> Liberal Democrats 5.31%
>> Other parties: 3.86%

If there were a local city council election tomorrow, based on these figures, by my calculation the resulting councillor make-up (with 54 seats up for grabs) would be as follows:

>> Labour 15 (up 2)
>> Green 13 (down 8)
>> Conservative 11 (down 7)
>> UKIP 10 (up 10)
>> Lib Democrats 3 (up 3)
>> Other parties 2 (up 2)

What hue do you think the likely administration would be? A Red/Green coalition surely.

This hypothetical tally is based on two dubious assumptions:

(a) That everyone votes the same way in local council elections as they do in Euro elections. I don't think that's true, UKIP obviously offered a distinctive proposition in the Euros which nearly a fifth of voters in Brighton & Hove agreed with, but their local election offer tends to be pretty vague and as far as I recall indistinguishable from Tory policies.

(b) That there is some sort of Proportional-Represe
ntation-like effect which distributes each party's percentage vote share evenly and equitably across the city, ignoring the fact that we have First Past The Post and each party tends to perform stronger in particular parts of the city (eg Greens mostly getting elected in the city centre, Labour doing well on council estates, Tories in the suburbs).

In reality under First Past The Post a score of 5% or 4% is not enough to see a party win a single seat in any ward, so I don't seriously expect to see the Lib Dems make a return (and certainly not advance on their pre-2011 tally),nor for any minor party to win a seat - that 3.86% was shared between ten different parties so was really fragmented. For UKIP to come from nowhere and win ten council seats really would be truly remarkable! In 2011 they only managed to stand 9 candidates across the city (compared to 54 each from Greens Conservative and Labour); all lost their deposits.

I haven't even mentioned the obvious point that there is still almost a year to go before the election and there will be further shifts. From the Green Party perspective we are only just exiting our "mid-term blues" phase (a well established phenomenon for governing parties during the electoral cycle, and it turns out we are not immune). We were also on a tight budget for this campaign since we need to save our scarce funds for next year.

Finally, turnout ought to be nearly double the 38% achieved in the city for the Euros. In 2010 it was 70%.
Here's a quick summary of the percentage scores for the Brighton & Hove European Election result yesterday: >> Labour 26.94% >> Green 24.53% >> Conservative 20.62% >> UKIP 18.74% >> Liberal Democrats 5.31% >> Other parties: 3.86% If there were a local city council election tomorrow, based on these figures, by my calculation the resulting councillor make-up (with 54 seats up for grabs) would be as follows: >> Labour 15 (up 2) >> Green 13 (down 8) >> Conservative 11 (down 7) >> UKIP 10 (up 10) >> Lib Democrats 3 (up 3) >> Other parties 2 (up 2) What hue do you think the likely administration would be? A Red/Green coalition surely. This hypothetical tally is based on two dubious assumptions: (a) That everyone votes the same way in local council elections as they do in Euro elections. I don't think that's true, UKIP obviously offered a distinctive proposition in the Euros which nearly a fifth of voters in Brighton & Hove agreed with, but their local election offer tends to be pretty vague and as far as I recall indistinguishable from Tory policies. (b) That there is some sort of Proportional-Represe ntation-like effect which distributes each party's percentage vote share evenly and equitably across the city, ignoring the fact that we have First Past The Post and each party tends to perform stronger in particular parts of the city (eg Greens mostly getting elected in the city centre, Labour doing well on council estates, Tories in the suburbs). In reality under First Past The Post a score of 5% or 4% is not enough to see a party win a single seat in any ward, so I don't seriously expect to see the Lib Dems make a return (and certainly not advance on their pre-2011 tally),nor for any minor party to win a seat - that 3.86% was shared between ten different parties so was really fragmented. For UKIP to come from nowhere and win ten council seats really would be truly remarkable! In 2011 they only managed to stand 9 candidates across the city (compared to 54 each from Greens Conservative and Labour); all lost their deposits. I haven't even mentioned the obvious point that there is still almost a year to go before the election and there will be further shifts. From the Green Party perspective we are only just exiting our "mid-term blues" phase (a well established phenomenon for governing parties during the electoral cycle, and it turns out we are not immune). We were also on a tight budget for this campaign since we need to save our scarce funds for next year. Finally, turnout ought to be nearly double the 38% achieved in the city for the Euros. In 2010 it was 70%. Eugenius
  • Score: 18

7:10am Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

Under (a) above I meant to add that there is also a standard mid-term effect of voters casting their Euro vote as a protest against the ruling national party, and Labour as the official opposition in Parliament (but not the True Opposition, hey) not surprisingly picked up a boost from that. In a year's time voters will be more focused on the positive choice of who they want to see elected for the next term, we will potentially see different choices between the local and parliamentary elections and also based on the personalities and track records of the candidates who are standing.
Under (a) above I meant to add that there is also a standard mid-term effect of voters casting their Euro vote as a protest against the ruling national party, and Labour as the official opposition in Parliament (but not the True Opposition, hey) not surprisingly picked up a boost from that. In a year's time voters will be more focused on the positive choice of who they want to see elected for the next term, we will potentially see different choices between the local and parliamentary elections and also based on the personalities and track records of the candidates who are standing. Eugenius
  • Score: 2

7:11am Mon 26 May 14

sharpley says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
The fact that Brighton makes people like you respond like this is one of the many reasons I like living here :)
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]The fact that Brighton makes people like you respond like this is one of the many reasons I like living here :) sharpley
  • Score: 42

8:02am Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

I'm just amazed that their is still such high support for the left-wing anti-capitalist focussed 'Green' party in Brighton and Hove!

At least it is great news that the anti-green vote has increased and that hopefully by this time next year a more responsible council led by ANY other party will be in power.
I'm just amazed that their is still such high support for the left-wing anti-capitalist focussed 'Green' party in Brighton and Hove! At least it is great news that the anti-green vote has increased and that hopefully by this time next year a more responsible council led by ANY other party will be in power. pachallis
  • Score: 18

8:11am Mon 26 May 14

Plantpot says...

What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked.

The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though).

Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.
What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked. The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though). Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them. Plantpot
  • Score: -16

9:35am Mon 26 May 14

ARMANA says...

WELL DONE U.KIP, !!
WELL DONE U.KIP, !! ARMANA
  • Score: 5

9:56am Mon 26 May 14

Morpheus says...

Zeta Function wrote:
It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order.

No surprises if many don't turn up.

Keeping in contact with constituents is also important.

People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.
Last night the MEPs who were re-elected were boasting about how they had amended and/or blocked bills that were not in the interests of the UK. It is impossible for them to do this if the rest of the MEPs do not agree. It is time the media told is exactly what the MEPs are doing in our interests and since there are other countries who also think the same, we need to know who these are and also the countries who act against our interest. The EU is just like an information black hole - nothing ever comes out of it. This needs to change and the media can make this happen.
[quote][p][bold]Zeta Function[/bold] wrote: It'll be worth noting how many new Ukip MEPS actually do anything in the European parliament for the salaries they will be receiving. For example if they table any motions, table amendments, put questions to the council, raise points of order. No surprises if many don't turn up. Keeping in contact with constituents is also important. People need to pause and think what it means for there to be such widespread support for the right across the country. UKip is persistently negative, against immigration, against Europe, no maternity benefit for women. They don't have a single bright idea as to how to transform capitalism: no policies that would produce improvements for workers and their families.[/p][/quote]Last night the MEPs who were re-elected were boasting about how they had amended and/or blocked bills that were not in the interests of the UK. It is impossible for them to do this if the rest of the MEPs do not agree. It is time the media told is exactly what the MEPs are doing in our interests and since there are other countries who also think the same, we need to know who these are and also the countries who act against our interest. The EU is just like an information black hole - nothing ever comes out of it. This needs to change and the media can make this happen. Morpheus
  • Score: 15

9:59am Mon 26 May 14

Quiterie says...

Plantpot wrote:
What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked.

The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though).

Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.
But UKIP did well at the last Euro elections, but that still didn't translate into any seats at the General Election. Even though they've done even better this time around their share of the vote will again collapse at the General Election, especially as their policies come under greater scrutiny.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked. The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though). Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.[/p][/quote]But UKIP did well at the last Euro elections, but that still didn't translate into any seats at the General Election. Even though they've done even better this time around their share of the vote will again collapse at the General Election, especially as their policies come under greater scrutiny. Quiterie
  • Score: 4

10:23am Mon 26 May 14

fred clause says...

Plantpot wrote:
What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked.

The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though).

Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.
dear god no the last thing we need is fatcat Tory's looking after there cronies for another 4 years hopefully they sink and take the racist Ukipers with them
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked. The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though). Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.[/p][/quote]dear god no the last thing we need is fatcat Tory's looking after there cronies for another 4 years hopefully they sink and take the racist Ukipers with them fred clause
  • Score: 3

10:44am Mon 26 May 14

maxiboy_ says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
B&H is a microcosm of London and the result reflects that fact. The city is a hive of Cultural Marxists but they being surrounded!
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]B&H is a microcosm of London and the result reflects that fact. The city is a hive of Cultural Marxists but they being surrounded! maxiboy_
  • Score: 11

10:52am Mon 26 May 14

maxiboy_ says...

Quiterie wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked.

The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though).

Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.
But UKIP did well at the last Euro elections, but that still didn't translate into any seats at the General Election. Even though they've done even better this time around their share of the vote will again collapse at the General Election, especially as their policies come under greater scrutiny.
UKIP will win MP's next year that's for certain but what's not certain is how many they will win.

Next years general election is on course for another hung Parliament but this time the LD's will lose many of their MP's and so Westminster will be fragmented and a two party coalition will be impossible. It will have to be a coalition of more than two parties or another general election.

By this time next year, Clegg, Cameron and Milliband will be gone.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: What these results tell us is that England especially is overwhelmingly a right wing country, and that the rise of UKIP may let in a left wing administration. This will be a disaster for the country as left wing policies are based on tax/borrow/spend which have never worked. The Conservatives have to very quickly work this out and stop their drift to the left and grow a pair. Either form a pact with UKIP or nick their most popular policies (it may already be too late though). Labour's success came in certain areas where it might be said that their policy of unfettered immigration worked for them.[/p][/quote]But UKIP did well at the last Euro elections, but that still didn't translate into any seats at the General Election. Even though they've done even better this time around their share of the vote will again collapse at the General Election, especially as their policies come under greater scrutiny.[/p][/quote]UKIP will win MP's next year that's for certain but what's not certain is how many they will win. Next years general election is on course for another hung Parliament but this time the LD's will lose many of their MP's and so Westminster will be fragmented and a two party coalition will be impossible. It will have to be a coalition of more than two parties or another general election. By this time next year, Clegg, Cameron and Milliband will be gone. maxiboy_
  • Score: 4

10:55am Mon 26 May 14

maxiboy_ says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Gratifying to see that Green Party is being cut back.

Clearly they are now in retreat and their day is up.
Thank goodness for that.

But I still want to know when my rubbish is going to be collected.
Is there any hope of that?
And the LD's are soon to join them as a fringe party.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Gratifying to see that Green Party is being cut back. Clearly they are now in retreat and their day is up. Thank goodness for that. But I still want to know when my rubbish is going to be collected. Is there any hope of that?[/p][/quote]And the LD's are soon to join them as a fringe party. maxiboy_
  • Score: 8

10:59am Mon 26 May 14

wexler53 says...

If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit.

So Tax/Borrow/OverSpend
/Waste/State control or

Tax/Borrow/OverSpend
/Waste/State/Thought Control....

What a choice!!
If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit. So Tax/Borrow/OverSpend /Waste/State control or Tax/Borrow/OverSpend /Waste/State/Thought Control.... What a choice!! wexler53
  • Score: 8

10:59am Mon 26 May 14

maxiboy_ says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.
Educated?

And which Mickey Mouse degree would that be? Up until the 1980's one could call a University degree something to write home about but now the majority of them are worthless pieces of paper.

You don't know the meaning of the word, "Education".
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]They're also more educated than the average South East voter so they can see straight through the MFE and UKIP nonsense.[/p][/quote]Educated? And which Mickey Mouse degree would that be? Up until the 1980's one could call a University degree something to write home about but now the majority of them are worthless pieces of paper. You don't know the meaning of the word, "Education". maxiboy_
  • Score: -6

11:11am Mon 26 May 14

clubrob6 says...

What the EU elections have shown is areas that have high rates of immigrants are turning to Labour,London for example the areas Labour won have high population of immigrants because immigrants know Labour is soft on the issue of immigration.UKIP is a protest vote to let the three main parties run by millionaire career politicians know that we have had enough of them telling us what we can vote on.Except in the north of England labour only do well in high immigrant areas,i think Brighton and Hove will probably get a Labour MP come the general election due to this fact.
What the EU elections have shown is areas that have high rates of immigrants are turning to Labour,London for example the areas Labour won have high population of immigrants because immigrants know Labour is soft on the issue of immigration.UKIP is a protest vote to let the three main parties run by millionaire career politicians know that we have had enough of them telling us what we can vote on.Except in the north of England labour only do well in high immigrant areas,i think Brighton and Hove will probably get a Labour MP come the general election due to this fact. clubrob6
  • Score: -7

11:33am Mon 26 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 10

11:45am Mon 26 May 14

clubrob6 says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election. clubrob6
  • Score: 1

12:15pm Mon 26 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

And rob you have hit the nail on the head. The uk needs quality immigration. People with good family values and skills who can help thenuk flourish economically. Unfortunately successive governments have allowed anyone in, rapists, perverts, nut cases, terrorists etc and this also damages the reputation of decent immigrants. It's the same with the unis being allowed to bring another 9,000 students into town without funding any infrastructure to support the increase in population. None of the parties have addressed this.
Also successive governments have failed to push the almost three million unemployed british citizens into jobs. We have allowed people to live on benefits while migrant workers take jobs as cleaners, hotel staff, waiting staff etc.
I work across Europe and this is not the case in other countries. You don't go into a French or Italian hotel and find migrant workers from other countries, they do not allow their own to sit at home claiming from the state. Only in the uk do we allow capable people to sit at home living on benefits while employers have to take migrant workers and then people moan about immigration.
Stopping benefits and forcing UK citizens into jobs would be a start, then many migrants would have to return home.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Brighton and hove next year. The greens were the party of protest voters, but if UKIP put a candidate in every ward, no doubt they will gain seats as it isn't the liberal town many people believe.
And rob you have hit the nail on the head. The uk needs quality immigration. People with good family values and skills who can help thenuk flourish economically. Unfortunately successive governments have allowed anyone in, rapists, perverts, nut cases, terrorists etc and this also damages the reputation of decent immigrants. It's the same with the unis being allowed to bring another 9,000 students into town without funding any infrastructure to support the increase in population. None of the parties have addressed this. Also successive governments have failed to push the almost three million unemployed british citizens into jobs. We have allowed people to live on benefits while migrant workers take jobs as cleaners, hotel staff, waiting staff etc. I work across Europe and this is not the case in other countries. You don't go into a French or Italian hotel and find migrant workers from other countries, they do not allow their own to sit at home claiming from the state. Only in the uk do we allow capable people to sit at home living on benefits while employers have to take migrant workers and then people moan about immigration. Stopping benefits and forcing UK citizens into jobs would be a start, then many migrants would have to return home. It will be interesting to see what happens in Brighton and hove next year. The greens were the party of protest voters, but if UKIP put a candidate in every ward, no doubt they will gain seats as it isn't the liberal town many people believe. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 7

12:20pm Mon 26 May 14

HJarrs says...

clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
[quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up. HJarrs
  • Score: -6

12:47pm Mon 26 May 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The UKIP result is due to other parties failing to listen to the public.
Thatcher failed to listen about the poll tax, Labour and the Tories failed to listen more recently about immigration and other issues. Locally the Greens have failed to listen to people and even ignored the outcomes of numerous consultations.
The result of ignoring or disbelieving the electorate is being punished at election time.
The risk now in Brighton and Hove is that the opposition parties have been absent and allowed the Greens to plough through almost every community.
This leaves a space for an alternative vote. Will this be UKIP?
The UKIP result is due to other parties failing to listen to the public. Thatcher failed to listen about the poll tax, Labour and the Tories failed to listen more recently about immigration and other issues. Locally the Greens have failed to listen to people and even ignored the outcomes of numerous consultations. The result of ignoring or disbelieving the electorate is being punished at election time. The risk now in Brighton and Hove is that the opposition parties have been absent and allowed the Greens to plough through almost every community. This leaves a space for an alternative vote. Will this be UKIP? Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 11

12:48pm Mon 26 May 14

ourcoalition says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
And proud of it!!!

You know you have lost when you revert to abuse - see you on the next BNP/NF/Fascist March - oh, I won't, 'cos you have cancelled it.

Bye, bye.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]And proud of it!!! You know you have lost when you revert to abuse - see you on the next BNP/NF/Fascist March - oh, I won't, 'cos you have cancelled it. Bye, bye. ourcoalition
  • Score: 9

1:00pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas? pachallis
  • Score: 11

1:27pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"You've got me there my friend. I have absolutely no idea why Malawi should be allowed to govern itself."

Going by the number of 'thumbs down' on my post and the lack of explanations regarding Malawi's self-governance, no-one appears to know what Malawi has that right which is denied to the UK.

It's weird, but a century ago this country was running a quarter of the globe, yet now it isn't trusted to run itself. What has gone wrong? Surely it isn't anything to do with the substandard immigrants who came here after 1950 and who flooded the country this century? Oh no, the idiots who supported that invasion would never claim that as a cause.

So why IS the UK denied self-governance?

It's because we have a self-serving political elite which has an eye on cosy EU jobs for which they don't require electing once they have been ejected from UK politics.

Well, there are many people in this country who want to govern ourselves again. UKIP may not be perfect, but it does offer the only credible alternative to the current traitorous status quo.
"You've got me there my friend. I have absolutely no idea why Malawi should be allowed to govern itself." Going by the number of 'thumbs down' on my post and the lack of explanations regarding Malawi's self-governance, no-one appears to know what Malawi has that right which is denied to the UK. It's weird, but a century ago this country was running a quarter of the globe, yet now it isn't trusted to run itself. What has gone wrong? Surely it isn't anything to do with the substandard immigrants who came here after 1950 and who flooded the country this century? Oh no, the idiots who supported that invasion would never claim that as a cause. So why IS the UK denied self-governance? It's because we have a self-serving political elite which has an eye on cosy EU jobs for which they don't require electing once they have been ejected from UK politics. Well, there are many people in this country who want to govern ourselves again. UKIP may not be perfect, but it does offer the only credible alternative to the current traitorous status quo. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -7

1:28pm Mon 26 May 14

clubrob6 says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
And rob you have hit the nail on the head. The uk needs quality immigration. People with good family values and skills who can help thenuk flourish economically. Unfortunately successive governments have allowed anyone in, rapists, perverts, nut cases, terrorists etc and this also damages the reputation of decent immigrants. It's the same with the unis being allowed to bring another 9,000 students into town without funding any infrastructure to support the increase in population. None of the parties have addressed this.
Also successive governments have failed to push the almost three million unemployed british citizens into jobs. We have allowed people to live on benefits while migrant workers take jobs as cleaners, hotel staff, waiting staff etc.
I work across Europe and this is not the case in other countries. You don't go into a French or Italian hotel and find migrant workers from other countries, they do not allow their own to sit at home claiming from the state. Only in the uk do we allow capable people to sit at home living on benefits while employers have to take migrant workers and then people moan about immigration.
Stopping benefits and forcing UK citizens into jobs would be a start, then many migrants would have to return home.
It will be interesting to see what happens in Brighton and hove next year. The greens were the party of protest voters, but if UKIP put a candidate in every ward, no doubt they will gain seats as it isn't the liberal town many people believe.
Most of the jobs that the young used to do when starting out in employment to help them through college ETC are now done by the unskilled immigrant workforce in this area.Plus we have become a soft touch for extremists protected by EU human rights laws,not many countries allows extremists to come here breed then send there children to fight wars they were too afraid to fight in themselves and then cover themselves by saying they did not give there blessing.Brighton and Hove is the only area of the country where I have found Taxi drivers with Sat Nav's as they don't know the area I wanted to go from the pier to the king Alfred and was at one stage on London road.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: And rob you have hit the nail on the head. The uk needs quality immigration. People with good family values and skills who can help thenuk flourish economically. Unfortunately successive governments have allowed anyone in, rapists, perverts, nut cases, terrorists etc and this also damages the reputation of decent immigrants. It's the same with the unis being allowed to bring another 9,000 students into town without funding any infrastructure to support the increase in population. None of the parties have addressed this. Also successive governments have failed to push the almost three million unemployed british citizens into jobs. We have allowed people to live on benefits while migrant workers take jobs as cleaners, hotel staff, waiting staff etc. I work across Europe and this is not the case in other countries. You don't go into a French or Italian hotel and find migrant workers from other countries, they do not allow their own to sit at home claiming from the state. Only in the uk do we allow capable people to sit at home living on benefits while employers have to take migrant workers and then people moan about immigration. Stopping benefits and forcing UK citizens into jobs would be a start, then many migrants would have to return home. It will be interesting to see what happens in Brighton and hove next year. The greens were the party of protest voters, but if UKIP put a candidate in every ward, no doubt they will gain seats as it isn't the liberal town many people believe.[/p][/quote]Most of the jobs that the young used to do when starting out in employment to help them through college ETC are now done by the unskilled immigrant workforce in this area.Plus we have become a soft touch for extremists protected by EU human rights laws,not many countries allows extremists to come here breed then send there children to fight wars they were too afraid to fight in themselves and then cover themselves by saying they did not give there blessing.Brighton and Hove is the only area of the country where I have found Taxi drivers with Sat Nav's as they don't know the area I wanted to go from the pier to the king Alfred and was at one stage on London road. clubrob6
  • Score: -3

1:33pm Mon 26 May 14

clubrob6 says...

HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
You should read some facts instead of just whats reported on the controlled media,Cameron supported a Tory minister MILLER who made more than £1M on a sale of a house where the mortgage was paid for by the tax payer.Yet we recently had a woman jailed for benefit fraud for tens of thousands.All the DIRT the main parties threw at UKIP backfired as the main parties are MUCH MORE CORRUPT FACT.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]You should read some facts instead of just whats reported on the controlled media,Cameron supported a Tory minister MILLER who made more than £1M on a sale of a house where the mortgage was paid for by the tax payer.Yet we recently had a woman jailed for benefit fraud for tens of thousands.All the DIRT the main parties threw at UKIP backfired as the main parties are MUCH MORE CORRUPT FACT. clubrob6
  • Score: -2

1:37pm Mon 26 May 14

HJarrs says...

clubrob6 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
You should read some facts instead of just whats reported on the controlled media,Cameron supported a Tory minister MILLER who made more than £1M on a sale of a house where the mortgage was paid for by the tax payer.Yet we recently had a woman jailed for benefit fraud for tens of thousands.All the DIRT the main parties threw at UKIP backfired as the main parties are MUCH MORE CORRUPT FACT.
Nope, UKIP are turbo Tories. Hands in the till and financed by the financiers. Trebles all round!!!
[quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]You should read some facts instead of just whats reported on the controlled media,Cameron supported a Tory minister MILLER who made more than £1M on a sale of a house where the mortgage was paid for by the tax payer.Yet we recently had a woman jailed for benefit fraud for tens of thousands.All the DIRT the main parties threw at UKIP backfired as the main parties are MUCH MORE CORRUPT FACT.[/p][/quote]Nope, UKIP are turbo Tories. Hands in the till and financed by the financiers. Trebles all round!!! HJarrs
  • Score: -5

1:39pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?[/p][/quote]I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton. Eugenius
  • Score: -10

1:51pm Mon 26 May 14

HJarrs says...

The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem.

The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated.

The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves.

That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.
The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem. The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated. The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves. That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame. HJarrs
  • Score: -8

1:57pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

HJarrs wrote:
The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem.

The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated.

The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves.

That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.
You call patriots 'haters' as if that's somehow a bad thing.

Hating the EU and what it stands for is something which all decent people people should do.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem. The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated. The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves. That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.[/p][/quote]You call patriots 'haters' as if that's somehow a bad thing. Hating the EU and what it stands for is something which all decent people people should do. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -2

2:11pm Mon 26 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Now the Green Party has made up a story that La Lucas 'won' the vote in Pavilion.

This is the same spin that they put on stories about rubbish and recycling.

They are a disgrace.
Now the Green Party has made up a story that La Lucas 'won' the vote in Pavilion. This is the same spin that they put on stories about rubbish and recycling. They are a disgrace. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 12

2:14pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Now the Green Party has made up a story that La Lucas 'won' the vote in Pavilion.

This is the same spin that they put on stories about rubbish and recycling.

They are a disgrace.
Just because you don't know how to do vote sampling at an election count doesn't mean we made it up. We wouldn't say it if we weren't sure.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Now the Green Party has made up a story that La Lucas 'won' the vote in Pavilion. This is the same spin that they put on stories about rubbish and recycling. They are a disgrace.[/p][/quote]Just because you don't know how to do vote sampling at an election count doesn't mean we made it up. We wouldn't say it if we weren't sure. Eugenius
  • Score: -8

2:54pm Mon 26 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Sampling was impossible because the ballot papers were scrambled across the city.
And there was a 30% postal vote.

That has been confirmed by BHCC officals.

And the comment 'We wouldn't say it if it wasn't true' is as fine a piece of Greenspeak as I have come across in a long time.
Sampling was impossible because the ballot papers were scrambled across the city. And there was a 30% postal vote. That has been confirmed by BHCC officals. And the comment 'We wouldn't say it if it wasn't true' is as fine a piece of Greenspeak as I have come across in a long time. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 12

2:56pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

In case anyone gets the wrong impression, "election observers" (look but don't touch) are encouraged at the count as part of the rigorous democratic verification process and the Returning Officer allocates a limited number of tickets allowing entry to the count to each political party on the ballot.
In case anyone gets the wrong impression, "election observers" (look but don't touch) are encouraged at the count as part of the rigorous democratic verification process and the Returning Officer allocates a limited number of tickets allowing entry to the count to each political party on the ballot. Eugenius
  • Score: -1

2:58pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Sampling was impossible because the ballot papers were scrambled across the city.
And there was a 30% postal vote.

That has been confirmed by BHCC officals.

And the comment 'We wouldn't say it if it wasn't true' is as fine a piece of Greenspeak as I have come across in a long time.
It was by no means impossible. Perhaps our team have devised superior methods to yours?
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Sampling was impossible because the ballot papers were scrambled across the city. And there was a 30% postal vote. That has been confirmed by BHCC officals. And the comment 'We wouldn't say it if it wasn't true' is as fine a piece of Greenspeak as I have come across in a long time.[/p][/quote]It was by no means impossible. Perhaps our team have devised superior methods to yours? Eugenius
  • Score: -4

3:10pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem.

The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated.

The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves.

That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.
Typical sour grapes from a pitiful green-left anti capitalist fanboy as a result of the pitifully poor results of the greens in the elections.

Keep up the good work @HJarrs in making the greens appear really desperate. At least Alex Phillips didn't become an MEP!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem. The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated. The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves. That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.[/p][/quote]Typical sour grapes from a pitiful green-left anti capitalist fanboy as a result of the pitifully poor results of the greens in the elections. Keep up the good work @HJarrs in making the greens appear really desperate. At least Alex Phillips didn't become an MEP! pachallis
  • Score: 5

3:13pm Mon 26 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

I place as much faith in your comments as I do in those of your Queens Park apparatchik who claims:

i ...'strong 2nd place in SE
ii... 'Great Green win' in city area vote.

Both claims are of course pure Green bilge.
Whenever will you learn?
I place as much faith in your comments as I do in those of your Queens Park apparatchik who claims: i ...'strong 2nd place in SE ii... 'Great Green win' in city area vote. Both claims are of course pure Green bilge. Whenever will you learn? Martha Gunn
  • Score: 8

3:17pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem.

The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated.

The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves.

That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.
Typical sour grapes from a pitiful green-left anti capitalist fanboy as a result of the pitifully poor results of the greens in the elections.

Keep up the good work @HJarrs in making the greens appear really desperate. At least Alex Phillips didn't become an MEP!
I wouldn't call overtaking and pushing the Lib Dems into 5th place nationally a "pitifully poor" result - we are over the moon.

Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The skies are darkening all over Europe as the haters and blamers have taken a chunk of the EU parliament. In the UK there is no doubt a political and media problem. The media have continually failed to explain what the EU is, how it works, what to be done and how to change. Instead, the media industry has reduced long reduced politics to sound bites, with Europe hardly discussed at all as it's a bit complicated. The major political parties have been only too happy to go along with media dumbing down and have been happy to stand in the way of EU reform for the pursuit of national power. LibLabCons are beyond being able to reform themselves. That such an important election has been reduced to a sideshow that attracts less than 35% of voters, who then vote with such scant knowledge and information, is a matter for national shame.[/p][/quote]Typical sour grapes from a pitiful green-left anti capitalist fanboy as a result of the pitifully poor results of the greens in the elections. Keep up the good work @HJarrs in making the greens appear really desperate. At least Alex Phillips didn't become an MEP![/p][/quote]I wouldn't call overtaking and pushing the Lib Dems into 5th place nationally a "pitifully poor" result - we are over the moon. Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too. Eugenius
  • Score: -6

3:21pm Mon 26 May 14

Martha Gunn says...

Dear Lord!

The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin.

Deeply shocking Greenspeak.
They are a total disgrace.
Dear Lord! The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin. Deeply shocking Greenspeak. They are a total disgrace. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 8

3:40pm Mon 26 May 14

Eugenius says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Dear Lord!

The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin.

Deeply shocking Greenspeak.
They are a total disgrace.
Some quick evidence on that, in haste:

Intro to Peter's bio on our national website: "Peter Cranie is an anti-racism activist, who has been involved with the Merseyside Coalition Against Racism and Fascism."

Liverpool Echo Feb 28 2014:

"Liverpool's Green Party candidate for the European elections called on voters to kick the BNP out of Brussels this May.

Peter Cranie narrowly lost out to BNP leader Nick Griffin by 0.3% – less than 5,000 votes across the North West region – five years ago."

Statement from Peter 3 Jan 2014: "You’ll be astonished to hear that being bankrupt does not disqualify Nick Griffin, a man convicted of incitement to racial hatred, from representing you and I in the European Parliament. Indeed, he has made clear that it won't affect party funds and I suspect it is actually a tactic to help the BNP to access the large donations they are expecting from legacies. He will of course be standing again in May for re-election.

"We absolutely must not and cannot let Griffin get re-elected to the European Parliament on May 22nd this year. "
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Dear Lord! The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin. Deeply shocking Greenspeak. They are a total disgrace.[/p][/quote]Some quick evidence on that, in haste: Intro to Peter's bio on our national website: "Peter Cranie is an anti-racism activist, who has been involved with the Merseyside Coalition Against Racism and Fascism." Liverpool Echo Feb 28 2014: "Liverpool's Green Party candidate for the European elections called on voters to kick the BNP out of Brussels this May. Peter Cranie narrowly lost out to BNP leader Nick Griffin by 0.3% – less than 5,000 votes across the North West region – five years ago." Statement from Peter 3 Jan 2014: "You’ll be astonished to hear that being bankrupt does not disqualify Nick Griffin, a man convicted of incitement to racial hatred, from representing you and I in the European Parliament. Indeed, he has made clear that it won't affect party funds and I suspect it is actually a tactic to help the BNP to access the large donations they are expecting from legacies. He will of course be standing again in May for re-election. "We absolutely must not and cannot let Griffin get re-elected to the European Parliament on May 22nd this year. " Eugenius
  • Score: -6

3:44pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Dear Lord!

The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin.

Deeply shocking Greenspeak.
They are a total disgrace.
@Martha Gunn - it is now becoming more apparent than ever that the left-wing greens are willing to lie through their teeth and spin on anything in a desperate attempt to appear to be a party of any real value to anymore.

So the Green's have one incompetent minority-led council; they are the official opposition on Liverpool council, they have 1 MP and now 3 MEPs.

They were talking about major swings of more than 2.5% to the Greens in the South East and ended up getting a 2.9% drop in the vote. That shows how much they are valued!

It doesn't really matter what the Greens say or think anymore - they are just a pitifully small minority disjointed party of extreme left-wing activists and fanbois.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Dear Lord! The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin. Deeply shocking Greenspeak. They are a total disgrace.[/p][/quote]@Martha Gunn - it is now becoming more apparent than ever that the left-wing greens are willing to lie through their teeth and spin on anything in a desperate attempt to appear to be a party of any real value to anymore. So the Green's have one incompetent minority-led council; they are the official opposition on Liverpool council, they have 1 MP and now 3 MEPs. They were talking about major swings of more than 2.5% to the Greens in the South East and ended up getting a 2.9% drop in the vote. That shows how much they are valued! It doesn't really matter what the Greens say or think anymore - they are just a pitifully small minority disjointed party of extreme left-wing activists and fanbois. pachallis
  • Score: 4

4:07pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

Eugenius wrote:
Martha Gunn wrote:
Dear Lord!

The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin.

Deeply shocking Greenspeak.
They are a total disgrace.
Some quick evidence on that, in haste:

Intro to Peter's bio on our national website: "Peter Cranie is an anti-racism activist, who has been involved with the Merseyside Coalition Against Racism and Fascism."

Liverpool Echo Feb 28 2014:

"Liverpool's Green Party candidate for the European elections called on voters to kick the BNP out of Brussels this May.

Peter Cranie narrowly lost out to BNP leader Nick Griffin by 0.3% – less than 5,000 votes across the North West region – five years ago."

Statement from Peter 3 Jan 2014: "You’ll be astonished to hear that being bankrupt does not disqualify Nick Griffin, a man convicted of incitement to racial hatred, from representing you and I in the European Parliament. Indeed, he has made clear that it won't affect party funds and I suspect it is actually a tactic to help the BNP to access the large donations they are expecting from legacies. He will of course be standing again in May for re-election.

"We absolutely must not and cannot let Griffin get re-elected to the European Parliament on May 22nd this year. "
@Eugenius - you and your friend @HJarrs get more pathetic by the minute - I'm actually starting to feel sorry for you!

So Peter Cranie was against racism (aren't we all!), and as BNP lost it was all down to the Greens? No!

We just can't trust green fanbois anymore - probably not even to sit the right way round on a toilet seat!

Keep up the good work!
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Dear Lord! The Green Party now claiming credit for seeing off Nick Griffin. Deeply shocking Greenspeak. They are a total disgrace.[/p][/quote]Some quick evidence on that, in haste: Intro to Peter's bio on our national website: "Peter Cranie is an anti-racism activist, who has been involved with the Merseyside Coalition Against Racism and Fascism." Liverpool Echo Feb 28 2014: "Liverpool's Green Party candidate for the European elections called on voters to kick the BNP out of Brussels this May. Peter Cranie narrowly lost out to BNP leader Nick Griffin by 0.3% – less than 5,000 votes across the North West region – five years ago." Statement from Peter 3 Jan 2014: "You’ll be astonished to hear that being bankrupt does not disqualify Nick Griffin, a man convicted of incitement to racial hatred, from representing you and I in the European Parliament. Indeed, he has made clear that it won't affect party funds and I suspect it is actually a tactic to help the BNP to access the large donations they are expecting from legacies. He will of course be standing again in May for re-election. "We absolutely must not and cannot let Griffin get re-elected to the European Parliament on May 22nd this year. "[/p][/quote]@Eugenius - you and your friend @HJarrs get more pathetic by the minute - I'm actually starting to feel sorry for you! So Peter Cranie was against racism (aren't we all!), and as BNP lost it was all down to the Greens? No! We just can't trust green fanbois anymore - probably not even to sit the right way round on a toilet seat! Keep up the good work! pachallis
  • Score: 7

4:27pm Mon 26 May 14

HJarrs says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
And long may we remain so!
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]And long may we remain so! HJarrs
  • Score: 0

4:39pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
And long may we remain so!
However I understand Caroline Lucas (real leader of the UK Green party rather than Natalie Bennett) now sees the 'writing on the wall' and is in favour of an election to decide on whether we stay in Europe!

So you admit you are a t*sser - this confirms all our beliefs about you being a sad little left-wing anti-capitalist green fanboy!

Keep up the good work!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]And long may we remain so![/p][/quote]However I understand Caroline Lucas (real leader of the UK Green party rather than Natalie Bennett) now sees the 'writing on the wall' and is in favour of an election to decide on whether we stay in Europe! So you admit you are a t*sser - this confirms all our beliefs about you being a sad little left-wing anti-capitalist green fanboy! Keep up the good work! pachallis
  • Score: 5

4:42pm Mon 26 May 14

1286trev says...

Has anyone noticed that where the Lib Dems have gained council seats,there are places like that, Ukip has still come first in the Euro vote.
The same voters in the same elections but, in Sutton,for instance, there is a swing of 16% from Lib Dem to Ukip. This is a spontaneous change of vote within a polling station.
Local election Lib Dem 48.8% Euro 20% difference 28.8%
Ukip 23.7% Euro 26% difference -2%
swing to Ukip 15.5%. This is why the LibDems lost near all their seats, except in the South east ,of course.
Has anyone noticed that where the Lib Dems have gained council seats,there are places like that, Ukip has still come first in the Euro vote. The same voters in the same elections but, in Sutton,for instance, there is a swing of 16% from Lib Dem to Ukip. This is a spontaneous change of vote within a polling station. Local election Lib Dem 48.8% Euro 20% difference 28.8% Ukip 23.7% Euro 26% difference -2% swing to Ukip 15.5%. This is why the LibDems lost near all their seats, except in the South east ,of course. 1286trev
  • Score: 1

4:51pm Mon 26 May 14

1286trev says...

Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels
By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain.
many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around.
Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain. many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around. 1286trev
  • Score: -6

5:02pm Mon 26 May 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively. Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -4

5:57pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

1286trev wrote:
Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels
By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain.
many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around.
You plainly have no idea what UKIP is or how the EU operates.

First off, if UKIP had its way, we'd leave the EU and free up immediately £55 million PER DAY for UK projects.

Second, MEPs are paid by the EU no matter which party they are from, so UKIP MEPs cost EXACTLY the same as Labour and Tory ones.

Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature.

Fourthly, UKIP is opposed to ALL EU attempts to grab further power from nation states, which is why it opposed ALL laws proposed there, even if it agrees with them.

Fifthly, UKIP recognises that trade in ivory and certain live animals is already illegal in the UK, so it has no need to 'enhance' the power of the EU bu supporting it on those (or any) measures).

HTH
[quote][p][bold]1286trev[/bold] wrote: Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain. many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around.[/p][/quote]You plainly have no idea what UKIP is or how the EU operates. First off, if UKIP had its way, we'd leave the EU and free up immediately £55 million PER DAY for UK projects. Second, MEPs are paid by the EU no matter which party they are from, so UKIP MEPs cost EXACTLY the same as Labour and Tory ones. Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature. Fourthly, UKIP is opposed to ALL EU attempts to grab further power from nation states, which is why it opposed ALL laws proposed there, even if it agrees with them. Fifthly, UKIP recognises that trade in ivory and certain live animals is already illegal in the UK, so it has no need to 'enhance' the power of the EU bu supporting it on those (or any) measures). HTH ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
And long may we remain so!
Admission Of The Day!

We had guessed, but it's always nice to be confirmed correct.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]And long may we remain so![/p][/quote]Admission Of The Day! We had guessed, but it's always nice to be confirmed correct. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -5

7:31pm Mon 26 May 14

FatherTed11 says...

So does this mean my rubbish is going to be collected now or what??
So does this mean my rubbish is going to be collected now or what?? FatherTed11
  • Score: 4

7:43pm Mon 26 May 14

pachallis says...

If you want a real laugh at the Green's expense pop over to twitter and see what Alexandra Phillips and Jason Kitcat were tweeting over the past few days.

Prior to the European count they were all very upbeat and positive. Now it's all gone very quiet and the greens are blaming everyone - you know the problem was low turnout, or first-past-the-post for councils, or the BBC didn't interview the Greens enough - wow - an insignificant little party of left-wing activists that has grown from 2 to 3 MEPs - who really cares about what they think?
If you want a real laugh at the Green's expense pop over to twitter and see what Alexandra Phillips and Jason Kitcat were tweeting over the past few days. Prior to the European count they were all very upbeat and positive. Now it's all gone very quiet and the greens are blaming everyone - you know the problem was low turnout, or first-past-the-post for councils, or the BBC didn't interview the Greens enough - wow - an insignificant little party of left-wing activists that has grown from 2 to 3 MEPs - who really cares about what they think? pachallis
  • Score: 2

8:53pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month! ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -9

9:52pm Mon 26 May 14

HJarrs says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change. HJarrs
  • Score: -1

10:43pm Mon 26 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
So the drug users simply upped and quit the place?

Dream on!

Besides, dead people cannot vote................
.I was referring to those who are still alive.

HTH
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change.[/p][/quote]So the drug users simply upped and quit the place? Dream on! Besides, dead people cannot vote................ .I was referring to those who are still alive. HTH ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -4

7:14am Tue 27 May 14

HJarrs says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
So the drug users simply upped and quit the place?

Dream on!

Besides, dead people cannot vote................

.I was referring to those who are still alive.

HTH
Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th.

Don't let that stop you posting your rubbish.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change.[/p][/quote]So the drug users simply upped and quit the place? Dream on! Besides, dead people cannot vote................ .I was referring to those who are still alive. HTH[/p][/quote]Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. Don't let that stop you posting your rubbish. HJarrs
  • Score: -3

7:27am Tue 27 May 14

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
So the drug users simply upped and quit the place?

Dream on!

Besides, dead people cannot vote................


.I was referring to those who are still alive.

HTH
Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th.

Don't let that stop you posting your rubbish.
Why should anyone take notice of what a left-wing pro-drugs anti-capitalist green party fanboy such as HJharrs says any more? Everything he posts turns out to be misleading. For instance, is he the t*sser he confessed to eartlier or not?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change.[/p][/quote]So the drug users simply upped and quit the place? Dream on! Besides, dead people cannot vote................ .I was referring to those who are still alive. HTH[/p][/quote]Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. Don't let that stop you posting your rubbish.[/p][/quote]Why should anyone take notice of what a left-wing pro-drugs anti-capitalist green party fanboy such as HJharrs says any more? Everything he posts turns out to be misleading. For instance, is he the t*sser he confessed to eartlier or not? pachallis
  • Score: 2

9:09am Tue 27 May 14

Plantpot says...

HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
Given that scientists are happy that fracking is safe, you will now be promoting that? After all, you believe climate change is based on science?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change.[/p][/quote]Given that scientists are happy that fracking is safe, you will now be promoting that? After all, you believe climate change is based on science? Plantpot
  • Score: 0

10:53am Tue 27 May 14

pachallis says...

Plantpot wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.
Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city.

I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month!
Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true.

I would recommend you go learn about climate change.
Given that scientists are happy that fracking is safe, you will now be promoting that? After all, you believe climate change is based on science?
@Plantpot - don't be silly - the Greens can't possibly do a U-turn on being against fracking. It is the only pro-environmental policy that they seem to have.

What about all the time and money wasted by the childish actions of Caroline Lucas in Balcombe?

What about all the efforts by the likes of Alexandra Phillips and Jason Kitcat to publicise the greens being against fracking?

What about all the financial support Alex's partner Tom Druitt has provided in providing free transport to fracktavists?

Would Caroline and Alexandra have to admit they have no scientific knowledge and are just being anti-fracking as a means to getting their left-wing policies introduced?

And of course you have all the irresponsible ideologists, such as HJarrs, who think the UK should lead the world by example by not taking advantage of fracking - a source of methane that the UN say should be used as a mitigation route to renewables.

No - the Greens have nailed their colour to the anti-fracking flag and they haven't got the b*lls to admit that they might have been wrong.

And don't forget that the Greens are still really in favor of staying within Europe even though they are now trying to appear they are in favour of a referendum.

Why? Because the PR voting is the only way that the Greens can have a voice as compared to first-past-the-post.

It is also the only way they can finance all their idiotic vanity schemes by getting money from various European funds that are fed from UK taxes. If we left Europe the funding would stop and the Greens would have to stop putting in cycle lanes.

Roll on May 2015!
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Great to see UKIP and other decent patriotic parties across Europe have seen off the extremists and haters of the left. We must never forget the countless millions murdered by the socialists in the 20th century. These people have a foothold in Brighton but the country as a whole rejected them decisively.[/p][/quote]Given that Brighton is the drug death capital of the UK, we can safely ignore the consensus of that city. I'm surprised so many of them manages to find a polling station.......and in the correct month![/p][/quote]Sorry, another Green failure along with not ruining the city has been to lose the title of drugs death capital of the Uk. Sad but true. I would recommend you go learn about climate change.[/p][/quote]Given that scientists are happy that fracking is safe, you will now be promoting that? After all, you believe climate change is based on science?[/p][/quote]@Plantpot - don't be silly - the Greens can't possibly do a U-turn on being against fracking. It is the only pro-environmental policy that they seem to have. What about all the time and money wasted by the childish actions of Caroline Lucas in Balcombe? What about all the efforts by the likes of Alexandra Phillips and Jason Kitcat to publicise the greens being against fracking? What about all the financial support Alex's partner Tom Druitt has provided in providing free transport to fracktavists? Would Caroline and Alexandra have to admit they have no scientific knowledge and are just being anti-fracking as a means to getting their left-wing policies introduced? And of course you have all the irresponsible ideologists, such as HJarrs, who think the UK should lead the world by example by not taking advantage of fracking - a source of methane that the UN say should be used as a mitigation route to renewables. No - the Greens have nailed their colour to the anti-fracking flag and they haven't got the b*lls to admit that they might have been wrong. And don't forget that the Greens are still really in favor of staying within Europe even though they are now trying to appear they are in favour of a referendum. Why? Because the PR voting is the only way that the Greens can have a voice as compared to first-past-the-post. It is also the only way they can finance all their idiotic vanity schemes by getting money from various European funds that are fed from UK taxes. If we left Europe the funding would stop and the Greens would have to stop putting in cycle lanes. Roll on May 2015! pachallis
  • Score: 1

11:43am Tue 27 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. "

You sound almost proud that Brighton's drug-users are killing themselves at a s slower rate than Manchester.

The fact remains that Brighton has high levels of drug use and this helps to explain why the Greens are so popular there.

Have you worked out that dead people cannot vote?
"Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. " You sound almost proud that Brighton's drug-users are killing themselves at a s slower rate than Manchester. The fact remains that Brighton has high levels of drug use and this helps to explain why the Greens are so popular there. Have you worked out that dead people cannot vote? ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Tue 27 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too."

So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?
"Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too." So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off? ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 3

12:42pm Tue 27 May 14

Eugenius says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. "

You sound almost proud that Brighton's drug-users are killing themselves at a s slower rate than Manchester.

The fact remains that Brighton has high levels of drug use and this helps to explain why the Greens are so popular there.

Have you worked out that dead people cannot vote?
There may be something in that - have you head of the "Stoned ape" theory of human evolution: that the addition of psychedlic mushrooms to the natural diet of humans' early ancestors Homo Erectus contributed to our evolution into the intelligent, self-aware, resourceful and co-operative species Homo Sapiens?
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "Sorry to disappoint, but after many years as the drugs death capital, the number of deaths have reduced rapidly recently thanks to good work by the council and many agencies and last year we were 8th. " You sound almost proud that Brighton's drug-users are killing themselves at a s slower rate than Manchester. The fact remains that Brighton has high levels of drug use and this helps to explain why the Greens are so popular there. Have you worked out that dead people cannot vote?[/p][/quote]There may be something in that - have you head of the "Stoned ape" theory of human evolution: that the addition of psychedlic mushrooms to the natural diet of humans' early ancestors Homo Erectus contributed to our evolution into the intelligent, self-aware, resourceful and co-operative species Homo Sapiens? Eugenius
  • Score: -1

12:44pm Tue 27 May 14

Eugenius says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too."

So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?
By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too." So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?[/p][/quote]By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP. Eugenius
  • Score: -3

2:44pm Tue 27 May 14

LargeAndInCharge says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton.

The MFE opposition also shows this.
You're right. Brighton has become full of anti-British, communist lefties who can't see beyond the self-indulgent, hypocritical ideology of an A-level politics student. These d!ckh€@d$ are nasty, bitter, twisted individuals who think the modern world owes them something. The world owes them NOTHING. These are the types who go to ethnic shops to buy ethnically picked tea from Ethiopia and then **** about capitalism, climate change, nuclear power and Jeremy Clarkson.
These ungrateful little $h!+$ don't realise how much Britain has changed the world and how we are rich from our past. I am proud to be British. We are not perfect but our achievements far out-weigh our misgivings. Keep calm and soldier on, mate. The left are weak, the left are wet and about as patriotic as the French.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: It just shows what a bunch of pro-EU, anti-Britain load of tossers live in Brighton. The MFE opposition also shows this.[/p][/quote]You're right. Brighton has become full of anti-British, communist lefties who can't see beyond the self-indulgent, hypocritical ideology of an A-level politics student. These d!ckh€@d$ are nasty, bitter, twisted individuals who think the modern world owes them something. The world owes them NOTHING. These are the types who go to ethnic shops to buy ethnically picked tea from Ethiopia and then **** about capitalism, climate change, nuclear power and Jeremy Clarkson. These ungrateful little $h!+$ don't realise how much Britain has changed the world and how we are rich from our past. I am proud to be British. We are not perfect but our achievements far out-weigh our misgivings. Keep calm and soldier on, mate. The left are weak, the left are wet and about as patriotic as the French. LargeAndInCharge
  • Score: 1

3:09pm Tue 27 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

Eugenius wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too."

So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?
By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP.
Aren't all the parties in the North-West 'anti-racist'?

I note your use of the words 'stop people voting BNP'. That implies something more than seeking to persuade people not to vote BNP. It also suggests that the Green message isn't 'Vote Green' but Don't vote BNP'.

You're also ignoring the fact that UKIP came second in that region despite having similar long-term goals to that of the BNP - surely if any party can claim to have 'wiped out' the BNP, it is UKIP?

And don't ignore the fact that UKIP's policies across the country are far more popular than the 'back-to-the-horse-a
nd-cart' policies the Greens want to inflict on everyone.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too." So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?[/p][/quote]By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP.[/p][/quote]Aren't all the parties in the North-West 'anti-racist'? I note your use of the words 'stop people voting BNP'. That implies something more than seeking to persuade people not to vote BNP. It also suggests that the Green message isn't 'Vote Green' but Don't vote BNP'. You're also ignoring the fact that UKIP came second in that region despite having similar long-term goals to that of the BNP - surely if any party can claim to have 'wiped out' the BNP, it is UKIP? And don't ignore the fact that UKIP's policies across the country are far more popular than the 'back-to-the-horse-a nd-cart' policies the Greens want to inflict on everyone. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -1

3:21pm Tue 27 May 14

Eugenius says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too."

So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?
By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP.
Aren't all the parties in the North-West 'anti-racist'?

I note your use of the words 'stop people voting BNP'. That implies something more than seeking to persuade people not to vote BNP. It also suggests that the Green message isn't 'Vote Green' but Don't vote BNP'.

You're also ignoring the fact that UKIP came second in that region despite having similar long-term goals to that of the BNP - surely if any party can claim to have 'wiped out' the BNP, it is UKIP?

And don't ignore the fact that UKIP's policies across the country are far more popular than the 'back-to-the-horse-a

nd-cart' policies the Greens want to inflict on everyone.
Some fair points. I don't dispute that UKIP's agenda was more popular than the Green's in this European election - nationally they came first, we came fourth.

Will be interesting to see what happens to UKIP's vote share over the next 12 months. Historically they have see-sawed between the Euros and the Parliamentary elections, always dropping to an insignificant showing in the latter. And the BBC (who very kindly gave UKIP blanket coverage for the past year) said UKIP's vote share was already down 6% in the Euros compared to polls in 2013.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "Also I suggest it was the heavyweight anti-far-right campaign of our candidate in the North West, Peter Cranie, which was instrumental in seeing nasty Nick Griffin of the BNP lose his seat there, even if poor Peter himself narrowly missed out on a place. We feel proud of our role as a party in that event too." So if the Greens didn't take his seat, how can they claim to have been instrumental in seeing the BNP off?[/p][/quote]By having the guts to base their campaign in the North West on an a clear anti-racism platform to stop people voting BNP.[/p][/quote]Aren't all the parties in the North-West 'anti-racist'? I note your use of the words 'stop people voting BNP'. That implies something more than seeking to persuade people not to vote BNP. It also suggests that the Green message isn't 'Vote Green' but Don't vote BNP'. You're also ignoring the fact that UKIP came second in that region despite having similar long-term goals to that of the BNP - surely if any party can claim to have 'wiped out' the BNP, it is UKIP? And don't ignore the fact that UKIP's policies across the country are far more popular than the 'back-to-the-horse-a nd-cart' policies the Greens want to inflict on everyone.[/p][/quote]Some fair points. I don't dispute that UKIP's agenda was more popular than the Green's in this European election - nationally they came first, we came fourth. Will be interesting to see what happens to UKIP's vote share over the next 12 months. Historically they have see-sawed between the Euros and the Parliamentary elections, always dropping to an insignificant showing in the latter. And the BBC (who very kindly gave UKIP blanket coverage for the past year) said UKIP's vote share was already down 6% in the Euros compared to polls in 2013. Eugenius
  • Score: 2

4:48pm Tue 27 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"Will be interesting to see what happens to UKIP's vote share over the next 12 months. Historically they have see-sawed between the Euros and the Parliamentary elections, always dropping to an insignificant showing in the latter. And the BBC (who very kindly gave UKIP blanket coverage for the past year) said UKIP's vote share was already down 6% in the Euros compared to polls in 2013."

Are they comparing different types of elections?

The BBC's UKIP coverage editorially has been largely negative.
"Will be interesting to see what happens to UKIP's vote share over the next 12 months. Historically they have see-sawed between the Euros and the Parliamentary elections, always dropping to an insignificant showing in the latter. And the BBC (who very kindly gave UKIP blanket coverage for the past year) said UKIP's vote share was already down 6% in the Euros compared to polls in 2013." Are they comparing different types of elections? The BBC's UKIP coverage editorially has been largely negative. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -4

10:08pm Tue 27 May 14

mattle says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
1286trev wrote:
Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels
By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain.
many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around.
You plainly have no idea what UKIP is or how the EU operates.

First off, if UKIP had its way, we'd leave the EU and free up immediately £55 million PER DAY for UK projects.

Second, MEPs are paid by the EU no matter which party they are from, so UKIP MEPs cost EXACTLY the same as Labour and Tory ones.

Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature.

Fourthly, UKIP is opposed to ALL EU attempts to grab further power from nation states, which is why it opposed ALL laws proposed there, even if it agrees with them.

Fifthly, UKIP recognises that trade in ivory and certain live animals is already illegal in the UK, so it has no need to 'enhance' the power of the EU bu supporting it on those (or any) measures).

HTH
"Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature."

What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. Look up 'ordinary legislative procedure' on google and you might actually learn something. But as most UKIP MEPs can't be bothered to turn up to the Parliament (although they happily take all the taxpayer-funded salary and expenses), I guess it doesn't really make much difference it they are too dimwitted to know how EU laws are actually made.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]1286trev[/bold] wrote: Don,t expect any representation from Ukip in Brussels By not getting involved Ukip will add to Britain,s costs of the EU as they will not push for any eurofunds for projects in the south east. Perhaps to compensate the British taxpayer, they could have their allowances taxed in Belgium, France as well as Britain. many of the retiring LibDem MEPs had senior responsibilities in the EU and were well respected, Britain will get even less respect once Ukip start throwing their toys around.[/p][/quote]You plainly have no idea what UKIP is or how the EU operates. First off, if UKIP had its way, we'd leave the EU and free up immediately £55 million PER DAY for UK projects. Second, MEPs are paid by the EU no matter which party they are from, so UKIP MEPs cost EXACTLY the same as Labour and Tory ones. Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature. Fourthly, UKIP is opposed to ALL EU attempts to grab further power from nation states, which is why it opposed ALL laws proposed there, even if it agrees with them. Fifthly, UKIP recognises that trade in ivory and certain live animals is already illegal in the UK, so it has no need to 'enhance' the power of the EU bu supporting it on those (or any) measures). HTH[/p][/quote]"Thirdly, the EU parliament has no say in anything that goes on in the EU. It is a front, a show of 'democracy' for the gullible. It debates matters, sure, but they are decided upon by the Commission, and it can only pass non-binding resolutions, which are NOT part of the legislature." What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. Look up 'ordinary legislative procedure' on google and you might actually learn something. But as most UKIP MEPs can't be bothered to turn up to the Parliament (although they happily take all the taxpayer-funded salary and expenses), I guess it doesn't really make much difference it they are too dimwitted to know how EU laws are actually made. mattle
  • Score: 0

10:41pm Tue 27 May 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Eugenius wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton.
So, is this one house only altogether or only one house in Brighton with others elsewhere ?

She was confirmed by the local Greens as owning 5 homes a couple of years ago so, if she really only has one house now, how come she has failed to make at last a million from the sale of the other 4 ?
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?[/p][/quote]I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton.[/p][/quote]So, is this one house only altogether or only one house in Brighton with others elsewhere ? She was confirmed by the local Greens as owning 5 homes a couple of years ago so, if she really only has one house now, how come she has failed to make at last a million from the sale of the other 4 ? Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 0

10:56pm Tue 27 May 14

Eugenius says...

Idontbelieveit1948 wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton.
So, is this one house only altogether or only one house in Brighton with others elsewhere ?

She was confirmed by the local Greens as owning 5 homes a couple of years ago so, if she really only has one house now, how come she has failed to make at last a million from the sale of the other 4 ?
One house only altogether. I've never seen evidence of this 5 houses claim, please share if you have anything. I don't know the specifics but my understanding was that they had a house in Belgium while Caroline was MEP. This was then sold when she was elected to Parliament and the proceeds used to purchase their new house in Brighton. When I first met her during her parliamentary campaign she was lodging with friends of hers in Brighton but still travelling (by train) to Brussels once a week.
[quote][p][bold]Idontbelieveit1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?[/p][/quote]I have it on record direct from Caroline herself that neither she nor her husband Richard are millionaires and they only own one house, here in Brighton.[/p][/quote]So, is this one house only altogether or only one house in Brighton with others elsewhere ? She was confirmed by the local Greens as owning 5 homes a couple of years ago so, if she really only has one house now, how come she has failed to make at last a million from the sale of the other 4 ?[/p][/quote]One house only altogether. I've never seen evidence of this 5 houses claim, please share if you have anything. I don't know the specifics but my understanding was that they had a house in Belgium while Caroline was MEP. This was then sold when she was elected to Parliament and the proceeds used to purchase their new house in Brighton. When I first met her during her parliamentary campaign she was lodging with friends of hers in Brighton but still travelling (by train) to Brussels once a week. Eugenius
  • Score: 1

1:56am Wed 28 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. "

^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^

The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed.

Here's what the EU says on the matter:

http://www.europarl.
europa.eu/aboutparli
ament/en/0081f4b3c7/
Law-making-procedure
s-in-detail.html

"Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it.

The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it."

So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted.

HTH
"What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. " ^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^ The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed. Here's what the EU says on the matter: http://www.europarl. europa.eu/aboutparli ament/en/0081f4b3c7/ Law-making-procedure s-in-detail.html "Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it. The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it." So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted. HTH ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: -2

12:48pm Wed 28 May 14

mattle says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. "

^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^

The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed.

Here's what the EU says on the matter:

http://www.europarl.

europa.eu/aboutparli

ament/en/0081f4b3c7/

Law-making-procedure

s-in-detail.html

"Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it.

The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it."

So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted.

HTH
Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says:

"The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases."

So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this.

But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it?
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. " ^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^ The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed. Here's what the EU says on the matter: http://www.europarl. europa.eu/aboutparli ament/en/0081f4b3c7/ Law-making-procedure s-in-detail.html "Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it. The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it." So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted. HTH[/p][/quote]Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says: "The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases." So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this. But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it? mattle
  • Score: 0

10:27pm Wed 28 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

mattle wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. "

^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^

The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed.

Here's what the EU says on the matter:

http://www.europarl.


europa.eu/aboutparli


ament/en/0081f4b3c7/


Law-making-procedure


s-in-detail.html

"Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it.

The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it."

So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted.

HTH
Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says:

"The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases."

So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this.

But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it?
You appear to be forgetting the presence and supremacy of the EU Commission.

It's all very well pointing out the that Parliament and The Council are 'equals' in some areas, but BOTH are subject to the Commission, which initiates and finally approves ALL EU legislation.
[quote][p][bold]mattle[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. " ^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^ The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed. Here's what the EU says on the matter: http://www.europarl. europa.eu/aboutparli ament/en/0081f4b3c7/ Law-making-procedure s-in-detail.html "Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it. The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it." So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted. HTH[/p][/quote]Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says: "The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases." So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this. But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it?[/p][/quote]You appear to be forgetting the presence and supremacy of the EU Commission. It's all very well pointing out the that Parliament and The Council are 'equals' in some areas, but BOTH are subject to the Commission, which initiates and finally approves ALL EU legislation. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

12:09am Thu 29 May 14

mattle says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
mattle wrote:
ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
"What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. "

^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^

The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed.

Here's what the EU says on the matter:

http://www.europarl.



europa.eu/aboutparli



ament/en/0081f4b3c7/



Law-making-procedure



s-in-detail.html

"Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it.

The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it."

So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted.

HTH
Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says:

"The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases."

So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this.

But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it?
You appear to be forgetting the presence and supremacy of the EU Commission.

It's all very well pointing out the that Parliament and The Council are 'equals' in some areas, but BOTH are subject to the Commission, which initiates and finally approves ALL EU legislation.
More UKIP tosh. The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law. There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission.

But if you unquestioningly believe the fantasy world as described by UKIP, then no amount of explanation of how the process really works is likely to convince you otherwise I guess.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mattle[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: "What an absolute load of crap. Like so many kippers, you clearly know nothing about how the EU actually works. Parliament's approval is ESSENTIAL for virtually all EU legislation - if the Parliament doesn't approve it, it won't become law. " ^^^ Ignorant Comment Of The Day ^^^ The EU Parliament may NOT prevent any legislation from being passed. Here's what the EU says on the matter: http://www.europarl. europa.eu/aboutparli ament/en/0081f4b3c7/ Law-making-procedure s-in-detail.html "Under Article 289 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), consultation is a special legislative procedure, whereby Parliament is asked for its opinion on proposed legislation before the Council adopts it. The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it." So The EU Council's decision is final no matter how the EU Parliament voted. HTH[/p][/quote]Did you even bother to properly read that link you give?? Here's what it also says: "The Single European Act (1986) and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties successively extended Parliament's prerogatives. It can now co-legislate on equal footing with the Council in a vast majority of areas (see Ordinary legislative procedure) and consultation became a special legislative procedure (or even a non-legislative procedure) used in a limited number of cases." So just to make it crystal clear for you, Parliament co-legislates for the vast majority of EU legislation now - i.e. its agreement is essential for laws to be passed. If you actually did some proper research or bothered to talk to anyone who's actively involved in the European Parliament's work (clearly not most UKIP MEPs) you'd understand this. But hey, blindly regurgitating UKIP cliches that are high on prejudice but low on any real facts is much easier, isn't it?[/p][/quote]You appear to be forgetting the presence and supremacy of the EU Commission. It's all very well pointing out the that Parliament and The Council are 'equals' in some areas, but BOTH are subject to the Commission, which initiates and finally approves ALL EU legislation.[/p][/quote]More UKIP tosh. The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law. There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission. But if you unquestioningly believe the fantasy world as described by UKIP, then no amount of explanation of how the process really works is likely to convince you otherwise I guess. mattle
  • Score: -1

12:28pm Thu 29 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

" The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law."

And when was the last time that Commission proposals didn't end up becoming EU law at the behest of the EU Parliament? The Parliament can reject all that it likes but if a piece of legislation gets rejected, then there is nothing to stop the Commission from re-presenting it.

Do you recall the time that the Parliament demanded that the entire Commission resign? Do you recall what happened? They were simply re-instated.

Finally, here's your classic:

" There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission. "

It ignores the fact that the Commission HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals. If the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it.

I do hope that point isn't too advanced for you.
" The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law." And when was the last time that Commission proposals didn't end up becoming EU law at the behest of the EU Parliament? The Parliament can reject all that it likes but if a piece of legislation gets rejected, then there is nothing to stop the Commission from re-presenting it. Do you recall the time that the Parliament demanded that the entire Commission resign? Do you recall what happened? They were simply re-instated. Finally, here's your classic: " There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission. " It ignores the fact that the Commission HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals. If the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it. I do hope that point isn't too advanced for you. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Fri 30 May 14

mattle says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
" The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law."

And when was the last time that Commission proposals didn't end up becoming EU law at the behest of the EU Parliament? The Parliament can reject all that it likes but if a piece of legislation gets rejected, then there is nothing to stop the Commission from re-presenting it.

Do you recall the time that the Parliament demanded that the entire Commission resign? Do you recall what happened? They were simply re-instated.

Finally, here's your classic:

" There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission. "

It ignores the fact that the Commission HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals. If the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it.

I do hope that point isn't too advanced for you.
I'm used to Ukippers having no real idea how the EU works, but it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals". But as you clearly don’t know much about how the EU really functions, I guess that changing your mind to suit your argument makes sense. Just to make it really, really clear, the Council and Parliament can amend Commission proposals how they want, so the final version can be quite different to what the Commission intended. And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. Still, you now seem to have abandoned your original statement that the Parliament" can only pass non-binding resolutions", so at least we're making some progress.

Commission proposals that didn't become EU law due to rejection by the Parliament? Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive, the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament), and the directive on takeover bids. There's more, but I can’t be bothered to spend time digging them out. Perhaps you should do some research and educate yourself? (I know the directives sound boring, but that's what real politics is actually about, rather than the posturing preferred by UKIP MEPs.)

And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. One of the consequences of all this was that the Parliament was given a lot of new powers in the subsequent treaties (particularly Lisbon) to further restrict the powers of the Commission. But as you seem to believe in a structure of the EU that is about 30 years out of date, I guess these changes haven't reached UKIP HQ yet.
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: " The Commission is not 'supreme' at all: the Commission draws up legislative proposals, either on its own initiative or at the request of the Council or Parliament, and once it publishes them, it is Parliament and Council that discuss and debate the proposals until both of them reach agreement on a final text. If one or the other won't accept it, then it won't become law." And when was the last time that Commission proposals didn't end up becoming EU law at the behest of the EU Parliament? The Parliament can reject all that it likes but if a piece of legislation gets rejected, then there is nothing to stop the Commission from re-presenting it. Do you recall the time that the Parliament demanded that the entire Commission resign? Do you recall what happened? They were simply re-instated. Finally, here's your classic: " There is NO 'final approval' for the text required from the Commission. " It ignores the fact that the Commission HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals. If the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it. I do hope that point isn't too advanced for you.[/p][/quote]I'm used to Ukippers having no real idea how the EU works, but it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals". But as you clearly don’t know much about how the EU really functions, I guess that changing your mind to suit your argument makes sense. Just to make it really, really clear, the Council and Parliament can amend Commission proposals how they want, so the final version can be quite different to what the Commission intended. And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. Still, you now seem to have abandoned your original statement that the Parliament" can only pass non-binding resolutions", so at least we're making some progress. Commission proposals that didn't become EU law due to rejection by the Parliament? Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive, the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament), and the directive on takeover bids. There's more, but I can’t be bothered to spend time digging them out. Perhaps you should do some research and educate yourself? (I know the directives sound boring, but that's what real politics is actually about, rather than the posturing preferred by UKIP MEPs.) And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. One of the consequences of all this was that the Parliament was given a lot of new powers in the subsequent treaties (particularly Lisbon) to further restrict the powers of the Commission. But as you seem to believe in a structure of the EU that is about 30 years out of date, I guess these changes haven't reached UKIP HQ yet. mattle
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Fri 30 May 14

ARMANA says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
Don't forget that the Greens finished over 10,000 votes ahead of Labour in 2009, and Labour has beaten them by 1,400 votes tonight. Of course in the General and local elections Labour more than doubled it's 2009 European vote in the city, so this bodes very well for both polls next May. If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit.
As a U.KIP voter its bitter sweet, to get rid of the Greens, iv got to vote for the second biggest bunch of idiots to get rid of them,
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: Don't forget that the Greens finished over 10,000 votes ahead of Labour in 2009, and Labour has beaten them by 1,400 votes tonight. Of course in the General and local elections Labour more than doubled it's 2009 European vote in the city, so this bodes very well for both polls next May. If residents want to get rid of the Greens it is Labour they need to vote for, but we will be setting out positive policies in the next twelve months to show why we deserve to run the city on our own merit.[/p][/quote]As a U.KIP voter its bitter sweet, to get rid of the Greens, iv got to vote for the second biggest bunch of idiots to get rid of them, ARMANA
  • Score: 2

3:02pm Fri 30 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

" it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals"."

There is no contradiction. The Commission obviously approves of its own legislation, and if any amendments arise through the legislation's passage through the Parliament, the Commission retains the right to scrap the legislation if it doesn't approve of the amendments.

The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval.

"And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. "

You mean you weren't able to understand the meaning? OK.

" Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive"

Which was already covered by existing EU law.

" the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament),"

Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009?

If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water.

"And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. "

So some resigned yet stayed on.
" it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals"." There is no contradiction. The Commission obviously approves of its own legislation, and if any amendments arise through the legislation's passage through the Parliament, the Commission retains the right to scrap the legislation if it doesn't approve of the amendments. The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval. "And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. " You mean you weren't able to understand the meaning? OK. " Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive" Which was already covered by existing EU law. " the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament)," Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009? If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water. "And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. " So some resigned yet stayed on. ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

10:34pm Fri 30 May 14

mattle says...

ZeeGee, ffs wrote:
" it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals"."

There is no contradiction. The Commission obviously approves of its own legislation, and if any amendments arise through the legislation's passage through the Parliament, the Commission retains the right to scrap the legislation if it doesn't approve of the amendments.

The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval.

"And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. "

You mean you weren't able to understand the meaning? OK.

" Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive"

Which was already covered by existing EU law.

" the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament),"

Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009?

If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water.

"And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. "

So some resigned yet stayed on.
“The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval.”

The Commission’s total approval? I suggest you actually talk to some of the people in the Commission who’ve authored proposals. The Commission knows that it has to accept changes being made that it wouldn’t otherwise have if it doesn’t want legislation rejected completely. If it tried to withdraw every piece of legislation that it didn’t totally approve of, no legislation would ever get passed.


””Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive””
“Which was already covered by existing EU law.”

No it wasn't. There was only the 1970s European Patent Convention, and that had nothing to do with the EU.


”Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009?
If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water.”

No. It was a completely separate proposal - 2001/0047(COD) if you want to look it up.


“So some resigned yet stayed on.”

Carrying on in a caretaker capacity is perfectly normal practice in most European countries after a government resigns or loses an election while a new government is negotiated. (This even happened in Britain after the last general election for a few days, although I’m sure UKIP won’t care for such dirty foreign practices.)
[quote][p][bold]ZeeGee, ffs[/bold] wrote: " it does make me laugh when you say in one post that the Commission "finally approves ALL EU legislation", and then in the next say that the Commission "HAS NO NEED to approve its own proposals"." There is no contradiction. The Commission obviously approves of its own legislation, and if any amendments arise through the legislation's passage through the Parliament, the Commission retains the right to scrap the legislation if it doesn't approve of the amendments. The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval. "And Parliament and Council have the power to demand that the Commission present legislation on an issue, so to say that "if the Commission doesn't want something to happen, then it won't propose it" is meaningless. " You mean you weren't able to understand the meaning? OK. " Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive" Which was already covered by existing EU law. " the Ports Directive (modified and resubmitted by the Commission a year later, and rejected a second time by the Parliament)," Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009? If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water. "And as for the time that the Commissioners were forced to resign, the President (Santer) was immediately replaced by a caretaker President (Marin), with the other Commissioners staying on in a caretaker capacity until new Commissioners took over a few months later. " So some resigned yet stayed on.[/p][/quote]“The fact remains that ANY legislation passed by the Parliament has the Commission's total approval.” The Commission’s total approval? I suggest you actually talk to some of the people in the Commission who’ve authored proposals. The Commission knows that it has to accept changes being made that it wouldn’t otherwise have if it doesn’t want legislation rejected completely. If it tried to withdraw every piece of legislation that it didn’t totally approve of, no legislation would ever get passed. ””Off the top of my head, there's the Software Patent Directive”” “Which was already covered by existing EU law.” No it wasn't. There was only the 1970s European Patent Convention, and that had nothing to do with the EU. ”Is that the port State control Directive 2009/16/EC, which became law in 2009? If so, that rather blows your claim out of the water.” No. It was a completely separate proposal - 2001/0047(COD) if you want to look it up. “So some resigned yet stayed on.” Carrying on in a caretaker capacity is perfectly normal practice in most European countries after a government resigns or loses an election while a new government is negotiated. (This even happened in Britain after the last general election for a few days, although I’m sure UKIP won’t care for such dirty foreign practices.) mattle
  • Score: 0

11:52am Sat 31 May 14

ZeeGee, ffs says...

"The Commission’s total approval?"

Yes, that's what I said. The Commission can pull the plug any time if it doesn't agree with the final draft.

" The Commission knows that it has to accept changes being made that it wouldn’t otherwise have if it doesn’t want legislation rejected completely. If it tried to withdraw every piece of legislation that it didn’t totally approve of, no legislation would ever get passed."

Well 'd'errrr'.

Did I claim the Commission was clairvoyant?

"No it wasn't. There was only the 1970s European Patent Convention, and that had nothing to do with the EU."

So why has the EU been voting upon the unitary patent package?

" It was a completely separate proposal - 2001/0047(COD) if you want to look it up."

Ah, yes.....rejected over the section on the proposals for rules governing cargo handling.

Is that why The 2013 European Ports Policy contains proposals for dealing with cargo handling? It looks like yet another case of the EU asking the same question until it gets the 'correct' answer.

"Carrying on in a caretaker capacity is perfectly normal practice in most European countries after a government resigns or loses an election while a new government is negotiated. This even happened in Britain after the last general election for a few days..."

The difference being (and one that you failed to spot) is that the last Labour government didn't remain in power AFTER it had resigned.

The
"The Commission’s total approval?" Yes, that's what I said. The Commission can pull the plug any time if it doesn't agree with the final draft. " The Commission knows that it has to accept changes being made that it wouldn’t otherwise have if it doesn’t want legislation rejected completely. If it tried to withdraw every piece of legislation that it didn’t totally approve of, no legislation would ever get passed." Well 'd'errrr'. Did I claim the Commission was clairvoyant? "No it wasn't. There was only the 1970s European Patent Convention, and that had nothing to do with the EU." So why has the EU been voting upon the unitary patent package? " It was a completely separate proposal - 2001/0047(COD) if you want to look it up." Ah, yes.....rejected over the section on the proposals for rules governing cargo handling. Is that why The 2013 European Ports Policy contains proposals for dealing with cargo handling? It looks like yet another case of the EU asking the same question until it gets the 'correct' answer. "Carrying on in a caretaker capacity is perfectly normal practice in most European countries after a government resigns or loses an election while a new government is negotiated. This even happened in Britain after the last general election for a few days..." The difference being (and one that you failed to spot) is that the last Labour government didn't remain in power AFTER it had resigned. The ZeeGee, ffs
  • Score: 0

9:26am Sun 1 Jun 14

Uncle Ruckus (No Relation) says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
And her multi-millionaire property developer husband Richard Savage...
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?[/p][/quote]And her multi-millionaire property developer husband Richard Savage... Uncle Ruckus (No Relation)
  • Score: 0

9:31am Sun 1 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Uncle Ruckus (No Relation) wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war.
Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party.
Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'.
Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.
By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.
Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.
More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?
And her multi-millionaire property developer husband Richard Savage...
Richard Savage is an English teacher, not a property developer and he is certainly not a millionaire.
[quote][p][bold]Uncle Ruckus (No Relation)[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: club rob, people in poor areas are more likely to vote Labour. Immigrants live in poorer areas as they arrive with nothing and live in slum areas. However, many are very ambitious and want out of these areas, particularly when they may have come from better areas in their own countries yet they have left due to economic conditions or war. Many immigrant groups who arrived with nothing in the UK in the post war years built very successful businesses in the UK and now populate many Tory areas. Look at some of the UKs most successful business people Rob. Many were immigrants who started off in what you call labour areas and contribute to the Tory party. Also Rob trawl through the list of Tory candidates in all tiers of Government and you will see that it is peppered with people who were once 'immigrants'. Also people believe Brighton and Hove is a socialist/liberal town but it has a history of electing Tory councils and also has two Tory MPs out of three.[/p][/quote]By the way I have nothing against immigration,i like most people just want it controlled so we know who is here and be able to deport them if for example they break the law.Many immigrants bring great benefit to our country but we have to be sensible and stop the open door policy on immigration that is the policy for the three main parties.The very fact the three main parties treated even the word immigrant as racist has led to things getting out of control.We have got to a stage in politics where we have millionaire career politicians telling us what we can vote on.Immigration is having massive effects on our public services we have 16000 people on the housing waiting list in B&H locals are being forced out we just want fairness put back into politics.UKIP have sent a message if the three main parties don't listen I think UKIP will even gain MPs come the next election.[/p][/quote]Which message is that? UKIP is just the millionaire career politician party you complain about. UKIP's MEPs have shown themselves to be second to non when it comes claiming expenses while not even turning up.[/p][/quote]More rubbish from HJarrs - you were a bit late with your left wing anti capitalist green fanbois çlap trap this morning - tell us all about about millionare Lucas?[/p][/quote]And her multi-millionaire property developer husband Richard Savage...[/p][/quote]Richard Savage is an English teacher, not a property developer and he is certainly not a millionaire. Eugenius
  • Score: 0

10:47am Sun 1 Jun 14

Old Ale Man says...

Eugenius, It's been a Red Green admin for the last 3 years old bean.
Eugenius, It's been a Red Green admin for the last 3 years old bean. Old Ale Man
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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