Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

I know the Hairy One called Cameron "slimeball".

Just watched Matthew Hancock. Jesus he is an even bigger one.

How did one party get so many?

Haze, do you feel you belong to the elite of the party?

Wait for the mantra from PHQ before and after the U-turns.

Lets not forget good ol Nick.

Oh dear, written evidence of more lies on top of all the deceit.. a truly nasty bunch of oinks.

One of the gaps in the UKIP story is that they want out of the EU and have a Free Trade agreement like Switzerland, Norway etc. The problem is that to join the Free Trade arrangement, you must accept free movement of people. Norway, in particular, has a bigger percentage of immigrant workers than we do. Switzerland is currently trying to cap immigrant numbers from the EU. This produced a warning from the EU that may be expelled from the trade agreement. As usual UKIP has not thought out the policy or is keeping quiet about it

Neither have the right winged euroseptics in the Con Party.

and what about the bench opposite?

That's why Cameron has backed down on a cap on EU nationals after a talk with Merkel. It is just not possible.

It is possible to put a cap on anything.

But not if you are part of the €U, which brings us around full circle.


Out of the €U toot sweet!

nor if you want to be part of the free trade agreement that then has preferential access to eu markets

If you want caps on EU immigration then you have to severe all connection with Europe. We would have to change our relationship to one similar to say a South American country. Anything much closer will require free movement of people.

The only time that Labour would want to exit EU would be if Le Pen and the National Front came to power.

Probably, UKIP and other far right i.... would be queuing up to join her.
========

Mellor,

He asks why he behaved like he did.

Because he is a nasty conceited elitist little B....D.

I wonder who else I could apply that to.

Sorry Manuel, must be Haze!

this has been recommended to me as a most interesting read, and should also interst certain sections here .....

Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World is a fresh and informed account of the modern world's most intractable conflict.

In the 1920s, hard-line Zionists developed the doctrine of the 'Iron Wall': negotiations with the Arabs must always be from a position of military strength, and only when sufficiently strong Israel would be able to make peace with her Arab neighbours.

This doctrine, argues Avi Shlaim, became central to Israeli policy; dissenters were marginalized and many opportunities to reconcile with Palestinian Arabs were lost. Drawing on a great deal of new material and interviews with many key participants, Shlaim places Israel's political and military actions under and uncompromising lens.

£2bn for NHS
the headline reads well, and one can only hope that it is wisely spent - pretty forlorn hope i fear
however, from where will this big slab of money of come as well as that for the mega infrastructure programmes that are also forecast?

more cuts in welfare payments?
possibly, as those on benefits will rarely be conservatives, and most probably don't vote at all

David Cameron is all fine speeches and no action

Does anyone in Downing Street really believe that this strategy will win over the voters, asks Janet Daley.




Master PR man: David Cameron at 10 Downing Street Photo: GETTY IMAGES



Janet Daley
By Janet Daley

7:00PM GMT 29 Nov 2014



Another week, another smart political move from David Cameron. Or was it? The endlessly trailed and ever-so-long-anticipated speech on immigration finally arrived, and in spite of Mr Cameron’s delivery – which implied unambiguous frankness – was immediately subjected to forensic textual analysis. Instead of putting to rest the question of what he really intended to do about the EU, he launched an instant new wave of doubt and interpretation. For all the Kremlinology about how much of this had been pre-agreed with Brussels and sold in advance to the Liberal Democrats, the most concise judg-ment – oddly enough – came from Ed Miliband: people were not going to believe the Prime Minister’s new promises when he had broken the old ones.


Banal it may be as an Opposition leader’s retort, but it does hit what has become the most serious (perhaps fatal) Cameron problem squarely on the head. The example at the top of everybody’s mind was the failure to deliver on the “no ifs, no buts” promise to reduce immigration, which was so inconveniently exposed by the net migration figures the day before the speech.


But only a day before that, there had been another grotesque embarrassment involving another of Mr Cameron’s smart political moves. Remember that brilliant surprise announcement first thing in the morning after the Scottish referendum result? Mr Cameron strode out on to Downing Street and proclaimed that the further devolution he had promised to the Scots would indeed be delivered, but it would have to be accompanied by a parallel undertaking to the English: if Scottish voters were to be given more control over their own affairs, they would have to lose their powers over matters that affected only English voters. Well, as of this moment, that does not appear to be true.


The initial recommendations seem to involve the Scots having their shortbread and eating it. They will not only get more tax-raising powers for themselves, plus the continuation of the Barnett subsidy from Westminster – but their MPs will continue to vote on English budgetary issues. That is what you call hitting the jackpot. Downing Street now says that, in fact, proposals to address the English question will be forthcoming “within weeks”, even though Labour leaders are claiming they have had an assurance that their Scottish MPs will not be shut out of English political matters. So, either Mr Cameron is saying different things to different people or he is about to rewrite the British constitutional settlement on the hoof. I’m not sure which is worse.


Once again, there is either going to be a public sense of betrayal or a fudge designed to give the impression that concrete actions have followed inspirational words. And all of this stems from making smart political moves that consist entirely of saying clever things.




More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11261407/David-Cameron-is-all-fine-speeches-and-no-action.html

Latest YouGov / Sunday Times results 28th November - Con 32%, Lab 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 15%;