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 also think that there are very short odds that the vote will quite easily be for staying in

however, i very much hope that DC will at least manage to get some worthwhile "adjustments" ...... ideally i'ld like to see a long term commitment (from whom and how?) to overall eu review and reform as some aspects are nowhere near what was envisaged when there were only 7/12 countries involved and are in need of dramatic overhaul

Dodgy Dave couldn't even adjust his own tie.

When I went up to Rotherham a few days ago, I neglected to take my phone for music, and found myself having to tune in to Radio Leeds. They were getting listeners to text in whether they'd vote in or out. Of the hundreds of texts they received, literally only one text was to stay in. Everybody else wanted out!

I guess that says something about the demographics of the average Radio Leeds listener (geriatric and retarded?), but it probably also dispels the myth about the eurosceptic lobby being predominantly disillusioned Tories.

Polls ,,look what happened at the election . hilary's post above says something , i think we could very well vote out .

I don't think the UK will vote to exit, Jimmy, but I do believe it's very important that the good folks of the UK are allowed to have their say in a referendum. And even if the public were to vote out, I don't believe the consequences would be as bad as the doom-mongers would have you believe.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of ignorance being demonstrated about freedom of movement and trade agreements, and the public are regularly blaming the EU for unrelated matters. It's not exclusive to the UK, however, and there's discontent all across mainland northern Europe.

I saw a programme about policing Sheffield (right by Rotherham) a few months ago .
The police were saying how much pressure is on them now as there 700 new families moved in to one area of the City (about 3 thousand people)
The problem was they congregate in streets around residential areas making a nuisance of themselves . The locals have had enough ,people who have lived in these streets for many years .

That is the reason i think we may have a surprise when there is a vote , i think in a lot of British cities folk have had enough .

I agree with you. The fear factor alone will be enough to make people vote to stay in. The pro lobby, and that will include Cameron, will promote the dangers of leaving. I also believe that leaving wouldn't be that bad. However, we may have to accept freedom of movement even then as part of a trade agreement.

On another related issue, I see that Farewell is having fairly public rows with Farage. It is not impossible that he could return to the Conservative fold and I am sure the party have been speaking to him. It would leave UKIP in a fine mess.

I don't think the Conservatives would have him back, Haystack, and they certainly don't need him now they have a majority. If he quits UKIP, I'm pretty sure he'd be forced into becoming an independent.

It would be nice if he did come back. It would do serious damage to UKIP and get the Conservatives more votes next time and increase their majority now. He might choose to trigger a by election though with uncertain results. He wasn't popular in the Conservative party and was regarded as a trouble maker. I think he left the party as he could see there was no chance of promotion and the same applied to Reckless.

the return of prodigal sheep is often more than welcome
that they might be occasionally ornery, would be no bad thing either

churchill switched parties and returned

If he is ornery, I would think he will feel at home in the tory party.

If he is ornery, I would think he will feel at home in the tory party.

indeed, just as does dennis skinner :-)

SNP to escalate battle for Commons front bench amid fury at Labour's 'absolutely pathetic' behaviour

SNP ready to order MPs into Parliament for 7am and block Labour committee appointments if Dennis Skinner's side does not back down in seats row



Nicola and the wee beasties




By Ben Riley-Smith, Political Correspondent

5:30PM BST 03 Jun 2015



The SNP is threatening a major escalation in its battle over a Commons front bench after branding Labour's refusal to hand over the seats "absolutely pathetic".


It is understood the leadership is willing to order MPs to get into Parliament at 7am and block Labour appointments on Commons committees if the row is not resolved.


"If they want to play silly games, we'll play silly games", a senior figure told this newspaper after admitting to being "f***ing furious" with Labour's attitude.


It comes with half a dozen Labour backbenchers – led by veteran Labour MP Dennis Skinner – continuing to refuse to give up their front bench seats in the Commons to the SNP.


There is anger among the SNP that despite getting official third party status in Westminster Labour is refusing to fully vacate the second opposition front bench.



the other beast



more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11649598/SNP-to-escalate-battle-for-Commons-front-bench-amid-fury-at-Labours-absolutely-pathetic-behaviour.html

I see that Jeremy Corbyn is running for the Labour leadership. I hope he wins as he would be even more unelectable than Michael Foot, Neil Kinnock and Ed Milband.

Max,

Start counting the u-turns of this U-bend government from now.

At the end of its period in "office", I think it will make FIFA look like a charity!

Tony Blair has denied reports he refused to speak at a world hunger conference because the organizers refused to pay him a £330,000 fee.

The former prime minister’s office said there had been no negotiations over how much he would earn.

Blair’s strong denial comes after an anonymous source told the Mail talks broke down over the speaking engagement because the event’s sponsors refused to pay the fee.

A senior figure at Eat, the British food chain sponsoring the hunger conference, confirmed the deal had fallen through because the fee was too high.

The controversial former Labour leader allegedly demanded £330,000 as a donation to his wife Cherie’s charity when approached by the Kruger Crowne talent agency.

The conference paid former US President Bill Clinton £327,000 to speak last year, but intimated Blair was not worth a similar sum, according to the Mail.

“Blair is just not Clinton, and even his star power is fast diminishing,” a source told the Mail.

“So for his talent reps to think Eat was going to pay massive bucks for him shows they overestimated his worth. My impression of the asking price is it was way beyond what he was worth for Eat. Blair is also controversial. His background and history as prime minister is controversial because of the role he played in Iraq.

“Some people don’t like his past, so when the forum organizers took that and the asking price into account, they decided to make do without him,” the source added.

Eat’s executive producer, Odd Arvid Stromstad, confirmed the fee was too high for the company to pay.

Stromstad told the Mail: “We were in contact but the fee they wanted was quite high, so we didn’t want to go into it.”

Tony Blair’s office strongly denied the allegations.

A spokesperson said in a statement: “We have never had any contact with this talent agency and they were not acting on our behalf.

“They approached the Cherie Blair Foundation for Women out of the blue, representing Eat, and all of their contacts were with the Foundation.

“They asked if Mr Blair would give the keynote speech in exchange for a donation to the Foundation, but Mr Blair was unable to do so because prior commitments meant it would be logistically impossible. This is the reason why he can’t attend,” they added.

Blair has come under scrutiny in recent years for his multimillion pound property portfolio and lucrative consultancy fees.

Some of Blair’s controversial clients include the government of Kazakhstan, which stands accused of human rights abuses.

I really do love you mummy!




UGGGH!