Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

David Cameron and George Osborne 'too rich' to care about migration, claims cabinet minister Priti Patel


Employment minister Priti Patel Credit: Eddie Mulholland for The Telegraph



By Tim Ross, Senior Political Correspondent
29 May 2016 • 8:12am




David Cameron and other leading pro-Europeans do not care about the effects of mass migration on working families because they are so rich, according to a cabinet minister.

Priti Patel claims the “luxury” lifestyles of campaigners who want to stay in the EU mean they are “insulated” from the impact of rising immigration on the daily lives of millions of Britons.

She says it is “shameful” that the Remain campaign leaders fail to consider the struggles of families who, unlike them, cannot afford private health care or fee-paying schools.


Although she does not directly name Mr Cameron and George Osborne, she repeatedly makes clear she is aiming her criticism at the “leaders” of the Remain campaign, who include the Prime Minister and the Chancellor.

In remarks that will deepen the divide at the top of the Tory Party, Ms Patel claims many Remain campaigners only see the benefits of migration, such as cheap domestic help and willing tradesmen.


But the Conservatives will never be able to honour their election promise to cut migration because it is impossible to control the border while Britain is in the EU, she says.

In an article for The Telegraph website, Ms Patel, the employment minister, writes: “It’s shameful that those leading the pro-EU campaign fail to care for those who do not have their advantages.

"Their narrow self-interest fails to pay due regard to the interests of the wider public.”



More:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/28/david-cameron-and-george-osborne-too-rich-to-care-about-migratio/

Exactly that .

I think there is a large degree of tory hypocrisy being expressed by Priti Patel.

Trust you to find a negative Fred.


So, your position is that you agree with Cameroon, everythings fine in the garden?

I have always had weeds in my garden!

I just keep them down by pulling them out.

I bet Priti is one of the (at least) 50 Tories, who's envelopes containing
letters for their demand of 'Call me Dave's' resignation, due to land on
the Tory chairman's desk in the next day or so...

Yes Fred Priti Patel who's parents came to this country ,worked hard and had a successful daughter ,i thought she would be right up your street ,someone you would admire ,also saying how Cameron and Osbourne are too rich to care .

But no when it suites you you will turn ,proper hypocrite , and before you call me dumbo you are about the thickest person on here .

PS she's bang tidy as well.

There won't be 50 letters calling for a leadership contest. It is a story blown up by the press. This morning there were Conservative MPs who want him to go saying they would not be writing the letters. Even the ones who might (maybe 30) wouldn't do it until after the referendum.

Conservatives 'so fractured over EU that fresh election needed'


Andrew Bridgen says Tory divisions mean they will need to seek new mandate, as David Cameron faces calls to quit



Some of Cameron’s critics are openly saying the party needs a new leader. Photograph: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images


Andrew Sparrow Political correspondent


Sunday 29 May 2016 14.17 BST



http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/29/andrew-brigden-conservatives-david-cameron-fractured-eu-debate-election

What's wrong with Boris or Osborne?

Perhaps, even Cruella might step up to the plate?

She would really be a election winner.

What's wrong with Boris or Osborne?

Perhaps, even Cruella might step up to the plate?

She would really be a election winner.

Economists overwhelmingly reject Brexit in boos for Cameron

Poll shows 88% of 600 experts fear long-term fall in GDP if UK leaves single market, and 82% are alarmed over impact on household income

Nine out of 10 of the country’s top economists working across academia, the City, industry, small businesses and the public sector believe the British economy will be harmed by Brexit, according to the biggest survey of its kind ever conducted.

A poll commissioned for the Observer and carried out by Ipsos MORI, which drew responses from more than 600 economists, found 88% saying an exit from the EU and the single market would most likely damage Britain’s growth prospects over the next five years.

A striking 82% of the economists who responded thought there would probably be a negative impact on household incomes over the next five years in the event of a Leave vote, with 61% thinking unemployment would rise.

Those surveyed were members of the profession’s most respected representative bodies, the Royal Economic Society and the Society of Business Economists, and all who replied did so voluntarily.

Paul Johnson, director of the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the findings, from a survey unprecedented in its scale, showed an extraordinary level of unity. “For a profession known to agree about little, it is pretty remarkable to see this degree of consensus about anything,” Johnson said. “It no doubt reflects the level of agreement among many economists about the benefits of free trade and the costs of uncertainty for economic growth.”

The poll also found a majority of respondents – 57% – held the view that a vote for Brexit on 23 June would blow a hole in economic growth, cutting GDP by more than 3% over the next five years. Just 5% thought that there would probably be a positive impact.

The economists were also overwhelmingly pessimistic about the long-term economic impact of leaving the EU and the single market. Some 72% said that a vote to leave would most likely have a negative impact on growth for 10-20 years.

Just 4% of respondents who thought Brexit would mostly likely have a negative impact on GDP over the initial five years said it would have a positive effect over the longer term.

'AT LEAST' 50 Tories have sent letters to the chairman, and should land on
his desk on TUES.....

"Poll shows 88% of 600 'experts' fear long term fall in GDP"

I'll go with the 12% who are saying there won't be any 'long' term harm.

It was the same with the ERM and then the Euro....ALL these so called 'experts'
were saying exactly what they're spouting now if we leave...

THEY WERE WRONG THEN...THEY'RE WRONG NOW!!!!!......

My guess is that a handful of Tories have sent letters to the chairman of the 1922 committee. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Interestingly, the MP who is driving this fantasy is Andrew Bridgen. He was on Sky News this morning saying that he had not written a letter and would not until after the referendum.

If all the Economist were laid End to End, would they reach a Conclusion?.

freakonomics.com/2012/01/09/if-all-the-economist-were-laid-end-to-end-would-they-reach-a-conclusion/

Dumbo and Manuel.

Don't bother to read this.

It is too sensible.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/29/eu-fear-brexit-contagion

Opinion

Our European allies dread Brexit, and they have good reason to fear it

Andrew Rawnsley
The ambition of some anti-Europeans goes further than pushing Britain out. They hope to destroy the EU
Angela Merkel with David Cameron
Angela Merkel with David Cameron at a meeting in Japan last week. Photograph: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
Sunday 29 May 2016 05.30 BST

It is the morning after the nightmare before. Britain wakes up on 24 June to find that it has chosen to quit the European Union. Breathless reporters tell viewers of breakfast-time news that David Cameron is holed up at No 10 preparing a speech to parliament which is expected to include an announcement that he will be resigning as prime minister. Boris Johnson is already preparing his leadership bid. He has taken a call from Donald Trump offering congratulations and campaign tips. Nigel Farage, his ambition achieved and needing a fresh purpose in life, is in talks about merging Ukip with a Borisovian Tory party. Vladimir Putin enjoys a celebratory vodka at the Kremlin. In France, Marine Le Pen tells her enthused supporters that Britain has sounded the death rattle of the EU and Frexit will follow. In Berlin, a solemn Angela Merkel says...


The stories you need to read, in one handy email
Read more
How would the German chancellor and other EU leaders respond? It is an important question. Arguably, there’s no more crucial question in this referendum. Even the most ardent of the Outers have to acknowledge that a Brexiting Britain couldn’t just cast off from its continent and drift into the mid-Atlantic. Britain would still want and need a relationship with our closest neighbours. It has even occasionally been the contention of some Outers that we’d have a better relationship with the EU once we’d self-ejected. So how the rest of the EU would react to Brexit and the impact that Brexit would have on the EU are crucial issues. I suppose it is because they are so crucial that they have barely featured during the referendum campaign.

We will soon get some indication of how EU leaders would be likely to respond from the most influential actor among them. I hear that Angela Merkel is planning an intervention before Britain votes. The precise timing is not yet decided, and the content will require careful calibration to avoid the risk of being counterproductive for the In cause, but her previous statements on the subject allow us to have a jolly good guess about what she will be minded to say. The German chancellor believes that Brexit would be bad for Britain, for Germany and for Europe. She will express German hopes that Britain will choose to stay with the EU. She will stress that, of course, it is for Britain to decide, but she will also emphasise that we should not think that a vote to leave would be without consequences, some of which we might not like. The Outers will doubtless respond to her with their routine shriek of complaint: that excruciating howl they direct at anyone, whether it be the Institute for Fiscal Studies or the president of the United States, the head of the NHS or the governor of the Bank of England, anyone who dares to express an opinion about the risks of Brexit that the Outers don’t want to hear and don’t want the public to hear. David Cameron and the In campaign will hope that fair-minded voters may think it useful to hear from the leader of the EU’s most populous state whose attitude to Britain will matter whichever way the vote goes.

Planning for an intervention by the German chancellor is one sign that Brexit is regarded as a serious threat in European capitals. So is the fact that EU leaders, their diplomats and Brussels officials are working on contingency plans for a coordinated response to a British decision to leave. While the official reaction to Brexit would be expressions of regret coupled with bravura declarations that the show will stay on the road, there could be no disguising that it would be the most severe reverse to the EU in its history. For the first time, the organisation would have lost a member – a very big member. That would diminish both the EU’s sense of itself and its clout in the world.

A post-Britain EU would be likely to drift in a protectionist direction. It could become more closed and parochial
It would be a profound blow at any time and even more so when the EU is already severely stressed by the refugee crisis, the strains within the eurozone, the rise of anti-European nationalists of the hard right and Russian adventurism on its eastern border. It would also have lost a member which, though often a pain in the backside to other players in the EU, has brought a unique contribution to the mix. This is another element missing from the referendum campaign: an account of the positive and very British ways in which this country has influenced the development of the EU. Britain has been a force for extending the single market and striking free trade agreements with countries around the globe. Britain spearheaded the push for enlargement to the east that helped to bind the countries liberated from Soviet tyranny into democratic norms. Barack Obama put it rather brilliantly during his recent visit when he observed: “You should be proud that the EU has helped spread British values – democracy, the rule of law, open markets – across the continent and to its periphery. The European Union doesn’t moderate British influence – it magnifies it.”

Britain is one of only two EU states – the other being France – with a fully global perspective. Britain with France established an EU defence policy that has undertaken more than 30 peace-keeping and humanitarian missions on three continents. The EU without Britain would be a shrunken player in global affairs.

It is reasonable to forecast that a post-Britain EU would be more likely to drift in a protectionist direction. It would be likelier to become more closed and parochial. It would certainly be a weaker actor on the world stage and on its own continent, a prospect that would delight the Kremlin, not least because it would create distance between Europe and the United States. In the immediate aftermath of a British vote to leave, a lot of the EU’s leaders would be very cross and pretty determined to make the terms of Brexit punitive as a deterrent to anyone else flirting with the idea of departure. There would certainly be no willingness to allow Britain to enjoy all the benefits of access to the single market from the outside.

The Outers commonly respond that EU leaders would ultimately swallow their anger and cut a special sweetheart deal for Brexiting Britain because it would be in their self-interest to continue trading with one of the world’s largest economies. However jilted the Germans felt, they’d still want to sell us their cars. However infuriated the French might be, they’d still want us to buy their cheese. This is a regular trope of Nigel Farage. Obviously, there’s some truth in it. But it is eclipsed by a much larger truth about our economic relations with the EU. Britain would have a lot more to lose from the absence of a deal, and the party with the more to lose typically comes out worse from a negotiation. Around half of British exports go to buyers in the EU. Only about 10% of exports from the rest of the EU come to Britain. That would leave us with a pretty feeble hand in a Brexit negotiation. Only two countries, Germany and the Netherlands, regularly have substantial trade surpluses with the UK. So they are the only two with much incentive to do a deal. Any one of the 27, including those countries that run trade deficits with Britain, would have a veto. That is why all the detailed analysis of what Brexit would entail comes to the conclusion that divorce negotiations would be extremely difficult, very protracted, terrifically tortuous and not positive for the British economy.

That is a relatively benign way of imagining the future relations between a Brexiting Britain and the EU. It assumes that there is still a functioning EU to have a relationship with. There is a more apocalyptic scenario and it is taken seriously by some serious people. They fear that the departure of Britain would set in train such destructive consequences that it would be the beginning of the end for the EU. Some of the Brexiters actively will that result. Their ambition is not confined to amputating Britain from the EU. The ultimate goal is to destroy the EU itself. Michael Gove has predicted that Brexit would trigger “the democratic liberation of a whole continent”, an event which he happily calls “a contagion”. It is surely most probable that the continental forces most energised by Brexit would be Le Pen’s Front National and the likes of Alternative für Deutschland and the contagion they would spread would be extreme nativism. For all its many faults, since its inception in the wake of the Second World War, the EU has generally been a positive force for liberalism, prosperity, stability, rule of law and tolerance in a continent that devoted many previous centuries to internecine and murderous conflict. In the doomsday scenario that would go into calamitous reverse as Europe fragmented into competing nationalisms. Field Marshal Lord Bramall, our most senior soldier and no one’s notion of a Euro fanatic, has to be right when he says that it would be catastrophic for Britain to be faced with “a broken and demoralised Europe just across the Channel”. Nightmare wouldn’t begin to describe it.

The debate is coming down to Immigration vs the Economy. They are the only cards that each side has to play.

That guardian article is full of B***S**T...

But what do you expect from a Pro EU mouth piece...

I missed a letter out of one of the words in the address in post 2496.

freakonomics.com/2012/01/09/if-all-the-economist-were-laid-end-to-end-would-they-reach-a-conclusion/