Blog powered by Typepad

« It was D&N wot dunnit! | Main | So what would you do if you were in Dave's hand-made brogues? »

Saturday, 04 May 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I can't for the life of me see any reason to vote Conservative in the Euro elections. Other elections, possibly, but not the Euros. Why vote for a party that's split on the only issue that matters for the Euro election?

My hope is that UKIP will evolve into thr English Conservative Party. Committed to a new arrangement whereby we English are shot of the lot of them - Frogs, Scots, Irish and so on - oh yes - and no more American wars! Given my advanced years I'd like them to get on with it!

Sent from a nice clean German hotel in Heidelberg.

Exactly right, DM.

I think you are becoming a tad too crotchety in your, er, mature years, BOE. Whilst I enjoy taking the odd swing at the Jocks, the Taffs and the Paddies, in reality I think we are marginally better off with each other than separate. Pretty place Heidelberg, I trust you remembered your lederhosen!

Did you see the comments by David Davis to his party? Reasonably sensible advice, but more 'locking the stable door, after...' I suspect than they realise.

Another thing I found out, and liked, about UKIP was their lack of a party whip, so in effect you are getting someone who votes as an independent, relying completely on representing their local voters views (and their own of course), rather than the 'party first, me second, backers third and voters.. who gives a damn what they think' attitude of the 'big three'.

As for 'devolution' - I still wonder at times whether the Scots, in particular, will ever realise just how much they are being played? The campaigns waffle endlessly on about 'independence' but fail to mention the fact that those campaigning want nothing more than to sell that independence to the European state. Just more 'divide and conquer' to my mind.

Don't underestimate the feelings developing in England as a consequence either. Imagine listening to somebody 2 miles away across an imaginary border complaining about representation, costs and hardship when they have both more representation and receive subsidies (and preferential treatment) on every imaginable area of life - it's not received well here, let me tell you.

Yes, I saw Davis's remarks and, as usual, he was spot on. What a pity, and what an example of 'the Stupid Party' at work, it was when they chose Cameron over him.

I am not so convinced by the political methodology (if such it can be called) of UKIP. A party needs discipline but their chances of actually forming a government being nil to minus nil the idea is wishful thinking.

Any 'federation' has inbuilt tensions. I hate to say it but I think Labour was probably right to give a certain amount of independence to the Jocks and Cameron was right to allow them a referendum. Failure to do this would have lead to mounting and possibly dangerous pressures. Now the Jocks have what (some of them) wanted and it will concentrate their minds wonderfully. If they vote to leave then I will be genuinely sorry but - so be it!

We are going to have to endure two years of Scottish whinging.. This will seriously p**s off the English and many nasty things will be said. Better to say goodbye now.

As to UKIP having nil chance of being in government - I bet you said the same about Cleggies shower a few years ago!

Well, BOE, when did they ever sound other than like an out-of-tune bagpipe. I can say that sort of thing because, of course, I'm half a 'bagpipe' myself! As for UKIP, what I said was that their chances of *forming* a government were minimal although there is a slight possibility, I suppose, that one day they might be part of a coalition.

One aspect which forever seems overlooked by the independence movement is the substantial numbers of Scots resident in England. Do they have a say in any devolution? One Scots friend raised the legitimate question of, post any independence, would he have to apply for 'a right to remain' through the normal immigration channels?

All those children of unmarried parents would only get nationality from their mothers too (current policy). The mayhem would be hilarious, or would 'the English' be expected to take the same as happened with Ireland 'we're an independent sovereign nation, we hate you, but we're going to send all our drunks/drug addicts/work-shy and criminals to you to subsidise and house... oh and we want free health-care and education too).

The oft touted difficulties of withdrawing from Europe would be as nothing compared to separating Scotland - defence, oil, etc.

Wouldn't all that be fun to watch!

As the child, born in London, of an unmarried, Scottish mother, I wonder how I would fare? What a hoot if some tribunal decreed that I was a proper Jock and must henceforth get me hence!

Oh I'm sure, as a thespian, you'd be able to claim protection under The Hague Conventions (1954 probably).

If not, then certainly The Geneva - after all bagpipes are the epitome of 'cruel and unusual torture' are they not, not to mention wondering how your frail southern physique would cope with 'proper weather'.

Failing all that try claiming sanctuary with your ecclesiastical lawn-mower (do your best Richard III and show some appreciation of the local campanologists and you'll be a sure thing).

I'll hire you as my brief, Able!

The comments to this entry are closed.