Farage no-show

[David Johnson]

[img]http://www.sub-scribe.co.uk/uploads/2/1 ... 382502.jpg[/img]

[David Johnson]

[img]http://davewhyteanimation.com/images/th ... Farage.jpg[/img]

[spider]

Now that is gay.

[Sam Slater]

But no word on Farage's gaffe about immigrants causing traffic jams?

The fact that you're deflecting attention on to other things means even you can't defend what he said.

[max_tranmere]

I find the whole UKIP thing rather odd, at worst the fact they've got 2 seats and might win another 2 or 3 is a shot across the bows for the government, but it's hardly a threat. I may have said this in another debate on here previously, I cant remember, but for them to get the nation into a position where we will leave Europe they'd have to have over half of the parliamentary seats. That's a minimum of 326 of the 650 seats that there are. What is the likelihood of that? None. They might get 5 at the most.

Voting for them is like when people vote for independent candidates, like someone who is standing on an 'elect me and I'll prevent the local hospital from shutting down' ticket. This happened a few years ago somewhere in the Midlands I think it was. The man won, but the government shut the hospital anyway. These fringe people are idealists, and while their intentions might be good it doesn't really influence decision making in Whitehall.

[spider]

Another day, another UKIP cock-up.............

[Essex Lad]

Ukip don't need to get a majority ? not that they will anyway ? all they need to do is force the debate on leaving the EU.

Cameron is talking nonsense when he says he will renegotiate our membership. He can't. The EU is a ratchet not a pendulum.

The pro-EU campaigners will fight with their usual dirty tricks if the referendum is ever held ? which it won't be.

[David Johnson]

On the subject of UKIP driving the agenda on the EU, Cameron's pledge of a referendum in 2017 doesn't make sense.

In his much heralded immigration speech a couple of weeks ago, he admitted that some of his measures would require treaty changes.

Now the whole purpose of the referendum was to vote on the package of measures that Cameron had managed to negotiate from the EU. Given the proposals we have heard so far require treaty changes I can see no way they will be finalised by 2017 which makes the referendum in that year a nonsense.

[Essex Lad]

Which is why I said it will never happen.

[David Johnson]

Being a "nonsense" and therefore "something never happening" is not a given.

This government has done many things that are nonsense - top down reorganisation of NHS, bedroom tax, talking about putting limits on the free movement of EU citizens etc.

What Cameron could do would be to see the direction of travel re. his suggested treaty changes e.g. some EU countries announcing they will flatly refuse to agree, in which case he can still have a referendum knowing that outcome of his proposed "re-negotiation".