Do you think the Tories will get a majority in 2015?

I forgot about the scarpping of CB for higher earners which was very unpopular on here. Doubt it would be changed back by any party now

WetAugust… so to summarise what you have said.

Ukip’s one and only policy is irrelevant to voters as they cannot deliver it.

You would only vote Ukip despite this, and care so little for UK domestic policies you would not vote for another party - even though after 20-years Ukip has no firm domestic policies via a manifesto, they currently stand for.

You believe a vote for an EU powerless Ukip in 2015 is NOT a vote for an incompetent Labour Party, even though figures (and the link I’ve just provided) show that Ukip stopped the Conservatives getting a slim majority in 2010 - and Ukip is polling at 20% of the vote currently.

You so strongly believe that we should be out of the EU, but would still NOT vote for the only ‘pro referendum’ Conservative Party, even if that policy was in their 2015 general election manifesto - choosing instead to vote for a powerless Ukip, likely to deprive the people of a say in Europe - in some ‘Bob Hope’ of Ukip one day winning a majority in Westminster, accepting huge damage could be done to our interests in the mean time by a pro EU socialist coalition of the Labour & Lib Dems.

Got it..but frankly all I see is a Ukip Party, with nothing to offer the electorate but a ‘protest vote’ the Monster Raving Looney Party (whatever) could also offer them, disingenuously just looking for power within Westminster..

vickibee...there would not be a policy to try occupy nearly 1 million empty council bedrooms if Labour didn't leave nearly 2 million looking for social homes before they left power, hardly helped by the net arrival of 2.5 million new citizens.

Furthermore Labour introduced tuition fees and was likely to raise them again once a report they asked for on how to fund a globally unprecedented 50% of our children go on to Uni - conveniently reported after the 2010 election.

P.S. Labour screwed private pensions, private company final salary schemes and the State Pensioners, one year giving them a 72p rise while raising Council tax every year - it was due, look and you will find the truth.

If all the people affected by unpopular policies turned out to vote they would be voted out. Eg students over tuition fee debacle, people affected by bedroom tax etc. The tories would probably lose

The people who tend to vote in the highest numbers are wealthy middle aged or mature people who are not that badly affected. Pensioners have been mostly protected.

Isitmebut:

"the trade unions here salivated over the prospects militant European super-unions".

In fact, it has always been the more traditional members of the Tory party and the more traditional members of the Labour party, including the trade unions, who have tried to hold on to Britain's sovereignty.

This was true in the seventies and it is still the case to-day. That's why UKIP have been so successful at forming a broad based party.

Itismebut.

The right to free movement of citizens within the EU was introduced under John Major's government when the Tories signed the Maastricht Treaty, not the Treaty of Amsterdam as you have stated.

And, what a coincidence, it was this treaty, and the lack of a referendum on it, that gave birth to UKIP.

Agirlwithwings….Frankly I’m not quite sure the relevance of your points to the situation we find ourselves in today, but I find it refreshing (but somewhat bizarre) that someone blames the Heath government of over 40-years ago, rather than Thatcher for all Labour’s mistakes.

However IMO this accusation is just as baseless, as although it was a Conservative government that first applied to join a 6-member EEC in 1961 (with 3 other countries), we were vetoed by France and it was the Labour Wilson government of 1967 that RE APPLIED to join – but as Wilson surprising lost the 1970 general election, it was the Heath government that finished the job Wilson started again, in the early 1970’s.

As for the “free movement of citizens’ within the EU, I think you will find that came to be in The Treaty of Amsterdam, signed in October 1997, by a Labour government I believe, around the same time they signed The Social Chapter the Conservatives wouldn’t – back in the days when the trade unions here salivated over the prospects militant European super-unions – which may explain Labour’s current ‘no’ to a referendum as their paymasters want to stay in.

So if your point is a Conservative government is to blame for high levels of immigration to this country it falls rather flat ESPECIALLY when looking at the inflow chart below, now out of date showing too low figures from 2001 to 2011 – but note the AVERAGE figures from 1991 to 1999, that also included ‘open door Labour’s’ first 18-months in power.

migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-and-uk
“Please note that the LTIM estimates used in this briefing are being revised by the ONS. In their 'Quality of Long-Term International Migration estimates from 2001 to 2011' report published on 10th April 2014, the ONS has revised the total net migration estimates for 2001-2011; this suggests that the total net-migration between 2001 and 2011 was underestimated by 346,000 net-migrants.”

New migration therefore is changed over a decade from just under 2.2 million to over 2.5 million.

Table 1..Inflows (thousands)…...EU……….Commonwealth………Other…...
Average 1991 – 1999………..…...60,000………….87,000……………...86,000
Average 2000 – 2003……….……..62,000………..101,000……….....120,000
2004……………………………….........130,000……….215,000……………155,000
2005……………………………….........152,000……….180,000……….....137,000
2006……………………………….........170,000……….201,000……….....143,000
2007…………………..............……..195,000……….74,000……………..131,000

And here is the RECENT report that ADDS to the above EU figures.
“Immigration from eastern Europe was massively underestimated, says official report”

"Office for National Statistics admits it missed an estimated 350,000 in net migration over a decade because of flaws in a key survey"
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10757336/Immigration-from-eastern-Europe-was-massively-underestimated-says-official-report.html

“The number of eastern European migrants who came to Britain in the last decade was hundreds of thousands higher than previously thought, the Office for National Statistics has admitted.

In a disclosure that will fuel intense national concern about immigration, the agency said it had failed to count an estimated 350,000 migrants who arrived in this country between 2001 and 2011.”

But the big question remains, WHY DID NON EU IMMIGRATION RISE, at a time when we opened our borders of up to 500 million new EU citizens????

Ismebut
The fact that UKIP could not offer a referendum until it had. Parliamentary majority should not be a surprise to you. It'S stating the bleeding obvious for anyone who has even a fleeting interest in politics.

Same for the Tories as they too can,t offer a referendum without a majority.

I don't believe we will ever leave the eu. but that does not stop same hoping we will one day.

Nothing - nothing at all would persuade me to ever vote Tory again and I could never bring myself toe vote for Lab or LibDem.

When we had the R referendum Party. It's composition was mainly exTories. UKIP,s demographic appears to be as many Lab as Tories, which surprised me. Stop believing the Tories when they keep saying a bite for UKIP will let labour in. Lab will lose a lot of votes yo UKIP too? I have been to UKIP meetings. I hear what those present have to say about their former political allegiances and who they intend to vote for next time. it is not as the so-called political pundits are gelling us.

the T oriels have a choice anyway - give us something's that we want to a vote for and people will vote for them.

The fact is they can't

Itismebut: Free movement of workers was part of the EEC from 1957, i.e. from the beginning. The Tories took Britain into Europe in 1973.

No one can say for certain why the Tories decided not to give British people the choice of whether to join the EEC or not but at the time public opinion was firmly against joining.

WetAugust…re your “not buying this recovery stuff” the IMF, the OECD, falling unemployment and other indicators show, it is happening, but not feeding through to most people yet as explained in this link. It would be worse when Labour gets back in (thanks to Ukip), as they have a record of surprise post election tax rises, similar to the ones promised before 2010, but they never gave details on.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2044969--Cost-of-Living-a-cunning-plan

As for why home prices are rising due to supply/demand, that is explained within the link below, but likely to run out of steam as the rush to purchase and fix mortgage rates before interest rates rise tails off and new tighter lending regulations coming in within weeks, feeds through into the housing market price structure.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/1977704-UK-Interest-Mortgage-Rates-WHO-S-in-control?pg=2

As for your point that Cameron NOT winning a majority in 2015 is key to offering ‘the people’ a referendum on the EU; well that is an uphill battle he is likely to lose as the Conservatives need a several point LEAD in the polls to obtain a small majority in parliament, when currently several percent BEHIND Labour.

All the while the one-policy Ukip’s power lust for 20 odd seats in Westminster ensures ‘the people’ in 2015 won’t get an EU referendum - as they ensured by around 26,000 votes across 20 odd key marginals in 2010, that the Conservatives didn’t have a majority in parliament to handle the EU/immigration issues (without the resulting Lib Dem objections) differently.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/7693877/General-Election-2010-Ukip-challenge-cost-Tories-a-Commons-majority.html

The United Kingdom Independence Party (Ukip) is standing in the way of a UK referendum, campaigning on a promise to leave the UK without a referendum they legally cannot keep.

So no more Ukip lectures/mantras please on Ukip’s urgent wish to leave the EU when we’d have to wait for a Ukip majority in the Westminster parliament, which could take another decade or more, if ever at all.

duh - meant to write 'have never seen'

Yes, I appreciate there's a lot of house renovation going on as I've recently renovated my own. But you could argue that those who are renovating may have been those who would have moved onwards and upwards house-wise, in better times.

Walking through the shopping centre of a large SW city and tourist trap, i was amazed at how many empty shops there were. Also, a number of really downmarket 'pop-up' shops, which I've seen seen in this prosperous city before.

I too am in 'middle England' but I think everyone is on tenterhooks just waiting for interest rates to finally start rising and worried about the effect that will have on them. Prices are also rising - my gas, electric, council tax, water rates have all increased substantially this year. Wages around here at pretty static. I cannot believe that people have more spending power now than they did last year.

WetAugust it is a reality in lots of areas. Where we are, no-one did much to their houses for several years through the recession - we are in an area of high prices.
The housing market is moving again, although not going mad - but people are spending money again.

Restaurants are busy, there are tradespeople in our road nearly every day - people are putting in new bathrooms/kitchens and other smaller jobs. For an awful lot of people the recovery is a reality that they see in their bank balance.

Obviously there are a huge number of people who are struggling, and I'm not dismissing that, but a lot of people do feel better off. We are not in a swanky area, people have 'normal' jobs - middle england. The Tories are very popular here.

I'm not buying all this 'recovery' stuff. OK, inflation may be down but it's only an indication of price fluctuations in those things that are part of the selected bundle of goods and services.

What about house prices and the 9% annual rise? How can wages keep up with that? They can't.

So people don't actualy feel 'better off' as the beeb keeps trying to ram down our throats on every news bulletin today just because their wage increases (if any) are just matching the inflation rate becaue people need housing. Some actually aspire to owning a home - an impossible dream when house prices are rising so quickly.

Vivienne a decent leader and some sensible policies? That would pretty much involve starting from scratch then, wouldn't it?

Osborne has done em up like a kipper. The economy's recovering, unemployment is down, and he may even have some more tax cuts up his sleeve.

Labour's strategy is in tatters, they're falling apart, what they call their "strategists" are at each other's throats like rats in a sack.

They're all at sea, and Ed Brawls is positively sea sick, I've never seen a politician want to see questioning end so quick. He looks like he hasn't slept all night and has been hitting the bottle to make things right. His hands are a-shaking, his knees are a-quaking, it's as if he is the entire barrel scraping. He is being tossed from side to side like a ship in a force nine gale, he's up sh*t's creek without a sail. I swear when he was questioned, he almost uttered a wail. He makes futile flat-lining signs with his hands, but he knows he's ip to his neck in quicksand. At PMQs, he sits like a wreck, arms clasped in prayer. He sees Osborne opposite - cool, calm and collected - and moans that life's not fair, his every waking moment is an absolute mare.

Why on earth does Labour not see disaster coming and replace Ed Miliband. All Labour needs is a decent leader and some sensible policies and they would win

Yes, that's all, and if only pigs could fly.

Have you seen the alternatives to Ed?

Off the top of my head, these characters spring to mind. I can't vouch for the spellings of their names, as I haven't got time to google all the spellings. But here goes...

You've got Ed Brawls and his wife, Yvette Cropper, Harriet Harm and her husband, Jack Ropey, Twistem Hunt, Handy Burnem, Dim Murphy, Pillory Benn, Vernon Croaker and in charge of policy, there's someone called Cruddas.

And you ask Why on earth does Labour not see disaster coming and replace Ed Miliband ?

They have looked at their front bench and they have stared disaster in the face. Don't you want them to have a fighting chance to win the election? Compared to that lot, Ed Miliband is Houdini, and they need all the help, magic and trickery they can get.

There's no one to replace Milliband that would be any more electable. His brother has pissed off to the US, not that I thought he was any good anyway.

Ed Balls - no thank you. A financial disaster

Mrs Balls - a humourless disaster

Liam Bryne - the man that joked about bankrupting the UK?

The Eagles - unelectable, both of them

Who?

Why on earth does Labour not see disaster coming and replace Ed Miliband. All Labour needs is a decent leader and some sensible policies and they would win. But that is not looking very likely at the moment.

Right now, right here I bloody hope the Tories get in singularly.

But

I bloody hope the Labour Party sorts itself out, gets decent policies and a leader. (Hey try the brother you fecking fools) and wins after.

And then let history repeat.....

If you want to talk about conditionality is erupt, I think you'll find that there are many actual conditions that must be met before Cameroon could offer that eu refereendum:firstly there is the small issue that the Tories would need to form the post election government in 2015, which is by no means certain. Then the Tories would have to get the big eu players, such as Germany, to agree the improvements the Tories wish to see -again, not something that will be easy to achieve, as merely has already pointed out. Only following negotiations would the question (and we don't even know what the question itself would be) could be put before the electorate in a referendum. The proposed changes if they are to be radical enough to satisfy the uk electorate would almost certainly require treaty change, which would take possibly years to achieve as each member state had yo individually ratify the treaty changes.

So 2017 looks rather ambitious, very uncertain and more the a little naive. You are right that UKIP will not gain any Westminster mp's, but it's popularity sill rattle those Tory mp's with very slim majorities, many of whom are also anti-eu and who may just grow some and start changing Tory policies with regard to the eu.

As for the EEC and what it did or did not permit in the way of residency rights - who actually cares. That's history. Heath knew what he was doing would lead to the EU when he got the uk admitted. Get just lied to the electorate. We'll the electorate are starting to realise that they are paying through the nose for an irritating useless organisation that us preventing the uk from fulfilling its global trading potential and is saying "enough"'

Firstly prove to me that there was ‘free movement’ of labour within the original EEC framework, as I remember working with many Europeans back then who needed permits to work.

Next our EU membership issue has been divided the Conservatives for years, in fact many voters in 1997 cited a Tory EU split and bickering party as a major reason for voting for Blair. I mean, it was hardly for economic reasons; it had grown from the recession for 27ish straight quarters, we were paying off our debts and heading for a balanced budget by 2001..

Generally speaking it was always going to be an open sore for the next Tory government/P.M., especially for a pro original (EEC) EU party that had seen the EU morphed out of all recognition since 1997.

With that backdrop, of course Ukip stirred all things EU up on behalf of the country, but who could not say that the 2007/8 financial crisis that showed this EU ‘one size fits all’ was a cumbersome, ineffectual project that fell down on the first major crisis, wouldn’t have done that anyway?

If it makes you happy, I’d acknowledge that Ukip (and the Tory Euro-sceptics) has brought the matter to a head at this moment, but with the EU saying after the financial crash they need to move closer/standardise more things i.e. financial services, accounting and other important stuff, then it should have happened anyway.

So are you saying that we should vote Ukip in both the EU and General Election as thanks for past services, rather than the Conservatives for the CHOICE of leaving an ever further integrating EU - which is against everything Farage has stood for within a party that sez ‘Independence’ on it’s can?

Ah, I see. In fact, the 'common market' always included 'free movement of labour' and Britain is not part of a single currency. The Tory party want to 'offer' a referendum now because of UKIP's popularity. Doesn't that show the power of UKIP.

Agirlwithwings….back then it was called the E.E.C and it was about a ‘common market’, not a great big honking one currency, one central bank, federal superstate but thanks to the (split) Labour Party there was a referendum.
“1975: UK embraces Europe in referendum”
news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/6/newsid_2499000/2499297.stm

As a matter of supreme trust, one could ask why did Labour wanted a referendum back then on a loose trading agreement, yet now insists they don’t trust the people in agreeing with them, that our future lies being assimilated into a European superstate?

This country needs an open and informative pros/cons that comes before a referendum, and if properly presented to the people, they should be trusted to vote on the evidence - why do the parliamentary Labour Party no longer trust 'the people' they say they represent?

Isitmebut. The Tories took us into Europe without a referendum. Why should we trust them now.