Oxford University denies that UKIP candidate Natasha Bolter ever attended Oxford

[claig]

"Natasha Bolter: Oxford University deny sex scandal Ukip candidate ever attended"

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11285916/Natasha-Bolter-Oxford-University-deny-sex-scandal-Ukip-candidate-ever-attended.html

Roger Bird, who is a PPE, introduced Natasha Bolter as having defected from Labour and being a PPE too.

I saw her interviewed on BBC Newsnight last night, and I did begin to wonder about Oxford and PPEs. I'm not a big fan of PPEs at the best of times, but Gordon Bennett, I thought to myself.

What's going on?

I highly recommend one of this.

This two for one thing really bothers you, doesn't it? Would that be a local decision or a national one? Because if one Tesco could do 2for1 and the next one along couldn't- that could be a bit complicated.....

'So whilst complaining about the money wasted by local councils'

We will vote to stop them wasting our money and spending it on what we consider important. I don't know the details of how it should be done, we are paying them to sort that out.

Jesus fucking Christ.

I hope UKIP do have a manifesto, because you might learn something from it.

'This two for one thing really bothers you, doesn't it? Would that be a local decision or a national one?'

It's national. It's Cameron. Yes it cheeses me off. Sort out the economy and provide jobs and stop trying to tell us what to do in a nanny state and restricting our free choice. Cameron is supposed to be a conservative.

Have you any idea how complicated
and expensive weekly referendums would be?

No, how expensive are they?

I don't know. It's not me wants to introduce them!

The AV referendum in 2011 cost £75m.

Not something you'd want to pay for every week.

I think we'll start with the cost of vote counters (because elections are generally counted by volunteers in the uk)...

Just read the Mail bin article - are you having a fucking laugh?

That says that if we organised recycling centrally and ran our bin purchasing nationally we could save money - no shit?!

Next you'll be telling me that the internal market in the NHS is a huge waste of money fullfact.org/health/market_national_health_service_costs_commissioning-30961

and... I could go on to the three million other things that have been expensively privatised, fragmented and put out to tender in the name of choice under various right-wing administrations, but suffice it to say, UKIP is not the answer to any of this.

If you wish to argue that central organisation and provision of local services is often the cheapest and most efficient way to do things, I will be right behind you, but our current smorgasbord of right-wing parties (I'm including Labour) aren't proposing this.

The current political dialogue is all about 'choice'. Which costs money. Which we don't have, or are unwilling to spend. So our services are shit. And we are told the answer to this is more 'choice'. Rinse and repeat, until our services are so crap that everyone has to go private anyway.

But yeah, political correctness,that's the biggest problem facing the UK. That's where our focus should be.

"The AV referendum in 2011 cost £75m."

Just over a pound per person for something vital for our democracy in order to stop being misruled. It is cheap at the price.

That's 75million PLUS the cost of paid staff...

"If you wish to argue that central organisation and provision of local services is often the cheapest and most efficient way to do things, I will be right behind you, but our current smorgasbord of right-wing parties (I'm including Labour) aren't proposing this."

I am arguing that, which is why I am against devolution and election of mayors and police commissioners etc. Cut out the cost of all that and have centralised control but have weekly referenda so that we the peope decide what the central control will do. UKIP was against privatisation of the Royal Mail and I agree with that policy.

Put it to the people whether services should be privatised or not, put power in the hands of the people, take it our of the hands of the lobbyists and the puppets.

'political correctness' is a huge problem because it restricts opposition and challenge and maintains the cosy consenus

"That's 75million PLUS the cost of paid staff..."

That's alright, it provides employment. Cut the subsidised alcohol in the House of Commons bar to pay for it, and foreign aid on the Ethiopian Spice Girls and taxpayer subsidies to aristocrats to erect landfarms on their estates to pay for it.

Democracy comes above all else, because the decisions should be made by the people.

Maybe the vote would be to switch off your street lights...

...something tells me you'd still complain it wasn't fair because you disagreed with it as it was a 'cosy consensus'.

To put it bluntly all this whining about political correctness and the like is merely you stamping your feet for not getting your way.

I quite like foreign aid thanks. For democratic reasons you understand.

'Maybe the vote would be to switch off your street lights... '

I very much doubt it , but if it was then that is fine because it is the will of the people.

'I quite like foreign aid thanks.'
Then put it to the people and see if they agree. The People's Army disgaree, let's see if that is the majority view or whether they disagree with Cameron and the merry band of modernisers.

But I thought you like democracy. Yet you disagree with foreign aid.

Hmm.

Maybe some concepts just blow your mind.

So-how would you decide what went to a referendum? What turnout would be conclusive? Would it be a straight majority? Would voting be compulsory?

"Maybe the vote would be to switch off your street lights... "

Yes, surely the fact that all your threads end up with a couple of dozen people going, "Er... what?" while one person agrees with you, should give you an inkling of how your referenda might go.

As someone who rarely leaves the house after the DC are asleep, and doesn't enjoy paying unnecessary council tax, I'd be all for turning the street lights off. I suspect my non-hard-partying pensioner neighbours would agree.

'But I thought you like democracy. Yet you disagree with foreign aid. '

What has foreign aid got to do with democracy? I don't remember the modernisers asking us whether it should be ring-fenced or not?

"So-how would you decide what went to a referendum? What turnout would be conclusive? Would it be a straight majority? Would voting be compulsory?"

I don't know the details. But nothing should be compulsory in a free country. I am not a progressive.

Also (and I realise this may be dangerous) have you met change.org? Whatever is currently pissing you off, you can either sign a petition or start one on there. And it's currently being listened to, because everyone is all about social media at the minute.

BoulevardOfBrokenSleep, you're kidding yourself, the Conservatives are going to be kicked out of councils all over Essex simply because they decided to turn our streetlights off. That is the reality.

If you went by Mumsnet, then you would think that the People's Army would never win the biggest landslide in postwar British parliamentary history and that no one reads the Daily Mail.

"have you met change.org"

What is the point of change.org they can't change anything. The People's Army is putting the heebie jeebies up the elite, the People's Army will change things and I agree with most of what they say. They will change things.