Comments on: UKIP surge in the wake of expenses expose

By: Neil

Neil — Mon, 18 May 2009 09:52:52 +0000

Michael,

How would we not have as big a presence on the global market? It would be bigger, we would not be hindered by the EU’s anti-free market, inward looking, protectionist regulations. Furthermore, as I pointed out before, the EU would still trade with us, on any scale for a simple reason – they need to.

And by the way, your “You wish there was still a British Empire” comment just makes you look petty and ridiculous.

By: Anthony Wells

Anthony Wells — Mon, 18 May 2009 08:57:49 +0000

I’m not doing normal moderation in this thread, since it’s beyond saving, and is a safety valve for people incapable of following the comments policy elsewhere – but there are lines. No libellous comments please.

By: Promsan

Promsan — Sun, 17 May 2009 19:16:00 +0000

…and it’s worth noting that in all the various tables for PPP GDP per Capita, HDI, “Happiness”, and all those sorts of things, EFTA countries: Norway and Switzerland outperform all but Luxembourg in the EU.

It comes across as reactionary fearmongering to say “we’ll be isolated and our economy will go to the dogs”, ahem, really? what’s happening at the moment? and how is EU membership helping exactly?

…and the notion that wanting freedom from an organisation that can’t get it’s accounts signed off for over a decade is all about clinging onto empire seems groundless (an understatement)…
there are any number of alternative economic models the UK could pursue that would yield better growth and social stability than the current arrangement with the EU …it’s just geographical convenience: why not a global union of industrialised and free democracies?

By: Promsan

Promsan — Sun, 17 May 2009 16:50:58 +0000

“Nationalists, like yourself, cant seem to get in into your head that the UK is no longer the heart of a global empire, we cant just pull up our draw-bridge and say no to other countries.”

…could always join NAFTA!
We’d be far better of with the US Dollar than the Euro.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Sun, 17 May 2009 15:21:29 +0000

Billy, I do believe your comments about Churchill are incorrect., he categorically did not want a “United States of Europe”. Churchill wanted the European countries to form a partnership and co-operate with each other (a much looser arrangement than a United States of Europe) leaving Britain to remain outside of Europe and be part of “The Commonwealth of Nations”. This would be very sensible seeing as the Commonwealth presently represents 53 countries and 2 billion people and our Queen is its head. Britain would also be able to trade freely with these countries, unlike now where we have to pay a fee to the E.U. for the pleasure. Ask yourself why is Norway such a prosperous country? Well, firstly it greatly benefits from a very flourishing and well run fishing industry and it is outside of the E.U. and can trade with whoever it chooses. Just think how much taxed income our Treasurery would be receiving now if only we had a well run Fishing Industry instead of one that is on its knees because of all the E.U. regulation. As an example a Norwegian fisherman is able to catch 16,000 tons of fish (I don’t know what kind) per year, whereas a Cornish fisherman is only allowed 16,000 kilos per year; French fishermen enjoy 70% of the fish stocks around our waters (which now belong to the E.U.) leaving our poor fishermen with 7%. If Britain is to prosper once more we must withdraw our membership of the European Union for the reasons stated above.