Coffee House

David Cameron aims at Ukip and attacks Labour with immigration clamp-down

29 July 2014

8:46 AM

29 July 2014

8:46 AM

The government has unveiled a set of measures to curb immigration. David Cameron has written an article in the Telegraph about what the government has already achieved and what it plans to do now. He has three themes.

1). To tackle illegal immigration. Cameron says that the government has shut more than 750 of ‘bogus’ colleges. He wants to go further: colleges will lose their licenses if 10 per cent of their pupils are refused visas. Cameron also repeats some of the provisions of the Immigration Act 2014. From November, for example, a system will be imposed to ensure that landlords have to account for the immigration status of their tenants. And deportation will be made easier by emphasising the qualifications in Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the right to family life, and by instituting a ‘deport first, appeal later’ policy whereby illegal immigrants and foreign criminals to whom there is ‘no risk of serious harm’ are deported and then appeal the decision from their homeland.

2). To ensure that the ‘right people come here for the right reasons’. Cameron takes the opportunity to display his ‘pro-immigration’ credentials. He reminds voters that the government has introduced special visas for graduate entrepreneurs and other ‘exceptionally talented’ people. He also says that the cap on non-EU migration has not hit growth because it has been under subscribed each year.

3). To tighten welfare entitlements for EU migrants. Cameron reminds voters that last year the government raised the threshold for EU migrants’ access to JSA and child benefit from 0 months to 3 months. Now he intends to reduce the amount of time that those migrants can claim those benefits from 6 to 3 months. Cameron also wants to limit the EURES scheme, which advertises more than 1 million jobs in the UK across the entire EU. He wants to reduce that number by 500,000. He also reminds voters that the government has banned overseas-only job advertisement.

[Alt-Text]


Cameron signs off by defending the government’s welfare and education reforms by arguing that they are essential to tackling immigration by reducing demand for foreign workers.

It is telling that David Cameron has taken ownership of this article and these policies, rather than the usually irrepressible Home Secretary Theresa May. The manoeuvre bears the mark of Lynton Crosby, who plans to make immigration central to an election campaign dominated by Cameron’s personality. The principal target is Ukip; specifically, those Ukip sympathisers who might return to Tory colours. The message to immigrants is, therefore, suitably robust: ‘you cannot expect to come to Britain and get something for nothing.’ Cameron goes on to say: you can’t trust ‘soft touch’ Labour on immigration. The signalling is not subtle.

There is, however, some doubt about whether these measures will be effective. The European Commission recently concluded that economically non-active EU mobile citizens account for a very small share of beneficiaries. In other words, curbing access to benefits will not solve the problem. The Commission’s findings are, of course, disputed; but, nevertheless, doubt remains. What is not in doubt is that the government is miles away from achieving its goal of reducing net migration ‘to the tens of thousands’ – a line that Labour is pushing this morning, having been caught on the hop by the Conservatives’ announcements (Andy Burnham was just ambushed on the Today programme after speaking about the NHS). Politically, Cameron remains a hostage to those words.


One other thing to note is that the government is hemmed in by Jean-Claude Juncker, who has made it clear that there will be no restrictions on freedom of movement. Juncker did, however, say that it is for member states to shape their welfare policies as they see fit. Will Cameron go further than he has today?

UPDATE: Sir Andrew Green of Migration Watch has just told the Today programme that a system of work permits needs to be introduced for non-skilled EU migrants, especially from eastern Europe. This will reduce the net flow of low skilled EU migrants. I expect that such a move would be unacceptable to the EU because it would restrict freedom of movement.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Sapporo

    The EU has, within hours, undermined Dave’s big announcement.

  • sarahsmith232

    ‘He also says that the cap on non-EU migration has not hit growth because it has been under subscribed each year.’
    So next rubbish. –
    What is the reason why the cap is undersubscribed? ‘Cause they’re all coming in via the other open-door visa routes. The cap only applies to work visa’s, not non-EU immigration overall.
    This person is really outrageous, he really does think people are absolutely stupid.

  • sarahsmith232

    Where to begin? Well, first off. –
    ‘the provisions of the Immigration Act 2014. From November, for example, a system will be imposed to ensure that landlords have to account for the immigration status of their tenants’
    I’ve looked at their Act, the landlords will NOT have to account for the status of their tenants, that is a bogus statement by Cameron. They give the landlord every kind of get out clause going. All the landlord has to do is say that they were using an agent and that they were responsible. What level of responsibility the agent then can be held accountable for is also spelt out in the Act. Guess what? Also, all they have to do is blame the landlord. If they say ‘the landlord said that he’d look into it, really, honestly, that’s what he said’ then the agent is absolved of all responsibility. So long as the pair of them blame each other then neither is then held to account. Oh, I just wonder how long it will take landlords to work that one out.
    Vote Ukip, vote Ukip, vote Ukip, he is a lying, scheming, underhand disgrace.
    Well, that’s just for starters.

  • foxoles

    ‘We are building an immigration system that puts Britain first’ says David Cameron.

    So why trash the immigration system we already had, which did just that?

  • Fraser Bailey

    Well, the steps on colleges are to be welcomed, assuming they are applied. What a racket that particular racket is.

    • HookesLaw

      They have been applied.

  • HookesLaw

    ‘‘economically non-active EU mobile citizens account for a very small share of beneficiaries’’ – and so the issue of benefit tourism is bogus.

  • fundamentallyflawed

    He highlights illegal immigration because he is aware that a great many people cannot differ between illegal and legal immigration.

    He highlights “right people” but has no real plans for removing the “wrong” people once they have committed crimes. This Government could not even deport a terrorist on its own without US intervention.
    He proposes tightening certain benefits for Eastern Europeans but many peoples concerns are less for people who have contributed to the system in some way and more the extended families of immigrants who come across and breed and gain full and free access to healthcare that people who work have to pay for – Prescriptions, Dentistry etc etc

    Hot air from the Tory leadership which Nigel Farage should be able to blow straight through in any debate

  • berosos_bubos

    When will he put border police into NHS hospitals?

  • R Fairless

    Cameron does not know with certainty whether or not the EU will allow his new found measures. Never-the-less he goes ahead with his propaganda in the hope and expectation that people will be deceived into thinking he is doing something. Its a PR ploy to divert attention from UKIP but it will not work. He tried the same deceit with regard to Juncker whom he supposedly opposed knowing full well he had neither the power nor influence to affect his appointment. It was the photo opportunity that mattered. But we have sussed him out; he is a good clone of Blair whom we have discovered too late what he is made of. We cannot undo the damaged he caused but we can be aware of his successor.

  • ADW

    It has always been the case that to prevent people coming here, and to remove those illegally here already, would require measures no liberal government would ever contemplate.

    Instead, they shove it under the carpet. Which is why, when a prominent supermarket exec pointed out a few years ago that the amount of food being sold in this country indicated the population was already above 70 million (even allowing for how obese and wasteful the British are) he was ignored by the lamestream media and the political class.

    • HookesLaw

      Only 70 – the figure I saw was 80 billion and that was meant to be in 2008. Try plucking another figure out of the air.
      Come out and produce the direct quote from which ever supermarket it was. In fact all that you prove is just how much food we waste
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24846612

      Research shows that Australia wastes $8 billions worth of food every year.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Research also shows that Call Me Dave’s head is going to be mounted on a spike, 9.25 months from now.

  • slyblade

    More lies and spin from Cameron, this is another ploy to win back UKIP voters

    Well let me state this right now THIS LAD IS NOT FOR TURNING.

    We all know that Brussels will challenge and defeat this, but by then Cameron thinks he will be safely ensconced back in No10. He must think we are utterly gullible and do not see straight through this weak pathetic attempt at being Euro sceptic

    As a second comment when UKIP had proposed such things Cameron and his Cohorts were the first to brand us Racist, what utter hypocrisy.

    What a shallow little narcissist he really is.

    • Alexsandr

      if he was serious he would have done it in 2010. the fact he didnt speaks loudly he is just being a opportunist.

    • HookesLaw

      You are the shallow one. There was a committment to cut immigration by the tories in their manifesto – this is a continuation of it. It was Farage who said he would not like a foreigner living next door. He condemns himself out of is his own mouth.

      The real crime in Britain is why so many are not interested in the jobs that are available.

  • Sapporo

    There is NO clampdown on immigration. On EU migration, he can do nothing. All we have above is a series of lies, manipulations and hopes. Look at the text, above: “wants to”, “intends to”, “emphasise”.

    • Aberrant_Apostrophe

      Even if those ‘aspirations’ were cast in concrete in the Tory Manifesto they wouldn’t be binding. The High Court said so.

  • Stephen

    There is a lot of concern expressed here about British jobs being taken by foreigners who migrate here and then take British jobs formerly filled by British workers. Is there any concern about British jobs being taken because the job migrates abroad and foreigners stay at home and take British jobs formerly filled by British workers?

  • Roy

    A few savory words, a few minor touches to the unrecognized unheeded regulatory system. Nothing to suggest any change to the ones moving off-shore to fight for the terrorist, leaving the family on welfare to keep the kettle boiling. Or a system of getting rid of the obvious rabble rouses stirring up trouble in the home made ghettos. The ones setting up their own rule of law, education, and policing. Nothing will have changed that has turned the UK into a den of iniquity. He would rather place the care and management of this country in the hands of the Bureaucrats of Brussels. Once the country is ‘in’, once and for all; he can wash his hands of any responsibility. The Europeans can then laugh their socks off with the spoils of the once Great Britain in their hands. A crowded island full of consumers ready made for their products with no fear of any rising industrial competition for their highly engineered exporting supremacy.

  • Bob339

    Dear Cameron,
    As usual you have tried another spin scheme. It will not fly. It belongs up there with your ‘hug-a-hoodie’ garbage. Resign now and help Britain.

  • Bob339

    I worked over twenty years in other countries. I was not allowed into any of them unless:
    a] I had a job to go to and b] I passed a medical. Why can we not implement this simple policy?

    • mohdanga

      Too easy, might be ‘racist’, others might think the UK ‘xenonphobic’, ‘another sign of British ‘bigotry’, ‘we’re a country of immigrants’ (umm, no), ‘we need immigrants to do the jobs we won’t do’, ‘we need cultural diversity’….you’ve heard them all from the multiculti, mass immigration apologists and proponents.

  • southerner

    There are only two classes of people that will fall for this. The Camerloons (like Hook) and the mentally challenged.
    Hang on – that’s one category.

  • Denis_Cooper

    “David Cameron aims at Ukip and attacks Labour with immigration clamp-down”

    Thanks for that headline explaining that Cameron is not doing this because of any conviction that immigration must be reduced but just in an attempt to draw support away from UKIP and Labour to his crap party; so it’s a fair bet that once the electoral pressure was off he would revert to his true position, which is in favour of mass immigration into our country whether we like it or not.

    All the more reason to vote for UKIP, I’d say.

    • the viceroy’s gin

      Poor Dave, he really doesn’t understand politics, does he?

  • JoeDM

    Too little. Too late.

    I do not believe Cameron. He is a pro-EU, pro-immigration, high tax, big State, wet non-Tory.

    • telemachus

      But there is no alternative in the Tory Party that will not produce greater schism

      • @PhilKean1

        A “schism” is what we need if we are to disinfect the Tory party of non-Tories.

        So bring it on.
        .

        • telemachus

          Fine by the forces of reason
          You promise us more than the last spell of 13 glorious years

          • Alexsandr

            look at the result in doncaster council by election last wek

            http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/ukip-victory-in-doncaster-by-election-1-6749238
            now who is the MP for Doncaster North?

            • Alexsandr

              hmm. tellytubby didnt reply to that one did he?

            • HookesLaw

              The UKIP candidate defected from Labour having previously defected fro the LDs.
              So he is a socialist. How does that square with UKIP? Are UKIP moving to the left?

              • the viceroy’s gin

                …you mean, over with you socialist Camerluvvies?

  • misomiso

    Cameron has obviously had private discussion with he Eurocrats, and they have told him they will help him but he must not go after Freedom of movement.

    What he doesn’t understand is that although people in focus groups may say thye dont mind people coming here to work, that is not what upsets them. It is the cultural change that is going on in the country that angers them.

    Get us out of Freedom of Movement Dave. Argue that it damages social cohesion, the very poor are the biggest losers, and that it should be an opt in system in the EU rather than a fundamental right.

    We would rather see the whole of the UK political system collapse than let you get away with pulling a Wilson.

    • telemachus

      You are wrong
      Progressive forces in society welcome cultural renewal
      And progressive forces have always taken this country forward
      little englandism has always been defeated in this land

      • Bob339

        for ‘progressive’ read ‘leftie loonie’

        • hmmcc

          I hate that word progressive.

      • Alexsandr

        ‘progressive’ means letting in loads of people with medieval attitudes. Sorry, but to me allowing mysogeny, violence and paepophilia in the name of religion is regression.

      • mohdanga

        Yet you same ‘progressives’ want to limit free speech, prosecute people for voicing their opinions, flood the country with unassimilateable third worlders…..what is the benefit of this??

  • George_Arseborne

    You can see some sort of panicking here? He is just useless like this writer? The electorates can not be taken for a ride with gimmicks. When a policy is announce because of UKIP he fails spectacularly.

  • swatnan

    This is DC’s attempt to outdo UKIP and play the Race Card; a bit early in the campaign isn’t it? Lets hope the moderate/wet conservatives challenge him, and depose him.

    • @PhilKean1

      Yes, let us hope that they do.

      After all, the axiom that things have to reach rock-bottom before they can improve – has never been more fitting.

      For if the Liberal wets in Cameron’s Party help us to prevent him winning a majority – he will be replaced by a Conservative after the 2015 election and the party will be disinfected of all non- Conservatives.
      .

      • telemachus

        All you folks who tell us that Cameron must go give us no alternative credible scenario
        It is like Welsh Anthem Singing Spock Redwood trying to supplant Major

        • @PhilKean1

          Any real Conservative alternative to Cameron can only be an improvement.

          • telemachus

            You duck the question

            • @PhilKean1

              Then don’t duck asking me as question that warrants a serious answer.
              .

              • telemachus

                We can all throw darts in leaders
                Were Octavian and Mark Antony an improvement after traitor Brutus did his worst?

            • Inverted Meniscus

              Now that is funny coming from you.

    • Alexsandr

      whats race got to do with anything. controlling immigration is not racist.

    • HookesLaw

      Cameron will get broad support form the conservative party for these measures.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        …be careful of your case selection, laddie. For you socialist Camerloons, it’s very important that you capitalize that word.

        We conservatives are not included in any of your socialist groupings.

  • @PhilKean1

    .
    He will say whatever needs to be said in order to struggle across the winning line –

    – at the 2015 General Election.

    Oh yes. From the mentality that thought up the 2017 in-or-out referendum that has no chance of ever resulting in Britain leaving the EU.

    A “restrictions to EU immigrants benefits” ploy that, assuming the EU is not immediately opposing Cameron’s rhetoric in order to help him win the 2015 election – will be challenged AFTER the election in the EU’s own Courts.
    And everyone knows that measures designed to inhibit economic & political union are always overturned by Courts that are – in effect – the EU’s stooges.

    But why now, Mr Cameron? Why make these suggestions as we head towards the 2015 election? Could it be down to the fact that UKIP are continuing to maintain their support levels?

    I suggest that this latest ploy won’t fool the very people who’ve decided to make sure David Cameron doesn’t win a majority in 2015 : real Conservatives.
    .

    • @PhilKean1

      .
      We don’t need restrictions to benefits paid to EU immigrants –

      – we need

      (1) – A visa system that applies to ALL visitors to the UK.

      End of problem. But that wouldn’t suit Cameron because, as most intelligent people can see, he is trying to make it as hard as possible for Britain to leave the EU.
      .

      • telemachus

        Illegal under EU Law
        And as you pointed out the 2017 referendum has no chance of us pulling out
        Further only the Tories will offer this
        Further no current projection give us a Tory majority government
        *
        In short you are pissing in the wind

        • @PhilKean1

          .
          No, I am just putting forward policies that are supported by the British people, and pointing out the facts behind Cameron’s various electoral ploys.

          Cameron’s backbenchers and their media friends will offer us an apology after he loses the 2015 election, or when they realise they’ve been tricked, again – for stupidly taking the pressure off Cameron and allowing him a quiet time up to the 2015 election.

          But we don’t want their apologies. They will be the ones to blame for trapping us inside a failed Socialist experiment.
          .

          • telemachus

            Fruitless
            *
            As you have acknowledged there is no prospect of any power combination that would give you what “we” want
            Sidney Silverman flew in the face of public opinion to abolish hanging
            And if Joe Public were given the decision again they would bring back hanging
            And repatriate immigrants
            And abolish a good number of human rights
            *
            You see
            You can bleat but in the end it is just that
            You would do better to give Cameron an number of reasonable and achievable reforms to take for renegotiation

            • @PhilKean1

              That’s a laugh.

              He has no minimum requirement for what he wants to achieve that could even constitute a credible “renegotiation”.

              Anyway, the renegotiation has now been replaced by a meaningless “reform” strategy because Cameron knows he can’t get the substantive powers returned that are demanded by the British people, and because such demands would set a benchmark by which we’d be able to judge his level of success.
              .

              • telemachus

                You actually know that in truth he does not want back substantive powers
                We have moved on
                In my particular corner of England we have a parish council which I support and in which I am active but for my extension I look to my Distict Council and if I offend National Policy I am willing to abide by Housing Depatment rules
                We need supranational bodies for if not we go back to 1914 or 1939

                • @PhilKean1

                  How ironic that the British people are being restricted from prospering and advancing by those who state the irrelevant and deceitful argument that doing so would constitute some sort of return to the past.

                • telemachus

                  Not just the past
                  But the destructive past
                  Look at the cataclysm that was Europe in the Millenium before the EU

                • @PhilKean1

                  Ahh, by your rationale, the intellectual and civil advancement we have undergone since those times will be undone, as, too -it would follow – would the scientific and medical knowledge we now have – if we do what you suggest will return us to the atmosphere and behaviour of the previous millennium?

                  And the trigger for this catastrophic return to those dark days would be the British people regaining the ability to choose which politicians make the laws they live by?
                  .

          • Count Dooku

            Then what you should be agitation for is:
            1) Parliament to unilaterally pass a law removing us from the EU.
            or
            2) A Conservative majority to guarantee an EU referendum in 2017. You should then campaign for us to leave.

            • @PhilKean1

              A Conservative majority?

              It isn’t my aggressive opposition to the census policies of the 3 Europhile parties which is consigning the British people to living under EU dictatorship – it is the naivety of those who practice Einstein’s law of doing the same things and expecting different results.
              .

            • ButcombeMan

              An Article 50 declaration, approved by Parliament, is what is needed.

              There is no chance whatsoever of achieving that, without UKIP MPs.

              Cameron will never support such a move himself. He will inevitably have to go.

              There is no point in teetering voters returning to the Tories. Labour supporters who want out of Europe should do the same. All vote UKIP.

              Everyone, from what ever background, must dig in and keep voting UKIP, at every possible opportunity until our freedom from Brussels rule is achieved.

              This is too important an issue for distractions over any other policy matter.

              • HookesLaw

                In the EU election 73% of the public voted against UKIP and its unique selling point.

                You are a looney obsessive irrational hysteric. Cameron has already said he does not want to be part of some ever closer EU union and you wilfully campaign against that, something which will put an Europhile Labour party in charge.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  …and how many voted against you Camerluvvies, lad?

                  I forget… where’d you Camerluvvies finish in that election?

                • southerner

                  Yes that election where you Camerlooons came where against UKIP and its unique selling point?

                • ButcombeMan

                  Why do you always feel the need to be personally abusive?

                  Not wanting to be subservient to Brussels is a perfectly respectable position and absolutely logical.

                  Cameron, sadly, is not believable, He blew that. I wish he was, but there we are. If he was honest he would tell the public about the Article 50 option, he does not, so he is dishonest.

                  The EU, as constructed, is not meeting the needs of its people

                  I think the battle to come out of the political EU, may take 20 years. I hope I am spared to keep voting for it.

              • Count Dooku

                No way in he ll UKIP will have enough MPs in Parliament to pass Article 50. They do not have conentrated support.

                It’s easy to sit on the sidelines and call for ideological purity. This never gets things done. Except in rare occasions, the people who get things done are the pragmatists and concensus builders.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  The LibLabCon clones already have their consensus, lad. It’s to be a socialist paradise. The only choice is being part of the LibLabCon consensus, or not.

        • JoeDM

          Sod EU Law !!!

          • Denis_Cooper

            “Sod EU law”, yes, provided that Parliament has expressly authorised the government to say “sod EU law”; otherwise the government would be acting illegally under the present law as enacted by Parliament, and we should not undermine the rule of law in our own country to avoid the consequences of foreign entanglements.

            • the viceroy’s gin

              There are many ways to dismiss with this foreign usurpation, and undermining it legally is certainly one of those. It’s illegitimate to do this, and undermining it shouldn’t be judged by the same standards used to judge adherence to domestic rule of law. Let the rest of the law catch up to the initial undermining, which might proceed absent all matters being settled neatly.

    • AndyL

      Why does the 2017 referendum have no chance of resulting in UK leaving the EU. Is it because those wanting UK to withdraw have no chance of winning?

      • telemachus

        1. As the reality dawns there is no prospect that the populace will vote for economic collapse
        2. Labour will be in power

        • AndyL

          The assumption in the original post was that Cameron gets ‘over the line’. If you think then leaving the EU means economic collapse then it’s a good thing the result will be in UK staying in.

          • HookesLaw

            The real point is that the whole policy of the kippers is built around a big lie.
            Even if out of the EU we still have to live with it. A ‘trade deal’ so beloved of the typical kipper means the single market and still being part of the free movement of labour. Just like Norway. who are also in schengen.
            Indeed if we upped and left the EU we might end up in Schengen as part of any deal and of course once out of the EU we would be negotiating from weakness.

            If in the EEA as are Norway then there would be little discernible difference to where we are now. But if we do want to get somewhere different it would be best done by negotiation fom within rather than simply walking out first.
            But as you have seen there is no rationality behind the stance of the average kipper,

            • Alexsandr

              oh change the record hooky
              we dont have to be in shengen, the single market, or the EEA.
              lots of countries in the world seem to manage without the european stuff, why cant we?

      • Denis_Cooper

        You write of “the 2017 referendum” as if it is sure to happen, which it is not even if Cameron continues as Prime Minister with an overall Tory majority; but if it does happen every effort would be made to ensure that it will be a re-run of Wilson’s 1975 referendum, and unfortunately there would be every chance that this Tory shyster would be able to repeat the trick of the previous Labour shyster.

        • AndyL

          That would be what people call ‘democracy’. It now seems that anti-EU people are fatalistic about their chances of winning a referendum, so would prefer it doesn’t happen.

          • Denis_Cooper

            I have warned for years that whichever of the three old parties were in power at the time they would move heaven and earth to turn an “in-out” referendum into a re-run of 1975, and would have a very good chance of succeeding. I would have thought that the experience of the AV referendum would have shown people how a referendum can be won through outright lies provided that the mass media are prepared to go along with and embellish the lies rather than demolishing them. I’m not sure that it can be called “democracy” when people are voting on the basis of deliberate misinformation systematically fed to them by the media.

            • AndyL

              That’s democracy. What a bitch

              • Denis_Cooper

                As a Tory you might like to call it “democracy”, others might call it “fraud” or “false pretences”, what a bitch.

                • AndyL

                  So you don’t want to give the public a vote in case they give the wrong answer.
                  That reminds me of Mick McGahey

                • Ooh!MePurse!

                  It is very stiking that nobody has answered the question that AndyL asked three hours ago.

                • HookesLaw

                  Yes. But AndyL has answered it for them.

                • HookesLaw

                  Arthur Scargill.

          • @PhilKean1

            They didn’t ask our permission to steal the sacred powers we entrusted to Parliament – so why do they need our permission to have them returned?

            The referendum is just another hurdle in the way of the British people regaining their right to choose which politicians make the laws they live by.

            • AndyL

              So if you don’t like democracy, what’s the alternative? The logic seems to be to avoid having a referendum in case you lose.

              It seems to me the anti-EU brigade are getting frit.

              • @PhilKean1

                The logic of the average Europhile is something to behold.

                I have just explained that the EU and their 5th column here in the UK realised they’d need to circumvent democracy and deceive in order to sign away the sacred powers entrusted to Parliament by the British people.

                And you then go on to accuse ME of not liking democracy?

                • AndyL

                  In our system, Parliament is sovereign. They don’t need to ask your permission to pass individual acts, sign treaties, go to war etc.

                  So I will ask again, if you don’t like the idea of a democratic referendum which Parilament will then implement, what is your alternative?

                • @PhilKean1

                  The British Parliament is NOT Sovereign. It is subordinate to the EU.

                  However, our so-called “system of democracy” relies on manifesto pledges by those who seek election setting out their aims – promises kept, lies NOT being told, tricks NOT being played, and honesty, not baseless scares.

                  Your inability to understand the simple facts I have set out and your moronic adherence to an irrelevant and illogical argument prevents us discussing this point any further.
                  .

                • Holly

                  ‘The British Parliament is NOT Sovereign’…

                  Only because the politicians elected by the British public have, bit by bit, signed our Sovereignty away.

                • HookesLaw

                  The UK parliament is soveriegn and its a falacy that its not.
                  AndyL’s point is massively valid. The way his question was avoided is telling.

                • AndyL

                  You are just avoiding the question.
                  If you don’t want a referendum with a simple question, what is your alternative?

                • @PhilKean1

                  We elect politicians who have Britain’s national interest as their first concern and who understand that Britain can’t stay in an EU which aims to force political and economic union on all 28 states.

                  This means we must hold our nerves, stick to our principles and not be deflected by the sort of tactics demonstrated today by Cameron.

                • AndyL

                  So you want to turn down a referendum because you are frightened of losing, and instead you are going to hold out for an overall majority in parliament.

                  Good luck with that.

                • @PhilKean1

                  I would be insulting myself and the electorate and playing by the traitors’ rules if I accepted the principle that they can strip us of our precious democracy without asking our permission – but we have to get on our knees and give our consent for the return of that which is rightfully ours?

                  It doesn’t need a majority. If UKIP can win 25 seats, there are enough decent Tory and Labour voters who’d join them so they could jointly negotiate with other parties for their support in a Coalition.
                  .

                • AndyL

                  I’m truly gobsmacked.
                  You think that if only one party proposes withdrawl from the EU in its manifesto, and that party gets a mere 25 seats, then you will have sufficient democratic mandate for withdrawl?

                  Even UKIP gets the balance of power with 25 seats, the best you will get will be a referendum. If Labour get a majority then you won’t get even that.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  There’d be nothing of consequence arising from any of the LibLabCon clones, lad. You’re drawing a fantasy distinction that simply doesn’t exist in the real world.

                • @PhilKean1

                  Remind me which of the 3 Europhile parties told voters in their manifestos that they intended to sign away their sacred powers to Brussels, and grant EU nationals – of ALL 28 states – the right to come to live and work in Britain and qualify for the same rights as UK nationals.

                  I should be gob-smacked by your myopic bias towards the Federal EU. But I am not.
                  .

                • AndyL

                  I have an opinion on the EU, but the way I would vote in a referendum is beside the point.

                  The fascinating thing is that the people opposed to the EU are frightened of asking the public whether they want to remain in or leave.

                • @PhilKean1

                  Not fear, just principle.

                  The main facts of the case are that self-determination is non-negotiable. It is a birth-right – that must NEVER be negotiated away of decided by the whims of an economically and politically ignorant public.

                  I am protecting them from themselves.

                  It is obvious by the way you write that you are quite young. Your opinions and judgements will change as you get older and you will realise how foolish and naive you were.
                  .

                • AndyL

                  I’m old enough to remember the 73 referendum, though I didn’t have a vote. Maybe compared to you that’s young.

                  Perhaps you can explain what rights we have that are a ‘birth-right’ and how they were established. What theory do you have that says the public are too stupid to be allowed to determine their future in a democratic process? How much older do I need to get before I get achieve the contempt for the public that you seem to have developed?

                • AndyL

                  What’s really ironic is that you are hugely concerned about the “non-negotiable” right of self-determination, yet you think the public are “economically and politically ignorant” and need “protecting from themselves”.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  You are a childish prat.

                  The EUSSR has made it plain that there will be no “renegotiation” of consequence, no matter what Call Me Dave is blathering (and he’s not blathering anything of detail or importance, you may depend). Further, Call Me Dave has informed all that he wants in the EUSSR and will campaign thusly, no matter what worthless blather is derived from the non-renegotiation and typed into a “referendum”.

                  Stop blathering about the “referendum”, you childish prat. It has no value, as both your boy Dave and your EUSSR heroes have already told you.

                • AndyL

                  Why does a referendum have no value?

                  Lets have a negotiation which might come out with something or nothing. Cameron can campaign whichever way he wants, and then the public will decide. What on earth is wrong with that?

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  You ask a question answered above, lad.

                  You are still a childish prat.

                • AndyL

                  > You are still a childish prat.

                  If you say so. It doesn’t explain why you are frightened of a referendum.

                • the viceroy’s gin

                  See above, laddie.

                  You are still a childish prat.

                • southerner

                  “In our system, Parliament is sovereign.”
                  If only it was.

                • AndyL

                  Of course it is.
                  Parliament chose to pool sovereignty with other countries in the EU. It can choose to un-pool it if it wishes. All you need to do is win a referendum and that will happen.

                  Except for some reason the anti-EU brigade don’t want a referendum. Odd that.

      • @PhilKean1

        Cameron is rushing to get Britain included in NEW, politically-weighted EU trade deals, and opting in to EU Crime and Justice legislation – that will further involve Britain in economic and political union – at the same time he is telling voters they’ll have the chance to vote to leave the EU.

        At the very least, if he was being honest and genuine, he would STOP signing Britain up to economic and political union until AFTER the British people have made their decision.

      • ArchiePonsonby

        Stuff the referendum! My vote for UKIP is MY referendum!

    • foxoles

      ‘He will say whatever needs to be said’. Correct. As Stephen Woolfe points out, Cameron’s statement is ‘cynical and vacuous’:

      http://www.ukip.org/ukip_migration_spokesman_hits_out_at_cynical_and_vacuous_cameron

    • @PhilKean1
Close