LBC Ferage Vs Clegg EU Debate

Did anyone catch it??

Good debate and I personally tipped it in Nigel's favour, I would be interested in people opinions of it, side note I watched it via Youtube live and was sad at the amount of racist comments on there and this did detrate it a little. Trending on Twitter from 1003 people shows it was in Nigel Ferage's favour at 53%

Personally want out of the EU and agree with Nigel regarding a work permit system as we have with non EU citizens wanting to work in the UK as apposed to the open movement for all stance of the EU.

I am not anti Europe but I do believe Brussells have to much control of the UK Parliament and its laws and it is time for a reforendum.

Props to Nick Clegg and Nigel Ferage to having this debate avoided by the two main parties. both put it on the line.

 

What European laws in particular do you have a problem with?

 

Hi Holyheadjch.

Apologies for the delay in getting back to you as balancing MAP with my work load (working a night shift) Got a bit of spare time now so will attempt to explain my stance on this, bare in mind I am not legally trained and just have a interest.

Firstly you probably guessed I take issue with the European Human Rights Act, no suprise there really as its not a popular piece of legislation in the UK..

For a example look at the issues surrounding the extradition of Abu Qatada for terrorist offences in Jordan and a well known incitor of racial hatred which due to interferance from Strasbourg cost the UK tax payer over 1.7 million pounds due to his claim of possible torture in his homeland.

Crazy concidering his absolute hatred of this country and endorsement of henious terrorist acts, this should be balanced in the interest of national security and surely the British Supreme Court should have a final say in the protection of the rights of its citizens not Strasbourg!

Article 8: The right to family life has been used both by foreign criminals to avoid deportation and by UK nationals in prison to avoid their sentences and this again undermines public confidence in our legal system.

On top of this I have an issue with the amount of membership fees we have to pay to Brussells which amounts to 55 million per day which I find obscene in the current climate, this alongside moving away from the open movement model of Europe and looking towards a points based visa system has swayed me towards UKIP. I have no issue with skilled migrants in fact I see them as essential but safe guards do need to be in place. along with border checks to ensure our security as we simply do not have the resources for a open door policy.

I am always open minded to others views so please feel free to comment, short on time and late in my shift so I hope it comes across reasonably coherent

 

Ah crap I missed it!

What channel was it shown on? Maybe I can catch it soon on iPlayer or something?

A few things pop to mind, but I'd rather wait to see the debate before I chip in properly.

 

Firstly, regarding the Abu Qatada case the Immigration Appeals Commission ruled in his favour on one point only; that if he was deported to Jordan, evidence would be used in his trial that was obtained by torture. The Human Rights Act guarantees the right to a fair trial. It's hard to argue that someone doesn't have the right to a fair trial; if we abolished that, then it's not hard to imagine that a less controversial figure (maybe the Dalai Lama) would get deported back to an oppressive country and face years in jail due to an unfair trial. For me the biggest question is not whether we should leave the EU because of this case, but why hasn't Abu Qatada been tried in the UK?

I think if most people looked at the rights afforded to all under the Act, they would agree that they would like to have those rights, for example:

- right to life
- freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
- freedom from slavery and forced labour
- right to education
- right to a fair trial

While some rights have to be curtailed if you are guilty of certain crimes, these are basic human rights that should not be denied to anyone.

Every study I've seen on the subject of immigration suggests that the UK is better off for it; immigrants claim less in benefits and pay more in tax.

Haven't got time to discuss anything else but I do feel we are far better off in the EU than out of it.

 

I can't help but think UKIP is riding on a wave of right-wing populism that caters to Daily Mail readers and closest racists. I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the party's policies, especially on the subject of immigration. I watched the debate on catch-up and Farage stumbled when Clegg challenged him to justify UKIP's inflated claims on the scale of immigration. The literature Clegg was referring to isn't all too dissimilar from that produced by the BNP. UKIP's policies resonate with people too ignorant to properly educate themselves on the true state of immigration in the UK; they blame the EU for low wages yet don't do anything to improve their circumstances. I'd like to think Farage's supporters don't really believe 450+ million people want to come to the UK, but they might actually be that thick. You see, my wife is an immigrant. She moved here 15 years ago, learnt fluent English in 3 months, paid her way through University, works 50 hours a week (on top of nearly 20 hours BJJ and judo training), and has never claimed benefits nor sought medical attention from the NHS (she has always paid for her own private health care). She still doesn't have a British passport. I know lots of immigrants and they all share similar stories. Hell, my family are all immigrants (just look at my username/surname). In fact, the only people I know who are on benefits are native English. They claim there are "no jobs" out there, yet they sit on their arses smoking cigarettes and watching Jeremy Kyle instead of getting out there and trying to improve their lives. Moping around and blaming other people seems to have become this country's national sport. UKIP's policies are too vague. I mean, at what point do they stop preventing all the terrorists and gypsies from stealing our benefits and start hurting honest, hardworking immigrants like my wife? :bang:

 

Goes for most of us I expect.

So you don't believe a country has the responsibility to consider human rights when making decisions? Seems like dangerous ground to walk on. Should we only guarantee a person's rights when it is convenient?

Do you not believe a person has a right to family life? Do you think a child should be removed from their family for no reason? Do you believe that the government should be able to force you to live apart from your spouse?

The CBI puts the net benefit to the UK economy at about £17m/day. So we pay £55m/day, but we get £72m/day back.

Skilled migrant workers are important to our economy, but so are unskilled migrants. They work on our farms, they work in our hospitals, they cook our food, clean our offices etc etc etc. They claim fewer benefits than UK residents, thus lowering the average benefit cost/capita. Sure, it's more complicated than that, but I don't think throwing the baby out with the bath water is a good idea.

UKIP have been telling us for years that when the restrictions on Bulgarians and Romanians are lifted, the floodgates would open and we'd drown in benefit thieving scumbags. And yet it never happened. The Home Affairs Committee concluded that there was no discernible increase in migration from those countries after the restrictions were lifted. So all that xenophobic rhetoric that seriously harmed our reputation overseas was for absolutely nothing, yet I don't hear Farage apologising.

 

Just to add to this point, IIRC UKIP released huge amounts of propaganda stating that "29 million immigrants will come to the UK once Romania and Bulgaria become part of the EU because of our easy benefits life, etc". Certainly that was the rhetoric being passed around a lot.

Last time I check, there's a about 21.1 million people in Romania and about 7.3 million people in Bulgaria.

'Nuff said I guess.

 

Farage is the acceptable face of UKIP, and he's clearly a bit bonkers. But a lot of their councillors seem to be either BNP types flying a different flag, or else crooks who've been caught lining their pockets at public expense.

All in all, they don't have much credibility, yet I fear that they will do very well in the next general election because they seem to be doing a good job of attracting the protest vote.

 

I did catch the debate, but the LBC one isn't till tommorow? That's radio karate sloth, you can catch it online, but I believe LBC are now national.

 

Hi Van Zandt,

Firstly I want to literate that I am not Anti-Immigration to say that would be both ignorant and stupid, Many of our sectors need talent from abroad to operate i.e. NHS, Banking ect. want I want personally is a point system much like Australia to attract skilled workers as apposed to unskilled rather than a open door policy which would effect our finite resources i.e. NHS, Pensions ect which is exactly what UKIP are proposing, seems like common sense to me.

Until they do this they are only fanning the flames and this is where Racism will lift its ugly head.

Its also about regain sovereign control of our own system, not paying for inclusion in the EU, People say about the loss of trade but other countries outside of the EU trade just fine. I am not saying the little England model we can still have a working relation with the EU without that level of commitment.

You mention UKIP supporters being closet racists, the members I have met are certainly not racists and that is more left wing smear than anything else. I

I am open minded to others views on this issue and welcome a friendly discussion on it.

Cheers

Dan

 

Did we not already have legislation in place protecting our human rights why the need to sign up to a new piece of legislation centrally controlled by the EU?

I agree that everyone has the right to a family life but if someone has broken the law or here illegally without good reason, this is simply a get out of jail card.

I have no issue with skilled migration and some unskilled but there needs to be a cap on it IMO as mentioned earlier as the truth is to much is a strain on our finite resources i.e. NHS ect. People have the right to endevour for a better life and its not that I am debating its simply putting controls in place.

I will look into your costings from the CBI as not come across that, thanks

 

Hi CrowZero,

It was the radio debate I was talking about which was also streamed live on youtube.

You can see it on the LBC website. LBC are national now BTW.

Cheers

Dan

 

I'm afraid that's the standard practice for far right groups. Look at the BNP, NF, even British Freedom (the political wing of the EDL)... all of them chock to the brim with people who have been involved in various other proto-fascist groups.

The story of the far right for the last 20 years or so in Britain has been one group merging into another. It started with the decline of the NF once it's street fighting force started to wain and a lot of them jumped ship in the 90's to the BNP because it had a more official look. Then the BNP started losing relevancy so a lot of them started getting involved in the EDL as a grass-roots movement.

Now the pendulum is swinging back the other way and people are realizing that UKIP might have a shot at power and so a lot of these "not racist but...." types are looking to co-opt it and push it even further to the right than before.

Nigel Farage is a sad testament to the fact that the left wing has utterly failed in capitalizing on the dis-content that has been produced in politics. I have my own theories but I think to keep it brief, people like Farage have done a much better job of making a radical alternative look satisfying and accessible than anyone else.

 

The European Convention of Human Rights was drafted in the early 1950's and brought in around 1953 (I think, I could be wrong). Later articles have been added on from that time, but the bill still goes back a fair few years. Britain didn't actually have its' own bill of human rights IIRC before then in a fashion that we know of, but subsequent legislation has been drafted since the forming of the convention reinforcing and upholding the parameters laid out accordingly. The Human Rights Act (1996/7/8? :dunno was also created to give further follow on effect to the Convention of Human Rights.

It's easy to forget that much of what the EU stands for was formed in the wake of WW2 and how that changed the politics of the member nations even today. It's also easy to forget that the European Union has also drafted laws about working rights and regulations and other bits and bobs which do benefit us as a whole. I can't remember the names of the different acts though.

That's about as much as I can remember from what little I studied about law through the OU. Barely made it to the end of my first year before I fell out (baby boy was born, I stopped keeping up with the TMA's because of it even though I kept reading and studying, didn't follow on for my second year).

Yeah, when people often bring up "We pay X million to the EU each year", it's often only part of the picture and doesn't take into what financial benefits we receive in turn, either.

Discussing what subsidies we get back out of the EU is tricky though as a lot of our subsidies come in the form of farming subsidies and not strictly financial/monetary rebates.

We also have to remember that we import far more than we export and that being part of the biggest single market in the world means we receive significant reductions in the amount of trade tax we pay out as well as the tax we would pay in turn. As a country that imports more than we export, it means we end up saving a lot more money than we would pay if we weren't part of it. Being a part of the single market also includes freedom of movement for everyone involved in said single market mind, which means immigration from other European Union & EU states can't be regulated in the same way.

And it's unlikely anyone would want to go into a trade bloc agreement with us. So when people talk about "how much we pay out", we really need a properly detailed breakdown of what we get back too. Otherwise it is just hyperbole.

Been away for a few days though, I'll find the interview tonight and listen to it.

Thanks CrowZero & Dan93 for pointing out where to find it

 

You do realise that the European Human Rights Act and the European Court of Human Rights has absolutely nothing to do with the EU and pre-dates the formation of what was then the Common Market. If we did vote to leave the EU we would still be under obligation to follow both the act and the rulings of the court unless of course we also withdraw from that treaty as well.

 

One thing that I've always wondered about if we leave the EU, do we kick out all EU nationals living in the UK? What about all the Brits who live abroad in the EU, would they have to relocate back to the UK? What happens to their properties, or businesses they own and run in EU nations if they have to come back to Blighty?

 

I doubt many Eurosceptics have thought that far ahead.