Tuesday 22nd March 2016

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:12 pm

'Budget for disabled people more than the defence budget' the Tories keep complaining.
'Top earners paying 28% of income tax' is their boast.

But neither thing really means much does it ?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:13 pm

yahyah wrote:& Brown did re-imburse people later on for some of the financial loss.

Yep. Increased the personal allowance a lot.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:15 pm

Anyone hear McDonnell ?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:17 pm

yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?

We weren't allowed to hear McDonnell.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:18 pm

NonOxCol wrote:I've reached the point where I think I viscerally loathe not just these fucking despicable excuses for humanity, but every last bastard that voted for them.

Sorry.

Join the club !!!!

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:18 pm

yahyah wrote:'Budget for disabled people more than the defence budget' the Tories keep complaining.
'Top earners paying 28% of income tax' is their boast.

But neither thing really means much does it ?

If anything, means tax base too narrow. Recession in the City flattens the public finances.

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:20 pm

yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?

Looking btl at Sparrows liveblog,it doesn't appear that Andrew heard McDonnell!

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:21 pm

yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?

No, but:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's all so bloody transparent and pathetic.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:23 pm

yahyah wrote:& Brown did re-imburse people later on for some of the financial loss.

Yep. Increased the personal allowance a lot.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:23 pm

Well, that was fun.

Osborne has come out fighting - unfortunately for him, he had absolutely nothing new to say and appears to think that making Crabb say there are "no plans" to cut "welfare" is an apology to disabled people for the worry he caused them.

McDonnell was good, I thought. He attacked the budget and its architect with equal contempt. I thought the MP who accused him of being a supporter of the people who killed his friends was out of order, but he was dealt with quite well.

Now, what I want to know is this - what happens if the government loses the vote this evening?
My understanding is that a government which loses a vote on a Queen's Speech or a Finance Bill has effectively had a vote of no confidence.
Is that right?

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:34 pm

Reminds me of the "no plans to raise the level of VAT"...i.e. we have no plans now but by tomorrow...

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:35 pm

NonOxCol wrote:
yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?
No, but:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's all so bloody transparent and pathetic.

Referring to Corbyn there, not McDonnell, I think. Probably right that, Cooper, in a Hague sort of way, would be effective in replying to a budget.

But it matters less than people like Katz think. Corbyn has other strengths.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:42 pm

AS has yet to report on what McDonnell had to say - half an hour after he sat down.

Quite a few people BTL are asking why we are treated to Tweets from umpteen Tory hacks on Osborne, but nothing on McDonnell.

If AS doesn't fix this soon, he will be open to accusations of bias that will bite, and rightly so.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:43 pm

Clarke looks rather the worse for wear on the BBC photos, reminds me of the Fast Show.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:50 pm

Ah - summary of McDonnell's speech up now.

Short but not too bad......now waiting for the Murdoch-sponsored Twits to tear it to shreds.....

danesclose · Post by **danesclose** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:50 pm

"News Thump" take on the Budget.
Warning, contains language that may offend

http://newsthump.com/2016/03/21/new-onl ... ccuntface/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NonOxCol · Post by **NonOxCol** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:50 pm

ephemerid wrote:AS has yet to report on what McDonnell had to say - half an hour after he sat down.

Quite a few people BTL are asking why we are treated to Tweets from umpteen Tory hacks on Osborne, but nothing on McDonnell.

If AS doesn't fix this soon, he will be open to accusations of bias that will bite, and rightly so.

Three pages and counting...

Lost every last shred of respect for AS after his verdict on the "tie/national anthem" bollocks tbh.

Though I said I loathed all Tory voters, I think the political coverage in this country is an abject disgrace. Hence the Katz tweet. The man is in charge of Newsnight, and invites nothing further left than a Blairite in day after day, week after week. He's clearly framing things from that perspective already.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:51 pm

[quote="yahyah"]'Budget for disabled people more than the defence budget' the Tories keep complaining.

I doubt if there are many people that haven't benefitted or will do from the former,or at least their families,most of it is cost saving in any case.A national security risk because they are costing too much?I

Rebecca · Post by **Rebecca** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 2:57 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
NonOxCol wrote:
yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?
No, but:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's all so bloody transparent and pathetic.
Referring to Corbyn there, not McDonnell, I think. Probably right that, Cooper, in a Hague sort of way, would be effective in replying to a budget.

But it matters less than people like Katz think. Corbyn has other strengths.

Blimey Tubby,do I detect a softening in your opinion of Jeremy Corbyn?

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:00 pm

Let's never forget that political coverage was as poor and skewed under the likes of Katz with Miliband as it has been under the present leadership.

I lost count of the number of times back then too that a single overt, factional Blairite was considered quite sufficient to put the "Labour" point of view.

Its also notable just how prickly these people get if they are even gently prodded about their bias.......

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:02 pm

I have spoken to the nurses looking after Toby - he's OK, but may be in hospital for some time.
When asked if she had any idea how long, the nurse asked how long's a piece of string!

Toby says he's fine with you all knowing where he is, he says he's still in "rejoice" mode re.IDS, and would love to get a few cards/letters but most of all he's interested in chocolate eggs.

Here he is -

Mr. Tony Britton
Ward 41
Kings Mill Hospital
Mansfield Road
Sutton-in-Ashfield
Notts
NG17 4JL

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:03 pm

Rebecca wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
NonOxCol wrote: No, but:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's all so bloody transparent and pathetic.
Referring to Corbyn there, not McDonnell, I think. Probably right that, Cooper, in a Hague sort of way, would be effective in replying to a budget.

But it matters less than people like Katz think. Corbyn has other strengths.
Blimey Tubby,do I detect a softening in your opinion of Jeremy Corbyn?

Maybe!

Think he's found some good frontbenchers.

GetYou · Post by **GetYou** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:10 pm

I had to switch the thing off before I hit something.

Yvette Cooper's initial question was not answered.

Then reasonable calls for an apology to those who have spent the past few days worried sick were rejected.

And £4.4bn cuts can be "absorbed"? Yeah, stuff em down the sofa where they can join the £65bn you lost, you twat.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:12 pm

I may send a card via car to Toby(Tony) it is only a few miles away, in honour of IDS.

Imagine naming a hospital after a loaf of bread.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:22 pm

I don't even now anybody that voted Tory,then again they would know it be unwise to tell me.Not that I know many people.I labelled my ex work colleagues (all female) "The Skinnerettes"

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:30 pm

After the discussion yesterday about how some Tory MPs are saying that WRAG claimants are capable of work, it's getting worse.....

There have now been more than 6 of them who have said this that I know of.

Yesterday, I posted here that I thought that it might be a deliberate ploy by the Tories to do this - as there were only two or three at that point, I would have accepted that I was getting a bit paranoid.

Not now - the DPAC people and others have been looking at various Twitter feeds and facebook pages; some campaigners have written to their MPs; and this idea that WRAG claimants can work is either a delusion more than a few MPs are under, or promoting this fallacy is deliberate, presumably with a view to making people think that ill people in the WRAG are fit for work.

I appreciate that just half-a-dozen deluded and/or ignorant MPs does not a conspiracy make; however, I would put nothing past this bunch of Tories. They know that this particular cut is causing a great deal of concern - how better to get support for it than to misrepresent what ESA is and why the groups are paid as they are? It's not as if theses bastards don't have form.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:30 pm

GetYou wrote:I had to switch the thing off before I hit something.

Yvette Cooper's initial question was not answered.

Then reasonable calls for an apology to those who have spent the past few days worried sick were rejected.

And £4.4bn cuts can be "absorbed"? Yeah, stuff em down the sofa where they can join the £65bn you lost, you twat.

Unhinged stuff coming from government - Sparrow gave us the following information below.

"The chancellor...did not address the issue that his budget now contains a £4.4bn black hole.

But ... Tory MPs were cheering wildly (or rather jeering wildly, at Labour), not sitting silently on their hands.

By no means a triumph, but it could have been worse."

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 98f62c5f35" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:32 pm

Thank you for Toby update and information, Ephemerid.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:34 pm

citizenJA wrote:
GetYou wrote:I had to switch the thing off before I hit something.

Yvette Cooper's initial question was not answered.

Then reasonable calls for an apology to those who have spent the past few days worried sick were rejected.

And £4.4bn cuts can be "absorbed"? Yeah, stuff em down the sofa where they can join the £65bn you lost, you twat.
Unhinged stuff coming from government - Sparrow gave us the following information below.
"The chancellor...did not address the issue that his budget now contains a £4.4bn black hole.

But ... Tory MPs were cheering wildly (or rather jeering wildly, at Labour), not sitting silently on their hands.

By no means a triumph, but it could have been worse."

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 98f62c5f35" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Osborne, a smirking lying shit with a broken budget who brass necked it out. The country breathes a sigh of relief as the political correspondents say he was maaaarvelous and should remain as chancellor.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:34 pm

Eph -"good spot" my arse.Definately intended as is" 50 billion on benefits"

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:37 pm

I caught the tail end of a Tory on Radio 4 this morning, talking about how much money we wouldn't need to pay out to the EU if we voted for Brexit.

Unless I misheard, one of his arguments seemed to be that we could row back on austerity as a result.
Is this going to be one of the Leave campaign's crafty ways of trying to get left leaning people to vote for Brexit ? Vote Leave, scrap austerity ?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:45 pm

We've not had word back in regards to Ephemerid's excellent question regarding a non-functional budget.
The £4.4b hole remains.
No budget, no confidence

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:48 pm

yahyah wrote:I caught the tail end of a Tory on Radio 4 this morning, talking about how much money we wouldn't need to pay out to the EU if we voted for Brexit.

Unless I misheard, one of his arguments seemed to be that we could row back on austerity as a result.
Is this going to be one of the Leave campaign's crafty ways of trying to get left leaning people to vote for Brexit ? Vote Leave, scrap austerity ?

"I caught the tail end of a Tory"

I hope you washed your hands.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:49 pm

yahyah wrote:I caught the tail end of a Tory on Radio 4 this morning, talking about how much money we wouldn't need to pay out to the EU if we voted for Brexit.

Unless I misheard, one of his arguments seemed to be that we could row back on austerity as a result.
Is this going to be one of the Leave campaign's crafty ways of trying to get left leaning people to vote for Brexit ? Vote Leave, scrap austerity ?

Strangely this is one of the better arguments I've heard! Eoin Clarke for example would probably agree. Trouble is most of the Brexiters want more not less austerity.

If we rewound to 2008, we had been outside the UK and someone like Ed M had been PM things could have been very different. Remember how we all hoped it was the moment to pounce on the predatory capitalists and change things for ever. Brown, who I admire a good bit, just didn't do it. And it was hard to pursue a radically different course to France and Germany.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:50 pm

ephemerid wrote:
yahyah wrote:I caught the tail end of a Tory on Radio 4 this morning, talking about how much money we wouldn't need to pay out to the EU if we voted for Brexit.

Unless I misheard, one of his arguments seemed to be that we could row back on austerity as a result.
Is this going to be one of the Leave campaign's crafty ways of trying to get left leaning people to vote for Brexit ? Vote Leave, scrap austerity ?

"I caught the tail end of a Tory"

I hope you washed your hands.

Yeuch. Don't mention pigs

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:50 pm

And scoff at Labour.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:52 pm

citizenJA wrote:We've not had word back in regards to Ephemerid's excellent question regarding a non-functional budget.
The £4.4b hole remains.
No budget, no confidence

Well, yes. I'm not overwhelmed with confidence meself.....

If there's anyone here who can tell me how the Parliamentary procedure works, I'd be grateful.

I know an effective vote of no confidence is the result if the Commons does not support a Queens' Speech, but I don't know how it works if they don't vote for a Budget.

Can anyone help?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:53 pm

ephemerid wrote:
citizenJA wrote:We've not had word back in regards to Ephemerid's excellent question regarding a non-functional budget.
The £4.4b hole remains.
No budget, no confidence

Well, yes. I'm not overwhelmed with confidence meself.....

If there's anyone here who can tell me how the Parliamentary procedure works, I'd be grateful.

I know an effective vote of no confidence is the result if the Commons does not support a Queens' Speech, but I don't know how it works if they don't vote for a Budget.

Can anyone help?

I think it would be considered a vote of no confidence, but remember Dave's changes to this.

Unlikely to happen then, although if you were a Tory very committed to Brexit......

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:55 pm

Looks like the short summary of McDonnell's speech on the AS blog is all there'll be for now - although there is a repeat of Osborne's.

It's a bit poor, really.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:55 pm

Section 2 of the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:

If the House of Commons resolves "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government", an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves "That this House has confidence in Her Majesty's Government". This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.
If the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election".

TR'sGhost · Post by **TR'sGhost** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:57 pm

ephemerid wrote:Not now - the DPAC people and others have been looking at various Twitter feeds and facebook pages; some campaigners have written to their MPs; and this idea that WRAG claimants can work is either a delusion more than a few MPs are under, or promoting this fallacy is deliberate, presumably with a view to making people think that ill people in the WRAG are fit for work.

I've been paying quite a bit of attention to trends in internet comments on media websites by Tory supporters about social security since before 2010.

It's quite curious that there are some perpetual standbys, typical of which is the "my cousin's mate's aunty's dog-walker had an ingrowing toenail once and now holidays in Lanzerotti using the private jet that all welfare claimants get - and they've got a 42" flat-screen TV as well!!!" That being the default general-purpose social-security thread distracter/diverter of course.

But there are also lines which come and go.

The issue in question has been a line pushed by quite a number of Tory commenters on websites for quite some time, certainly at least three years, on and off. It goes hand in hand with the continual misrepresentation, often by the same that posters again and again, that DLA=ESA and both are claimed by sending a form in with no checking procedure to make sure anything in the form is true.

And it's often a little gang that simultaneously trot out "Work Related Activity" = fit to work and ESA is "unemployment benefit for people who were sick but are fit for work now the lazy bastards, but kindly IDS overflows with compassion and will help them find an unskilled zero-hours jobs. They should be on their knees thanking him. Oh look - they are, IDS says so."

Then they drop that for a while until all of a sudden there's a number of them dragging it out again.

You might almost suspect they were being co-ordinated somehow.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 3:58 pm

Debbie Abrahams has just posted a clip of McDonnell

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 4:02 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
I think it would be considered a vote of no confidence, but remember Dave's changes to this.

Unlikely to happen then, although if you were a Tory very committed to Brexit......

OK - thank you Lovely Paul.

I can't stomach much more of the Tories asking if their right honourable friends agree with them that they're all marvellous hear hear; so I switched off a while ago when Clarke started his marathon drone.

Up to that point, there wasn't much evidence of rebel backbenchers as far as I could see. I suspect the whips have been indulging in some threatening behaviour to make sure they toe the line.

After the awful events in Brussels today, Cameron's held a security council meeting as expected - I simply cannot imagine what it would be like to have Osborne doing that job. Cameron is bad enough, but Gidiot is such a twunt I just can't see him as PM at all.

Scary stuff.

HindleA - I hope your brother is safe. And anyone reading/visiting, I hope your people are OK if they're over there.

ephemerid · Post by **ephemerid** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 4:10 pm

TR'sGhost wrote:
ephemerid wrote:Not now - the DPAC people and others have been looking at various Twitter feeds and facebook pages; some campaigners have written to their MPs; and this idea that WRAG claimants can work is either a delusion more than a few MPs are under, or promoting this fallacy is deliberate, presumably with a view to making people think that ill people in the WRAG are fit for work.
I've been paying quite a bit of attention to trends in internet comments on media websites by Tory supporters about social security since before 2010.

It's quite curious that there are some perpetual standbys, typical of which is the "my cousin's mate's aunty's dog-walker had an ingrowing toenail once and now holidays in Lanzerotti using the private jet that all welfare claimants get - and they've got a 42" flat-screen TV as well!!!" That being the default general-purpose social-security thread distracter/diverter of course.

But there are also lines which come and go.

The issue in question has been a line pushed by quite a number of Tory commenters on websites for quite some time, certainly at least three years, on and off. It goes hand in hand with the continual misrepresentation, often by the same that posters again and again, that DLA=ESA and both are claimed by sending a form in with no checking procedure to make sure anything in the form is true.

And it's often a little gang that simultaneously trot out "Work Related Activity" = fit to work and ESA is "unemployment benefit for people who were sick but are fit for work now the lazy bastards, but kindly IDS overflows with compassion and will help them find an unskilled zero-hours jobs. They should be on their knees thanking him. Oh look - they are, IDS says so."

Then they drop that for a while until all of a sudden there's a number of them dragging it out again.

You might almost suspect they were being co-ordinated somehow.

That's interesting Mr.Ghost - I've noticed that over time as well.

But do you think this might be a bit worse than the usual thing?

Reason I ask - IDS was pratting about for some time calling ESA binary and whatnot, then along comes the £30 WRAG cut.
Cue outrage and urgent questions and all the rest - then Tory MPs (and now no less a personage than the Oleaginous Crustacean, the new DWP head honcho) are out and about telling their fans that WRAG claimants are fit for work.

Obviously, certain cretins have opined this for years; they'd have people in comas sent off to workfare. But I just feel this is a bit worse, somehow.
When quite senior MPs are actually saying and writing this as if it were fact, it worries me.
Whether they know it's not true or not....I'm not sure which of those is worst!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 4:53 pm

Today's House of Commons debates - Tuesday 22 March 2016
Updated 15 minutes ago

John McDonnell (Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington - Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer):

"At the bottom of the Budget is a Chancellor who, as some have mentioned, is more interested in his political career than the welfare
of disabled people, and more interested in becoming the leader of his party than in the health of our economy. He is not a Chancellor
but a political chancer. I pay tribute to colleagues on both sides of the House who forced him to U-turn on his proposed cuts to
disabled people.

This is not a one-nation, compassionate Budget—nobody believes that—but a Budget shot through with unfairness at its heart. Even
one of the Chancellor’s own Cabinet colleagues last week denounced it as fundamentally divisive and unfair. It is not a competent
Budget. It fell apart within a couple of days, and the Chancellor still cannot explain how he will fill the £4 billion hole. This is not a
Budget for the long term either—a long-term economic plan that lasts three days? It is a Budget built around short-term political
tactics and it has backfired spectacularly. They used to say that a week was a long time in politics but, under this Chancellor, a
weekend is the length of a long-term economic plan. What a failure!

This is not a Budget for the economy or the country, either, but one that is constructed around self-imposed austerity. It is about
politics—incompetent politics at that—not economics, and it has blown up in the Chancellor’s face. For the sake of his party—he
might think about that—and certainly for the sake of the country, it is time for him to go."

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publi ... known/236/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 5:05 pm

[Ken Clarke]...said that he thought that George Osborne was “quite right”
to “wait for events and see what happens” between now and the autumn
statement before deciding how to fill the £4.4bn black hole (over four years)
created by his decision to scrap the PIP cuts.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 98f62c5fe3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is that allowed?
Is it okay to vote on a budget with holes in it?

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 5:13 pm

citizenJA wrote:
[Ken Clarke]...said that he thought that George Osborne was “quite right”
to “wait for events and see what happens” between now and the autumn
statement before deciding how to fill the £4.4bn black hole (over four years)
created by his decision to scrap the PIP cuts.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blo ... 98f62c5fe3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is that allowed?
Is it okay to vote on a budget with holes in it?

Of course it is - if you want to be known as the party of unfunded tax cuts.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 5:21 pm

yahyah wrote:Anyone hear McDonnell ?

Yes. He was coherent, and spoke well.

I was fed up with the way it was reported, don't like this win/lose thing they have going these days re debates, what about right and wrong, moral values etc., or is it just sbout who can spin things best? Osbourne did the usual Tory thing, ugh. But can now see why Corbyn did not bring up IDS yesterday, because McDonnell used IDSs statements about gis own government to undermine GO and create a moral argument against the budget after speaking very effectively about the effect on disabled people of the sustained attack on them by the govt. before moving on to other aspects that were troubling. He did well, in the face of some pretty awful but well thought out interventions from the tory benches, at least one of them so appallingly opportunistic that the Speaker had to remind the house to keep on topic.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 5:29 pm

Maybe all governments should do this if they can't make their sums add up. Stick in something that they then cancel, and hope something turns up in the next 6 months.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Tue 22 Mar, 2016 5:30 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
yahyah wrote:I caught the tail end of a Tory on Radio 4 this morning, talking about how much money we wouldn't need to pay out to the EU if we voted for Brexit.

Unless I misheard, one of his arguments seemed to be that we could row back on austerity as a result.
Is this going to be one of the Leave campaign's crafty ways of trying to get left leaning people to vote for Brexit ? Vote Leave, scrap austerity ?
Strangely this is one of the better arguments I've heard! Eoin Clarke for example would probably agree.

It's not a great argument. Non-members have to pay in, and lose their influence.