That old lie. It's not true, the EU auditors have given the budget a clean bill of health since 2007. What they have found is some "material error" but at no higher a level than national governments find which is unsurprising since it's down to the national governments to administer these parts of the spending and it's they, not the EU, that has failed to properly oversee the spending.
Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (June Poll)
- Thread starter Rilot
- Start date
- Status
That old lie. It's not true, the EU auditors have given the budget a clean bill of health since 2007. What they have found is some "material error" but at no higher a level than national governments find which is unsurprising since it's down to the national governments to administer these parts of the spending and it's they, not the EU, that has failed to properly oversee the spending.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
Remain have regularly high jacked rhetoric with exaggeration that could only be seen as the exact same as lying on an industrial scale in my view.
We'll be leaving Europe and our allies ... No, we'll still be part of the five eyes, Nato, willing to assist allies and in need of trade and other things.
We'll become little englander isolationists ... No, the UK wouldn't even succeed that way and likes migration, our politicians have only ever been eager to ignore public view on this anyway.
We're using the politics of fear and division ... No, there is no division in merely leaving what is supposed to be a union you are allowed to join or leave freely anyway and the only fear and division is coming from worries of the EU tearing apart our democracy so people are afraid they have no control and divided as they are being falsely accused of being racist for wanting control.
Posters of factual events are racist ... No, don't even need to explain that one other than to point out it's clear they started this line of thinking as soon as they mentioned they had to attack hatred and division after jo cox's death. Using a dead MP to promote there new PR move was certainly shady enough.
They even tried to early on high jack the word europe to apply it to the union. Oh well, I hope it's a nice trip to Amrica.
Rubbish, even Sparkhill doesn't look like that.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
If I am reading the same article it says 30% of UKIP voters. But let's double it and add a bit, this is EU territory, numbers are meaningless, it's all in the social cohesion
It also says that in the poll 28% of *ALL VOTERS* feel it may be rigged....
They don't need to repeal it. I imagine they'll just claim that the next treaty doesn't transfer any sovereignty to the EU and therefore a referendum isn't necessary. A few years later when it's clear it has transferred sovereignty it's too late. Make no mistake, TPTB in Europe aren't going to tolerate ordinary people deciding if their treaties become enacted.
Getting net migration below 100,000 would do huge damage to our country. Why? Because over half of non-EU migration is students. Getting below 100,000 would only be possible if we decimated the number of students coming over and pouring money into our universities and the economies of university towns. It's a stupid target set without any sensible consideration of what it means.
They do. The error rates in EU spending are not higher than the rates in UK spending.
"Material error" doesn't even mean it was spent incorrectly, it means there was some problem with some part of the oversight, allocation or spending.
Oh come on Moses, that's completely unreasonable to expect him to actually read the article before commenting on it....
I know you think you're some sort of authority on all things EU with your links to LSE studies, but any chance of providing some information to back up your claim?
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,371
- Location
- Northumberland
Now that is a perfectly reasonable criticism to make (if still incorrect)
If ever there was a relevant time to use the adage 'Play the ball not the man' it's now
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
Oh come on Moses, that's completely unreasonable to expect him to actually read the article before commenting on it....
Hmm, what can I say....?
It pains me deeply to type this, but, err, sorry, I admit I did only skim read it My apologies, it's 47% for study in the most recent figures, just under 50%. That's still over 88,000. There's no way we'd be able to reduce non-study immigration to 12,000 or less without enormous damage to our economy and even further restricting the family rights of British citizens (already disgustingly slashed by Thereas May's decision to make it so British citizens have less right to reside with their spouse in the UK that people from other EU countries).
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,537
It and the vast majority of Birmingham outside about a mile of the city centre looks exactly like that.
Surely the net figure for students is quite low? We get a huge number arriving, buy they leave after 3-5 years.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,371
- Location
- Northumberland
Why would we want to stop the students coming here to study as long as they are paying their own way, not getting UK student loans and then sodding off without paying them back?
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
What do we think the split will be? I'm thinking 57% remain, 43% leave.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,371
- Location
- Northumberland
As good a guess as any, just like Osborne economics.
- Status