• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

The Times predictable attack on Farage

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #91
    I also kind of like Farange being an MEP to take the mick a little, then to milk it to take the mick some more. It's kind of sticking his nose up at them.

    And as per my previous comment, if we were allowed, as contractors, to have a tax free allowance, would we turn it down, as we didn't need it, or take it with open pockets? I think there's a world of difference between an expense and an allowance, although maybe I am being a tad naive.

    Comment


      #92
      Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
      Quite. If they disagree with how UKIP spend EU money, perhaps some should consider that that is also a criticism of the EU - the unnecessary employment, the excessive pay and perks these people get and the lack of transparency.

      How many years is it now that the auditors have failed to approve the EU budget?

      Audit 'seriously undermines credibility' of EU spending - Telegraph
      This is where opponents of the EU have a very valid point that is not being addressed sufficiently by the EU parliament or the whole organisation. It's one reason why I personally don't think we need the EU parliament; what we need is more along the lines of the EEA, with some minimal product standards defined to make free trade easier, not harder.
      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

      Comment


        #93
        Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
        This is where opponents of the EU have a very valid point that is not being addressed sufficiently by the EU parliament or the whole organisation. It's one reason why I personally don't think we need the EU parliament; what we need is more along the lines of the EEA, with some minimal product standards defined to make free trade easier, not harder.
        The organisation you are looking for already exists. ETFA. About EFTA | 50 years of promoting free trade and economic integration - EFTA

        An organisation Britain left in order to join the EU!

        Comment


          #94
          This is where opponents of the EU have a very valid point that is not being addressed sufficiently by the EU parliament or the whole organisation. It's one reason why I personally don't think we need the EU parliament; what we need is more along the lines of the EEA, with some minimal product standards defined to make free trade easier, not harder.
          Indeed. Of course even a trading association must intrude into other areas. Not just product standards IMO but stuff like workplace rights, maximum working hours, minimum pay etc or some countries would just undercut all the others with a sweatshop culture. Lots of other things make sense too like close cooperation on policing, given the international nature of much crime.
          bloggoth

          If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
          John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

          Comment


            #95
            For those of you who may be confused by the relationship between the EU, the EEA, EFTA and the Council of Europe here's a diagram.




            All very simple really

            Comment


              #96
              Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
              Indeed. Of course even a trading association must intrude into other areas. Not just product standards IMO but stuff like workplace rights, maximum working hours, minimum pay etc or some countries would just undercut all the others with a sweatshop culture. Lots of other things make sense too like close cooperation on policing, given the international nature of much crime.
              Well yes, but aren't these matters that could be negotiated at the level of councils of the responsible ministers?
              And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

              Comment


                #97
                Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                This is where opponents of the EU have a very valid point that is not being addressed sufficiently by the EU parliament or the whole organisation. It's one reason why I personally don't think we need the EU parliament; what we need is more along the lines of the EEA, with some minimal product standards defined to make free trade easier, not harder.
                No, they should abolish the European Commission and the office of the President of Europe instead, two useless and anti democratic institutions.

                More power should be given to the European Parliament, but they should halve the number of MEPs.
                <Insert idea here> will never be adopted because the politicians are in the pockets of the banks!

                Comment


                  #98
                  Originally posted by petergriffin View Post
                  No, they should abolish the European Commission and the office of the President of Europe instead, two useless and anti democratic institutions.

                  More power should be given to the European Parliament, but they should halve the number of MEPs.
                  That's another possible solution; I don't have a preference actually as long as the EU moves toward being more like the EEA.
                  And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                  Comment


                    #99
                    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                    That's another possible solution; I don't have a preference actually as long as the EU moves toward being more like the EEA.
                    But the EEA is stupid. In practice you are subject to most of EU economic regulations without having your say.

                    We said that a million times, you can't compare Britain with Switzerland or Norway. Besides, we have no gold left.
                    <Insert idea here> will never be adopted because the politicians are in the pockets of the banks!

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
                      Quite. If they disagree with how UKIP spend EU money, perhaps some should consider that that is also a criticism of the EU - the unnecessary employment, the excessive pay and perks these people get and the lack of transparency.

                      How many years is it now that the auditors have failed to approve the EU budget?

                      Audit 'seriously undermines credibility' of EU spending - Telegraph

                      Would this be this one:

                      After months of complex negotiations, the European Parliament finally approved the EU’s budget for 2014-2020 yesterday (19 November). The budget regulation was approved by 537 votes to 126, with 19 abstentions. The accompanying Inter-Institutional Agreement was approved by 557 votes to 118, with 11 abstentions.
                      Thats actually an article from 2012 and IIRC the budget has actually been approved since around 2006 (I have posted a link to this elsewhere), unless there is a different budget?
                      Brexit is having a wee in the middle of the room at a house party because nobody is talking to you, and then complaining about the smell.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X