2015 election TV debates

[Pubey]

They want immigration controlled which is not the same as being anti immigration.

A 5 year ban on immigration is what Farage has proposed. Call it what you want, that seems anti-immigration to me.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

What are Labours policies on HS2 + the Heathrow epansion?

As I've been at pains to point out before, I'm not an apologist for the Labour party.

In answer to your question, (as I'm sure you know), I believe Labour are in favour of H2 expansion (though not at any price) and I believe they'll opt for a second runaway at Gatwick after next year's report is published.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

So you failed then.

After missing nearly a whole year's schooling because of a badly broken leg,after being knocked down by a car.Yes.

 

[callan]

A 5 year ban on immigration is what Farage has proposed. Call it what you want, that seems anti-immigration to me.

Immigrants must financially support themselves and their dependents for 5 years. This means private health insurance (except emergency medical care), private education and private housing - they should pay into the pot before they take out of it.

Not the same as a 5 year ban.

 

[callan]

As I've been at pains to point out before, I'm not an apologist for the Labour party.

In answer to your question, (as I'm sure you know), I believe Labour are in favour of H2 expansion (though not at any price) and I believe they'll opt for a second runaway at Gatwick after next year's report is published.

So you don't actually know what their policies are?

 

[Pubey]

Immigrants must financially support themselves and their dependents for 5 years. This means private health insurance (except emergency medical care), private education and private housing - they should pay into the pot before they take out of it.

Not the same as a 5 year ban.

I was going from this:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/07/ukip-ban-immigrants-nigel-farage

If it's off the table then fine, but I'd suggest it's another case where Farage says what he really wants and then realises it wouldn't work.

 

[callan]

I was going from this:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/07/ukip-ban-immigrants-nigel-farage

If it's off the table then fine, but I'd suggest it's another case where Farage says what he really wants and then realises it wouldn't work.

Try this;

http://www.ukip.org/issues

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

So you don't actually know what their policies are?

That is NOT what I said.

 

[callan]

That is NOT what I said.

You Said

In answer to your question, (as I'm sure you know), I believe Labour are in favour of H2 expansion (though not at any price) and I believe they'll opt for a second runaway at Gatwick after next year's report is published.

So either you believe it, which is what you wrote...or you know...which requires no belief and would be evidence based.

So I stated that you don't know what the policies are.

 

[Pubey]

Try this;

http://www.ukip.org/issues

Yeah but they're not mutually exclusive. He could try to bring in both policies if he wanted to.

If he wants to ban immigration for 5 years, then even if it's not practical or doesn't happen, it still suggests a strong anti-immigration stance.

 

[callan]

Yeah but they're not mutually exclusive. He could try to bring in both policies if he wanted to.

If he wants to ban immigration for 5 years, then even if it's not practical or doesn't happen, it still suggests a strong anti-immigration stance.

He's banning immigration to settle in the UK for 5 years, immigration to work via work permits on a points based system would still be allowed.

 

[londonblue]

Frankly none of this interests me in the slightest just as I'm indifferent if Miliband can eat a bacon sandwich. There is an irrational obsession today with where someone went to school. The questions should be exclusively on policies and whether they would improve the lot of this country.

So credibility isn't an issue? What I mean by that is whether or not their policies add up. Any politician can make promises in a manifesto. The questions such as, do the numbers add up, and do I trust them to actually deliver must count for something.

I'm not trying to have a dig at any politician specifically, I'm just asking an honest question: do you not think credibility counts?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You Said

In answer to your question, (as I'm sure you know), I believe Labour are in favour of H2 expansion (though not at any price) and I believe they'll opt for a second runaway at Gatwick after next year's report is published.

So either you believe it, which is what you wrote...or you know...which requires no belief and would be evidence based.

So I stated that you don't know what the policies are.

What I stated were Labour's official positions,certainly as regards to H2 expansion and whatever government is in power after May (whether Labour or Tory ) has already agreed ,in advance,to implement the recommendation of the Airports Commission report,which will almost certainly recommend a second runway at Gatwick.

If you have any different information,I'd be interested to hear it.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

Funny how UKIP are only scheduled to be in ONE TV debate but nearly the entire thread is talking about UKIP.

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

After missing nearly a whole year's schooling because of a badly broken leg,after being knocked down by a car.Yes.

Did you know the driver?:winking:

 

[Shrimpers are Magic]

The Greens did somewhat better than the Lib/Dems at the last election (Euros) both in terms of share of the vote and number of MEP's.

They also had an elected member of Parliament in 2010-something UKIP didn't achieve.

Yeah but if we are going on the last election which was the Euro's then UKIP pretty much cleaned up didn't they?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Did you know the driver?:winking:

Ha! No-he was a Naval Officer in a hurry to board his ship in Portsmouth,apparently.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Yeah but if we are going on the last election which was the Euro's then UKIP pretty much cleaned up didn't they?

You'd be unwise to extrapolate from UKIP's performance in the Euro's, as any sort of reliable guide to how well they'll do in next year's General Election,IMO.

 

[Uncle Leo]

Yeah but if we are going on the last election which was the Euro's then UKIP pretty much cleaned up didn't they?

They did well at the Euros, but historically those elections - which no-one really cares about - are more about a protest vote. Many, many, many, people who voted UKIP last May won't do so this May.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

They did well at the Euros, but historically those elections - which no-one really cares about - are more about a protest vote. Many, many, many, people who voted UKIP last May won't do so this May.

And many,many more who didn't vote at the Euros will turn out in May.

The higher the turnout, the less chance there is of UKIP winning anything more than just a handful of seats.