window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'UA-116206765-1');

UKIP have a chance!!!!

UKIP have a chance!!!!

Corbyn and his team are more communist than socialist.
The Tories are more BRINO than BREXIT, more socialist than Labour, and tax us too much.
Only UKIP has the mission for the future:
1)  Real BREXIT now
2)  Integrity with morality and support for Christian and UK Cultural social and traditional values
3)  FREEDOM of Speech and assembly
4)  Justice for all and an end to the European Arrest Warrant, plus Officer led Police reform
5)  UK removal from EU MILITARY affairs and more UK assistance to USA and NATO
6)  Proportional representation that still permits strong UK Government
7)  RESPECT AND TOLERATION but total UK intolerance of disrespectfulness and intolerance
8)  UK pressures upon proper integration within the UK community of all immigrants and ensuring that spoken English and knowledge of English ways be learned before any citizenship is granted
9)  NHS reform by small charges(real ones to all without a NI card) to reduce unnecessary waste and use and missed appointments and other inevitable abuse of a free service. Small charges produce big savings and less abuse.
10.) More to follow anon……”

2 Responses so far.

  1. Tony Woodcock says:

    Dear Editor
    Brexit us not about the NHS.
    It is not about trade deals or the environment.
    Brexit is about taking back control of our own destiny as a nation. Being a self-governing, self-determining nation once again.
    It is about whether we want to live on our feet or on our knees.
    It is what our colonies aked for in the 70’s and what we understood and granted them.
    Why is it so difficult for the English to understand this universal concept??
    Thank you concordanceout
    Tony Woodcock

  2. editor says:

    Dear Tony
    Absolutely correct. Apologies for the delayed reply. We all appreciate you writing in to us.

    Thank you.

    It is only the Remainers who cloud the issues so, like the dreadfully unpatriotic and misguided malevolent Chancellor Hammond. Malevolent , as on purpose he vomits project fear as John Redwood and Jacob Rees Mogg so clearly criticize him for so doing and so treacherously so. Hammond then goes round again to smell the vomit!

    We carry on and we will carry on until Brexit is honestly achieved……and we all know that the great British People know full well that they seek no more Elitist or Bureaucratic tyranny ever. Roll on the next election!.
    ——————————————————————–
    Tony please see below… thanks for writing Regards Roger editor
    —————————————————————————————-
    “John Redwood’s Diary The Treasury is too gloomy
    Posted: 25 Aug 2018 10:06 PM PDT
    “The UK economy has done well in creating many new jobs, generating considerable additional tax revenues for public services, continuing to grow and attracting large new investments from leading companies around the world since the referendum. This has happened despite a series of tax attacks on it by successive Chancellors out to damage the housing and car markets amongst others and against the background of a substantial monetary tightening engineered by the Bank of England. It has been possible thanks to past reforms and thanks to the growth of a large cadre of entrepreneurs prepared to venture their time and their money, and to many people willing to work in new areas and jobs. It has happened with the Treasury and Bank forecasting a recession in 2016-17 that did not happen, and constantly telling us of unlikely negative effects of our chosen policy of Brexit.”

    “This week again the big difference between the Chancellor and the government was visibly on view. This is not a new problem.. He was elected along with all Conservative MPs on a Manifesto which said we would get on and implement Brexit. The Manifesto saw the benefits of taking control of our laws, our money and our borders. It looked forward to spending plans that spend the EU contributions on our priorities, and to trade and migration policies that make sense for the UK and are fair to all parts of the world. The Chancellor thought otherwise and has spent his time in office trying to delay or derail Brexit by recreating as much of our current arrangements within the EU as possible.

    The government line on timing was that we will leave on 29 March 2019. Under pressure from the Treasury and others the PM then allowed the government to say that if they reached an Agreement late with the EU, any individual clause or requirement of the Agreement that could not be put in place by 29 March 2019 could slip to a later specified date. She proposed a variable implementation period. This was still not sufficient for the Chancellor who led the charge to demand a 2 year delay in our exit from the EU. The EU pushed this back to 21 months and demanded a high price for this concession. It meant that a Chancellor who is famous for seeking to block any good idea to spend a bit more on a domestic public service that needs it, was happily flagging through a huge new set of payments to the EU in order to stay in it for a bit longer. The absence of effective Treasury resistance to the financial demands of the EU is one of the worst features of their behaviour. One of the main reasons I and others voted to leave the EU is we want to spend the money we send them here at home on a mixture of increased spending and tax cuts to promote faster growth and a stronger economy and society.

    Six members of the government and two Conservative Vice Chairmen resigned over Chequers because they rightly saw it granting too many concessions to the EU undermining what people expect from Brexit. Looking at the arguments within government that have spilled over into the press the differences between the Chancellor’s views and where most of the rest of the party is are larger than the disagreements between those who resigned and the compromise position he helped force on the government at Chequers. As this week has made clear the Chancellor is fundamentally against the whole idea of Brexit, wrongly seeing it as damaging to the economy, a central policy put to the people in the Conservative Manifesto of 2017 and a core policy of the government. He should back it and be sensibly optimistic about the economy he helps guide, or pursue his disagreements from the backbenches. He should also reverse the damage his and his predecessor’s higher taxes have done in the next budget.”
    ———————————————————————————————————
    Briefings for Brexit [BfB] said this week [Graham Gudgin an Economist at Cambridge] : –

    “The risks of a no-deal scenario have been vastly overstated, not least in the Chancellor’s letter to the Treasury Select Committee this week. He repeated the discredited Treasury prediction that a ‘no-deal’ outcome would result in a loss of 5-10% of GDP. This is based on a black-box (general equilibrium) model which is highly susceptible to the assumptions put into it. An academic study using the same model estimates that GDP losses would be two-thirds lower than the Treasury forecasts. Our own forecasts are that losses would be small and temporary: see http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/centre-for-business-research/downloads/working-papers/wp493.pdf

    Editors of BfB are—–
    Dr Graham Gudgin
    Economist, Centre for Business Research, Judge Business School University of Cambridge
    Professor Robert Tombs
    Emeritus Professor of French History, University of Cambridge

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *