Huguenot

Tarot, you witless buffoon, 49% of our exports are to Europe. When you f*ck it up on that magnitude you don't say things like 'shouldn't have put your eggs in one basket'.

CPZ?

They do seem to be imposing unreasonable restrictions upon you, and you seem to be taking them on. I'm actually quite distressed that you've come on the EDF seeking solutions - it's not your job to deal with their petty demands, they are not 5 years old, and you are not mummy. Your hubby for starters can stop with this anti soup bollocks. It's just annoying. How old is he? I think maybe for a couple of years when they all turn up you should discard the dutiful housewife approach and just go down the pub with mates. Doormats are for doors.

Any individual may have a personal agenda when campaigning for office. Your claims are unreasonable at three levels: to single out the Jews, to assume that they are religiously conservative, to assume that they are willing to exploit office to further a religious agenda. The projection of destructive, illicit and covert agendas upon Jews in order to socially exclude them is an unpleasant habit of many centuries, and your accusation is made particularly repugnant by suggesting that if there is no evidence of wrongdoing, this is only because Jews have hidden it. You effectively make them guilty of perfidy by birth and disregard any evidence to the contrary. There is no more validity to your approach than a mediaeval witch hunt, and it deserves no more credit.

You're accusing me of 'lying' about the EU? Oh good grief. You had to invent your own words and attribute them to me (words that I didn't say or mean) in order to 'prove' me a liar. What I meant was that people's relationship with the EU hadn't changed, so grow up and stop accusing people of lying will you? A photo of a lunatic burning an EU flag is no more representative of the Greek public than photos of the EDL are representative of the UK. Your refusal to accept 32,000 people as a representative sample just makes you sound stupid, I'd drop it if I were you. There is no President of the European Union - although some of the institutions like the Council or to Commission have presidents. So you should get a little education before making pronouncements. You also sound daft claiming these roles are 'unelected'. You'll probably be surprised to learn that our own Prime Minister isn't elected either - he's appointed by his own party. Finally, the governments in Italy and Greece were tumbled by their own people and their own representatives, not by Europe - so stop making vacuous claims. The rest of what you say is so distorted and misrepresentational it doesn't real deserve a response. The rubbish about the EU being the same as the Euro just makes you sound silly.

You guys remind me of a couple of Normans sat in the living room sharing a can of lukewarm Fosters telling each other that you're having a great time whilst the party's going on next door. "Yeah, but PROVE I'm not having a great time!" - no thanks mate, I'm just gonna go join the party. The silly thing is that it's not as if you weren't invited.

Fuss over nothing. The LU has no problem with people carrying cameras and taking photos in the station. The original idea was to stop people setting up a photo studio in a confined space, which is understandable. It's a tragic reflection of Bob Crow that he has enabled stupid, aggressive and destructive employees with bad attitudes to keep their jobs. This sign is nothing but a reflection of that problem. I worked with the LU, frequently at Aldwych for 9 years.

Quids - excellent. I am now Pol Pot, and you are snuffling around a Godwins. Carter - must try harder. I mean, really? They only interviewed 32,000 Europeans in a balanced representative sample, so the results are 'complete crap'? Were you drunk when you wrote that? You also miss the point regarding the changes in the EU in the last 10 years. Most people do not know about the administrative changes you've suggested - they will not have impacted on people's view about Europe. The only thing big enough to have impacted people's views are the challenges with the Euro, whipped up by an anti-European press. However, the EU and the Euro are not the same thing, and Europe is not responsible for Britain's woes. The irony is that 'pulling out of Europe' cannot make Britain better, it can only make Britain worse. There is no upside to giving the bird to Europe. Since that is manifestly obvious, then your anti-European stance cannot be rational. So what then, can be fuelling your rabid anti-European stance that is so extreme that you claim interviewing 32,000 people cannot give us a fair idea what people think?

Ha ha! Very good.

Eh? My position has not changed recently. @Quids: I distinctly remember having a row with you four years ago of whether it was practical or whether it was necessary. Do you think the Euro was flawed at its conception? Were/are there flaws? Yes of course. I'm aware you may fundamentally believe this is simply a yes/no economic question, wherein our differences lie. Economically the Euro is going to struggle through these formative years. However, I believe that the Euro is a political question that transcends fiscal mathematics - it is a necessary and vital part of social and global progression. The 'flaws' are built-in as executional parameters. To say 'is it flawed' is to say 'are there problems with walking': of course you can only trip when walking, but these are necessary elements of progress. I don't contest them, I welcome them as a demonstration of growing skills and experimentation to a greater goal. I've argued relentlessly that the Euro is part of a process towards political, administrative and economic integration Do you think that sovreighn states can have a shared currency without centralised Fiscal Control? No - but I also think that the privatisation of currency is an implausible construct. I don't believe that the ownership of the means of exchange should lie within the hands of 'interested' individuals. Currency in the modern definition is effectively a facilitator of barter that relies upon inequality to function. Globalisation and the demands of the labour market render it a social issue that should be regulated outside of nation states. The move to centralised fiscal control over a broad geography is a step toward the 'world currency' based on equality of labour that I feel is the inevitable consequence of the information age. Do you think that handing over a sovreaign states fiscal control to a central state without the will of the people is democratic? Currency is not currently remotely connected to the will of the people - it's a private commoditisation of a fabricated concept. The move to a central state control is an increase in democratisation, not a decrease. Do you think ALL critics of the Euro are bigoted europhiles? (Europhobes?). No - it depends upon their term of reference. If they're drawing conclusions based on substantiated evidence and/or historical reference I'll take the point. If they're opining on a projection of unsubstantiated perspectives then their motivation is simply prejudice. Do you think the Euro has been a good thing for Greece, Irealnd, Italy and Spain thus far? Come on mate, you and I are pretty similar ages - you remember what it was like yeah? I don't expect a 25 year old pharmaceutical rep from Brighton to remember what it was like when we were really f*cked, but I expect you to!!

European views...

"There is not and never has been any UK support for the project, and tbh there is precious little support across the EU outside of the narrow political class and a thin seam of Euro idealists." No, I'm afraid you're wrong - that's where your whole argument collapses. For European views please check by on the research I provided a few weeks ago. Your claim is both unsubstantiated and untrue. Every time I generate the data to prove it, you lose the argument - and then you repeat the same mantra later on, leaving me to have to generate the research again. It's boring. Even 10 years ago Britain was 68:19 in favour of staying in the EU. Now it's 49:40 in favour of leaving. How has the EU changed since then? Not at all. The only difference is the Euro crisis, and how it has been exploited by anti-regulatory and isolationist businesses who could exploit a weak Britain.

No HAL9000, it's not statistically valid - the numbers are all too small. There is no equivalence between 24 Jewish MPs and 200 Muslim ones. One is a numerical point of interest, the other is a decisive minority. By that logic we should be talking about the possible consequence of having 2,400 non Muslim or Jewish MPs. ermmmm... right? Anyway, let it go - you're only sh*t stirring for tarot, everyone else will ignore this conversation.

I understand the sentiment - but as I've illustrated before, Europeans don't feel this way about it. You're describing a British state of mind. Europeans don't empathise with why the British would be indifferent to the 'European Project'. There's a potential misread of the Le Monde quote above - it's not justifying the British position, it's scornful of what it believes to be a simplistic Anglo-Saxon preoccupation with markets rather than people. The Greeks for example do not feel, nor protest the proposition, that the austerity has been imposed by Germany. In fact they believe that they've been subject to a monumental rip off from their own social elite. Europe (and European legislation) is perceived as an opportunity to resolve this - not, as the British think, a threat on sovereignty from afar.

I think the editorial is well put also - apart from the conflation of influential right wing Eurosceptics and the 'British' in general. Neither does that mean that I think the 'British' position is correct - I can just recognise it. Current anti-Europe sentiment in the UK is entirely predicated on a confusion between the Euro and the EU, and an externalisation of British woes upon some dangerous European interlopers. Nor am I worried about the absence of the UK from this deal in particular (I never imagined it was likely) - but I do think that this position is indicative of a greater malaise, and it's foolish to imagine that Europe will continue to do business as usual with a country that they feel is either indifferent or hostile to their interests, and was disruptive in their hour of need. In that context mathematical calculations about the inclusion in certain agreements simply miss the point - it's the political fallout that matters, and the potential tarrifs that manifest themselves consequently.

This much for this much

Dishwasher?

History will more likely look back on this as a blip in the creation of a European super economic zone, and the moment that the British truly disappeared up the arse of their own self destructive vanity. It's not even as if we've developed other trading partners to fill the gap. UK export trade with BRIC is 5%, Germany is 11%. We rely on a bankrupt US that can't even locate the UK on a map, we turn up our noses at our closest trading partners. We have a fraction of the exports to our own commonwealth countries than US, Germany, France or... even Italy! It's pathetic. And you guys truly think we're clever?

No posturing required from me - the Tories have done it all for themselves: the UK is effectively now in the slow lane whilst the powerhouses of Europe are creating a superpower on our doorstep. We've excluded ourselves from a conversation that will define the economic strength of the UK for the foreseeable future. Us and Hungary - what great company to be in. And all over some wafty BS about 'who has the power'.

The 'cost' of regulation is a fabricated factoid. It's meaningless. What about the cost of a drop in consumer or business confidence through lack of regulation? What about the cost to the economy of unregulated fraud? As for the 5,000 vs 15,000 issue - it's just silly. You have no idea how many are needed. Fewer is not necessarily better, as the banking industry has shown. At least in the EU we can share the cost of creation and implementation, instead of having to pay for it on our own. If you think the problem with fishing is EU regulation you must be nuts. EU regulation on fishing and stocks is the only thing holding the industry together. If you left it to the fishermen there'd be no fish left. You're right that the EEA allows SOME of the freedoms of the EU, but not all. What will be the cost of losing freedoms? In your anti European twaddling you don't care - you don't care about the cost in jobs or GDP because you're happy to cut off your nose to spite your face when it comes to foreigners. If you don't have access to the export figures then try Ernst and Young Here Why do you question the figures? Are you trying to prove that we don't really do business with the EU? How silly is that? Your costing is also foolish, you're trying to estimate what we spend on the EU without estimating what we get back directly and indirectly through exports. The obvious point is that the benefits in exports and freedom offer far more back than our share of the costs. Overall, there is simply no downside to being in the EU, but the is a MASSIVE potential downside to leaving.

It's big jump from DJKQ saying something isn't practical to suggesting she doesn't care about the welfare of a child.

I don't think you'd be able to hang burglary on a bailiff: The intention to commit an offence (Theft, Grievous Bodily Harm or ,for S9(1)(a), Criminal Damage) , being an essential element of burglary, requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. For example, if entry is made to regain property which the defendant honestly believes he has a legal right to take, there is no intention to steal and the defendant is entitled to be acquitted. However, it has been held that a conditional intent to steal anything found to be of value is enough to satisfy this requirement.

Aggravated burglary is only when the burglar is carrying a weapon and is aware they have it.

The irony is that you don't see 'how you can judge', but that's exactly what you are doing. The problem is that you aren't familiar with education, your views are seriously tainted by a virulent anti-authority streak, you credit children with adult experience and judgement, and you have an unhealthy egotistical tendency which causes you to elevate 'rights' over 'responsibilities'. All of these combine to a great flashing warning light that reads 'DO NOT GET INOLVED IN EDUCATION'.

Nah, there ain't gonna be any referendum on anything soon. It's just not worth it with the economy struggling already.