A Ukip source said: "Ms Ross should probably resign her candidacy and donate her deposit to a cancer charity.”
Ross has responded: “No surprise Kippers don’t like dark humour…”
Farage had to have a testicle removed due to cancer
Just like those who mocked Cameron for having a disabled child, and then mocking him after he died. The thing is if they're having to resort to attacking a person like this, it means they have run out of arguments on their policies.
I think these two things are miles apart. The joke about Farage - whilst it's in bad taste - is actually quite funny. Jibes about Cameron having a disabled child; and mocking the child's death; are beyond the pale.
So bad taste jokes are allowed now if they are directed at somebody disliked by certain people? Maybe I'll tell a joke about Brown having one eye.
Why is it common knowledge how many testicles Adolf Hitler, Nigel Farage or any other man has/had? I honestly had no idea what the "joke" referred to. Is it supposed to be about Hitler?
Have UKIP ditched their attacks on "political correctness"?
I'd also suggest there's a difference between mocking Cameron for having a disabled child, and pointing out the hypocrisy of him claiming DLA for his own son and then removing that support for many disabled people once in Government.
Except he didn't remove support from any disabled people in Government, so really his dead son was being used as propaganda to support a lie.
Disabled people have frequently cited the damage caused to them by the bedroom tax.
Only those who live in social housing and have more bedrooms than are required for the size of family living there. And are not prepared to pay the extra £14 per week rent that entails.
Oh, and are not pensioners.
I know quite a few people who are unhappy with having to pay the extra...... but all of them, without exception, do pay it to stay in their property.
Most of them also receive mobility allowances and have vehicles provided instead of receiving the allowance. Again, all of them have bigger/better cars than the allowance gives them. They all pay extra to have these bigger/better vehicles, but none of them complain about that.
I'd also suggest there's a difference between mocking Cameron for having a disabled child, and pointing out the hypocrisy of him claiming DLA for his own son and then removing that support for many disabled people once in Government.
Except he didn't remove support from any disabled people in Government, so really his dead son was being used as propaganda to support a lie.
Disabled people have frequently cited the damage caused to them by the bedroom tax.
Only those who live in social housing and have more bedrooms than are required for the size of family living there. And are not prepared to pay the extra £14 per week rent that entails.
Oh, and are not pensioners.
I know quite a few people who are unhappy with having to pay the extra...... but all of them, without exception, do pay it to stay in their property.
Most of them also receive mobility allowances and have vehicles provided instead of receiving the allowance. Again, all of them have bigger/better cars than the allowance gives them. They all pay extra to have these bigger/better vehicles, but none of them complain about that.
As far as I can tell the argument put forward by disabled people is referenced in this article.
Fiiish, I have to say that I am more right than left, but on this occasion, you are being ridiculous. You can't say that the PM is not responsible for govenment policy.
Individual ministerial responsibility is a constitutional convention in governments using the Westminster System that a cabinet minister bears the ultimate responsibility for the actions of their ministry or department.
The cabinet minister may well bear ultimate responsibility, but The PM is the PM and I personally believe you're being silly if you are claiming, that the PM bears no responsibility for the party he governs.
That article is interesting. Are the only complaints about the housing benefit reductions related to the disabled lacking an exemption that they have a seemingly fair claim to? Because it seems as though there is a wider complaint being made against the principle as the Guardian and others refer to these reductions, inaccurately, as a "tax". Tax is something that gets paid to the state not a benefit withdrawn by the state.
In saying this it does not matter whether the reduction is fair and justified or not. Its an abuse of language.
I thought the principle was to try and free up housing space by encouraging those who did not need a spare room to move to a smaller property. The disabled generally have a fair claim to needing that space don't they? Though cases will differ and one shouldn't generalise.
Whatever way you look at it the policy has been a massive shot in the foot by the Tories and what has it achieved? The Scots in particular were apoplectic about it!
Fiiish, I have to say that I am more right than left, but on this occasion, you are being ridiculous. You can't say that the PM is not responsible for govenment policy.
Individual ministerial responsibility is a constitutional convention in governments using the Westminster System that a cabinet minister bears the ultimate responsibility for the actions of their ministry or department.
The cabinet minister may well bear ultimate responsibility, but The PM is the PM and I personally believe you're being silly if you are claiming, that the PM bears no responsibility for the party he governs.
I'd also suggest there's a difference between mocking Cameron for having a disabled child, and pointing out the hypocrisy of him claiming DLA for his own son and then removing that support for many disabled people once in Government.
Except he didn't remove support from any disabled people in Government, so really his dead son was being used as propaganda to support a lie.
Disabled people have frequently cited the damage caused to them by the bedroom tax.
Only those who live in social housing and have more bedrooms than are required for the size of family living there. And are not prepared to pay the extra £14 per week rent that entails.
Oh, and are not pensioners.
I know quite a few people who are unhappy with having to pay the extra...... but all of them, without exception, do pay it to stay in their property.
Most of them also receive mobility allowances and have vehicles provided instead of receiving the allowance. Again, all of them have bigger/better cars than the allowance gives them. They all pay extra to have these bigger/better vehicles, but none of them complain about that.
As far as I can tell the argument put forward by disabled people is referenced in this article.
Not everybody can be filed under 'people you know' can they?
And I didn't say they could.
But seeing as I work in this area and deal with disabled tenants on a daily basis, I thought you'd might like to hear of some examples that deal with the issues at hand.
Plenty of them have also moved to smaller, more suitable accommodation, freeing up badly needed family homes for, er, families.
Which is exactly what the spare room subsidy was bought in for.
But then the Guardian has never bothered to interview those who have seen this move as successful for a great many people. I mean, why would it?
The bedroom thing was a way of reducing government spending, one of many varied measures. With more cuts due, whichever government is in power, the question is where cuts should come from.
I don't know the full details, but as a comparison just to 'bedroom tax', I believe most fee paying schools enjoy charitable status, and get tax advantages. Now for some schools that may well be justified, but I would also suspect that for a lot of others who enjoy the status, that charitable status is inappropriate. My knowledge in this area is flimsy I admit, but I wonder if there would be a similar income from the independent schools not getting tax benefits in this way, and the spare bedroom payments being cut for the disabled.
If I am right, and I don't pretend this was a stark choice of alternatives, then it might indicate which sector of society this government wants to go after, and which they leave alone.
I can't help feeling, with the cuts, that it is the poorest and most disadvantaged that get it the deepest. For spending, well the high speed train thing is all well and good, and will probably help business, and the government argue that a booming business economy will eventually help everybody, but I bet the first in line to sample the fruits of better business won't be the disabled.
I don't blame whichever government puts their mates first, that's what they all do isn't it? I simply know more disabled and disadvantaged people than business people, and of course that kind of knowledge would influence my vote.
Personally I wouldn't say the high speed train thing is well and good. Nor that it will help business in a material way. House of Lords committee saying today that the money should be spent differently (assuming the money is available in the first place).
Personally I wouldn't say the high speed train thing is well and good. Nor that it will help business in a material way. House of Lords committee saying today that the money should be spent differently (assuming the money is available in the first place).
There is a view that HS2 is the wrong project in the wrong place and that there would be greater benefits from a number of smaller improvement projects, but they wouldn't look so impressive...
A Ukip source said: "Ms Ross should probably resign her candidacy and donate her deposit to a cancer charity.”
Ross has responded: “No surprise Kippers don’t like dark humour…”
Farage had to have a testicle removed due to cancer
Just like those who mocked Cameron for having a disabled child, and then mocking him after he died. The thing is if they're having to resort to attacking a person like this, it means they have run out of arguments on their policies.
I think these two things are miles apart. The joke about Farage - whilst it's in bad taste - is actually quite funny. Jibes about Cameron having a disabled child; and mocking the child's death; are beyond the pale.
So bad taste jokes are allowed now if they are directed at somebody disliked by certain people? Maybe I'll tell a joke about Brown having one eye.
Go ahead! Everyone likes a good laugh. As long as it's funny and it's about a public figure; and not just poking fun at people with disabilities.
The bedroom thing was a way of reducing government spending, one of many varied measures. With more cuts due, whichever government is in power, the question is where cuts should come from.
I don't know the full details, but as a comparison just to 'bedroom tax', I believe most fee paying schools enjoy charitable status, and get tax advantages. Now for some schools that may well be justified, but I would also suspect that for a lot of others who enjoy the status, that charitable status is inappropriate. My knowledge in this area is flimsy I admit, but I wonder if there would be a similar income from the independent schools not getting tax benefits in this way, and the spare bedroom payments being cut for the disabled.
If I am right, and I don't pretend this was a stark choice of alternatives, then it might indicate which sector of society this government wants to go after, and which they leave alone.
I can't help feeling, with the cuts, that it is the poorest and most disadvantaged that get it the deepest. For spending, well the high speed train thing is all well and good, and will probably help business, and the government argue that a booming business economy will eventually help everybody, but I bet the first in line to sample the fruits of better business won't be the disabled.
I don't blame whichever government puts their mates first, that's what they all do isn't it? I simply know more disabled and disadvantaged people than business people, and of course that kind of knowledge would influence my vote.
To keep their charitable status, most fee paying schools provide "free places" to local pupils who would not otherwise be able to afford to attend. The schools usually have a governor who is in some way connected to the local authority, who oversees the compliance. I don't know if this is true of Eton, Harrow etc, but it is certainly the case in many private schools around South London.
Another strand of the charitable status plan, is that many private schools provide 6th formers as classroom assistants to local primary schools as part of a community outreach, and provide singers/musicians to local old folks homes etc.
Some schools offer their facilities (sports, meeting rooms etc) for use by other local schools.
I don't know if the numbers would balance, but if the schools paid tax, maybe the other community benefits would stop.
Tbf, the headline stuff is far from surprising but I think some of the figures are a little:
"the survey found that support for Ukip was twice as high among those who said they were “really struggling” on their current income than those who described themselves as “really comfortable”"
"Three quarters said they felt that ordinary people did not get their fair share of the nation’s wealth – almost exactly the same proportion as Labour supporters"
"the vast majority of Ukip supporters (81 per cent) said they would like Britain to withdraw from the European Union, as many as 17 per cent said they would prefer to stay in"
"Those in working class occupations were also twice as likely to identify with Ukip as those in managerial and professional positions"
Tbf, the headline stuff is far from surprising but I think some of the figures are a little:
"the survey found that support for Ukip was twice as high among those who said they were “really struggling” on their current income than those who described themselves as “really comfortable”"
"Three quarters said they felt that ordinary people did not get their fair share of the nation’s wealth – almost exactly the same proportion as Labour supporters"
"the vast majority of Ukip supporters (81 per cent) said they would like Britain to withdraw from the European Union, as many as 17 per cent said they would prefer to stay in"
"Those in working class occupations were also twice as likely to identify with Ukip as those in managerial and professional positions"
Seventeen per cent of Ukip supporters want Britain to remain in the EU? I am trying to get my head round this!
One in six Ukip supporters disagree with the Ukip leadership about whether Britain should be in the EU?
Perhaps they just want the right to self determination in that respect rather than a particular outcome and see UKIP as the way to get it. Or perhaps they see UKIP as the modern day anti establishment party for the working classes and will vote for them whilst not expecting them to win or their policies to be given effect. I don't see why one would have to want to leave the EU in order to vote UKIP and I believe there are SNP members who would vote No to leaving the UK in the same vein ie lack of any confidence in Labour or Tories.
Perhaps they just want the right to self determination in that respect rather than a particular outcome and see UKIP as the way to get it. Or perhaps they see UKIP as the modern day anti establishment party for the working classes and will vote for them whilst not expecting them to win or their policies to be given effect. I don't see why one would have to want to leave the EU in order to vote UKIP and I believe there are SNP members who would vote No to leaving the UK in the same vein ie lack of any confidence in Labour or Tories.
The clue is in their name. It's pretty much what the whole party is built on. I suppose it's like saying, "I'll vote for the greens but I'm quite happy to burn more fossil fuels and build more nuclear power stations."
perhaps they see UKIP as the modern day anti establishment party for the working classes and will vote for them whilst not expecting them to win or their policies to be given effect.
I think it's surprising because it's the central tenet of what Ukip stands for. If you gave Farage one free hit and let him have one policy enacted, free of charge, it would be Brexit. Probably.
perhaps they see UKIP as the modern day anti establishment party for the working classes and will vote for them whilst not expecting them to win or their policies to be given effect.
I think it's surprising because it's the central tenet of what Ukip stands for. If you gave Farage one free hit and let him have one policy enacted, free of charge, it would be Brexit. Probably.
But not the demographic they appeal to specifically. Slightly different, people in this country may be just after something out of the norm (blue/red/yellow) and something that "appears" to stick up for "them".
The bedroom thing was a way of reducing government spending, one of many varied measures. With more cuts due, whichever government is in power, the question is where cuts should come from.
I don't know the full details, but as a comparison just to 'bedroom tax', I believe most fee paying schools enjoy charitable status, and get tax advantages. Now for some schools that may well be justified, but I would also suspect that for a lot of others who enjoy the status, that charitable status is inappropriate. My knowledge in this area is flimsy I admit, but I wonder if there would be a similar income from the independent schools not getting tax benefits in this way, and the spare bedroom payments being cut for the disabled.
If I am right, and I don't pretend this was a stark choice of alternatives, then it might indicate which sector of society this government wants to go after, and which they leave alone.
I can't help feeling, with the cuts, that it is the poorest and most disadvantaged that get it the deepest. For spending, well the high speed train thing is all well and good, and will probably help business, and the government argue that a booming business economy will eventually help everybody, but I bet the first in line to sample the fruits of better business won't be the disabled.
I don't blame whichever government puts their mates first, that's what they all do isn't it? I simply know more disabled and disadvantaged people than business people, and of course that kind of knowledge would influence my vote.
I can't help agreeing that the bedroom tax is an ill-thought out policy. If it resulted in people downsizing because they could, it would have a neutral effect on the Welfare budget, it would not be a tax. It would result in more efficient allocation of social housing, I would tend to think that was a good outcome. In fact little downsizing, has occurred, it is reducing the welfare budget by over £350m a year and rent arrears have increased. Can't help thinking that it is increasing Welfare spending somewhere else.
Labour will struggle to replace this revenue in reversing the bedroom tax and keep within the cap on welfare spending Ed Balls has committed Labour to. It will remain an iniquitous policy.
So Nigel's campaign locally in Thanet was run by an ex NF member - Nigel lost and the UKIP breakthrough was a seat (In keeping with the original title.)
Along the way he accused the BBC of selecting a biased audience, complained about hignfw and his party suspected electoral fraud and complained of such (there was none)
Nigel resigned, declared he would stand for election, rescinded his resignation and is now ovwhelmingly popular. So poplar that he was described as " angry and snarling" by his national campaign leader who said he was turning the party into a personality cult.
In the interim the party wants thier MP to claim all the allowances he can.
So Nigel's campaign locally in Thanet was run by an ex NF member - Nigel lost and the UKIP breakthrough was a seat (In keeping with the original title.)
Along the way he accused the BBC of selecting a biased audience, complained about hignfw and his party suspected electoral fraud and complained of such (there was none)
Nigel resigned, declared he would stand for election, rescinded his resignation and is now ovwhelmingly popular. So poplar that he was described as " angry and snarling" by his national campaign leader who said he was turning the party into a personality cult.
In the interim the party wants thier MP to claim all the allowances he can.
Hmmmm.
Who was the ex NF member ?
Agree with the rest.
Tbf, on Question Time last night, Farage was recommending, that his party claim zero of the allowance !
So Nigel's campaign locally in Thanet was run by an ex NF member - Nigel lost and the UKIP breakthrough was a seat (In keeping with the original title.)
Along the way he accused the BBC of selecting a biased audience, complained about hignfw and his party suspected electoral fraud and complained of such (there was none)
Nigel resigned, declared he would stand for election, rescinded his resignation and is now ovwhelmingly popular. So poplar that he was described as " angry and snarling" by his national campaign leader who said he was turning the party into a personality cult.
In the interim the party wants thier MP to claim all the allowances he can.
Minor parties of the far left and far right generally implode because of jealousies, ambitions and general hatreds of almost like minded fellow party members .. perhaps this is because inside every left or right 'mini extremist' lies the heart and soul of a potential little dictator .... I admire Farage because it seems to me that he truly and deeply believes that the UK would be far better off outside the EU. I think that he feels that all internal party squabbling is beneath him and detracts from his crusading message. All the internal backbiting is about personal ambition and agendas and ambitions other than those relating to EU membership. All the other political parties must be rubbing their hands with glee at the infighting within UKIP
So Nigel's campaign locally in Thanet was run by an ex NF member - Nigel lost and the UKIP breakthrough was a seat (In keeping with the original title.)
Along the way he accused the BBC of selecting a biased audience, complained about hignfw and his party suspected electoral fraud and complained of such (there was none)
Nigel resigned, declared he would stand for election, rescinded his resignation and is now ovwhelmingly popular. So poplar that he was described as " angry and snarling" by his national campaign leader who said he was turning the party into a personality cult.
In the interim the party wants thier MP to claim all the allowances he can.
Hmmmm.
Who was the ex NF member ?
Agree with the rest.
Tbf, on Question Time last night, Farage was recommending, that his party claim zero of the allowance !
He was head of a branch in 1978? Is that the best you can come up with? What a pile of bollocks!
Instead of digging up ancient relics try and look a bit closer to the modern day.
There are dozens of Lab/Lib Con candidates with strong links to the BNP who have stood over the last few years. Do you think it's just a UKIP thing then?
Comments
Who the fuck is Jenny Ross?
Why is it common knowledge how many testicles Adolf Hitler, Nigel Farage or any other man has/had? I honestly had no idea what the "joke" referred to. Is it supposed to be about Hitler?
Have UKIP ditched their attacks on "political correctness"?
The "joke" isn't funny or clever. Try again.
Oh, and are not pensioners.
I know quite a few people who are unhappy with having to pay the extra...... but all of them, without exception, do pay it to stay in their property.
Most of them also receive mobility allowances and have vehicles provided instead of receiving the allowance. Again, all of them have bigger/better cars than the allowance gives them. They all pay extra to have these bigger/better vehicles, but none of them complain about that.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/10/disabled-tenants-bedroom-tax-challenge-supreme-court.
Not everybody can be filed under 'people you know' can they?
In saying this it does not matter whether the reduction is fair and justified or not. Its an abuse of language.
I thought the principle was to try and free up housing space by encouraging those who did not need a spare room to move to a smaller property. The disabled generally have a fair claim to needing that space don't they? Though cases will differ and one shouldn't generalise.
Whatever way you look at it the policy has been a massive shot in the foot by the Tories and what has it achieved? The Scots in particular were apoplectic about it!
But seeing as I work in this area and deal with disabled tenants on a daily basis, I thought you'd might like to hear of some examples that deal with the issues at hand.
Plenty of them have also moved to smaller, more suitable accommodation, freeing up badly needed family homes for, er, families.
Which is exactly what the spare room subsidy was bought in for.
But then the Guardian has never bothered to interview those who have seen this move as successful for a great many people. I mean, why would it?
I don't know the full details, but as a comparison just to 'bedroom tax', I believe most fee paying schools enjoy charitable status, and get tax advantages. Now for some schools that may well be justified, but I would also suspect that for a lot of others who enjoy the status, that charitable status is inappropriate. My knowledge in this area is flimsy I admit, but I wonder if there would be a similar income from the independent schools not getting tax benefits in this way, and the spare bedroom payments being cut for the disabled.
If I am right, and I don't pretend this was a stark choice of alternatives, then it might indicate which sector of society this government wants to go after, and which they leave alone.
I can't help feeling, with the cuts, that it is the poorest and most disadvantaged that get it the deepest. For spending, well the high speed train thing is all well and good, and will probably help business, and the government argue that a booming business economy will eventually help everybody, but I bet the first in line to sample the fruits of better business won't be the disabled.
I don't blame whichever government puts their mates first, that's what they all do isn't it? I simply know more disabled and disadvantaged people than business people, and of course that kind of knowledge would influence my vote.
Another strand of the charitable status plan, is that many private schools provide 6th formers as classroom assistants to local primary schools as part of a community outreach, and provide singers/musicians to local old folks homes etc.
Some schools offer their facilities (sports, meeting rooms etc) for use by other local schools.
I don't know if the numbers would balance, but if the schools paid tax, maybe the other community benefits would stop.
"the survey found that support for Ukip was twice as high among those who said they were “really struggling” on their current income than those who described themselves as “really comfortable”"
"Three quarters said they felt that ordinary people did not get their fair share of the nation’s wealth – almost exactly the same proportion as Labour supporters"
"the vast majority of Ukip supporters (81 per cent) said they would like Britain to withdraw from the European Union, as many as 17 per cent said they would prefer to stay in"
"Those in working class occupations were also twice as likely to identify with Ukip as those in managerial and professional positions"
One in six Ukip supporters disagree with the Ukip leadership about whether Britain should be in the EU?
;0)
Just speculating on the Poll results.
Labour will struggle to replace this revenue in reversing the bedroom tax and keep within the cap on welfare spending Ed Balls has committed Labour to. It will remain an iniquitous policy.
Along the way he accused the BBC of selecting a biased audience, complained about hignfw and his party suspected electoral fraud and complained of such (there was none)
Nigel resigned, declared he would stand for election, rescinded his resignation and is now ovwhelmingly popular. So poplar that he was described as " angry and snarling" by his national campaign leader who said he was turning the party into a personality cult.
In the interim the party wants thier MP to claim all the allowances he can.
Hmmmm.
Agree with the rest.
Tbf, on Question Time last night, Farage was recommending, that his party claim zero of the allowance !
I admire Farage because it seems to me that he truly and deeply believes that the UK would be far better off outside the EU. I think that he feels that all internal party squabbling is beneath him and detracts from his crusading message. All the internal backbiting is about personal ambition and agendas and ambitions other than those relating to EU membership. All the other political parties must be rubbing their hands with glee at the infighting within UKIP
Instead of digging up ancient relics try and look a bit closer to the modern day.
There are dozens of Lab/Lib Con candidates with strong links to the BNP who have stood
over the last few years. Do you think it's just a UKIP thing then?