Tony Blair, disowned even by his heir.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/10698247/Pity-Tony-Blair-disowned-even-by-his-heir.html


Tony Blair has proved to be useless as a Middle East Envoy so why is he still taking money from the taxpayer when he is a millionaire???

Hi Panda

To say Blair has proved useless as a peace envoy to the Middle East is almost praise. A b****y catastrophic disaster is what he was and is. As for why he is still taking tax payers money, that is one of the ways he became a millionaire to begin with.

You have to remember he has no conscience at all, that is a considerable help when taking money he hasn't done anything for and hasn't earned in any way.

Brown is the same. At the last general election he was re elected with an increased majority. You can count on the fingers of one hand how often he's put in an appearance. he doesn't even trouble his backside to turn up for PMQ's. That is certainly not representing his constituents. he; like Blair happily takes the money though.

Did you notice in the last few days when various MP's were interviewed regarding the cost of living and whether the budget is a good one or not. Fulminating about hard working people (the new buzz words) being let down, yet not one of them mentioned or was asked about their own inflation busting increase. I do realise full well, that when agreeing to be interviewed they make it clear that there are certain "no go areas" Their own fat cat living is apparently one such. even though since 80% of our laws are now controlled and enacted in Brussels they are 80% redundant. (They never mention that either)

To think we were gullible enough to believe Heath when he called it a Common Market shows how little we know about Government. Now we are being censured by the EU for trying to reduce Benefits, why are successive Governments STILL reluctant to break away from the EU??? If they try to take us to Court all we have to do is , as the second biggest Donor, point out the failings of the EU. The Auditors havn't been able to sign off the accounts for many years, Why is the decision to take in new Members not voted on by all Members, the last few Countries are quite poor so won't be able to contribute much . Had the EU just been confined to Defence and Trade it might have worked, but not the way it is run now.

Good morning Panda

I think I am right in saying that we are the only member of the so called EU that actually sticks to all the directives. None of the others do, they pick and choose what they will obey and what they won't. Even our so called French friends. I should say especially our French friends, because the entire thing was originally conceived as a Franco German dominated enterprise.

As for our Friend Heath, he gave us a referendum on joining a mutually beneficial trading organisation along similar lines to The Benelux or EFTA co-operatives. So of course the majority voted for it. Naturally, who wouldn't?

Papers subsequently released under the 30 year rule have shown that Heath (among others) knew perfectly well it wouldn't stop at that. A much more closely knit political merger was envisaged, culminating in the united States of Europe. Of course we were not told that at the time, or the result of the referendum almost certainly would have been vastly different. Lies by omission.

I never had any time for de Gaulle, he knew where to run when his future friends overran his country in 6 weeks. He spent the war in relative luxury and safety in Britain and when we gave him his country back, never had a good word for us. To his credit (There is some good in everybody) he didn't wan us in the then common market.

As you say, we are the second biggest contributor. Given that it is a Franco German brain child why are we not a t the very least the third biggest?

Morning katertaif

Governments listen to big business saying we would lose out etc but we sell very little to Europe , the French have the monopoly on subsidies for Agriculture , we lost most of out Car Exports because of the strikes, sold the best to Germany.

Cameron has chickened out of decision making saying there will be a referendum IF he wins the next election, latest poll shows the Conservatives only 1% above Labour.

We still have the Commonwealth, a Universal Language, and if the Minister for Trade would get off his backside and tour the World touting for Business we could do a lot better . That's one thing about Boris, he goes to India and comes back with a Film Contract to make two films in the U.K.  

Hi Panda

Cameron put two caveats on this alleged referendum. The one as you say was "IF" he wins the next election. The second rider was a referendum would be offered after successful negotiations with our (ahem) partners on modernising, reforming, or whatever anyone calls it the EU.

In a recent speech Merkel poured cold water all over that. What it came down to was don't rely on us, and don't expect the rest of us to alter things to suit you. So given that these successful negotiations will very likely not take place, where does that leave any referendum?

It would leave the majority of people who like you and me, would vote to get the hell out and leave them to it. That would not suit Cameron it would not suit Milliband, and most certainly would not suit Clegg. Not to mention the MEP's riding the gravy train.

So what excuse he will eventually use, I don't know, but I cannot see him holding any referendum when the result would not be what he personally wants. Even if it was held, and we voted to get out would they then try it on like they did when Eire voted No? Lets have another vote, and get it right this time? I believe it is just electoral posturing, and he has no intention of holding any referendum

katertaif wrote:Hi Panda

Cameron put two caveats on this alleged referendum. The one as you say was "IF" he wins the next election. The second rider was a referendum would be offered after successful negotiations with our (ahem) partners on modernising, reforming, or whatever anyone calls it the EU.

In a recent speech Merkel poured cold water all over that. What it came down to was don't rely on us, and don't expect the rest of us to alter things to suit you. So given that these successful negotiations will very likely not take place, where does that leave any referendum?

It would leave the majority of people who like you and me, would vote to get the hell out and leave them to it. That would not suit Cameron it would not suit Milliband, and most certainly would not suit Clegg. Not to mention the MEP's riding the gravy train.

So what excuse he will eventually use, I don't know, but I cannot see him holding any referendum when the result would not be what he personally wants. Even if it was held, and we voted to get out would they then try it on like they did when Eire voted No? Lets have another vote, and get it right this time? I believe it is just electoral posturing, and he has no intention of holding any referendum

I think your'e right and we would probably have so many obstacles to get over because of the Treaties we signed , it would take years. The only way anything could happen is if other Countries wanted to leave and it was said a while ago that if the EURO failed a breakaway group including Germany , Finland Sweden and other Northern Countries and that Germany was printing Deutchemarks