Cameron spending £9 Million on Brexit Propaganda.

HornetSaver

CLAPTON wrote: »

anyway I approve of government funded propaganda as long as all parties have equal access

All parties have equal access to government spending, subject to voter approval at a general election.

Or does that argument only apply when someone happens to agree with a government decision?

CLAPTON

HornetSaver wrote: »

All parties have equal access to government spending, subject to voter approval at a general election.

Or does that argument only apply when someone happens to agree with a government decision?

I'm sure there are many corrupt regimes all over the world that will admire your reasoning.

One needs to note the difference between democracy and liberty.

Generali

CLAPTON wrote: »

It is clearly a political message
it's a bit like supply and demand determining price : it true whether or not you support the subject matter under discussion.

anyway I approve of government funded propaganda as long as all parties have equal access

just consider a monthly communication from say 5 parties _ only £1.5 a head per month - value for money to have a better informed electorate -who could possibly object?

Nobody said life was fair.

The British people voted for MPs that support a Government. Those MPs stood on a platform that:

1. The PM would cut a deal with the EU
2. The PM would then call a referendum on EU membership in light of that deal
3. The PM, and thus the Government, would support a Remain vote subject to the deal

You got the Government the British people voted for and the Government is doing as promised. If you don't like it you should have campaigned harder for what you did want.

Generali

SnooksNJ wrote: »

It's a lot when you can read the information on the internet for free.

11% of Brits have never used the internet:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/itandinternetindustry/bulletins/internetusers/2015

It seems a shame to deny them such important information.

HornetSaver

CLAPTON wrote: »

I'm sure there are many corrupt regimes all over the world that will admire your reasoning.

It's not my reasoning. It's the reasoning used by anyone who happens to approve of an unpopular decision which benefits them. Reasoning I decided to use sarcastically (and clearly unsuccessfully).

My personal view is that if leaving the EU would be as catastrophic for the country as the Government claims, then 30p per household is a pathetic amount of money to spend on pressing the case for such a vital vote. On the other hand, if it isn't that important but is simply the Government's preferred outcome, then they shouldn't be spending anything on it.

michaels

Generali wrote: »

Nobody said life was fair.

The British people voted for MPs that support a Government. Those MPs stood on a platform that:

1. The PM would cut a deal with the EU
2. The PM would then call a referendum on EU membership in light of that deal
3. The PM, and thus the Government, would support a Remain vote subject to the deal

You got the Government the British people voted for and the Government is doing as promised. If you don't like it you should have campaigned harder for what you did want.

The 'deal' is materially different from what was suggested in the manifesto.

In the UK we vote for MPS not parties and the majority of Tory MPs support Brexit.

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

Nobody said life was fair.

The British people voted for MPs that support a Government. Those MPs stood on a platform that:

1. The PM would cut a deal with the EU
2. The PM would then call a referendum on EU membership in light of that deal
3. The PM, and thus the Government, would support a Remain vote subject to the deal

You got the Government the British people voted for and the Government is doing as promised. If you don't like it you should have campaigned harder for what you did want.

Cameron also said he would recommend leave in certain circumstances : nobody, not even himself believes his deal has any substance and his promise to reduce immigration to 10s of thousand is still operative (no ifs no buts) but can't be achieved by the 'deal'.


anyway, a matter of little substance, as he behaves exactly as we expect politicians to behave but that doesn't stop one supporting a better way.

I do give credit to the fact we are having a referendum unlike the false promise of Blair.

CLAPTON

HornetSaver wrote: »

It's not my reasoning. It's the reasoning used by anyone who happens to approve of an unpopular decision which benefits them. Reasoning I decided to use sarcastically (and clearly unsuccessfully).

My personal view is that if leaving the EU would be as catastrophic for the country as the Government claims, then 30p per household is a pathetic amount of money to spend on pressing the case for such a vital vote. On the other hand, if it isn't that important but is simply the Government's preferred outcome, then they shouldn't be spending anything on it.

is that sophistry or sarcasm?

mayonnaise

michaels wrote: »

The 'deal' is materially different from what was suggested in the manifesto.

In the UK we vote for MPS not parties and the majority of Tory MPs support Brexit.

No they don't. (unless this article is hopelessly out of date)

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-02-22/number-of-conservative-mps-backing-brexit-reaches-115/

156 Conservative MPs support remaining in the EU
134 have said they will back "Brexit"
40 are still undeclared

mayonnaise

Our resident brexiteers seem to favour democracy only when it suits them.