10 3 mins 7 yrs


When Conservatives stop acting as Conservatives, then someone else will eventually come along and take their place.

And so it is with the British Conservative Party, led by Etonian liberal David Cameron. To my mind, he is the Emperor with no clothes, and UKIP have exposed his nakedness previously in Clacton and they will do so again next month when they take the Rochester and Strood Parliamentary seat from the Conservative Party, possibly triggering the destruct button for Cameron.

Just the other day, the European Commission handed the UK an “unexpected” bill for £1.7 BILLION to be paid on December 1st. This loot has to be handed over to the robber barons in Brussels because our economy has been doing too well, and so we must be punished. Knowing that this is political DYNAMITE, and a huge hostage to UKIP good fortune, Cameron has huffed and puffed and said he will NOT hand over the cash —- by that date. He blustered that he serves the will of the British people, not the EU bureaucracy.

But that begs the question – if he serves the will of the British people why did he push through gay marriage legislation that the majority of people here opposed? If he serves the will of the British people why did he embrace green draconian eco-lunacy policies that is seeing our landscape defaced from coast to coast?

If he serves the will of the British people and finds this £1.7 BN soooooo unacceptable, why does he lavish £11 BILLION on a bulging foreign aid budget that most British people would rather was shrunk, not increased?

Cameron postures as a Conservative but has governed as a Liberal. And even now, he is not being honest with the electorate which is why – next month – the voters of Rochester & Strood will deliver their damning verdict on his leadership. At that time, the people WILL have spoken and he will stand exposed for ALL to see.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]


  1. The increase is down to changes in accountancy rules. This was known. Whether or not they knew the consequences is unclear. If not, then someone should be sacked. If they did, then they did not want to tell us.

    There is a very good explanation over on Dr. Richard North’s site, EUReferendum. It has a lot to do with the UN and how the EU applies rules mandated from them.

    Gay marriage was a Cameron (Dave and Sam) idea. Once again, you will have to go to EUReferendum to find out but, in an nut shell, it has to do with our presidency of the Council of Europe.


    The Political Class have NEVER served the people of this country. They serve only those that contribute to their coffers.

    What UKIP threatens to do, is spoil things by taking monies from them, that’s all.

  2. //The increase is down to changes in accountancy rules. //

    //because our economy has been doing too well, and so we must be punished.//

    It’s nothing to do with punishment or changes in accountancy rules. The contributions to the EU budget depend on each country’s economic performance (not tax intake BTW). When the UK economy grew beyond budget, its contribution had to be increased accordingly.

    The UK actually pays less than another country with the same economic performance would, due to the “UK rebate”, which was negotiated by Thatcher. The greater part of this rebate is borne by France.
    France thus pays a significantly higher portion than its output would normally require; pays even more than the UK which has a much bigger economy.

    Germany of course pays most, around EUR 30 bn; France pays around EUR 23 bn, Italy is next, followed by the UK with around EUR 17 bn.
    Ireland pays very little, around 1.7 bn, only a quarter of the figure paid by the Netherlands.

  3. As I posted previously, if this adjustment had worked out as a refund for the UK, would Cameron and the blowhard Tory press have refused it?

    He is truly contemptible, but he will limp on as PM until next May.

  4. Noel

    You leave out the fact that the fat dumb and happy French farmers get a very big share of agriculture funds

  5. Whatever. France is still a greater net contributor to the EU than the UK is, despite its significantly smaller economy.

  6. Peter, did you mean rubbish that France is a greater net contributor to the EU than the UK or rubbish that France has a smaller economy?

    If the latter, then I stand corrected. Frankly I’m surprised UK GDP is less than that of France, even if they margin isn’t great.

    But my point still stands: France is a greater net payer into the EU than Britain is, even allowing for its small advantage in GDP; it also makes a greater net per-capita contribution.
    Germany of course pays even more. Germany and Denmark, for example, pay about 3 times more per head net into the EU than the British do.

    I mention this because, to hear a lot of the folks here, you’d think the whole EU is riding on poor Britain’s back.
    The argument will also be relevant if/when it comes to a referendum. As the little net loss the UK incurs is mostly borne by the people, corporate Britain is going to do its utmost to keep the UK in.

  7. Why does Germany and Denark tolerate such an imbalance?

    Germany is rich, but so is Britain, despite the moaning you can hear from them

  8. If the latter, then I stand corrected

    Noel, you do indeed.

    But your final paragraph at 11.25 pm is correct. The UK does well from the EU. The question is can it do just as well if it leaves. I suspect that it can and it will.

  9. Why does Germany and Denmark tolerate such an imbalance?


    They have totally different histories. Germany has only existed since 1866 and it has a huge guilt complex about the two world wars. Denmark has become much closer to Britain in the last few years. They are both headed for the exit door.

Comments are closed.