79 3 mins 7 yrs

Lord Tebbit is one of those few politicians that commands respect. A true ally of Margaret Thatcher until the end, he is Conservative through and through and yet all he can see this year is looming defeat for his Party. Why? Simple – broken promises.

David Cameron can only hope to win the election if Ukip ‘implodes’, Tory grandee Lord Tebbit warned today. As the Conservatives launched their first election poster of the campaign, the former party chairman said the Prime Minister will pay a heavy price for breaking a promise to tackle immigration.

He said that only a collapse in support for Ukip – which has made big gains in the past year – would allow the Tories to form an overall majority after May 7. Before the last election Mr Cameron pledge ‘no ifs, no buts’ to reduce net migration to the ‘tens off thousands’. But latest figures show 260,000 more people arrived in the UK than left in the last year, including a record 228,000 extra immigrants who arrived from elsewhere in the European Union. Lord Tebbit told BBC Radio 4’s The World at One: ‘Mr Cameron swore that he would get immigration, net, down to tens of thousands, so that’s a real problem,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s The World at One. ‘It makes it difficult for him to persuade people that he can control it without a radical change in our relationship with Europe, which Ukip would then point out would almost certainly mean leaving the European Union.’ ‘I think it is going to be very difficult to win an overall majority unless, for some reason or another, Ukip should implode.’

UKIP will not implode. In fact they will grow as they seek to attract traditional LABOUR voters as well as Conservative voters. All this added together means that Cameron WILL NOT win an overall majority and so we are going to have to see what sort of Coalition will come together.

UKIP, shrewdly, have not ruled OUT a Coalition with the Conservatives but with one killer  precondition – Cameron cannot be Prime Minister! May will be fun.

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

79 thoughts on “WHY CAMERON CANNOT WIN IN 2015…

  1. It is true that Cameron has let down many many people in many ways, unfortunately the three other parties are not electable. In my long life, every Labour administration since 1945 has ruined the economy and then left it for someone else to clear up the mess, not least the last one. Admittedly Cameron and clique have done little to aid recovery especially with their insane energy policy. To win, he should first listen to the People and then scrap the Climate Change Act. This alone would help the People and Industry.

  2. Despite its claims of growth the UKIP has hardly gained sufficient support to name the court jester, let alone to be a kingmaker. The phrase that the UKIP has not “ruled out” a coalition with conservatives borders on fantasy, as the voters have already ruled it out by not voting for the UKIP.

  3. In fact they will grow as they seek to attract traditional LABOUR voters

    Cameron wants to privatise the NHS, how would that attract traditional Labour voters?

    May will be fun

    Be careful what you wish for.

  4. Cameron wants to privatise the NHS, how would that attract traditional Labour voters?

    *Farrage wants to privatise the NHS, how would that attract traditional Labour voters?

    Apologies

  5. Paul

    Privatize the NHS ?

    How would he propose to finance it?

    Would participation be voluntary or would everyone in the UK be covered?

    Long experience in discussing this type of issue shows that people from the so called right are generally very fuzzy on the details.

    ( And I support elements of privatization, but recognize that health care is a different type of economic issue that other economic matters )

  6. Farage does not, alas, advocate privatising the NHS.

    (Point of pedantic order: he does not advocate de-collectivising health care.)

    The old political factions, and their court stenographer in the media, want people to think that UKIP are a way out party of way out policies, but by any historical measure UKIP is pretty centrist.

  7. The British people would never tolerate replacing the NHS with a any system that didn’t protect the entire population.

    David, when you ran for office, did you advocate eliminating the NHS?

  8. UKIP makes UKIP policy:

    Nigel Farage: UKIP supports NHS not private insurance

    The Daily Mirror is Labour’s Pravda for the peasant class. Scaring them with stories of crushing the NHS and murdering nurses is standard Labour propaganda. Never an election goes by without dire threats of the Tories (and now, in a nod to their growth, UKIP) threatening to dynamite NHS hospitals while strangling doctors with their own entrails.

    No adult should waste a single second believing this rubbish.

  9. And [ Farage ] denied that he had ever advocated an American-style model, saying he had alluded rather to the insurance-based French and Dutch systems when arguing that “we may have to think about ways in the future about dealing with healthcare differently”.

    From Pete’s link

    It sounds like he was trying at one time to engage in intelligent discussion of alternatives …each of which would have covered the entire population

    The US system was never a good model, as it never properly protected the entire population, and even ” right wing ” Farage recognized that

  10. The Daily Mirror is Labour’s Pravda for the peasant class

    Perhaps you’d prefer that well known left wing rag the Mail Pete?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2832627/Farage-caught-camera-saying-abolishing-NHS-says-won-t-rule-forming-coalition-Labour-Miliband-s-party-fail-win-Election.html

    ‘I think we’re going to have to think about healthcare very, very differently. I think we’re going to have to move to an insurance-based system of healthcare’

    My own opinion? I simply think he’s a liar after getting caught out. Either way,

    NHS free at the point of delivery

    That kind of ambiguous guff won’t endear him to traditional Labout voters

  11. Paul McMahon –

    The Mail is the Tory Pravda aimed at the suburbs. It’s every bit as anti-UKIP as the Tories are. In fact the most anti-UKIP publication, by a mile, is The Telegraph.

  12. The Daily Mirror is Labour Pravda

    The Daily Mail is Tory Pravda

    Such a relief that we can rely on the objectivity of those gay hippy Commie lefties at the Beeb.

  13. Hatred and/or fear of UKIP unites the Lib/lab/Con. This is because UKIP’s central policy would cut off a source of money for the political class i.e. the EU. Look at how many grandees would lose their gold-lined pensions, starting with Kinnock, Mandelson…..

  14. Farage is an MEP. On leaving the EU, he’ll lose his income. He is willing to lose his income as an MEP in order to get the UK out of the EU. Too many others are bought-and-paid-for.

  15. Farage and the UKIP are playing the one card that every other group refuses to acknowledge let alone play… the truth.

    The UK is the dumping ground for the EU all the destitute are foisted onto the UK and it is taking it’s toll. The people know it and the only person they hear addressing it is Farage.

    With each growing bit of disgust from those that have lived generations in the UK Farage’s position of power grows.

  16. His position of power? That is like saying a pigeon’s fart could reverse the rotation of the Earth.

  17. Really?

    Time will tell won’t it Mahons.

    and hey if Cow farts can cause the planet to heat up and kill us Who knows what a pigeon’s fart could do…..

  18. Based on past experience with minor parties their support tends to get squeezed in elections, they should be ecstatic if they win any seats.

  19. Farage is an MEP. On leaving the EU, he’ll lose his income. He is willing to lose his income as an MEP in order to get the UK out of the EU

    Yeah? We’ll see.

    The UK is the dumping ground for the EU all the destitute are foisted onto the UK

    Total and utter bullshit.

  20. I’m sure Allan was claiming that UKIP were part of an establishment plot to destroy the BNP a couple of years ago. So fickle.

  21. There’s a difference between power and influence.

    Farage has zero power outside of UKIP, but his influence has been growing and is enough now to severely panic the establishment parties, at least enough to force them into adopting (though with no intention of implementing) harsher rhetoric on the EU.

  22. Pete, Farrage is nothing but a shallow populist.

    The only way that Farrage will renege his MEP salary is if he gets a Westminster MP’s salary (and where he can employ his Euro émigré wife can be paid directly by the British taxpayer instead of circuitously which is the present arrangement.

  23. Troll – how much time? David implies by the next election. You have demonstrated a rather broad misunderstanding of history, politics and events in the US. Are you now expanding this to Europe?

  24. Paul McMahon –

    Pete, Farrage is nothing but a shallow populist.

    What’s this objection to populism? Which (electorally) successful politician has not been “populist”? Blair is the most recent real populist, and he was also a revolutionary.

    Granted Blair was a disaster, but Gordon Brown was unpopulist and also a disaster.

    Farage is shallow? No.

    Cameron is shallow. Miliband is shallow. Clegg is so shallow you wouldn’t get your feet wet if you walked on him. Farage is a hail-fellow-well-met type and knows the power of a good line, but I sense a steely streak beneath it all.

    ATW and other places have showed some of his speeches, in the EU Parliament, which no-one else would dare speak. Some of them have been literally in the faces of the most powerful EU apparatchiks. I’d put the latter down to a mischievious sense of humour, which always weighs heavy in a man’s favour, but if pushed I suspect that Farage can show much more than a talent for a speech and holding a pint.

  25. Ross is correct. The nature of our electoral system and the tradition of how British voters act at General Elections means It will be almost impossible for UKIP to pick up even more than a couple of seats at the next election. They can influence a Tory or Labour victory depending on how they take votes in different constituency seats, but they will not end up as power brokers.

  26. Paul – Farage is reasonable wealthy. He doesn’t need an MP’s salary.

    And to get the UK out of the EU, a patriot would be prepared to pay whatever it takes.

  27. I sense a steely streak beneath it all

    I don’t at all.

    Farrage is playing almost the perfect game; he will continue to receive his MEP salary (and his wife hers), until he is either voted out or Britain leaves the EU. The former is unlikely to happen while he continues with his anti EU populism and the latter will only happen if and when his party get to power by which time he will of course be a Westminster MP and the British taxpayer will be paying his and his wife’s salaries directly.

    Blatant and shallow troughness.

  28. Paul – Farage is reasonable wealthy. He doesn’t need an MP’s salary

    Does his wife?

    A patriot would be prepared to pay whatever it takes

    As I said previously; we’ll see.

  29. Paul – are you saying that Farage would not take the UK out of the EU because he would wish to preserve an MP’s income for himself and secretarial salary for his wife?

  30. Allan

    Paul is saying the opposite. By the time he was in a position of power to be able to take the UK out of Europe he would already have a Prime Ministerial salary and wouldn’t need his EMP salary.

    Anyway surely if UKIP really was a principled party that did not believe in the existence of the EU it would refuse to sit in the European Parliament and take a taxpayer funded salary and expenses for an entirely EU dependent position.

  31. What I’m saying is that both Farrage and his wife’s noses are in the public funded trough and that’s where they’re going to stay, be it through the EU or Westminster and that’s his main priority. If, as you suggest, ‘Farage is a reasonably wealthy man’ his double standard of campaigning against Euro immigration whilst getting his Euro emigré’s wife nose into the British tax payer funded EU funded job only underlines his troughery.

    And now that I’ve answered you question perhaps you’ll answer one of mine?

    Were you, as Ross suggests above, claiming that UKIP were part of an establishment plot to destroy the BNP a couple of years ago?

  32. Colm

    I don’t agree with it being hypocritical for him to sit in the EU parliament.

    Being in the belly of the beast gives him a big platform for his anti EU views

    He gets them to fund his insurgency too.

  33. He gets them to fund his insurgency too

    Actually he gets the taxpayer to fund him, (and his wife), hence my point about his troughery being underlined.

  34. Phantom

    That would be a good policy if the EU Parliament was a genuine seat of real power but it isn’t. It is a huge expensive bloated talking trough designed to effect the fraud of democratic EU political decision making with no power in any meaningfull sense and Farage would do better campaigning for a boycott of both EU parliament elections and seats in that chamber.

  35. Phantom –

    Does this sound correct?

    It sounds like nonsense. In fact it sounds like a hit job. Farage no doubt has a few quid, but I don’t think he has $215million and lucrative cosmetic endorsements.

    Paul McMahon gets the way he is tonight when the target is someone he doesn’t like. All of a sudden the statist, socialist, pro-immigration McMahon comes over all libertarian, anti-tax and anti-immigration.

    He’s a funny old sod.

  36. What would you have him do differently?

    Not go against his own party policies by employing his German wife in a tax funded payer position?

    I mean, if what’s said is true it’s not as if she needs the job / money is it?

    You do realise that the European Parliament has absolutely no power don’t you?

  37. I’m not commenting on the power of that parliament.

    By sitting there he both denies a seat to a pro EU candidate and he gets the EU to fund someone who fulminates against them

    This is effective insurgency politics

  38. Paul McMahon gets the way he is tonight when the target is someone he doesn’t like. All of a sudden the statist, socialist, pro-immigration McMahon comes over all libertarian, anti-tax and anti-immigration

    Eh? Pointing out hypocritical double standards of politicians makes me ‘libertarian, anti-tax and anti-immigration?’

    Surely you can do better than that Pete?

  39. This is effective insurgency politics

    No it’s not, not when power rests with the Euro Council of Ministers.

    I take it that you now longer want to comment on his finances / troughery?

    As I said; he’s a shallow populist.

  40. Paul McMahon –

    Why mention that Mrs Farage is German? What do you mean by that? If you imply that British patriots shouldn’t be married to German women then you misunderstand British patriots.

    However much the pair have trousered from tax-victims, it’s alot less than Irish republicans have done, yet you seem far less keen to pile in on Irish republicans for taking from the same source.

    Sorry your objections on both counts are insincere and invalid.

  41. If you imply that British patriots shouldn’t be married to German women then you misunderstand British patriots.

    Excerpt I’m not implying that at all what I’m stating is that it’s blatant hypocriscy to stand aginst Euro immigration and then have a Euro emigré work for you in a tax payer funded position.

    Yet you seem far less keen to pile in on Irish republicans for taking from the same source.

    Pete, come back when you give me an alternative to the British Exchequer for Irish Republicans to pay their taxes to.

    But hey, ifI’m being hypocritical then I must be in good company with Nige eh?

  42. Paul

    Why point out that Mrs Farage is German? What’s the significance of that?

    You come back too when you develop a concern for tax-victims strip-mined by Irish republicans, who have robbed far more than the Farages ever could.

  43. Were you, as Ross suggests above, claiming that UKIP were part of an establishment plot to destroy the BNP a couple of years ago?

    I don’t recall but if I did say that, then it seems that the BNP has been destroyed and their supporters have moved to the less threatening UKIP.

    As for Farage being PM and taking the UK out of the EU, that is ridiculous. Farage need only force the Cons to do what they have reneged on – have a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU.

  44. See Phantom at 9.45pm.

    Is anybody here seriously saying that Farage needs the money from politics to fund himself and his wife? Here is a despicable, treacherous couple who did exactly that:

    http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1048767

    GLENYS KINNOCK, the new minister for Europe, has amassed six publicly funded pensions worth £185,000 per year with her husband Neil, the former leader of the Labour party.

    They have already received up to £8m of taxpayers’ money in pay and allowances, he as a European commissioner and she as a member of the European parliament.

    The pair are already drawing payments from three of their taxpayer-funded pensions. Glenys Kinnock, 64, soon to be elevated to the House of Lords alongside her husband, is collecting a teacher’s pension and from next month is entitled to another from Brussels with an estimated annual value of £48,000.

    Lord Kinnock, 67, is receiving one pension as a former MP and a second for his service in Brussels, together worth more than £112,000.

    Glenys Kinnock is simultaneously drawing a ministerial salary of £83,275. Her job entitles her to a further ministerial pension.

    After she retires from her job she will be eligible to draw a further UK-based pension related to her service as an MEP, worth £19,730 a year.

    Neil Kinnock, who resigned last week as unpaid chairman of the British Council to avoid “perceived conflict of interest” with his wife’s ministerial role, receives a pension of £83,089 for his service as European transport commissioner between 1995 and 1999 and vice-president of the commission from 1999 to 2004.

    He receives a further £28,936 a year for his 25 years’ service as an MP, including time as leader of the opposition. He also claimed £13,700 of allowances while a member of the House of Lords during 2007-8.

    During their time in Brussels both Kinnocks claimed a housing allowance on top of their incomes, even though they lived in the same home. This alone would have netted the couple almost £600,000 over 10 years.

    “The Kinnocks are Brussels’s very own Lord and Lady Expenses,” said Mats Persson of Open Europe, the London-based think tank that calculated the Kinnocks’ earnings.

    That is serious troughery, and Mandelson is in the same league.

  45. You were:

    The Establishment parties have agreed that UKIP is a safe receptacle for the protest votes until next year’s British elections by which time the Establishment parties will show just how clean and shiny they are. UKIP can be counted upon to behave as they have already shown with their compliance in the EU Parliament – they even mention reform rather than British withdrawal.

    Or here:

    The BNP is the only opposition and UKIP is licensed by the leftist establishment to be the electorate’s vent.

    There’s lots more in that vein.

  46. Ross, on January 3rd, 2015 at 8:27 PM Said:

    I’m sure Allan was claiming that UKIP were part of an establishment plot to destroy the BNP a couple of years ago. So fickle.

    A ‘couple’ of years ago? The quotes dug up are from 2009 which is little wonder that I couldn’t recall – though I didn’t deny it. And at the time, I was correct. Why would there have to be a vent to take support from the BNP? From 2008, and my goodness, how right the BNP was:

    RACISM CUTS BOTH WAYS?

  47. Why point out that Mrs Farage is German? What’s the significance of that?

    The significance Pete is that Farage’s party actively campaigns against Euro immigration yet the party leader’s wife is a Euro immigrant who’s in a tax payer funded job.

    Now Pete, if you can’t see the anomaly in that then you’re either being deliberately obtuse or you’re less intelligent than I had you pegged.

  48. The significance Pete is that Farage’s party actively campaigns against Euro immigration…..

    UKIP campaigns against the ‘open door’ immigration policy in favour of controlled immigration. I prefer no immigration and massive repatriation but as long as UKIP appears to campaign for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU then that suits me.

    if you can’t see the anomaly

    Paul – do you see anomalies?

  49. As long as UKIP appears to campaign for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU then that suits me.

    Which would mean the end the end of free movement for EU member citizens in Britain, (and for British emigrés to the EU, of which there are much more) i.e. actively campaigning against Euro immigration.

    Paul – do you see anomalies?

    Of what? if you’re speaking about those which exist in your imagination no, if you’re speaking about those which exist in your opinions about repatriation to ‘ancestral homelands’ yes.

    And please, no links.

  50. Which would mean the end the end of free movement for EU member citizens in Britain,

    So? Nobody needs free movement into and out of my country. Why should there be?

    It’s like this Paul. There was a massacre by the taliban in Pakistan and the BBC’s report is below. At about 8 secs, there is a picture of a young boy in a sheepskin jacket on a board displaying images of the murdered children:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30629751

  51. Nobody needs free movement into and out of my country. Why should there be?

    Because those EU members might respond by ‘repatriating’ the much greater numbers of Britons living and working in the EU back to Britain?

    It’s like this Paul. There was a massacre by the taliban in Pakistan and the BBC’s report is below

    I asked you for no links so why on earth are you babbling on about some Taliban massacre on a thread about UKIP and their Euro policies?

  52. Paul

    Its all part of Allan’s Grand Universal Theory – Everything bad that happens can be linked back to its original source ….. the machinations of evil Jews 😉

  53. Because those EU members might respond by ‘repatriating’ the much greater numbers of Britons living and working in the EU back to Britain?

    What? That’s like saying that we must not leave the EU because they’ll refuse to trade with us. A minority of Britons live and work abroad. If the countries that they’re in decide that they must leave because Britain has taken back its sovereignty then it’s good because at least teh other countries have taken a step in recoverinmg their own sovereignty.

    Colm – “no links” as we don’t want to know…

  54. There are much greater numbers of Britons living and working in Europe than vice bersa.

    I’d be interested in hearing your economic plan for full employment for all the returning British Euro immigrants (and who you’d blame for all the unemployment now the Euro emigrés have been repatriated)

  55. Paul

    It’s easy. Allan would employ all the returning white Britons as immigration enforcers. They would be sent around the country forcing non whites out of their homes and back on to aeroplanes back to ‘Bongo Bongo’ land.

    Simples !

  56. There are much greater numbers of Britons living and working in Europe than vice bersa.

    The number of white Europeans isn’t a problem. It’s the fact that being in the EU means that any 3rd-worlders who enter the EU through Italy as an example come directly to the UK and get in. They shall be returned directly home – not to France or Italy but home.

    Colm – it’s a start!

    As for the huge trade deficit which the UK has with ‘Europe’, that would be eliminated immediately when they cease to trade with us. It will be terrible having to manufacture our own goods and not have enormous debts but I’m sure that the UK and the Britrish people will survive. After all, whatever did we do before multi-culturism?

  57. The number of white Europeans isn’t a problem

    So, you’re pro free movement for white Europens within the EU?

  58. Paul – no, but whites aren’t a threat to the genetic heritage of other whites whereas blacks and browns most definitely are.

  59. So you’re not pro free movement of white Europeans within the EU?*

    *See my question re your economic plan for full employment for all the returning British Euro immigrants and who you’d blame for all the unemployment in Britain now the Euro emigrés have been repatriated?

  60. Paul – I want the UK out of the EU and that’s it. Once sovereignty is retaken, all national policies can be made for the benefit of Britons first nd foremost. It’s not a difficult concept: the UK out of the EU.

  61. I have said elsewhere, that TRUST is an important factor. Some people do not think so, as their want. But why vote for a Party that you KNOW will not keep its Manifesto promises ? They think that, because, Cameron says something like; “We will hold a referendum on membership of the EU in 2017 ‘if’ we win a ‘majority'” Naturally translate into a Cast Iron Promise which this time, he rally means it. Utterly delusional !

    Cameron may well win enough seats to form a coalition Government, which he is hoping to do, so then he can renege on that promise, like all the other promises made last time. He trying the same trick. People stupidly think the Tories will rebel and kick him out, they might ? There again, they might not !

    The best hope, is to do to the Tories, what the Scots are going to do to Labour. Give them the middle-finger and tel them to F-off !

  62. Last week you wanted the UK busted up

    Your views lack coherence

    If I liked something I wouldn’t want it dismembered

  63. So what you want is an emotional ‘get all the foreigners out’ which would be the cure to all ills and Britain would be great again without thinking about the prectical repercussions of other countries following suit and what it would mean for Britain?

    See my question re your economic plan for full employment for all the returning British Euro immigrants and who you’d blame for all the unemployment in Britain now the Euro emigrés have been repatriated?

    I want the UK out of the EU and that’s it. Once sovereignty is retaken, all national policies can be made for the benefit of Britons first nd foremost. It’s not a difficult concept: the UK out of the EU

    Not a difficult concept and certainly less difficult than the economic repercussions of returning immigrants etc.

    You reall haven’t thought this through have you?

    I’d say this discussion is finished.

  64. Phantom – here is the explanation which I gave to you and I did ask you if you understood it. Clearly you don’t:

    THE DEATH OF LABOUR IN SCOTLAND…

    Allan@Aberdeen, on December 29th, 2014 at 7:55 PM Said:
    Phantom, on December 29th, 2014 at 7:07 PM Said:
    If SNP had its way the final say in very many things would move from Brussels to Brussels.

    Phantom – let me put the rationale for Scottish ‘independence’ from a Unionist Republican – that’s me.

    UKIP is attempting to release the UK from the EU and may succeed in getting a majority of Britons to support its core policy but the Establishment is powerful and would ensure that the UK cannot escape, in all probability. Nonetheless, if the UK cannot get out, then Scotland might. If Scotland gets independence from the UK then it leaves the EU. A referendum would be required to get Scotland back in – I’ll campaign for ‘no’ – and then the members of the EU would have to allow Scotland in, which Spain is already pledged to veto because it doesn’t want to set a precedent for Catalonia.

    So Phantom, here it is made simple:

    1. I would prefer to get the UK out of the EU failing which
    2. I would wish to get Scotland out of the EU

  65. Your views lack coherence

    Please explain how?

    You are a in favour of the British union, I assume you were also in favour of the USSR?

  66. Paul – the economic repercussions of being in the EU are terrible and that is established fact. Getting out will allow the UK to make policies FOR THE UK. End of.

  67. Getting out will allow the UK to make policies FOR THE UK. End of

    End of?

    When you tell me your economic plans to employ those millions of returning Britons living and working in the EU it’ll be ‘end of’ then.

  68. Paul – sure, when you tell me what the case for remaining in the EU. Mass immigration, destruction of industry, destruction of nationhood, permanent mass unemployment, falling real wages – these are not favourable to remianing in the EU.

    Btw why is a pro-immigration Irish ‘republican’ who lives in Spain so insistent on the UK remaining in the EU?

  69. Blah blah blah Allan. Let me know how those emotional politics get on.

    Why is a pro-immigration Irish ‘republican’ who lives in Spain so insistent on the UK remaining in the EU?

    Who said anything about being insistent? No, the only thing I have done here is question Farage’s double standards about Euro emigrés beinng employed in taxpayer funded positions and what you’d do economically when you have the Fatherland in place.

    As far as I’m concerned it’s for the Brits to decide what they want to do and the only dog I have in this fight is access between the two states on the island of Ireland, (I’d personally oppose secession on those grounds alone).

  70. I’d personally oppose secession on those grounds alone

    Secession of what from what?

Comments are closed.