It hasn't happened (and won't change) while we stay in as the ECJ ruling is in place.
But they make promises they don't keep all the time (ie immigration numbers), we have been promised a referendum for years - so why did he do it now? If it is all such a terrible idea and the country is going to fall into such a terrible disaster zone, why did he do it?
If you looked at the polling mid the last term, it all pointed to the UK voting for a hung parliament. It looked as though there would be no Conservative government but another collaboration. In the context of that, it was an empty promise and there would be no referendum. Instead, the Conservatives won, and had to follow through on this promise in order to maintain the whole of the Tory party voting with the government, given the small majority, rather than the Civil Ware of the last small majority during the Major era.. It wasn't a promise made to the people of the UK, it was a party politics play that massively backfired.
An uncomfortable point that was made to Boris Johnson on LBC this morning. A caller asked Boris if he was comfortable having the UKIP and far right votes in his back pocket. Boris was extremely uncomfortable about this aspect of the vote and tried extremely hard to distance himself from it, refusing to talk about UKIP as they were unofficial. Then he banged on about taking control of immigration.
It's amazing what people could see coming with hindsight.
There's not a huge amount wrong with regulation if it is done for the right reasons. It's only when it is done for poor reasons that there are issues. This bit has already been covered by upcoming investment regulation, so there is unlikely to be more.
That is outrageous - once again a remain supporter accusing everyone on the LEAVE side (ie half the country) of being racist, facist, not being nice guys and girls, etc - change the record and use a decent argument!
I wish I had a crystal ball!
If I'm honest, with either option, what we access and how services will be provided will change, predominantly down to funding. Any party that gets elected needs to accept the unpopular mandate that the change in age of the population and the change in the available treatments requires a different approach to be taken. As a country we spend not too far different amounts as a percentage of GDP to many other European countries, but nearly all of ours is paid for by the government. It would be nice to have an adult debate about this, but I fear it is a sacred cow that the electorate does not want to discuss.
Let me put it in a different way. Based on the polling so far, it would appear that without the extreme and unpleasant views of a proportion of the population, who are not voting leave for independence or democratic reasons, the vote would not be so close.
To be honest, TTIP is very little different to the route the current Government wants to go down (and previous governments had already started). The only real difference is the companies that are doing the privatisation.
You accused half the population of either being a racist or being associated with racists. I am not denying there are racists in the UK that will vote LEAVE you cannot possibly say there are not some who will vote remain. There is not much I can do about that - and it certainly is my choice - I will not let the fact that there are unsavory people voting change the way I want to vote. Otherwise one would never vote at all for anything!
