Redbridge considered a key battleground by Tories and Labour, while left wing alliance looks to highlight council cuts to chip away at Labour dominance in Waltham Forest

East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Voters going into the polling station at Churchfields Junior School South Woodford this lunchtime Voters going into the polling station at Churchfields Junior School South Woodford this lunchtime

Polling has opened across Waltham Forest, Redbridge and parts of Epping Forest as millions of voters across Britain cast their ballots in European and local council elections.

Redbridge is considered a battleground seat, with Labour looking to take control of the council away from a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition.

Political heavyweights such as Labour leader Ed Miliband and London Conservative mayor visited the borough in a sign of how close both parties believe the election will be.

Labour has criticised the timing of an announcement by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt that the A&E department at King George Hospital in Goodmayes will stay open beyond a deadline for closure next year.

They accused the Tories of unfair electioneering, but Conservatives will hope the news will help the party's push to take overall control of the borough.

In Waltham Forest candidates for the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition are fielding candidates in every ward and will be hoping to maker inroads against Labour's dominance in the borough.

The booths opened at 7am throughout the UK for the European Parliament contest to return 73 Euro MPs, while more than 4,000 council seats at 161 English local authorities and those in Northern Ireland are also up for election.

Nationally Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will await the impact of the Ukip-effect as voters go to the polls following a campaign dominated by Nigel Farage's Eurosceptics.

Party chiefs and pundits will scan the results closely as they attempt to assess if the UK Independence Party is developing into a long-lasting force that will sway who holds power at Westminster after next year's general election - or if people can be tempted back after making a protest vote this year.

A poll by YouGov for The Sun projected that Ukip would win the European elections with 27% of the vote, with the Lib Dems back in fifth place.

Party insiders are braced for the possibility of the Liberal Democrats losing all of their 11 European seats, according to a leaked document, the Guardian said.

Bookmakers predict the Conservatives could be pushed into third place, with Ladbrokes reporting punters are backing Ukip to pick up the most votes in the Euro poll ahead of Labour.

Mr Farage's party hopes to challenge for first place in the European election after a strong showing in 2009 and in council contests and Westminster by-elections.

This scenario coming to fruition could provide Prime Minister David Cameron with a challenging 12 months in Downing Street as he seeks to appeal to the nation and keep the Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party content on issues including immigration.

The Government's attempts to slash net migration to the tens of thousands will come under the spotlight as official figures are released at the same time as voters go to the polls.

The election results will also be a clearer indication as to whether Mr Farage's party has successfully negotiated close media scrutiny of its candidates and policies.

A senior Labour source said the party hoped to gain up to 200 councillors, and had been ploughing resources into seats they will be targeting in next year's general election.

A good night would see Labour claim a 25% share in the European elections, giving Ed Miliband's party 22 MEPs instead of the current 13.

But the party admitted that European contests had been "historically difficult" for Labour and other centre-left parties across the EU.

The source also indicated that it would not be surprising if Ukip claimed the top spot and British politics entered a new era.

The source said: "We are now in an era of four-party politics but what we have got to do, and what we hope we are starting to do, is win where it matters in the local elections."

Labour was "ruthlessly" targeting its efforts at battleground seats in next year's Westminster contest, inspired by US president Barack Obama's strategy - masterminded by Labour's new guru David Axelrod - of focusing resources where they would have the most impact.

"We know we are going to have less money than the Tories, so we have got to make better use of the money and people we have got, and to use that in the most sensible way," added the source.

The party hopes the strategy will pay dividends in areas including Redbridge, Croydon and Cambridge.

Labour strategists will also be hoping to see the Tories failing to hold seats in marginal wards in Basildon, Peterborough, Southend and Swindon - the authority where Mr Miliband failed to recognise the name of the party's senior councillor during a campaign radio interview.

T he pro-EU Liberal Democrats are braced fo r a "difficult" night as the results are returned.

The party is set for an electoral mauling in the council contests and could find it suffers a potential wipeout in the European vote after its fourth place in the 2009 poll.

Snap opinion polls also suggested Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg was considered to have lost in two televised debates with Mr Farage as his "party of in" pushed the EU case against Ukip, the "party of out".

A Lib Dem source has suggested the party's hopes rest on getting their vote out in the strongholds where they have Westminster MPs.

The biggest battlefield in England is expected to be London, with all seats in the capital's boroughs up for grabs.

Polling stations are open throughout the day and some councils will count overnight, although many will declare during Friday.

Counting of the European Parliament votes starts on Sunday but no announcements can be made until 10pm under rules barring declarations until polls have closed all over the EU.

Final results in Scotland will not be available until Monday morning, because of opposition to Sunday working in Comhairle nan Eilean Siar - Western Isles.

But - at the same time - counting will be getting under way in Northern Ireland.

This will be under the single transferable vote system, possibly involving several rounds.

For a full list of candidates across Waltham Forest, Redbridge and Epping Forest, click here.

Comments (21)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:57am Thu 22 May 14

Villagecranberry says...

None of the parties are willing to discuss immigration and open border policies except UKIP. This issue has a massive knock on effect and drains our fragile infrastructure as regards schools, housing, hospital resources and so on. I can understand why Farage has rattled a few cages as a result and am quite certain he will be giving the main parties a bloody nose.

I urge Farage to stay cool and keep his feet on the ground and not venture into one of those advertising planes where he came down with a thud last time.
None of the parties are willing to discuss immigration and open border policies except UKIP. This issue has a massive knock on effect and drains our fragile infrastructure as regards schools, housing, hospital resources and so on. I can understand why Farage has rattled a few cages as a result and am quite certain he will be giving the main parties a bloody nose. I urge Farage to stay cool and keep his feet on the ground and not venture into one of those advertising planes where he came down with a thud last time. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 15

8:59am Thu 22 May 14

T. Watts says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
None of the parties are willing to discuss immigration and open border policies except UKIP. This issue has a massive knock on effect and drains our fragile infrastructure as regards schools, housing, hospital resources and so on. I can understand why Farage has rattled a few cages as a result and am quite certain he will be giving the main parties a bloody nose.

I urge Farage to stay cool and keep his feet on the ground and not venture into one of those advertising planes where he came down with a thud last time.
Morning Cornbeefur! In your eagerness to troll and spout your racist nonsense, you missed out the bit about the green toothed lefties on the Orford Road.

Raise your game!
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: None of the parties are willing to discuss immigration and open border policies except UKIP. This issue has a massive knock on effect and drains our fragile infrastructure as regards schools, housing, hospital resources and so on. I can understand why Farage has rattled a few cages as a result and am quite certain he will be giving the main parties a bloody nose. I urge Farage to stay cool and keep his feet on the ground and not venture into one of those advertising planes where he came down with a thud last time.[/p][/quote]Morning Cornbeefur! In your eagerness to troll and spout your racist nonsense, you missed out the bit about the green toothed lefties on the Orford Road. Raise your game! T. Watts
  • Score: -23

9:55am Thu 22 May 14

myopinioncounts says...

Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 6

11:34am Thu 22 May 14

T. Watts says...

myopinioncounts wrote:
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...
[quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.[/p][/quote]Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate... T. Watts
  • Score: -26

12:18pm Thu 22 May 14

Alan_1976 says...

myopinioncounts wrote:
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
If you need someone to vote against clamping down on the global Ivory trade and who can fail to turn up to protect British interests on Fishing then they are indeed the place to place your mark....

http://anotherangryv
oice.blogspot.co.uk/
2014/05/ukip-fish-an
d-ivory-voting-recor
d.html
[quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.[/p][/quote]If you need someone to vote against clamping down on the global Ivory trade and who can fail to turn up to protect British interests on Fishing then they are indeed the place to place your mark.... http://anotherangryv oice.blogspot.co.uk/ 2014/05/ukip-fish-an d-ivory-voting-recor d.html Alan_1976
  • Score: 11

1:05pm Thu 22 May 14

garym says...

I would assume that apart from the immigration stuff, everyone is aware of their policies on the day to day stuff?
I would assume that apart from the immigration stuff, everyone is aware of their policies on the day to day stuff? garym
  • Score: 0

1:47pm Thu 22 May 14

Alan_1976 says...

garym wrote:
I would assume that apart from the immigration stuff, everyone is aware of their policies on the day to day stuff?
Two negative votes (so far) for asking if people have learned what a candidate stands for before voting for them....
[quote][p][bold]garym[/bold] wrote: I would assume that apart from the immigration stuff, everyone is aware of their policies on the day to day stuff?[/p][/quote]Two negative votes (so far) for asking if people have learned what a candidate stands for before voting for them.... Alan_1976
  • Score: 0

1:52pm Thu 22 May 14

myopinioncounts says...

T. Watts wrote:
myopinioncounts wrote:
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...
No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'.
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.[/p][/quote]Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...[/p][/quote]No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 16

4:11pm Thu 22 May 14

T. Watts says...

myopinioncounts wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
myopinioncounts wrote:
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...
No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'.
Yep. Small minded.
[quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.[/p][/quote]Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...[/p][/quote]No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'.[/p][/quote]Yep. Small minded. T. Watts
  • Score: -17

5:17pm Thu 22 May 14

myopinioncounts says...

T. Watts wrote:
myopinioncounts wrote:
T. Watts wrote:
myopinioncounts wrote:
Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.
Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...
No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'.
Yep. Small minded.
Would you have said this to the Australian Aborigines, the Maori's and the Native American Indians when they complained of being squeezed out of their own lands and their cultures decimated by immigrants?
Of 500 pupils there were only 5 from ethnic backgrounds when I was in a Walthamstow secondary school in the 1950's. By 2005 that figure had risen to over 95% (in a reception class) in one local school.
Do you seriously claim that this rate of immigration is acceptable, desirable and puts no strain on resources and community relations ?
[quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]T. Watts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]myopinioncounts[/bold] wrote: Is there a UKIP candidate to vote for in Waltham Forest? I didn't see one on the High Street Ward list.[/p][/quote]Maybe UKIP realised there aren't enough small-minded racist biggots in Waltham Forest to make it worth fielding a candidate...[/p][/quote]No, I suspect the real reason is that there are not enough people who are adversely affected by immigration left in Walthamstow. Those who are in favour of unlimited immigration include Buy to Let landlords, beds in sheds landlords, and ethnic minorities who would not want to prevent their relatives and friends from coming here to live. As a life long resident of the Borough I now feel a stranger in my own 'land'.[/p][/quote]Yep. Small minded.[/p][/quote]Would you have said this to the Australian Aborigines, the Maori's and the Native American Indians when they complained of being squeezed out of their own lands and their cultures decimated by immigrants? Of 500 pupils there were only 5 from ethnic backgrounds when I was in a Walthamstow secondary school in the 1950's. By 2005 that figure had risen to over 95% (in a reception class) in one local school. Do you seriously claim that this rate of immigration is acceptable, desirable and puts no strain on resources and community relations ? myopinioncounts
  • Score: 18

6:55pm Thu 22 May 14

stickmanny says...

Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it?

Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity.

As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere?
Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it? Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity. As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere? stickmanny
  • Score: -12

9:54pm Thu 22 May 14

Villagecranberry says...

stickmanny wrote:
Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it?

Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity.

As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere?
Why do you suggest that people should leave their homeland simple because they genuinely feel threatened and their lives changed because of mass immigration? These are real issues that politicians in the main parties have been refusing to address for years giving rise to new parties who are prepared to offer an alternative. Maybe the liberals who welcome and encourage this union with Europe should move over to Romania and make that country a better place as there must be something fundamentally lacking in this country and many others in Europe that makes millions to want to come over onto this tiny island.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it? Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity. As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere?[/p][/quote]Why do you suggest that people should leave their homeland simple because they genuinely feel threatened and their lives changed because of mass immigration? These are real issues that politicians in the main parties have been refusing to address for years giving rise to new parties who are prepared to offer an alternative. Maybe the liberals who welcome and encourage this union with Europe should move over to Romania and make that country a better place as there must be something fundamentally lacking in this country and many others in Europe that makes millions to want to come over onto this tiny island. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 9

7:09am Fri 23 May 14

stickmanny says...

Because there is no 'threat'
Because their lives haven't 'changed'
Because they are in control of their own lives
Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years

The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.
Because there is no 'threat' Because their lives haven't 'changed' Because they are in control of their own lives Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it. stickmanny
  • Score: 1

10:47am Fri 23 May 14

Villagecranberry says...

stickmanny wrote:
Because there is no 'threat'
Because their lives haven't 'changed'
Because they are in control of their own lives
Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years

The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.
The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services.

The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'.

It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Because there is no 'threat' Because their lives haven't 'changed' Because they are in control of their own lives Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.[/p][/quote]The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services. The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'. It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 3

11:29am Fri 23 May 14

Alan_1976 says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
stickmanny wrote:
Because there is no 'threat'
Because their lives haven't 'changed'
Because they are in control of their own lives
Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years

The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.
The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services.

The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'.

It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.
UKIP has explained their own poor performance in London

http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/uk/pol
itics/ukip-blames-lo
ndon-election-perfor
mance-on-difficulty-
appealing-to-the-edu
cated-and-cultured-9
423200.html

Too many "educated" and "cultured" individuals.

So I guess that means the 1000 voters for UKIP can be considered uneducated or uncultured.

At least that's the verdict of UKIP...

If you're uneducated and/or uncultured then UKIP want you...
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Because there is no 'threat' Because their lives haven't 'changed' Because they are in control of their own lives Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.[/p][/quote]The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services. The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'. It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.[/p][/quote]UKIP has explained their own poor performance in London http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/uk/pol itics/ukip-blames-lo ndon-election-perfor mance-on-difficulty- appealing-to-the-edu cated-and-cultured-9 423200.html Too many "educated" and "cultured" individuals. So I guess that means the 1000 voters for UKIP can be considered uneducated or uncultured. At least that's the verdict of UKIP... If you're uneducated and/or uncultured then UKIP want you... Alan_1976
  • Score: 1

2:46pm Fri 23 May 14

myopinioncounts says...

stickmanny wrote:
Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it?

Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity.

As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere?
So, by your remarks I gather you WOULD have said to the indigenous peoples of Australia, America and New Zealand that THEY must move out if they are not happy with the level of immigration.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Considering the treatment European immigrants meted out to Aborigines and American Indians that not really a fair comparison is it? Yes immigration has put strain on resources, so the answer is more resources rather than more austerity. As for community relations: there does not have to be a strain unless you create it. Clearly you do not appreciate your new neighbours, but unfortunately for you London is a world city. Maybe you'd be happier elsewhere?[/p][/quote]So, by your remarks I gather you WOULD have said to the indigenous peoples of Australia, America and New Zealand that THEY must move out if they are not happy with the level of immigration. myopinioncounts
  • Score: 3

10:04pm Fri 23 May 14

stickmanny says...

I'm saying modern day immigrants are not exactly stringing up the natives, running them through, stealing their land or forcibly removing their children.

Therefore your comparison stinks.
I'm saying modern day immigrants are not exactly stringing up the natives, running them through, stealing their land or forcibly removing their children. Therefore your comparison stinks. stickmanny
  • Score: -2

10:14pm Fri 23 May 14

stickmanny says...

Villagecranberry wrote:
stickmanny wrote:
Because there is no 'threat'
Because their lives haven't 'changed'
Because they are in control of their own lives
Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years

The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.
The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services.

The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'.

It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.
What does potential(ly) arbitrary mean exactly? Something is either arbitrary, or not.

The UK is perfectly able to accommodate this number of people (and more), but it has chosen not to. Ask the government why not.

Thinks will get much worse eh? Are you Enoch Powell in disguise?
[quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Because there is no 'threat' Because their lives haven't 'changed' Because they are in control of their own lives Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.[/p][/quote]The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services. The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'. It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.[/p][/quote]What does potential(ly) arbitrary mean exactly? Something is either arbitrary, or not. The UK is perfectly able to accommodate this number of people (and more), but it has chosen not to. Ask the government why not. Thinks will get much worse eh? Are you Enoch Powell in disguise? stickmanny
  • Score: -2

10:52pm Fri 23 May 14

Villagecranberry says...

stickmanny wrote:
Villagecranberry wrote:
stickmanny wrote:
Because there is no 'threat'
Because their lives haven't 'changed'
Because they are in control of their own lives
Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years

The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.
The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services.

The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'.

It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.
What does potential(ly) arbitrary mean exactly? Something is either arbitrary, or not.

The UK is perfectly able to accommodate this number of people (and more), but it has chosen not to. Ask the government why not.

Thinks will get much worse eh? Are you Enoch Powell in disguise?
How can I be 'Enoch Powell in disguise?'

He died in 1998.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Villagecranberry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: Because there is no 'threat' Because their lives haven't 'changed' Because they are in control of their own lives Because immigration is a fact of life in London and has been for hundreds of years The 'something' lacking is the same thing that drives100.000 UK born nationals to leave the UK every year. It's called 'choice'. I thought the right was in favour of it.[/p][/quote]The people have now voiced their concerns through a vote for UKIP. The only party to address the issues that give rise to genuine concern amongst ordinary folk who's lives ARE affected by this influx of uncontrolled and lawful immigration. The EU is flawed as our infrastructure cannot cope with the potential arbitrary demand on public services. The country and world is different than it was 100 year ago. Transport and accessibility is much easier for example and tens of thousands of people who have expressed their genuine concerns through voting for UKIP yesterday cannot all be dismissed as 'racists bigots'. It is now time for all the main parties to have a proper debate about our continued membership and open border policies otherwise things will get much worse.[/p][/quote]What does potential(ly) arbitrary mean exactly? Something is either arbitrary, or not. The UK is perfectly able to accommodate this number of people (and more), but it has chosen not to. Ask the government why not. Thinks will get much worse eh? Are you Enoch Powell in disguise?[/p][/quote]How can I be 'Enoch Powell in disguise?' He died in 1998. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 0

11:00pm Fri 23 May 14

Villagecranberry says...

stickmanny wrote:
I'm saying modern day immigrants are not exactly stringing up the natives, running them through, stealing their land or forcibly removing their children.

Therefore your comparison stinks.
No they are not doing what you say, their effect on the indigenous population is mor sinister and subtle.

The writing is on the wall now after UKIP's huge vote. I personally did not vote but probably would have voted for them had I the time as a protest vote. Cameron this evening looked pathetic on Newsnight and is already moving his position onto UKIP's territory. Across Europe there is the same movement, people feel threatened, financially, economically and domestically by uncontrolled immigration. They feel vulnerable to crime and economic trespass on their livelihood. I really feel that people have really had enough.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: I'm saying modern day immigrants are not exactly stringing up the natives, running them through, stealing their land or forcibly removing their children. Therefore your comparison stinks.[/p][/quote]No they are not doing what you say, their effect on the indigenous population is mor sinister and subtle. The writing is on the wall now after UKIP's huge vote. I personally did not vote but probably would have voted for them had I the time as a protest vote. Cameron this evening looked pathetic on Newsnight and is already moving his position onto UKIP's territory. Across Europe there is the same movement, people feel threatened, financially, economically and domestically by uncontrolled immigration. They feel vulnerable to crime and economic trespass on their livelihood. I really feel that people have really had enough. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 0

7:17am Sat 24 May 14

stickmanny says...

Too busy to vote for UKIP because you were on here singing about UKIP.

Fool.
Too busy to vote for UKIP because you were on here singing about UKIP. Fool. stickmanny
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree