• Would you pay £20,545 for this car?

      0 comments

    Above, GF52 0ZX, a 2002 Ford Mondeo 1.8LX (petrol) 5 door hatchback, manual transmission.

    The car’s mileage is 136,000 miles. The used car dealer in Hunslet, Leeds in the West Riding of Yorkshire states that the vehicle’s next MOT is due on 18th March 2017. It has air-conditioning, cruise control, an alarm, electric windows (front/rear), a heated front windscreen, “in car entertainment” (Radio/CD).

    Those interested should telephone the trader on their land-line; 0113 2422600 or mobile; 07752074603.

    And the price?

    £295 p/x to clear – NOT £20,545! That is the cost of the nearest and cheapest equivalent new Mondeo a “Zetec” being a 5 door hatchback with a 1.0T EcoBoost 125PS (petrol) with a 6 Speed manual transmission.

    Clearly any person willing to pay an additional £20,250 for the car – which sum would enable them to buy the brand new (2016) equivalent to this car would be an idiot!

    Who could be so stupid?

    How about the man below?The problem would be that he would not be spending his own money. He would be spending yours – in the sense that it is taxpayers money!

    Clearly Dear Reader, you would strenuously object to such a waste of taxpayer’s money!

    And yet something not completely different is being proposed by The Three Monkeys (Messrs. Johnson, Davis & Fox)!

    How?

    Because a “trade deal” between the UK and the EU to replace what we already have will be in economic terms WORSE than:
    1. Our present situation within the EU
    AND
    2. EFTA + EEA membership (FLEXCIT)

    This is why the Remainians and the Remainiacs are probably hoping for a clause to be inserted in the final agreement for a second referendum giving the British People the opportunity to change their mind on Brexit. This we understand is the view of Labour leadership challenger, Mr Owen Smith the Member for Pontypridd.

    This is why this organ is of the opinion that the political wish list of Ms Nicola Sturgeon offers the best hope for this country!
    GOTO: http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/2016/07/17/brexits-best-hope-nicola-sturgeon/
    Now let us address some of the specific issues associated with what is and what could be on offer.

    This is necessarily a complex subject so for brevity’s sake we will simplify matters greatly.

    FLEXCIT – essentially the so-called “Norway Option” has been derided by the Remainians and the Remainiacs as a poor substitute to EU Membership on the UK’s existing terms.

    Apart from the British Gazette, Doctor North and some others, at NO time did any significant member of the Leave campaign challenge this BLATANT BULLSHIT!

    The “Norway Option” has many advantages over the UK’s present position, some of which are:

    1. It stops the UK being dragged kicking and screaming towards “ever closer union” by dint of the very fact that the UK would no longer be in the EU!

    2. Many of the EU regulations and directives stem from the deals the EU makes on it’s members behalf with other international organisations. These particular regulations and directives are communicated to Norway in the so called “Fax Laws”. What the Remainians and the Remainiacs FAIL to point out is that Norway herself has a say in the making of these regulations and directives by taking part in the same discussions as the EU.

    Think of it this way:

    You are a farmer growing potatoes for a supermarket. Your potatoes are marketed under a particular own brand belonging to the supermarket. This means that they are your farm’s spuds but are in bags with the supermarket’s name on them. OK, you are visiting family – off your farm – and decide to cook them a meal. You nip down to the supermarket and buy some of the spuds you have grown. They may have been bought at the supermarket but you grew the spuds and it is your cottage pie you have served up!

    3. FLEXCIT keeps the UK in the EEA (aka Single Market). This is essential for the City of London and the Financial Services Industry.

    4. The control FLEXCIT gives the UK of EU immigration is less than that which would be available under UKIP’s “Australian style points based system”.

    In other words, UKIP’s “Australian style points based system” would come at the cost of many jobs in the financial services industry and also significant loss of corporate tax revenue to the Treasury.

    EU politicians have been pointing this out to the UK.

    UKIP think that it should be possible to negotiate membership of the EEA/Single Market but with the ability to impose “Australian style points based system” and to pay either less, much less or nothing to the EU.

    This is Alice in Wonderland nonsense!

    Such is the level of this nonsense that one is forced to ask this question?

    Why is UKIP peddling this line?

    There will be more than one reason.

    One of the reasons may well be that UKIP are not and were never going to be involved in the negotiations. They therefore have the luxury of criticising from the sidelines.

    The other reason may well be that UKIP wished to be true to the representations it made during the campaign. After all, it was UKIP’s message that Brexit would mean control of EU migration up to the level of the introduction of an “Australian style points based system” that actually WON the Brexit vote! It has to be admitted by those such as the British Gazette that had “the Norway Option” been presented as the Brexit route we could not have argued that the Liechtenstein solution is the same as an “Australian style points based system” and as such the chances of the Brexit vote being one would have been reduced, probably substantially.

    Then there is another less charitable possibility: Some people in UKIP might have concluded that they will be in a “win-win” situation if they persist in their present course. Not being party to the negotiations UKIP will always be able to declare that they would have been able to secure a much better deal had they been allowed to negotiate and that the poor deal is the fault of the government.

    Then there is the second referendum. Were the vote to go Remain UKIP would be able to blame the government for such a lousy deal that caused the voters to reject Brexit. UKIP would have of course the twin compensations of a probable increase in members and also the continuation of their platform in the European Parliament.

    Be under no doubt. The platform that has made UKIP the force it is in British Politics is the European Parliament and this is because the elections are held under Proportional Representation.

    Brexit means no more elections to the European Parliament which means the First Past the Post for Westminster and local council elections. UKIP will possess an insignificant presence post Brexit.

    Write a comment