Letter: Turn round UK decline

I still cannot fathom the minds of those who do not understand the EU and who wish to continue to to be dominated by this unelected and undemocratic regime.

eu flag stock

To try to simplify the decline of the United Kingdom after nigh on 40 years being part of this expensive mistake, just look around for yourselves.

The countryside is awash with litter, the surfaces of just about everything are daubed with meaningless graffiti, pavements and pedestrian areas are covered in discarded chewing gum and cigarette ends, vandalism and anti-social behaviour is ever on the increase. The appalling state of so many of our roads – these are just a very few of the ways where our country has declined whilst in the EU.

Now with Brexit we have the opportunity of determining our own path, overseen by our elected government, something that has not been possible for far too long.

Whatever figures people may come up with, our membership of this cash-guzzling monster, according to a number of experts, has been in the order of £400 billion.

As I say, what benefit has it been to us when you see the decline that has taken place over these last decades?

We now have the chance to use that membership fee to turn around the decline that has been allowed to take place whilst as a member of this failed experiment.

Peter Harman, Tibberton

Send us your letters for publication:

Email us at starmail@shropshirestar.co.uk or write to: Readers’ Letters, Shropshire Star, Ketley, Telford, TF1 5HU. Letters MUST include the writer’s name, address and telephone number. Letters will only be published anonymously in exceptional circumstances. The editor reserves the right to condense or amend letters.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Comments for: "Letter: Turn round UK decline"


Personally I cannot fathom the minds of people who would jeopardise 50% of our trade simply in order to have a bit of a pop at foreigners.

Does the letter writer really see 'surfaces of just about everything daubed with meaningless graffiti', and 'pavements and pedestrian areas that are covered in discarded chewing gum and cigarette ends'?

Honestly? In leafy Tibberton? And could he perhaps provide us with evidence of the EU laws which demand that morons write graffiti, or discard their chewing gum or cigarette ends?

I've seen some ridiculous nonsense written about our membership of the EU, but this one really takes the biscuit!


Actually I cannot fathom the minds of people who would jeopardise 50% of our trade simply in order to have a bit of a pop at foreigners especially those whose prejudice is against non EU trade .

Regarding waste I would state the obvious cause and consequence of EU Waste Framework Directives 2008/98/EC, and the Landfill Directive 1999//31/EC but hey don’t let the real world get in the way of your socialist ideology . I see only yesterday a piece in this paper about the £40k cost of clearing up some fly tipping in Telford , you cannot correlate the cost of waste taxation and regulation fuelling the national crisis of fly tipping ? You could sound like an elected member of T&W with that duplicitous guff.

Naturally your myopic postulations ignore the very core weaknesses of EU hegemony, take the most serious local social issue of CSE in Telford now amongst the highest nationally it is a public disgrace. EU supremacy dictates not to govern with regard to consensual sexual activities in which children may be involved , this is permissive lunacy. EU Directive obliges Member States to provide for criminal penalties in their national legislation in respect of the provisions of Union law on combating sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. The very same Directive then states in the same absurd paragraph “This Directive creates no obligations regarding the application of such penalties, or any other available system of law enforcement, in individual cases.” ( obligatory provision to have no obligatory application). The EU undermines the best traditions of the British rule of law effectively allowing the appalling situation we now have of convicted offenders not being given custodial sentences for child sex offences , as was reported of a disgraced police officer living in Telford in this paper last week! Clearly the realisation is that EU bureaucracy and harmonization is beyond your capabilities when having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 82(2) and Article 83(1) , or the actual consequence in application of many of the Directives has been such as Directive 2011/92/EU.


Shrewsbury Mum

"I still cannot fathom the minds of those who do not understand the EU and who wish to continue to to be dominated by this unelected and undemocratic regime."

Why the need for more of this?- the referendum is over. What I still cannot fathom is why, having *won*, so many Brexiters continue to berate those of us who voted Remain, and to blame every problem from the last 40 years on the EU- according to this letter, even litter!

I voted Remain because I thought that that was the right thing to do. I still think that, but I hope that I am wrong- if not, we have made a terrible mistake and our children will pay for it. Only time will tell, but in the meantime letters like this one are really unhelpful.


Anyone who thinks leaving the EU is a bit of a shame will have “Remoaner” painted on their door, and every year on Article 50 Day they must walk through Jacob Rees-Mogg Avenue dressed as a Belgian while citizens throw fireworks at them, which won’t even be deemed dangerous as health and safety laws were all burned in a ceremony shown live on TV hosted by David Starkey.


How exactly does a Belgian dress?


Left leg first. Thankfully we’ve got our country back and at last it’s in the hands of the common man. Instead of having to defer to elites, our decisions are made by characters such as Boris “One of Our Own” Johnson. He may disappear for a few hours during Brexit negotiations, to nip down the bookies and put a score on the dogs, but that’s because he’s down-to-earth Boris, from the spit and sawdust wing of the Bullingdon Club.

Robert Tressell

Just another oafish Sun reader Brexiteer who treats the Referendum like a football match to be won or lost and then beat up the opposition on the way home. Britain was full of litter and graffiti before we joined the EU and will be the same or worse after we leave. I'm just amazed at how many stupid and simplistic arguments these people keep coming up with to blame everything on the EU without looking at the benefits.


Indeed. He seems to be yet another one who thinks there will be some magical pot of money coming back to us as a net figure, to be spent on improving our lot. To the contrary, unfortunately, we will lose out heavily.

If we look at his figures - they are somewhat exaggerated. Our net contribution is about £8.6 bn per annum at present. The actual cash figure over the last 40 years will be a fair bit less than the £400bn he claims, because of inflation, but it may be that adjusted for inflation we will have paid about £340bn in what are effectively mem


(try again...) ...effectively membership fees. But we got plenty back for those membership fees - around 4-5% of our GDP, or £62bn per year. Multiply that by 40 and you get 2,480bn - even if these figures were wrong by a factor of 3 (and they aren't) we'd still be getting more than twice the value back that the letter writer claims we have 'wasted'.

Oh, and before anyone accuses me of sourcing figures from 'lefties' - these figures come from the CBI, hardly a left-leaning group!


PJS I would like to reply but I do not you running to the editor to get it deleted


As I've often pointed out - I've never asked for anything to be deleted - but you carry on with your paranoid fantasies...


Agree.Very bizarre.

I bet he reads the Daily Mail.


know I read FT what do you read the Dandy ?


Obviously has never been to Austria, or Germany or Sweden or Denmark. All countries where you never see litter and graffiti is extremely rare. You can say the same of most of Holland (Amsterdam is the exception that proves the rule

Tony in BC

I left the UK some 55 years ago to live in Continental Europe. I enjoyed living in countries that were relatively free of litter, were generally cleaner and the working environment so much better - you know clean and efficient factories with employers who actually appreciated your work and cared for your welfare.

Moreover the pay was better, benefits and vacations better, accommodation cheaper relative to pay - not to mention better food.

Returning to the UK on vacation I was invariably disgusted and ashamed of the grimy, dirty railway stations, the littered streets, the drabness, the cynicism - and, at the same time, baffled by the views of so many people who believed Brits were so much better off than their Continental cousins.


The high number of idiots freely roaming the world never ceases to amaze.


PJS: Are you claiming we would do no trade at all with EU states if we were not members of the EU because that seems to be the basis for your argument? That we get twice the value back of the losses claimed by the letter writer. Even if you were right would not than make trade with the EU uneconomical as we loose half of the trade returns simply to be allowed to trade with EU states?

Is not the real equation the up front cost between FREE Trade as members of the EU and the cost of any trade deal we might agree when we leave or in the worst case the cost of WTO rules and the balance of import and export taxes.

By the way can you let us know what the up front costs of trade with the USA, Australia, New Zealand or Mexico, how much do they charge for their trade deals? Do we have to pay these countries a sweetener for access to their markets?


I'm quoting the CBI figures which show that the benefit of EU membership equates to around six times the figure we pay in. Even if the CBI had that wrong by a factor of three - we would still be

getting back more than twice what we contributed.

As for the other countries, we don't have free trade with them - if we did, why would May and others be so keen on cosying up to a lunatic egomaniac like Trump?

There's also a well-accepted maxim that trade opportunities decrease with distance - it's far more beneficial for an economy to trade with neighbours than with people on the other side of the world. Our contribution is not a sweetener - it's essential a membership fee - and one from which we benefit greatly - why would anyone want to put such a beneficial relationship at risk? The idea that we could somehw achieve such a beneficial relationship by the use of WTO rules is pie in the sky.

Now, back to the letter - do you think that the EU is to blame for graffiti, or for discarded chewing gum?


Yes actually see EU Referendum: ‘Remain’ graffiti to be removed from Bruton High Street after Brexit vote

Read more at http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/eu-referendum-8216-remain-8217-graffiti-to-be-removed-from-bruton-high-street/story-29508733-detail/story.html#QQVoxaMBwpQ2Lb8V.99

And yes for chewing gum see COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2016/1776, it tastes disgusting now .

well you did ask not my fault you are clueless.



If there was a single lingering doubt in the minds of any readers that you persistently troll this site, then your last post will have removed it.

Well done.


PJS. I am not questioning your figures only the concept that the payment of a backhander to the EU is an asset because we get 6 times more than the cost of the sweetener back in trade.

Obviously it follows from your argument that if we did not pay that bribe we would loose that trade. I do not think that is the case and the real cost of trade with the EU without a trade deal should not be calculated on the present cost of membership but on the differences between what they will charge us in import duties and what we will charge them for import duties.

Whether we have free trade with other countries is not relevant to what they would charge us for a free trade agreement. You are claiming that the payment of a bribe to the EU is worth it because of the value of the trade, so the level of bribes demanded by other countries is a relevant question.

The EU can call these charges whatever they like but you are the one claming they are worth paying because of the level of trade hence they are a charge on trade otherwise known as a bribe.

I believe you are offering false perspective on several levels, because you are arguing for membership of a political union based only on an argument for trade, because you assume that we loose we would looses all that trade and because you are ignoring the paramount political element of the EU .

To directly answer you question "why would anyone want to put such a beneficial relationship at risk" Because the political costs are far to high. Never mind graffiti the real cost of EU membership has been the loss of our democracy.

Tony in BC

Eu - by kowtowing to the US (and China!) you folks will likely lose more of your sovereignty, democracy not to mention international prestige than by staying within the European Union. An organization which has raised the living standards of millions, and whatever you say, is a continent where the average citizen is better serviced by law makers and governments than almost anywhere on the planet - including China and the United States.

If you believe that trade with the US is 'free' then you obviously have never done much in the way of commerce with that country. And with the new regime in Washington things are going to get much tougher.

You mention trade with Commonwealth countries - but Brexit will be a stumbling block for Canadian trade with the UK as our new trade agreement with the EU will no longer apply to the UK.

But I guess we will all have to just 'muddle through' - sad eh!


Tony the EU is not a continent it is a political organisation.

I do not know what you mean by law makers or being better served by them or what that has to do with PJS making an argument for the EU based on trade and claims the money we pay upfront for access to the single market is money well spent because we get six times that amount back in trade. Hence the upfront cost of trade with other countries becomes relevant ie. How do the upfront costs of a free trade agreement with other countries compare to the cost of a free trade agreement with the EU. The other point is nothing stops trade we can trade with Canada with or without a free trade agreement it is all about the costs of that trade imposed by states. That is important because many seem to take the view that without being in the EU we won't be allowed to trade with the EU that is nonsense.

The whole argument for membership of the EU is always about trade how much we would loose if we leave ext. ect. Nothing at all about the political cost, we voted to leave because of political issues, because we felt as a people we no longer controlled those who make our laws that voting was a total waste of time.

You seem to misunderstand the term sovereignty it is having the final say in a decision, for instance we can choose to make a trade agreement on certain terms or we can refuse, in the EU that choice is removed hence sovereignty is removed and please do not try to argue the EU is democratic.


If you join a gentlemen’s club and pay a membership fee, they don’t let you through the door. If you ask why, they say: “Because the regulations are, sir, that in order to be permitted entry, you must call us a bunch of whining anti-democrats for 40 years and then leave, announcing this is the happiest day of your life.”

jim jams

In the same vein when you go through a divorce, the missus doesn't say now hand over that jag and fur coat you promised me for next xmas and then we can start talking about how much we are going to settle on but never mind the house and property that we own...unless your wife's name is EUstace.


David Davis and Theresa May assured us we’ll be in a stronger position with the EU now than we were as members. That should work, because most institutions give you more favours if you’re not a member.


Now we’re in a much stronger position to demand what we like from the EU as we’re leaving it. Everyone knows you get a much better service from any club once you’ve left it. It’s the same with a snooker club, if you’re a member you’re bound by all these rules and have to make payments, and in return they let you play on the tables. But once you’ve left, you can go in without paying and blow up the chalk and do whatever you like and no one minds, because you’re free and at liberty at last.


PJS you say that trade opportunities decrease with distance well china and most counties in the far east have not done bad at trading at distance ?


Ah - I thought you weren't responding to my comments as a result of your non-evidential paranoid belief that I'm somehow getting your posts deleted!

Anyway - it's basic economics - the further the distance you have to move your goods, the greater the cost of those goods. Your examples of far East exporters such as China are not good ones - principally because they have large, and sometimes effectively captive, populations of very low paid workers, and few rules around intellectual property, counterfeiting etc.

We operate more responsibly than that, though I'm sure that there would be many on the right only too keen to see us tuned into a low tax corporate sweatshop.

And, following your flawed logic, why do you think we have never been flooded with American cars for example? Even Far East car manufacturers decided to set up factories here - why do you think they opted for that?


PJS ARE you saying that you never buy goods from China or the far east it seems you are still good at telling fairy tales which most of your posts seem to be ?


Of course I buy goods from China - but if you bothered to read properly you'd understand that China is not a normal trading nation - because of its size, its totalitarian regime, its vast cheap labour force, and its willingness to ignore international rules.

No-one trades on the basis of a level playing field with China, and if some Brexiteers think we will be able to negotiate a trade deal that in the long run would be more to our benefit than theirs, then frankly they are dreaming. We were much better off with the single market we had than a risky attempt to deal with a maverick trading nation like China.


We should consider the possibility that this letter was written by a Remainer, seeking to undermine confidence in the wisdom of Brexit.


I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said "The doors of wisdom are never shut." sadly though Remoaners' actually never wish to leave their confinement.



On the topic of wisdom, in another thread, you said the following:

'PJS also endorses students in full time education outside of Shropshire claiming over £72,000 in Councillors allowances from Telford and Wrekin Council as elected members.'

Now was it really wise to make such a statement when I have never expressed any opinion at all on that subject? Indeed, I wasn't at all aware of it (assuming of course that what you say is true!).

So please let us all know when, and where, I supposedly endorsed or even mentioned such a thing - I'd be fascinated to know. Alternatively you could simply admit that you lied about it. Your continued silence, I'm sure, will be taken to be an admission of the latter.


PJS few EC do not trade on a level playing field like France ? They are still taking my post off when I reply in kind you must very well in with the Editor ?


France, Germany etc. ae all subject to the same trading rules as we are - that's what the single market is about.

As for your posts allegedly disappearing, perhaps you need to check your internet connection or your computer equipment. Better still, why not take it up with the site moderator? Whatever may, or may not, be going on with your posts, it's certainly nothing to do with me! I'll say it again - I have never requested that a post be removed from this site or any other - how clear do I have to make it before you give up on this nonsensical assumption?


PJS why did France not allow our meat in when it was given the all clear after foot and mouth or money given to their Ship builders so they could build our Q E 2 ?


The French were threatened with fines for not allowing our beef in thanks to the rules put in place to ensure a level playing field. In the end they had to give in as a result of that threat.

The QE2 was built several years before we joined the EU, and as far as I'm aware, was built at Clydebank. Why did you think it was built in France?


PJS I made a mistake I should have it was Queen Mary 2 that was made in France PJS I am getting as bad as you for getting things wrong ?


The Queen Mary 2 is owned by Cunard - a largely US-owned company. As such, they have a perfect right to get their ships built wherever they like. In this case, although Harland and Wolff were in the running to secure the contract. France did nothing illegal - they simply competed for, and won the contract - there were actually some doubts that H & W could actually meet the needs of the contract anyway - perhaps that's why Cunard settled on France?

If, over the years, France's governments supported their shipbuilding industry, rather than running it down in favour of diaphanous 'service industries', then they've perhaps made better decisions than our governments, but we can hardly blame them for that.

In the end - the QM2 has nothing to do with the EU anyway - Cunard could have had it built in Japan or Korea if they'd wanted - and still registered it under a British flag.

So firstly you provided the wrong ship, and then it turns out that the 'right' ship is irrelevant in the context of the debate. And you talk about people getting things wrong?


There are several aspects of this argument that simply don't add up. One of the most striking aspects when travelling the continent is how most of the cities are so much cleaner than many in the UK. There are exceptions, of course, but if the EU was somehow to blame for litter, we'd expect Brussels to be a festering dump, would we not? I can personally tell you it isn't.

As for the graffiti, well that's not an exclusively European thing. Look how much vandalism goes on in the USA, for instance. It is a global phenomenon, and the claim that our EU membership has any relationship to an increase in graffiti holds no water whatsoever.

I wonder whether the long-term fallout of the Thatcher governments' social and economic policies has caused people to question what has happened to the country they grew up in. It happens to have broadly coincided with the consolidation of the EEC into the EU, but the "I'm alright Jack" mentality that took hold from the '80s onwards was very little to do with our EU membership. Unfortunately the blame for our social problems has been laid at the wrong door.

Why worry about chucking your rubbish over your shoulder onto the pavement if there's "no such thing as society?"


Oh well Jeremy Corbyn's the answer is it ?



David Davis and Theresa May assure us we’ll be in a stronger position with the EU now than we were as members. That should work, because most institutions give you more favours if you’re not a member. Supermarkets ask: “Do you have a loyalty card?” If you say, “Yes”, they squirt carpet cleaner in your eye, but if you say, “No”, they give you a free bucket of fresh salmon.

Squid Prono

What comedy gold, and they say Brexiteer's have no sense of humour.

I can just picture the scene in Brussels. EU commissioners and bureaucrats sitting around a table in a dark, smoke filled room. A mustachioed man in lederhosen leans forward to speak (in a German accent),

"Ve lost ze voor. But ve all know vat vill bring zose Englishers to zer knees."

Puzzled looks on all their faces until one swarthy looking Spaniard quizzically asks,


"Ve vill graffiti all over zer valls. I shall give zem the cheap lager, und they vill drink it until zey are doing the vomit in the streets and the fighting. Francois vill chain-smoke his Gitanes, and zen spread them everywhere. And Dimitri vill chew ze gum and spit it in the pavements. After 40 years of zis unbearable treatment zey vill be at our mercy."

All laugh maniacally.

One thing you can be sure of with Brexiteers is that you'll always get a well cooked turkey with all the tin foil they have (pity they usually end up wearing it as a hat).

..................................................................................................................gobble, gobble!


I'm from Edinburgh. Like other cities, prior to our joining the EEC, the colour of the cities buildings was black. This was from years of pollution. Now, with a load of EU money, the cities buildings are now back to the colour of cream sandstone.

Don't tell me the UK was cleaner before we joined the EU.


I felt the black stood as a testament to the people who worked in the industries that produced the stain and was a constant reminder of the lives lost. Just a personal feeling nothing to do with the EU debate.


PIS you got things wrong by voting to stay in thy EU


Well that remains to be seen, doesn't it.

Certainly I didn't fall for the lies of the 'leave' campaign, about £350 million per month suddenly being available to us, nor did I fall for the racist nonsense about thousands of Turks or Syrians coming here, nor for the pretence that somehow the EU were making lots of 'bad' laws for us (although no-one ever seemed to be able to name any)!

We've seen our currency struggling since the vote, and I don't doubt it will sink further when we leave. Given the figures I've presented (and as usual, you've presented none at all) I think we're in for a prolonged economic downturn. Far from having money to spend, as the letter writer wrongly assumes, we'll find ourselves even further in debt and quite unable to pay off the debts the bankers left us all with.


PJS I hope you are not saying that the people that voted to leave were racist ? Why have you used the word racist in your comments ?

the fat controller

Not all Leave voters are racist but all racists voted Leave?!

None of us really knew what we were voting for - nobody knows whether this will work out for the best or not because nothing like this has ever happened before. But as soon as prominent figures in the

Leave campaign started whipping up racism and xenophobia I wanted no part in that so I voted Remain.

Yes, I was on the losing side, and we are still being bleated at by Leavers like the writer of this letter. Whatever happened to being "humble in victory..."?!


I said that I didn't fall for the racist campaign run by parts of the 'Leave' group.

It's quite clear that Farage's campaign and rhetoric were designed to stir up fear and dislike of foreigners - I'd certainly call that a racist approach, and it will have attracted racists, and encouraged xenophobia amongst others. Do I think that all leave voters were racist? No - of course not, but a significant minority of them were, and a larger minority - perhaps even a majority of them, exhibited signs of xenophobia.


So you maintain half of the people of this country are either racist or have an unreasonable fear, distrust, or hatred of strangers, foreigners, or anything perceived as foreign or different. Wow! What it must be like to live in your world where you are forced to dehumanize those different from you. Possibly you are the one exhibiting signs of xenophobia.

the fat controller

No, he didn't say that.

Yes there are racists and xenophobes that voted Leave just as there are racists and xenophobes who voted UKIP and voted for Trump.

No amount of saying "we're not all racist and xenophobic" takes away the fact that some of you are and that Nigel Farage, Donald Trump and the more sinister parts of the far-right capitalise on this to build their "movement".

It wasn't coincidence that the posters unveiled by Nigel Farage during the Leave campaign were very similar to Nazi propaganda. Nor is it a coincidence that, since the referendum, racist and xenophobic incidents have increased dramatically.


Seem like he did say that

"Do I think that all leave voters were racist? No - of course not, but a significant minority of them were, and a larger minority - perhaps even a majority of them, exhibited signs of xenophobia."

Some people think they can call those who disagree with them nasty names in an attempt to dehumanize them and belittle them. You cannot stop yourself doing it even whilst calming you are not. You prove more about yourselves than those you attack.


PJS You have just said that perhaps ever a majority of them exhibited signs of xenophobia or in plane English being racist is that not trolling ?


Ukip must be at the point now where it could raise funds by turning the lovable quotes from its supporters into a diary, with a different one at the top of each page to brighten up the day.

For 3 April there’s probably been a councillor from Margate saying: “Spaniards are only 3 per cent human and 97 per cent seaweed. It isn’t racist to say this, as they would prefer to live between rocks on the beach rather than be forced into houses, which upsets them as they miss the crabs.”


You need to understand the difference between racism and xenophobia. Xenophobia in this case relates to an irrational fear of foreigners, which many Brexit voters, judging by their rhetoric appeared to have suffered from. Racism is simply irrational hatred of foreigners, and the wishing of harm to them or a desire to treat them badly because of their race alone. It can be a fine line, but there is a difference.

It's harldy surprising that xenophobia increased, given the amount of propaganda pumped out by tabloid rags and the likes of UKIP. It's not trolling - it's a statement of fact. I hope that's 'plane' (sic)enough English for you...

As for you 'Eurealist' you ought to know better. You clearly do know the difference between a racist and a xenophobe, and I'm afraid your view that the vast majority of Brexit voters did so on the basis of some high-minded principle of theoretical sovereignty simply isn't borne out by surveys done of why people voted as they did.

jim jams

Oh you poor deluded fool. I voted leave as did the majority of the people that I know from a large age range and many run succesful businesses.

No-one in my family or close friends has a hatred of foreigners or a fear of them, you really must stop getting your "facts" from the Dandy and the beano.

jim jams

As JF points out you will probably ask this to be deleted as I classed you (rightly in my opinion) a PDF.


Here he is, the guy who thinks the phrase ‘a third of the globe being pink’ refers to skin colour!!! Dear, oh dear, oh dear, no wonder bigotry is ignorant.

Over the last few years it's become one of our quaint English traditions that on any day following the announcement of immigration figures, certain newspapers display headlines such as "TEN MILLION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT POLES TO SWARM INTO BRITAIN LIKE PLUMBING LOCUSTS. And they plan to MASSACRE OUR KITTENS!"

These newspapers would compete with each other until they seem to insist the number of Poles coming was more than the number of Poles in the world, but when challenged they'd have replied, "Yes — well that's because they're planning to bring 10 million of their dead, to make use of our soft-touch spirit welfare scheme".

However, more recent statistics have spoilt this game because it turns out half the Poles who came here have gone back to Poland. Presumably these newspapers will get round that by screaming "Poland on brink of disaster as it's invaded by millions of Poles!"


Oh dear, another paranoid person who thinks I ask for posts to be deleted...

jim jams

Jett, the colour actually used to be red and it's your map that's getting old and faded now but I had heard that the EU wanted all remaining british colonies to be painted pink from here on as it's a much more PC, airy fairy colour which suits the modern airy fairy times that we live in and will go better with the snow flakes that just don't seem to fall from the sky anymore, since being invaded by so many foreign plumbers, I can only assume they have done an exchange our snow for their workforce...sounds reasonable in the mixed up world that you live in.


Not black or white as you previously thought, red and more usually pink were both used so at least you've looked it up https://timesatlas.com/category/The+Power+of+Maps+Part+One

Like all panics about immigration, the anti-Polish rhetoric has created an almost artistic level of irrationality. One complaint went along the lines of, "The trouble with Poles is they walk in groups of four on the pavement, so you fall in the road trying to get round them." When challenged with, "I'm sure just as many English people walk in groups of four on the pavement", the reply was, "Yes, but at least they do it in a language I can understand".

Which at least is an original way to be annoyed, to snarl: "I don't mind falling in a puddle, as long as it's with the right mix of vowels and consonants. But when it's with three or even FOUR Zs it's time we took a stand."

jim jams

Well no Jett, I didn't need to look it up because I'm of an age and intelligence where I know these things from experience but at least the snowflakes are doing some homework, well done you could be in line for a gcse soon.


What a pity your memory didn't kick in earlier old chap.

Now that more Poles are leaving than coming, the anti-immigration newspapers have to revert to more traditional complaints. For example, one paper told us that, "One immigrant is arrested every four minutes." But they must have been short of space, because they left out how the average for the whole population is one arrest every THREE minutes.

Now they'll print a story that: "Immigrants are refusing to adapt to our way of life by only being arrested once every four minutes. If they don't want to follow our customs they should go back to where they came from."


Most of the apocalyptic warnings of Eastern European takeover could be traced back to the organisation MigrationWatch, a right-wing lobbying group but quoted uniformly by the most hysterical anti-immigration papers. But now the Poles are going the other way, instead of issuing a statement reading, "Whoops, sorry", they've declared the British population is still destined to rise to an unsustainable 80 million in the next 40 years, because millions are coming here from Africa. MILLIONS of them, and they're bringing Mount Kilimanjaro because of our soft-touch summit payments, and all their giraffes and the Sahara desert.


No PJS because you lack trust in your own arguments you are forced to dehumanise those who voted "leave" so you can claim the moral high ground. In your world there must be something basically wrong with those who voted leave because they rejected all your arguments.

That is why you claim a "majority" of 17.5 million people who voted leave did so because they have an irrational fear of foreigners.

It just is not acceptable in your world to allow an equality of views so you invent something unsavory about those who have a different but equally compelling political view than you.

Instead of debating issues we always end up debating your inventions.


I have every faith in my own arguments - I've provided figures from the CBI - which you have said you don't dispute, and if you believe that any future trade deal with the EU will be anything like as advantageous as the deal we currently have then you are dreaming. The extent to which we lose will depend upon the nature of the Brexit that we pursue, but lose we will, and if the militant approach to Brexit continues, we'll lose heavily. I haven't seen any plan from you or your fellow travellers here which indicates that we will be anything but worse off.

At best, we'll end up with a deal similar to the Norway/Switzerland arrangements. The letter writer's suggestion that somehow there will be a returned premium to be spent

on urban regeneration is ridiculous - we'll have to replace all of the subsidies for Cornwall, Wales, agriculture, etc. first, and by then any returned money will be more than spent - and that doesn't even begin to take into account the inevitable downturn in the economy due to net loss of trade.

Turning to the description of numbers of leave voters as racist, or voting as a result of xenophobia, it's clear that all racists who voted will have voted leave - surely you cannot dispute that. If we look at UKIP's campaign, it was based pretty much entirely upon painting immigrants as a problem - blaming them for NHS problems, housing problems, crime, low pay and a wide range of austerity related difficulties, none of which they are to blame for - it was all about scapegoating, and was designed to attract those who were already irrationally afraid of foreigners, and to encourage yet more to believe things about foreigners which weren't true.

Given that, and the rhetoric I hear from many people who voted leave, and from what I see/hear them say on the TV/radio, and also looking at the surveys taken on why people voted as they did - it's clear that a large cohort of leave voters fell for the propaganda of Farage and others. It may or may not be a majority of them (and that was what I said above - 'perhaps even a majority of them') but it was certainly a significant minority at least. I don't use the words 'racist' or 'xenophobia' in unsavoury terms - I use them as adjectives which are factually correct.


Incidentally - when I posted my last post, it appeared, I then got a 404 error, and upon refreshing the page it had gone, and now it's back.

Should I a) assume that the site is having some problems, or b) leap immediately to the conclusion that others are having my posts deleted?!


PJS, how many times do we need to keep telling you this is not about trade but the political cost demanded by the EU.

To the rest I believe you make my point for me you are incapable of recognising a reasoned argument for leaving and therefore have to invent reasons for this mental aberration displayed by 17.5 million people, all you are doing is offering your view as an indisputable fact.

For over 40 year you people have been able to get away with charges of racism against what you thought, despite the evidence, were only a few malcontents who would go away. Unfortunately for you, you have now been proved wrong even against a concerted government and media backed campaign in the biggest national ballot ever. And you lot are so shocked you cannot think outside the box you have built around yourselves, so instead of a few racists there are suddenly 17.50 million. can you even see how ludicrous that suggestion is.

Of course I reject your misinterpretation of the Leave campaign because you abjectly fail to define it correctly. Stop your self-interested attempts to discern motivations, stop trying to close down debate with insults and listen to the opposing arguments, look instead to your own opinion and ask perhaps why so many deluded people were motivated to vote to remain in an anti-democratic corporate sponsored political union when 17.5 million people knew better.


So where did I say that 17.5 million people voted on the basis of racism? I know that the leave campaign liked to exaggerate, but why are you doing so?

I said that a minority of that of leave voters voted on the basis of racism, and that a more significant minority (possibly a majority of them) of leave voters did so on the basis of xenophobia - which would make the figure between 8.5 and 9 million people Why have you doubled it?

Moving on to trade, far from defending the letter writer's erroneous belief that somehow we'll have a returning cash bounty to be spent, you seem to accept the CBI's figures that show we benefit a great deal from our membership, and that you are reckless over whether or not we lose that benefit, all for the sake of some largely imaginary loss of sovereignty, and despite the fact that you cannot specify any 'bad' EU laws.

That clearly wasn't the basis upon which a large section of the leave vote voted - and if you're being honest with yourself you know it - the inconsistency of your arguments shows that.

Cunning Linguist

What utter rot, every time there’s an article on the EU you attempt to close down debate on other people’s opinion if it doesn’t fit in with your agenda so legitimate arguments regarding financial issues you immediately dismiss as irrelevant.

Is ‘dehumanise’ the latest buzzword used to deflect racist language? It would appear to be, the number of times you’ve used it here. Ukip is a party that, at best, merely attracts racists. As a reminder, here are a few comments from current or former Ukip members:

Stourport-on-Severn councillor Eric Kitson was questioned by police after he shared anti-Muslim cartoons on Facebook. In one particularly memorable post he said of Muslim women: ‘Hang em all first then ask questions later.’

Diane James was UKIP MEP for the South East of England and said that Romanians are naturally associated with crime: “On 1 January 2014 the floodgates will open for Bulgarian and Romanian citizens [to come to Britain]. “We are not just talking about pressure on services from immigration but also, and I have to say it, the crime associated with Romanians.”

After the death of Nelson Mandela, West London UKIP member David William Griffiths wrote in the members-only forum that some people were ‘intended by nature’ to be slaves.

Joseph Quirk, former UKIP candidate for Boldon Colliery Ward on South Tyneside Council has said: “Well, I reckon dogs are more intelligent, better company and certainly better behaved than most Muslims.”

After comedian Lenny Henry said there should be more black and ethnic minority people in creative industries, William Henwood said that Henry should move to a ‘black country’.

Andre Lampitt, the star of Ukip’s European Election TV campaign tweeted: “Most Nigerians are generally bad people… I grew up in Africa and dare anyone to prove me wrong.”

Local council candidate James Elgar tweeted: #ThingsAsianBoysDo groom and rape underage white girls, stab and rob innocent old white people, bomb innocent white people.”

UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom famously said that the UK should stop providing aid to ‘bongo bongo Land’.

Councillor Dave Small posted on Facebook: “I visiting the city of Birmingham recently and felt like a foreigner in the city of my birth, all around me I could hear the sound of jabbering in an alien voice … we also have the Pakistani’s and the Somali’s. Tell me Mr Cameron Why? the men wear their Pyjamas.”

UKIP member Ken Chapman posted: “islam is a cancer that needs eradicating multi-culturism does not work in this country clear them all off to the desert with their camels that’s their way of life.”

Do you think the people on the receiving end of this rubbish felt ‘dehumanised’ at all?

James B

Anyway, all of us who dislike xenophobia, whether we voted Brexit or Remain, will have enjoyed the photo of the young woman from Birmingham smiling bemusedly at the angry little EDL man during the EDL demo on Saturday.


Agreed, and I don't think it was an invention as pronounced by Eupompous.

jim jams

Yes much nicer than throwing bricks at them, as was the case in Telford a few weeks back....maybe the snowflakes are getting less aggressive when faced directly with their opposites.


Unfortunately too late to undo the murders of Jo Cox and Zbignew Pawalec.


Say what you like about a British murderer, at least they have the manners to put vowels and consonants in the right order.


No one disputes there are racists whatever interpretation, and from whatever race, weather someone is actually "unreasonably" frightened of foreigners is questionable, but that really has nothing to do with the claim being made by PJS that most of the 17.50 million people who voted to leave did so because they are racists or unreasonably frightened of foreigners.

That is the claim I am disputing because PJS and other of his ilk are using this slur to dehumanise those of us who voted leave in an attempt to belittle our compelling reasons for doing so. They are attempting to turn a political difference into an illness that need treating.

Their problem is they are so locked up in their own world that they simply cannot see that other do not share their world view. So they refuse to accept that others totally disagreed with them for their own reasons and did not see this countries future as part of a United States of Europe but as an independent democratic state.

They also forget people voted to leave the EU after years of experience of the EU, they knew and understood fully what being a member of the EU meant to them and they chose a different path despite the massive "Remain" campaign conducted by their own government and most of the media.

Tony in BC

Eu - let's go back to the letter. The writer insinuates that litter, graffiti, anti-social behaviour, the poor condition of roads in the UK is the result of 40 years of EU membership.

And obviously you agree with this sentiment.

Indeed I remember a time, about 1953, when things were looking good - no more rationing, a new Queen, Everest was climbed for the first time on a British expedition - the Zeitgeist - the spirit of the day had everybody looking forward to a bright future.

But this spirit changed - there were the Teddy Boys with their knuckle dusters, the road system no longer adequate for the new era, the Germans and even the Japanese were building better cars - yet we couldn't improve and change to meet this challenge. And instead there was industrial unrest in every sector, mining, transport, manufacturing. Education was of little importance - especially technical - and that ridiculous class system kept the working class from higher education and even skills training.

Many of us left to seek our fortunes in countries were hard work was appreciated and success admired.

And a decade or so later - when Britain, still ridden by strikes, with begging bowl at the IMF, the currency devalued - along came the Common Market.

Strange isn't it that within a decade of joining, the economy improved - indeed British people are better off now than many Americans, Canadians, Germans and Swedes - in stark contrast to 1974. In fact I tried (in the past) to hire young Brits - but could not pay the wage they are used to in the UK.

In leaving the EU - one can only wish Britain and the people good luck - but I doubt the litter will be gone or the social problems - and your roads and highways today are as good, if not better than most.


The problem may be that many people who voted to leave the EU are anti-immigration without being racist. But the more you pursue the idea of blaming immigration for the country’s problems, the harder it is to avoid a racist conclusion. Because such logic depends on accepting “they” are somehow worth less than “us”, more likely to claim benefits and commit crime and catch fire and summon the devil. And they don’t integrate like the British, who move to Spain and within hours are indistinguishable from the locals, singing folk songs about carrying buckets of squid into the Granada Mountains in the local dialect.


PJS you seem to getting deeper and deeper in to the ---- ?



I'm putting forward well-reasoned views, supported by facts and evidence. Have you ever though of trying that? It might make your posts less dull and predictable.

(Cue non-evidence based whinge about having posts deleted...)!

Try our beta site!

We’re getting ready to launch our brand new website for shropshirestar.com and we’d like to give you a sneak preview.

We’re still applying the finishing touches, so please bear with us if something’s not quite right.

We'd love to hear your thoughts, good or bad, via the simple feedback button that you'll see to the right side of every page.

Try the beta