I must admit to feeling a little disappointed when I read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26538420

Daily Mail lie, the wage was around £90k.

According to the latest figures available from the Trade Union Certification Officer, as of 2012 Bob Crow's basic salary at the RMT was £89,805. The union also paid £10,313 of National Insurance contributions to the state and £34,429 into his pension pot in 2012. No car or chauffeur was provided. He was criticised for living in a council house, despite his five figure salary (often incorrectly cited as a 'six figure salary'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Crow

Bob Crow died not knowing how well off he was, to judge by today’s news. The Daily Telegraph opens its tribute to him with the words: “Bob Crow defended his £145,000 salary, insisting: ‘I am worth it.’ And so he was.” Yesterday’s Standard referred to his “£145,000 salary.” On the BBC website he is described as having “lived in a council house, despite earning £145,000 a year.” The same words are on page 13 of The Times. Even Reuters, normally so reliable, reported that he was on “an annual salary of 145,000 pounds ($241,200)”

No he wasn’t. His annual salary was around £96,000. The confusion arises because when the Certification Officer examines trade union accounts, he asks not what the General Secretary is paid, but what it costs to employ him. I can’t find the latest figures on line, but the 2012 figures are here. Scroll down to page 11, and you find that Bob Crow’s salary was then £89,805. With £10,313 employers’ national insurance, and £34,429 pension contributions, which came to an overall pay package of £134,547.

Bob Crow was well paid, but never had anything approaching a £145,000 salary.

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/...145000-salary/

I agree jim, when it comes to the EU all three seem to pussy foot around obeying there EU masters.

That is similar to what the company and much of the press did on the Grangemouth oil refinery staff dispute.
Add up all the operating costs, divide it by the number of employees, then claim that the resulting figure is what each employee is getting paid as a wage.

Out of date, it was as reported on the radio a few days ago around £90 thousand mark, forgot the exact figure but it was in the 90's as I recall.

Even so that filthy dirty scumbag rag the DM got it wrong so what is new with that? They love twisting the facts and spreading there lies and hatred just so they can sell that vile rag of there's which is unfit to wipe your arse on in case you catch something off it.

Excuse me I need to rinse my mouth out with my mouthwash.

I read it on your BBC news website (forgot to put in the link to source), so thought it must have been reliable considering the BBC is a left of centre organisation.

Have to agree with Jim :agree:, it reads like Mr Milibean scoring an own goal by ignoring the public desire for a chance to vote on their future. If Lord Mandy supports this plan then it must be a bad idea, like giving up much of the UK rebate. Ed must be getting pressure from the banks and big business not to leave the EU or wants a job on the Brussels gravy train in the future. How can he support the Scotch referendum on leaving the UK but not allow the UK to hold one on leaving Europe. Surely if Europe is so good then the voters will choose to stay in by a large majority and there is no risk of leaving, so hold a democratic referendum and then carry on as normal.

I too am disappointed about Eds decision, but I suppose it better than lying by saying he will give a referendum if\when Labour get in and then does not.

In one...he's gambling on getting the Tories backbone supporters on the side of Labour.

Well that difference might be because if Scotland leaves Britain Britain can set the terms.
Whereas if the UK leaves Europe then Europe sets the terms.
The politicians are well aware of this, that is why Cameron keeps pledging to have a vote but not having one, and why even the Kippers leadership admit that their anti Europe stance is just empty rhetoric.

People of Europe rise up and bring down that nest of vipers known as the EU. Rise up and break your chains or sit there and get beaten up by the EU.

Scotland is a country/province with its own laws and parliament, but would need to arrange terms with Great Britain (UK) over use of currency (Sterling) and division of armed forces, power utilities, etc.

But if GB left EU then no real issue, as it has a separate currency, no land borders, and could trade with the US, Commonwealth, or Far East without EU. And if the French get all uppity then just ban the import of cheeses and wine :D, and buy more decent new world wines instead. Instead of paying vast a amount of money to subsidise EU, and then getting some back in a rebate (why not just pay less in the first place) they could spend the money on their own infrastructure. Less EU workers also means better soccer teams, which they really need to improve on.

Soccer/Football I can certainly agree on :)

You miss the important stuff.
The most important is how much debt you get saddled with.
Westminster will decide how much of the UKs debt Holyrood has to pick up, Brussels will decide how much of the EUs debt Westminster has to pay.

Glad you mentioned Utilities. Britain sold off most of hers for a pittance as part of an ideologicly driven excersize in asset stripping.
Many of these are now owned by State and Semi-State companies in EU countries.
How much do you think those countries will screw you in those business interests if you don't want to play their game anymore?

Good point. Of course the easy option with utilities is just to renationalize them all again. And build some new nuclear power stations so there is less dependency on Russian gas.

I suggest you stop eating borscht I'd Russian gas is a problem for you.

Nationalise them, like Chavez?:03:

How are you going to pay the EU for their assets? After all they bought them so they own them, plus they bought them for knockdown bargain basement price, will they demand real market value if you want it back?
Could be a very expensive business deal if they demand a fair price

As for switching to nuclear to get rid of Russian gas. Your biggest gas imports are from Western Europe not Russia. That's Norway Holland and Belgium. Which sounds kinda EU doesn't it.
As far as Nuclear goes .The French State owned EDF is doing Hinkley isn't it?
The next project in development is by the State owned Rosatom.
So the plan is to switch from a 1-2% reliance in Russian gas from Gazprom and go for a 5% reliance on Russian nuclear from Rosatom.
Plus if Scotland gets its independence it gets the bulk of your gas reserves . What guarantee is there that you can still import your currently domestic gas and they won't pipe it to Europe instead?

Votes for independence and leaving trade blocs are all well and good, but the important question is "Then what?".
The "then what?" should be fully answered and understood before people put their little X on the ballot slip.
Not that that will make any difference. For example I still find people in Ireland complaining about measures they don't like, brought in by EU treaties which they willingly voted in favour of. All the information was available for them before the vote, they simply didn't bother and just voted in ignorance.

Fresh squeeze on NHS pay sparks union strike warning

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26556047


One word....................................... Insulting

That is the counter argument.