Prisoners allowed the vote.

Brian Adolf only had to wait a few years the Germans seem to have all the say in Europe they are pulling the purse strings soon the money will not be worth the paper its printed on.jp

Another stupid idea of Cameron and Osborne, they want `Gay`[ dont like that word,] Marriage.
I am scared that one day they will make it compulsary.
.
Now if they Force the Church to have `GAY` Marriage, will they also Force the Mosque to have `GAY` Marriage.?????, I doubt it.
.
Now some of you dont call me `Homophobic` [another word I hate, ] I have a family member, a neice who is a Lesbian and `married` in a civil ceremony to another woman and also they have adopted a boy. I Do Not Approve.
Cheers
Brian.

well lads i have read some really interesting posts,and liked them very much. if tony reads this , is it possible to set up a simple yes/no vote for a referendum?

roger that was an excellent post.

George Bernard Shaw was an irishman who loved england. he had his own seat in a pub in hertforshire(i think) i have sat in that seat and the area is called shaws corner.

It was always said beware the yellow peril, i think we need to watch the teutonic one much more closely. I hope for all our sakes that David Cameron will show real bottle, and rattle the European cage , KT

Kieth Cameron is a pussy he robs the British to pay the EU to push papers around spending billions to tell you a banana is bent or strait if the EU was a fella you drank with you would tell him to .... off and leave you alone that's what we should do put it to the people who give thees clowns the jobs and let them know they work for us? are we that stupid to put up with this.JP

I dont really have any hard and fast opinions as to whether those in jail have the right to vote or not, guess there are lots of pros and cons to it . What I do object to is people mixing up the EU with the court of human rights. This court was one of Churchills objectives that older members faught a long hard war to achieve.

My other objection is that the flag we served under was that of the British Merchant Navy not the English Merchant Navy. There is no Nation State called England, or Wales or Scotland for that matter, only that of the UK. The Uk like most civilised nations does follow rules and laws emposed on it from outside. From the UN, the Geneva convention. international maritime organisations to name but a few

As you so rightly remind us, Eifon, there is no nation state called England (although, I confess, one does exist in my head and in my heart). You are also correct in reminding us of Britain's adherence to the impositions placed upon her by virtue of her membership of the U.N., the Geneva Convention and various other international organisations. By making that point, I hope you were not suggesting that Britain's membership of the EU was no different to any other international body, if so, then I must disagree. Unlike the EU, no other international organisation seeks to impose restrictions and effect a partial control that many British citizens find alien to their everyday life - therein lies the 'rub', I'm afraid.

..................Roger.

The Court of Human Rights was set up after WW2 to prevent another Holocaust or other such happenings.
Not to over ride our Democratically elected Government who are the law makers of this once great country.
We cannot deport Terrorists, because of Strasbourgs Human Rights Laws.
We have to accept an Algerian Terrorist and Criminal who is being deported from Spain for Crimes because he once married an British woman 25 years ago just to get a passport. He has never been to Britain for 25 years. But the foreign Judges in Strasbourg say we have to take him in. NOT make Spain keep him or deport him back to Algieria.
We cannot deport Abu Quatada back to his homeland of Jordan, he is a Jordanian citizen, because some faceless foreigners in Strasbourg say it is against his Human Rights.
What about the Human Rights of the British Citizen who elects a government and that government is then over ruled by a Foreign Court.?
Churchill certainly did not agree to that.
ALSO to get back to the thread.
Prisoners did not respect the Human Rights of their victims, so they cannot expect to have the same human rights they abused.
Cheers
Brian.

My take on this is if they were allowed the vote they wont use it,I wonder how many of them voted before they were locked up.To deny them the vote they will want it only for the reason of being able to claim compensation for infringing their Human Rights.I dont want rapists and paedophiles coming out of prison richer than when they went in through a large compensation payout for being denied something that they could'nt care less about anyway.Just how much do the people of the UK (on the outside) value the right to vote,judging by the turnout at the elections I would say not very much,I know many people that have never been near a polling station in their lives.
Regards.
Jim.B.

Brian, first point most of countries in EU are of a socialist nature so democracy as we know it may well not exist.
The concept of a free trade zone is good, locking countries into a single entity is not. So many countries around the world are trying for freedom. Some parts of Spain want to cut away from the main body of the country.
If what I heard is true Cameron told Eu that he was not prepared to put any more money into EU as he felt the British people had suffered enough budget cuts.

As I see it there is nothing stopping England establishing stronger trade relations with countries outside of EU and it may be of great benifit to them if they did so.
As for prisoners having the vote!!!!! If I am correct the only reason persons are sent to gaol is because they have broken some community laws and regulations. Do the crime, do the time. One of the aspecst of prison is the removal of privaleges and voting is one such entity.