egafd.com

"William Beveridge, the eldest son of Henry Beveridge, an Indian Civil Service officer and scholar Annette (Akroyd) Beveridge, was born in Rangpur, India (now Rangpur, Bangladesh), on 5 March 1879. After studying at Charterhouse School and University College, Oxford, he became a lawyer".

Sounds pretty toffish from where I'm standing!

I've done a quck check on the Johnson Toffometer, a handy device with a classy gold finish (?3.99 from Argos). Results tend to be in the following range: below 25% (not really a toff); 25-90% (definitely a toff); over 90% (the essence of toffdom)

and the printout from the device shows:

Beveridge - son of a civil servant, public school, Oxford (20% on the Toffometer)

Brown - son of a Minister, state school and University of Edinburgh (0% doesnt register on the Toffometer)

Cleggie - grandson of a Russian baroness, father runs a bank, public school, Oxbridge educated, (70%)

Cameron - direct descendant of King William IV, son of a stockbroker and grandson of a baronet, married to the daughter of Viscountess Astor. (95% on the toffometer, one of the highest scores recorded!)

Given the infallibility of the Johnson Toffometer, no further debate has any merit.

David Johnson
(common as shite)

David Johnson wrote:

> Correct, that is the current position. But that isnt to mean
> that constitutions, laws etc never change.
>
> Cheers
> D

True. But when was the last time an EU law was changed in favour of a nation state? The changes all benefit the EU not individual countries. The only way to change things is for the UK to pull out of the EU.

"The changes all benefit the EU not individual countries. The only way to change things is for the UK to pull out of the EU."

This is clearly not the case. It is the individual countries that provide members to the European Parliament and those members which vote on proposed laws at plenary sessions. The laws passed may benefit some countries more than others, but to say that the changes benefit the EU not individual countries is nonsense.

For example you mentioned free movement of labour. That wasnt the case for Poland for example where it was agreed in the early years of accession, member countries would be able to limit the number of Poles entering their countries.

Cheers
D

That's true. However, the UK was one of the few (three, I think) who did not limit the number allowed in. And British workers paid the price.

I will rephrase: The changes all benefit the EU not the UK.

Yes, agreed, but "Scottishness" adds a handicap of 50% in my opinion, making Brown beat the other two on aggregate!

Dont think you could accuse the next leader of the labour party,Mr Alan Johnson,of being a toff.

"That's true. However, the UK was one of the few (three, I think) who did not limit the number allowed in. And British workers paid the price.

I will rephrase: The changes all benefit the EU not the UK."

The point is that the UK themselves in the shape of the British government of the day, NOT the EU decided that they werent going to take advantage of the ability to limit the Polish migration initially.

"Yes, agreed, but "Scottishness" adds a handicap of 50% in my opinion, making Brown beat the other two on aggregate!"

Sorry but Scottishness is the direct opposite of toffdom. I will this once though, make an exception and give Brown a manual score of -50 on the toffometer (one of the lowest scores ever recorded).

I will arrange a visit from Social Services immediately.

D

Alan "Algy" Johnson was probably a secret Toff, he masqueraded as a so called, "Tesco shelf filler" and then a "Postman" as a cover, when he was younger......!wink!

Here are some more, New Labour "Champagne Comrades"