Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
David L. Failure to improve productivity is always cited by economists as one of the main, if not the main reason why economies don't do better than they should. And it's said to be a problem affecting many/most Europen country's economies and the US. So why don't we just "improve productivity". Maybe because no-one knows how to? Or because it's not so easy to do without someone/something hurting badly in the system or it negating its benefits in eg increased unemployment due to increased automation?
Improving automation is the answer, we all know it, and where its economic companies do it, see eg self-checkouts at supermarkets as a recent example.
Yes it may result in increased unemployment, but that is just Luddism.
Companies won't invest in automation if the automation is more expensive than the staff, as they'll be undercut by competitors just using cheap labour instead. Increasing staff demands makes automation more affordable relatively, plus if unemployment is going to increase then doing so at a time of labour shortages is better than at a time of mass unemployment.
The invisible hand of free market is creaking at the bits trying to say that automation is needed, that's why we have labour shortages. We need to leave the market to do its thing, either firms pay higher wages, or don't get staff, or get automation going, either way the solution works.
Everyone who bemoans they "can't get staff" needs to be told to piss off and either automate or offer better terms and conditions so that they can, that can ripple through the economy so that those who are able to, are able to automate and be competitive by doing so.
Productivity increases can be worker inspired as well as from investment.
But the workers need to benefit by increased earnings from any productivity increases they initiate otherwise they're unlikely to happen.
I suspect in recent decades they haven't been and that the gains from worker inspired productivity increases have been used to boost business profits and director earnings instead.
One of the things you don't do is refer people to Zoe WIlliams, who floats somewhere in outer space in her commentary - perhaps near 'Beetle Juice'. She's pretty much a guarantee of getting the wrong end of the wrong shtick.
The "make them stand in a queue" doesn't even make sense - when people come back, they'll see (if they haven't noticed already) that we let EU travellers (and those of several other countries) through the same e-gates as UK passport holders, giving a decent chance that they'll conclude that the EU is just being vindictive. Again.
There’s also a fair degree of national autonomy, within the EU, on border processes, as demonstrated by Portugal allowing UK passport holders through their e-gates. Over time, Spain, the Netherlands and Belgium will probably follow the same path, as doing so can be a selling point for UK tourists and visitors - at which point, everyone concludes that it’s simply a case of the French being French.
Over here in Sicily I have seen a 1997 Twingo shod in brand new Uniroyals and a 40 year old beaten up Panda in a Pirelli version of "town and country" tyres. All modern stuff (post 2005) sits on matching OEM rubber. Yet back home a 2020 Carrera S rides on a combination of Linglong, Windforce, Jinju and Landsail.
I once bought a Mk.7 Golf R to flip and it was on 18 month old Belshina tyres that had already cracked and dry rotted. Made in Belarus! Even the minicab drivers won't touch them.
Normally Nitto NT01 or Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 for me. Although I have recently had to buy a set of ADVAN Sport v105s due to Brexit fuelled supply chain chaos.
The C300 only ever has the Contis, to match those it arrived on and are absurdly expensive and shortlived. The used 2019 3 series will have Bridgestones on the front to match the Bridgestones on the back to replace the mismatched Pirellis shortly. For the Minis I am not spoilt for choice. The owners club recommend NangKangs (which I have) or Falken, although the very late model Rover Mini from Japan arrived with matching Yokohamas which are unavailable in the UK.
When I scrapped my 2006, 250,000 mile Vectra it was shod in Hankook Evos. They were worth new three times the value of the car. Tyres maketh the man!
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
I am pretty sure the EU will not allow SM access without FoM. Wasn't that the entire problem with the Cameron negotiations? The four freedoms. They are interlinked and indivisible
That's exactly what will happen. The fact that senior Brexit-supporting people are back to talking about Norway/Switzerland model *already*, and they are in Schengen, is significant. For two reasons.
First, people are starting to recognize that we really have blown our economic feet off with the shotgun we were using to threaten the trespassers, and something needs to be done.
And secondly, the other global economic factors mean that something has to be done with a degree of urgency that probably wasn't quite there pre-Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
We'll never re-join the EU; Brexit is, after all, Brexit.
We will just end up with a range of treaty obligations and benefits that are functionally equivalent, but without the hard-to-reconcile-for-many "ever closer union".
What of freedom of movement? Immigration will remain a hot topic whose importance waxes with economic hardship, and wanes in the better times.
But before long, enough people will fudge stats showing that losing the relationship with the EU to help manage undesirable immigration is a net disadvantage, and enough people will look for equally fudgy treaty arrangements to deal with that.
Not the current Government. But Hannan is floating this change in the articles of faith for the true blue believers, and we should not ignore it.
Sorry but no, Hannan has always supported the Norway/Swiss model. The fact that he still supports what he has always supported doesn't say anything of any significance, or mean that anything "needs to be done". He's always been a believer in that, so nothing has changed.
What it does say is that now we are able to do things. Within the EU we were locked into a single model, the EU. Outside of the EU we can choose to take whatever path we want to take, we can choose to stick with what we have, we can choose to move further apart, we could choose to move closer.
That is a free, democratic debate for us to have now that we couldn't have if we hadn't left, that's why people like Hannan who backed the EEA model pre-Referendum were willing to campaign for Vote Leave despite Vote Leave ruling out the EEA model in its campaigning, because the only possibility we'd ever get that, was if we did leave.
Yes, I agree that this has been Hannan's position all along (something that seems to have been lost) - but it is, for want of a better word, "re-surfacing" and been presented as a new position.
I also respect your view that this renegotiation couldn't have taken place while in the EU - I think you're probably right (ETA: in part, because of a lack of capability and leverage on the UK side). The question for historians is whether the balance of pains is worth it, but present day politicians need to move on from that argument, as it is not productive. This feels like the first step in that process from what was the "leave" side.
I agree with you there, we need to move on from arguments of the past and look to the future. That applies not just to the Leave side of course.
Indeed. In fact I was calling out the fact that the first green shoots are, in fact, blue ones. I'm not a fan of Hannan, and was firmly a Remain voter, but any way forward is going to come from a more "reality based" view of the world that neuters both extremes.
As an employer recruiting new staff is far harder than keeping on existing staff, which is why its a good idea to respect your staff and not treat them like disposable cogs.
That is very true. Recruitment costs are big, and it's not just the hiring, but training and getting someone up to speed. Losing an employee with years of experience costs far more indirectly than paying a recruitment agency to find a replacement. Any business that casually hires and fires is a bad business.
We are not going to rejoin the EU. We won't ask for it. They won't agree to it.
None of those statements is true
They're all true. You have no control over that Scott, only control over whether you're going to let it blight your life or not. It seems at the moment your answer is 'yes'. I hope that sooner or later you'll decide that it's not worth it, or if that shift isn't possible, make a life and a career for yourself on the continent, where perhaps you'll feel more comfortable.
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
If the EEC of 1975 or even 1985 were on offer, the populace of every EU country would say 'yes please and shove everything else up your gravy train'. So im guessing they wont offer it.
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
And us accepting the RULES of the single market but having no say in what they are or their jurisdiction. I understood that to be an intolerable state of affairs for every freeborn Briton/Cornishman?
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
You can have two UK passports if you are a frequent traveller or need them for work reasons or to visit so-called 'incompatible' countries.
It doesn't, of course, help you get round the EU visa rules as entry and exit increasingly moves over to being recorded on a central database.
And if you're missing an exit stamp, that could be a problem whenever you tried to use that document again.
As an employer recruiting new staff is far harder than keeping on existing staff, which is why its a good idea to respect your staff and not treat them like disposable cogs.
That is very true. Recruitment costs are big, and it's not just the hiring, but training and getting someone up to speed. Losing an employee with years of experience costs far more indirectly than paying a recruitment agency to find a replacement. Any business that casually hires and fires is a bad business.
It's more expensive, yes, but in many ways "easier". As long as you maintain a good, old fashioned HR/outsourcing provider separation between the people responsible for hiring and the people responsible for trying to mould the people you end up with into something capable of delivering business value. Ideally, you make the whole thing an unaccountable mess, and rely on business size and inertia to keep going in the face of your obvious inadequacies.
Not that I am cynical about some/many of the organizations I come across.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
David L. Failure to improve productivity is always cited by economists as one of the main, if not the main reason why economies don't do better than they should. And it's said to be a problem affecting many/most Europen country's economies and the US. So why don't we just "improve productivity". Maybe because no-one knows how to? Or because it's not so easy to do without someone/something hurting badly in the system or it negating its benefits in eg increased unemployment due to increased automation?
Improving automation is the answer, we all know it, and where its economic companies do it, see eg self-checkouts at supermarkets as a recent example.
Yes it may result in increased unemployment, but that is just Luddism.
Companies won't invest in automation if the automation is more expensive than the staff, as they'll be undercut by competitors just using cheap labour instead. Increasing staff demands makes automation more affordable relatively, plus if unemployment is going to increase then doing so at a time of labour shortages is better than at a time of mass unemployment.
The invisible hand of free market is creaking at the bits trying to say that automation is needed, that's why we have labour shortages. We need to leave the market to do its thing, either firms pay higher wages, or don't get staff, or get automation going, either way the solution works.
Everyone who bemoans they "can't get staff" needs to be told to piss off and either automate or offer better terms and conditions so that they can, that can ripple through the economy so that those who are able to, are able to automate and be competitive by doing so.
Productivity increases can be worker inspired as well as from investment.
But the workers need to benefit by increased earnings from any productivity increases they initiate otherwise they're unlikely to happen.
I suspect in recent decades they haven't been and that the gains from worker inspired productivity increases have been used to boost business profits and director earnings instead.
Yes that's probably fair to say, though that can be a different type of investment ultimately and again a creaking labour market is trying to fix that. Firms that invest more in their staff through rewarding their staff like you say will be more productive and compete but if rival firms can just undercut that business via throwing peanuts at monkeys then they won't do it.
Firms need to start investing, whether it be in machinery, or R&D, or just their own staff, or something else, rather than thinking there's an endless pool of monkeys to throw peanuts at.
Good morning. Not much to add to yesterday, except to say the economic news this morning is grim. And before anyone chips in with "it's grim everywhere else, too". Well, yes. That's my point.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
David L. Failure to improve productivity is always cited by economists as one of the main, if not the main reason why economies don't do better than they should. And it's said to be a problem affecting many/most Europen country's economies and the US. So why don't we just "improve productivity". Maybe because no-one knows how to? Or because it's not so easy to do without someone/something hurting badly in the system or it negating its benefits in eg increased unemployment due to increased automation?
Improving productivity is hard. It requires a number of different problems to be addressed in a coordinated way. Training, new kit, available markets, the balance between the cost of labour and capital, these are issues in the main for the individual economic unit.
What can governments do? They can improve infrastructure so that goods and services can move about more easily. They can address housing where that is an issue. They can focus on education and make it more relevant to the jobs that are hopefully going to be produced in a particular area. They can use tax policy to encourage both investment and training (in fairness there were small elements of that in the budget). They can work to produce stability and steady demand, reducing the risk of investment.
There is no magic bullet or quick fix. There are long term gains from steady application. And that does not seem to interest our politicians of any stripe.
Thanks. I'm glad you say it's hard to achieve because it certainly sounds it!
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
If the EEC of 1975 or even 1985 were on offer, the populace of every EU country would say 'yes please and shove everything else up your gravy train'. So im guessing they wont offer it.
Oh, indeed. Euroscepticism only became a factor of any significance with Maastricht. And the Eurozealots still haven't learned their lesson even after the British people pushed the nuclear button which was the only one they had left to them.
As an employer recruiting new staff is far harder than keeping on existing staff, which is why its a good idea to respect your staff and not treat them like disposable cogs.
That is very true. Recruitment costs are big, and it's not just the hiring, but training and getting someone up to speed. Losing an employee with years of experience costs far more indirectly than paying a recruitment agency to find a replacement. Any business that casually hires and fires is a bad business.
Precisely. Too many bad businesses are out there, just like in the 1980s reforms they need to be allowed to fail and die if they can't reform. Either firms need to improve, or they need to be allowed to struggle and face up to the reality of their own failure.
Bailing out failed businesses has never been a recipe for success.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
Perhaps the two most important statistics, are those which don’t generate the headlines - GDP per capita, and productivity. Measure actual outputs, and don’t fudge the stats by throwing millions of units of unskilled labour at the problem.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
If the point of the rule is to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge, it is apparent that the rule doesn't work, because there's still constant speculation about a challenge (there's just a bit more speculation about how it would work)! :-) That was true with May and it's been true so far with Johnson (albeit "so far" is only 13 hours...).
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
If the point of the rule is to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge, it is apparent that the rule doesn't work, because there's still constant speculation about a challenge (there's just a bit more speculation about how it would work)! :-) That was true with May and it's been true so far with Johnson (albeit "so far" is only 13 hours...).
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
It is a natural rule, but it's clearly an inadequate one.
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
They can do whatever they want.
And an appeal to sticking to rules in the same breath as Boris Johnson is the ultimate irony.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
But that's total bollocks as well. The UK's economic output - its GDP - is not shrinking 4% a year. A 4% annual contraction is an historically nasty recession. Even the GFC recession of 2008-9 (the worst since WW2) only took about 7% off GDP
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
If the EEC of 1975 or even 1985 were on offer, the populace of every EU country would say 'yes please and shove everything else up your gravy train'. So im guessing they wont offer it.
Oh, indeed. Euroscepticism only became a factor of any significance with Maastricht. And the Eurozealots still haven't learned their lesson even after the British people pushed the nuclear button which was the only one they had left to them.
There was a huge amount of Euroscepticism in the early '80s... but it was in Labour, not the Conservatives.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
Perhaps the two most important statistics, are those which don’t generate the headlines - GDP per capita, and productivity. Measure actual outputs, and don’t fudge the stats by throwing millions of units of unskilled labour at the problem.
And beyond the economic stats there are quality of life issues.
Currently, for example, the people in their 50s who have reduced their work hours are being bemoaned for reducing GDP.
Yet for them it must be a rational quality of life choice - a bit less money for a lot more free time.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
Why reveal it for Bozo and co to steal all (or large parts) of it immediately?
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
Perhaps the two most important statistics, are those which don’t generate the headlines - GDP per capita, and productivity. Measure actual outputs, and don’t fudge the stats by throwing millions of units of unskilled labour at the problem.
Yes, although as with all economic statistics, we must be careful because generally they do not really measure what we want to know, just some rough approximation to it.
For instance, we could increase productivity by closing down our least productive industries, but then we'd have lower GDP and a lot of ex-workers claiming unemployment benefit. If we left these firms open and replaced men with machines, as well as higher productivity, we might have the same GDP but we'd still have a lot of unemployed ex-workers driving up the benefits bill. And because the machines are made in Germany, we've worsened our trade deficit too. Of course, the holy grail is to redeploy the same resources from low to high productivity but that is not always easy.
The consensus this morning seems to be that Boris is toast. It's very unfortunate for him that the big talking point seems to be that he did worse than Thatcher, Major and May.
It's just a question of when he goes. But it could get very messy for the Conservative Party and he and his MPs have made matters a lot worse by not making a clean kill.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
You can have two UK passports if you are a frequent traveller or need them for work reasons or to visit so-called 'incompatible' countries.
It doesn't, of course, help you get round the EU visa rules as entry and exit increasingly moves over to being recorded on a central database.
And if you're missing an exit stamp, that could be a problem whenever you tried to use that document again.
As long as the EU relies on old-fashioned stamps (why do they do this?!), then a 2nd passport allows you to evade the visa rules
I'm not encouraging it. But if they are stupid enough not to install e-gates everywhere, making life better for everyone, then pff
As I say, the problem will be solved by the free market (or e-gates). Countries that want British tourists and need the money will make it easy for us to go there. Greece, Malta, Cyprus, Portugal, probably Spain
Emma Barnett is very good indeed. Perhaps she'd have been a better option than Chris Mason who in my view is not turning out to be up to it
Yes. He kept repeating "no one seriously thinks the PM will lose" yesterday. Well. The market said it was one in six. Plenty on here thought he might well, including myself, and in the end it was reasonably close. Opinion, not analysis from him.
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
If the EEC of 1975 or even 1985 were on offer, the populace of every EU country would say 'yes please and shove everything else up your gravy train'. So im guessing they wont offer it.
Oh, indeed. Euroscepticism only became a factor of any significance with Maastricht. And the Eurozealots still haven't learned their lesson even after the British people pushed the nuclear button which was the only one they had left to them.
There was a huge amount of Euroscepticism in the early '80s... but it was in Labour, not the Conservatives.
This is true, but it never really became an electoral factor. Granted, withdrawal from the EEC was in the 1983 manifesto but my understanding (though it was before my time, so happy to be corrected) that it didn't shift significant numbers of votes in either direction.
boulay is angry and sad at how Boris has turned out as PM. I'm not because his character was there for all to see. You can't be disappointed by someone from whom you expect nothing less. He is shameless and always has been.
Very few here are arguing he might survive. It's seems to be accepted generally that it's a matter of when, not if, he gets ousted. However Betfair punters are less certain.
Boris to be PM at the next GE market
Yes 2.76-2.82 (36% chance) No 1.55-1.57 (64% chance)
Easy money to be made if you are sure he is going before the next GE.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
But you only 'Joined December 2020', so how is that possible ;-) ?
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
Why reveal it for Bozo and co to steal all (or large parts) of it immediately?
Because implementing Labour policies would make Boris lose what little credibility he has left. "We can't tell you what our policies are in case the other side implement them" is so weak there aren't words to describe it.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
This is a Spartan agoge not an Edwardian tea party. We need a lot more personal abuse. The type of thing that really cuts deep. Really distressing shit.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
But that's total bollocks as well. The UK's economic output - its GDP - is not shrinking 4% a year. A 4% annual contraction is an historically nasty recession. Even the GFC recession of 2008-9 (the worst since WW2) only took about 7% off GDP
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
The figure I remember was 6% over about 15 years? Which I think would mean about 0.3% lower growth per year.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
Says someone who loves to call people "gammons".
I saw Piers Morgan at the cricket the same day that you were. So now every time I read one of your posts I hear it in his voice.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
Why reveal it for Bozo and co to steal all (or large parts) of it immediately?
Because implementing Labour policies would make Boris lose what little credibility he has left. "We can't tell you what our policies are in case the other side implement them" is so weak there aren't words to describe it.
The obvious one is the windfall tax on oil companies. Which the government admittedly added a massive unfunded cherry on top.
For those interested in Ukraine, here's the announcement on UK multiple-launch rockets. Ukrainian troops will be trained in the UK. We are definitely invested in this.
The problem I see with this very expensive kit is that the battle for the Donbas is being decided now. It is going to arrive too late. Also the provision of such expensive systems without adequate air defence will make them the highest priority targets for the Russian airforce.
It was obvious to a complete amateur like me over a month ago that the current battles were going to be won by Russian artillary unless something was done to counterbalance that. This is what has happened and I fear that Ukranian casualties in May and early June will have been horrendous. We really need to move faster, welcome though this is.
It looks to me that we're firmly in the Breakthrough Defeated quadrant - Russian military is unable to co-ordinate an integrated attack in time and space leading to piecemeal attacks unsupported by combat enablers. Any gains come at a high price in troops and material. Success is tactical at best; campaign ends in numerous operational setbacks and strategic defeat.
Yes Russia is winning right now. And has been for over a month. The Ukranians are showing incredible courage but their best trained troops are being chewed to pieces by intense artillary bombardments that leave the recipients wounded, concussed, deafened and disorientated. It's brutal and they very largely cannot fight back until the Russians try to take the cities.
Have the Russians achieved what they wanted to achieve in this time? Of course not. Have their casualties been beyond their worst nightmares? Certainly. Have they shown that the Russian bear was in fact sclerotic, sick, starved by corruption and poorly trained? Undoubtedly. But to pretend that they are not winning is delusional. The Ukranians themselves are saying as much. They need heavy artillary and they needed it a month ago. They are hanging on until it comes. I hope it is not too late.
The Tory party has changed leader 3 times when it has been in power and on each occasion it then went on to win a subsequent term in power.
This time the Tories are going to go into the next election asking us to trust the PM when 41% of their own MPs do not have confidence in him.
This does not seem to me to be a winning formula. But, hey, what do I know.
And so on to the next mess we go. It's like a Laurel and Hardy film - only without the charm or humour.
I suspect many of the 59% don't have confidence in Boris either.
But they backed him for personal reasons or because they had even less confidence in the alternatives.
If they can't discern a better candidate for PM than Boris in their midst, then they might as well apply for the Chiltern Hundreds, because politics really isn't for them....
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
I didn't say Roger is witless. I said his remark is. And it is. There is no way Britain is "losing 4% of GDP every year because Brexit". So, no it was not "ad hominem"
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
Never understood why Brexit folk never went for EFTA/EEA, would have avoided the political integration they feared, but retained economic benefits and avoid NI problems. Also would have been a classic British conservative compromise.
The romantic theological Brexiteers, inspired by folk like Farage and Cumming won the day and steered us on to this rock.
FoM is the answer. What should have happened , and still should, is this answer (EFTA/EEA) combined with a negotiated derogation from FoM. This requires both EU and UK acting as grown ups. The political cover required to make it uniquely possible is the fact that it resolves most of the island of Ireland issues.
While lots of people wanted to leave the EU there would never have been a majority without the promise of FoM.
No, we could solve the Northern Ireland protocol issue instantly by agreeing to be in the single market for goods and services (just as Northern Ireland is). Nothing to do with freedom of movement for people. The ONLY downside is that it means accepting EU standards. But they are currently EXACTLY the same as our standards, and we have only the vaguest ideas on what we might like to change (some gene editing, maybe, some unspecified resitrictions that we might drop). We could probably negotiate a side-agreement that if we make goods that don't meet EU standards, they must have a label "not for exports to the EU", so if we really want to create a gene-edited strain of pig or something we could still do it.
I genuinely don't see the problem, except frankly unrealistic petty nationalism ("We won't accept foreign standards for what they import from us!").
Apart from the NI special case, is anyone in the SM for goods and services without both FoM and the jurisdiction of the ECJ + giving the power to the EU of legislating for us?
What makes you think this is an option? If it were there would have been a majority in parliament for it.
It's always been an option from the EU side. But you're right that it does mean accepting the ECJ as court of arbitration if we insist on trying to export something to them that they don't want. But is that the end of the world, if in reality we want to have the same standards? After all, if the EU introduces some weird and unacceptable requirement that fish fingers must be wrapped in linen or something, we can just refrain from trying to export that particular product to them - in that event, they wouldn't import it anyway. Essentially the deal would be that the default is free movement of goods and services meeting EU standards, unless the item is labelled "not for export to the EU". Free movement of goods in what's happening in NI right now, and I've not heard of a single case of a NI producer finding it problematic, have you?
I believe this is basically the EEA position too, no?
You're ignoring the main point (deliberately?)
Can we have Single Market access without offering Free Movement of People??
Surely this is impossible. It's the whole crux of Brexit. But if we can have SM access without FoM then let's do it tonight
Of course we can in the sense that there's no law of physics preventing it.
But it does require the EU to realise that it's not the end of the world to allow it.
If the EEC of 1975 or even 1985 were on offer, the populace of every EU country would say 'yes please and shove everything else up your gravy train'. So im guessing they wont offer it.
Oh, indeed. Euroscepticism only became a factor of any significance with Maastricht. And the Eurozealots still haven't learned their lesson even after the British people pushed the nuclear button which was the only one they had left to them.
There was a huge amount of Euroscepticism in the early '80s... but it was in Labour, not the Conservatives.
This is true, but it never really became an electoral factor. Granted, withdrawal from the EEC was in the 1983 manifesto but my understanding (though it was before my time, so happy to be corrected) that it didn't shift significant numbers of votes in either direction.
I don't know how much it mattered to voters, although "no" got a third of the vote in the 1975 referendum. But splits over Europe was a factor in the formation of the SDP, and that certainly had huge electoral impact! So I think the nature of our relationship with Europe has a deep history as a political and psephological topic.
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
If the point of the rule is to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge, it is apparent that the rule doesn't work, because there's still constant speculation about a challenge (there's just a bit more speculation about how it would work)! :-) That was true with May and it's been true so far with Johnson (albeit "so far" is only 13 hours...).
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
It is a natural rule, but it's clearly an inadequate one.
Yeah. Was kind of wondering if there needs to be a secondary bar? Like the old margin of 15%? Something like 60% or even two thirds and you continue. With an absolute bar on another challenge for a year. Less than half you're out as now. Between those figures, a leadership election. But one in which the incumbent is perfectly entitled to stand again. We'd have a leadership election now. But one including the PM. And Hunt, presumably. And, at least the Tory Party could have it out. Instead. We drift on. Like a zebra who has escaped the lions, but is bleeding out alone.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
If the point of the rule is to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge, it is apparent that the rule doesn't work, because there's still constant speculation about a challenge (there's just a bit more speculation about how it would work)! :-) That was true with May and it's been true so far with Johnson (albeit "so far" is only 13 hours...).
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
It is a natural rule, but it's clearly an inadequate one.
Yeah. Was kind of wondering if there needs to be a secondary bar? Like the old margin of 15%? Something like 60% or even two thirds and you continue. With an absolute bar on another challenge for a year. Less than half you're out as now. Between those figures, a leadership election. But one in which the incumbent is perfectly entitled to stand again. We'd have a leadership election now. But one including the PM. And Hunt, presumably. And, at least the Tory Party could have it out. Instead. We drift on. Like a zebra who has escaped the lions, but is bleeding out alone.
I think it either needs to be two-thirds, or a simple majority of backbenchers only. But I like the idea of two separate thresholds.
Does anyone know what would happen if there was a vonc in the commons which was carried? It seems it no longer forces a GE, but I can't find what the actual resulting situation would be.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
This is a Spartan agoge not an Edwardian tea party. We need a lot more personal abuse. The type of thing that really cuts deep. Really distressing shit.
Though I can't see many of us admitting to liking black broth. Would that be a matter for shocked admiration or repelled denunciation?
For those interested in Ukraine, here's the announcement on UK multiple-launch rockets. Ukrainian troops will be trained in the UK. We are definitely invested in this.
The problem I see with this very expensive kit is that the battle for the Donbas is being decided now. It is going to arrive too late. Also the provision of such expensive systems without adequate air defence will make them the highest priority targets for the Russian airforce.
It was obvious to a complete amateur like me over a month ago that the current battles were going to be won by Russian artillary unless something was done to counterbalance that. This is what has happened and I fear that Ukranian casualties in May and early June will have been horrendous. We really need to move faster, welcome though this is.
It looks to me that we're firmly in the Breakthrough Defeated quadrant - Russian military is unable to co-ordinate an integrated attack in time and space leading to piecemeal attacks unsupported by combat enablers. Any gains come at a high price in troops and material. Success is tactical at best; campaign ends in numerous operational setbacks and strategic defeat.
Yes Russia is winning right now. And has been for over a month. The Ukranians are showing incredible courage but their best trained troops are being chewed to pieces by intense artillary bombardments that leave the recipients wounded, concussed, deafened and disorientated. It's brutal and they very largely cannot fight back until the Russians try to take the cities.
Have the Russians achieved what they wanted to achieve in this time? Of course not. Have their casualties been beyond their worst nightmares? Certainly. Have they shown that the Russian bear was in fact sclerotic, sick, starved by corruption and poorly trained? Undoubtedly. But to pretend that they are not winning is delusional. The Ukranians themselves are saying as much. They need heavy artillary and they needed it a month ago. They are hanging on until it comes. I hope it is not too late.
Turning this into artillery war is to give the Russians home court advantage - they are the counter-battery kings.
Although I accept that the Ukrainians probably don't have a better option at this point.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
But that's total bollocks as well. The UK's economic output - its GDP - is not shrinking 4% a year. A 4% annual contraction is an historically nasty recession. Even the GFC recession of 2008-9 (the worst since WW2) only took about 7% off GDP
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
Again you miss the point. If you lop your feet off, you will be three inches shorter than you would be otherwise, and next year you will be three inches shorter than you would be otherwise, and the next year. That is different from saying you would shrink by another three inches each year so six inches next year and nine the one after. Now, I do not know what figures Roger is looking at but it is possible to believe that Brexit is the brilliant idea which made our GDP's feet fall off.
ComRes had some interesting polling out on yesterday and the relevant stuff around it Broadly - 'still an asset to the Tories? 30 yes 60 no but improved from 24/64 in January 'More likely to vote Tory if he goes? 23 more likely 51 no difference 16 less likely
Doesnt suggest a big vote shift on the cards either way to me. Biggest impact will be certainty to vote when he goes. Also suggests position is as we see, single digit lead that regardless of what happens leader wise should swingback to within MoE even stevens and lead to a minority Labour government
All caveated by CoL and the response
The above us my attempt at dispassionate analysis. Angry me wants to say feck the fat lying betrayer and then fine the curry prick and turf him out
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
David L. Failure to improve productivity is always cited by economists as one of the main, if not the main reason why economies don't do better than they should. And it's said to be a problem affecting many/most Europen country's economies and the US. So why don't we just "improve productivity". Maybe because no-one knows how to? Or because it's not so easy to do without someone/something hurting badly in the system or it negating its benefits in eg increased unemployment due to increased automation?
Improving productivity is hard. It requires a number of different problems to be addressed in a coordinated way. Training, new kit, available markets, the balance between the cost of labour and capital, these are issues in the main for the individual economic unit.
What can governments do? They can improve infrastructure so that goods and services can move about more easily. They can address housing where that is an issue. They can focus on education and make it more relevant to the jobs that are hopefully going to be produced in a particular area. They can use tax policy to encourage both investment and training (in fairness there were small elements of that in the budget). They can work to produce stability and steady demand, reducing the risk of investment.
There is no magic bullet or quick fix. There are long term gains from steady application. And that does not seem to interest our politicians of any stripe.
Thanks. I'm glad you say it's hard to achieve because it certainly sounds it!
If it were easy everyone would be doing it.
One of the more interesting phenomena is the incredible growth and increases in productivity achieved by economic hubs or clusters where the supply of well trained labour becomes plentiful. I think the government should be trying hard to create these around the country, working with local universities and colleges as well as employers. Not all of these will work, of course, and it does have shades of picking winners, something that failed so badly in the past. But if governments focused on creating the capacity for growth rather than individual employers I think it would work.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
I found something similar to this with languages. For about a decade I used to work for a French company in Norway on a rotation and then, on occasion, teach at the headquarters of the company in Paris. Norway work was in Norwegian and English, and teaching was either teach in French and explain in English of teach in English and explain in French.
My problem I found was that when I first arrived in either Paris or Norway after an extended period in the other country my brain had trouble adjusting to the change. English was fine but, for the first few days after arriving Paris, if someone spoke to me in French my brain would say 'ah, foreign language' and would default to Norwegian and I would answer in that language. The same for the first few days back in Norway, I would automatically default to French.
The effect never wore off even after a decade. It seems my brain can handle English and one other language but goes into meltdown when a second new language is introduced.
Does anyone know what would happen if there was a vonc in the commons which was carried? It seems it no longer forces a GE, but I can't find what the actual resulting situation would be.
PM either calls a GE or resigns and someone with the confidence of the house is summoned to lead If he doesnt resign HMQ dismisses him.
For those interested in Ukraine, here's the announcement on UK multiple-launch rockets. Ukrainian troops will be trained in the UK. We are definitely invested in this.
The problem I see with this very expensive kit is that the battle for the Donbas is being decided now. It is going to arrive too late. Also the provision of such expensive systems without adequate air defence will make them the highest priority targets for the Russian airforce.
It was obvious to a complete amateur like me over a month ago that the current battles were going to be won by Russian artillary unless something was done to counterbalance that. This is what has happened and I fear that Ukranian casualties in May and early June will have been horrendous. We really need to move faster, welcome though this is.
It looks to me that we're firmly in the Breakthrough Defeated quadrant - Russian military is unable to co-ordinate an integrated attack in time and space leading to piecemeal attacks unsupported by combat enablers. Any gains come at a high price in troops and material. Success is tactical at best; campaign ends in numerous operational setbacks and strategic defeat.
Yes Russia is winning right now. And has been for over a month. The Ukranians are showing incredible courage but their best trained troops are being chewed to pieces by intense artillary bombardments that leave the recipients wounded, concussed, deafened and disorientated. It's brutal and they very largely cannot fight back until the Russians try to take the cities.
Have the Russians achieved what they wanted to achieve in this time? Of course not. Have their casualties been beyond their worst nightmares? Certainly. Have they shown that the Russian bear was in fact sclerotic, sick, starved by corruption and poorly trained? Undoubtedly. But to pretend that they are not winning is delusional. The Ukranians themselves are saying as much. They need heavy artillary and they needed it a month ago. They are hanging on until it comes. I hope it is not too late.
The Ukrainians absolutely need long range artillery and counter-artillery support.
But I'm not sure how much we can or should read into the glacial progress that Russia is making in some areas. The Ukrainians seem to be applying the time honoured strategy of choosing where to make their stands and making strategic retreats where necessary. See the current battle in Serenvodetsk (sp?) the Russians were able to advance to much of it, but then met fierce resistance and it was even visited by the Ukrainian President, something that wouldn't happen if it was all a one way grind like you're suggesting.
The cost to lives and buildings and communities is immense and tragic, but I don't think its possible to say Russia is "winning". Hopefully more and more artillery keeps finding its way to Ukraine though, as fast as possible.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
Yep - I do. I understand that while the UK needs the EU more than they need us, EU member states would still like better access to the UK market than they get currently and that, generally, the EU is made stronger by having a smooth, trust-based relationship with the UK.
You do this stuff for a living, and you’re not prone to lying fantasies, so I am happy to take it on trust. I sincerely hope you are right
If Starmer can fix some of this shit it would be great. I have long thought it would be a Remainer that might make Brexit work, as so many Brexiteers are ideologically wedded to a Platonic ideal of Brexit, and the more pragmatic Leavers - eg Hannan - have generally left the scene
And we agree that none of this can happen until Boris goes. He REALLY needs to go.
A rare moment of concord on PB
But you are wrong about remoaner ultras. They exist in numbers. @Scott_xP is far from alone in his dogmatism
I do not come across them except on here and on Twitter. I agree with them that leaving the EU was a mistake, but we have to move on from that. If they can't do it, they are going to be permanently disappointed. It is no way to lead a life.
You don't read the Guardian, then. The Labour Party's very own newspaper
From Polly Toynbee to Nick Cohen to Martin Kettle to dozens of others, they are all Rejoiners, they are merely staying reasonably quiet for now, so as not to scare the horses.
That will change as Starmer gets nearer to power. I expect the first Guardian editorial or lead columnist to suggest rejoining the SM within the year
We will rejoin at some point unless the EU blows up. Staying out will make us poorer, and people don't like being poor. And anti-EU sentiment is far stronger in the generation that will die in the next 20 years than among those who will still be alive and voting. Aligning ourselves with the SM is an intelligent first step in that process. Of course we will have people advocating that - a Tory MP no less already has. None of this will happen quickly though. Perhaps you will have exited to the great free holiday in the sky by the time it happens. Perhaps I will have, too.
Nah. The EU is heading in a direction we can never accept and the longer we are out the more those differences will become apparent.
What I do think will happen at some point is we will join EFTA and probably the EEA. But I would say that as it has always been the best result in my view.
The EU is not heading very clearly in any direction at all. It is as likely to blow up as to become a coherent single federal state in my opinion, and more likely to continue to muddle along as a collection of sovereign states who make some decisions collectively. It will probably see an increasing division between an inner, more integrated, core and the rest. The UK could easily find a berth in that outer ring in ten or twenty years - a wasteful and damaging journey back to where we would have been anyway.
Why bother and suffer all the inevitable pain of the political and social problems associated with the EU when the trading partner route lies with EFTA and the EEA. If we will end up anywhere closer to the EU it is there. As long as EFTA exists it will always be viewed as preferable to full EU membership.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
You can have two UK passports if you are a frequent traveller or need them for work reasons or to visit so-called 'incompatible' countries.
It doesn't, of course, help you get round the EU visa rules as entry and exit increasingly moves over to being recorded on a central database.
And if you're missing an exit stamp, that could be a problem whenever you tried to use that document again.
As long as the EU relies on old-fashioned stamps (why do they do this?!), then a 2nd passport allows you to evade the visa rules
I'm not encouraging it. But if they are stupid enough not to install e-gates everywhere, making life better for everyone, then pff
As I say, the problem will be solved by the free market (or e-gates). Countries that want British tourists and need the money will make it easy for us to go there. Greece, Malta, Cyprus, Portugal, probably Spain
The problem is that it's a mix, with the most common arrangement being both a physical stamp and a scan into a database. So the second passport really isn't going to help you that much, unless you travel forewarned as to which border crossings are keyed into the EU-wide database.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
I didn't say Roger is witless. I said his remark is. And it is. There is no way Britain is "losing 4% of GDP every year because Brexit". So, no it was not "ad hominem"
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
An economist writes: Actually Roger is absolutely right and you have misunderstood what he has said. Since I don't engage in ad hominem remarks I won't call you witless. GDP is a flow concept. It measures the amount of output (or equivalently spending or income, the three are theoretically equivalent) produced in a given economy over a given period of time. The statement that Brexit has cost us x% of GDP per year (I won't comment on whether x is 4 or some other number as estimates differ, but FWIW 4 seems reasonable and is in the ballpark of the BOE and OBR estimates) means that the level of GDP is 4% below what it would have been if we hadn't Brexited, every year or every quarter. It doesn't imply lower GDP growth for ever, simply a permanently lower level of GDP vs this counterfactual. I hope this helps.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
Properly interesting. Thanks
Certainly accords with my experience. I started driving abroad early in life - in my 20s, and it took maybe a decade to get completely used to it - ie to a place where I would never forget which side of the road to drive on, whether it was left or right
Now it is instinctive, and - more pertinent to your point - I can switch between them seamlessly, like using one hand over the other if you are ambidextrous. They do feel like two distinct but similarly easy tasks
The same applies to driving automatic or with a gearbox, I reckon. At first it can be tricky to switch between, but eventually it becomes reflexive
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government. 2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax. 3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt. 4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing. 5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway. 6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as: 7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level? 8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year. 9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
Yep - I do. I understand that while the UK needs the EU more than they need us, EU member states would still like better access to the UK market than they get currently and that, generally, the EU is made stronger by having a smooth, trust-based relationship with the UK.
You do this stuff for a living, and you’re not prone to lying fantasies, so I am happy to take it on trust. I sincerely hope you are right
If Starmer can fix some of this shit it would be great. I have long thought it would be a Remainer that might make Brexit work, as so many Brexiteers are ideologically wedded to a Platonic ideal of Brexit, and the more pragmatic Leavers - eg Hannan - have generally left the scene
And we agree that none of this can happen until Boris goes. He REALLY needs to go.
A rare moment of concord on PB
But you are wrong about remoaner ultras. They exist in numbers. @Scott_xP is far from alone in his dogmatism
I do not come across them except on here and on Twitter. I agree with them that leaving the EU was a mistake, but we have to move on from that. If they can't do it, they are going to be permanently disappointed. It is no way to lead a life.
You don't read the Guardian, then. The Labour Party's very own newspaper
From Polly Toynbee to Nick Cohen to Martin Kettle to dozens of others, they are all Rejoiners, they are merely staying reasonably quiet for now, so as not to scare the horses.
That will change as Starmer gets nearer to power. I expect the first Guardian editorial or lead columnist to suggest rejoining the SM within the year
We will rejoin at some point unless the EU blows up. Staying out will make us poorer, and people don't like being poor. And anti-EU sentiment is far stronger in the generation that will die in the next 20 years than among those who will still be alive and voting. Aligning ourselves with the SM is an intelligent first step in that process. Of course we will have people advocating that - a Tory MP no less already has. None of this will happen quickly though. Perhaps you will have exited to the great free holiday in the sky by the time it happens. Perhaps I will have, too.
Nah. The EU is heading in a direction we can never accept and the longer we are out the more those differences will become apparent.
What I do think will happen at some point is we will join EFTA and probably the EEA. But I would say that as it has always been the best result in my view.
The EU is not heading very clearly in any direction at all. It is as likely to blow up as to become a coherent single federal state in my opinion, and more likely to continue to muddle along as a collection of sovereign states who make some decisions collectively. It will probably see an increasing division between an inner, more integrated, core and the rest. The UK could easily find a berth in that outer ring in ten or twenty years - a wasteful and damaging journey back to where we would have been anyway.
Why bother and suffer all the inevitable pain of the political and social problems associated with the EU when the trading partner route lies with EFTA and the EEA. If we will end up anywhere closer to the EU it is there. As long as EFTA exists it will always be viewed as preferable to full EU membership.
I am not bothered either way TBH but being a rule taker not a rule maker isn't without frustrations of its own (especially as the UK was pretty influential in writing the rules when it was an EU member).
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government. 2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax. 3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt. 4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing. 5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway. 6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as: 7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level? 8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year. 9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
Deliveroo and Just Eats play as many games as possible to keep people self employed (i.e. not paid waiting for their next delivery) rather than employed as possible.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
Yep - I do. I understand that while the UK needs the EU more than they need us, EU member states would still like better access to the UK market than they get currently and that, generally, the EU is made stronger by having a smooth, trust-based relationship with the UK.
You do this stuff for a living, and you’re not prone to lying fantasies, so I am happy to take it on trust. I sincerely hope you are right
If Starmer can fix some of this shit it would be great. I have long thought it would be a Remainer that might make Brexit work, as so many Brexiteers are ideologically wedded to a Platonic ideal of Brexit, and the more pragmatic Leavers - eg Hannan - have generally left the scene
And we agree that none of this can happen until Boris goes. He REALLY needs to go.
A rare moment of concord on PB
But you are wrong about remoaner ultras. They exist in numbers. @Scott_xP is far from alone in his dogmatism
I do not come across them except on here and on Twitter. I agree with them that leaving the EU was a mistake, but we have to move on from that. If they can't do it, they are going to be permanently disappointed. It is no way to lead a life.
You don't read the Guardian, then. The Labour Party's very own newspaper
From Polly Toynbee to Nick Cohen to Martin Kettle to dozens of others, they are all Rejoiners, they are merely staying reasonably quiet for now, so as not to scare the horses.
That will change as Starmer gets nearer to power. I expect the first Guardian editorial or lead columnist to suggest rejoining the SM within the year
We will rejoin at some point unless the EU blows up. Staying out will make us poorer, and people don't like being poor. And anti-EU sentiment is far stronger in the generation that will die in the next 20 years than among those who will still be alive and voting. Aligning ourselves with the SM is an intelligent first step in that process. Of course we will have people advocating that - a Tory MP no less already has. None of this will happen quickly though. Perhaps you will have exited to the great free holiday in the sky by the time it happens. Perhaps I will have, too.
Nah. The EU is heading in a direction we can never accept and the longer we are out the more those differences will become apparent.
What I do think will happen at some point is we will join EFTA and probably the EEA. But I would say that as it has always been the best result in my view.
The EU is not heading very clearly in any direction at all. It is as likely to blow up as to become a coherent single federal state in my opinion, and more likely to continue to muddle along as a collection of sovereign states who make some decisions collectively. It will probably see an increasing division between an inner, more integrated, core and the rest. The UK could easily find a berth in that outer ring in ten or twenty years - a wasteful and damaging journey back to where we would have been anyway.
Why bother and suffer all the inevitable pain of the political and social problems associated with the EU when the trading partner route lies with EFTA and the EEA. If we will end up anywhere closer to the EU it is there. As long as EFTA exists it will always be viewed as preferable to full EU membership.
I am not bothered either way TBH but being a rule taker not a rule maker isn't without frustrations of its own (especially as the UK was pretty influential in writing the rules when it was an EU member).
Citation needed on the last part, as it certainly didn't feel that way.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
But that's total bollocks as well. The UK's economic output - its GDP - is not shrinking 4% a year. A 4% annual contraction is an historically nasty recession. Even the GFC recession of 2008-9 (the worst since WW2) only took about 7% off GDP
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
It is witless to try and pretend that Brexit has/will bring anything more than irrational emotional benefit to what will become an aging minority. It was a vanity project for journalists and old farts with Col. Blimp tendencies. Sadly it will not be those selfish fuckers who live with its unnecessary consequences and have to correct what has become more obvious as a a completely pointless fuck up at best, or massive con trick and foreign policy disaster at worst.
Boris Johnson is the personification of Brexit; a complete incompetent joke. Apologists for both just make themselves look more foolish by every protestation they ejaculate.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
I found something similar to this with languages. For about a decade I used to work for a French company in Norway on a rotation and then, on occasion, teach at the headquarters of the company in Paris. Norway work was in Norwegian and English, and teaching was either teach in French and explain in English of teach in English and explain in French.
My problem I found was that when I first arrived in either Paris or Norway after an extended period in the other country my brain had trouble adjusting to the change. English was fine but, for the first few days after arriving Paris, if someone spoke to me in French my brain would say 'ah, foreign language' and would default to Norwegian and I would answer in that language. The same for the first few days back in Norway, I would automatically default to French.
The effect never wore off even after a decade. It seems my brain can handle English and one other language but goes into meltdown when a second new language is introduced.
High-level skills can quickly deteriorate when not used.
I once lived in Spain for six months, and on returning home through France realised I’d forgotten even basic French.
I’ve not flown a plane for a decade, there’s very good reasons that the next time I do, it will be several flights with an instructor before being allowed to go up solo.
Left and right handed cars though, no problem at all, even with manual gearboxes. Some skills eventually become so ingrained they get stored in the long term memory.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government. 2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax. 3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt. 4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing. 5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway. 6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as: 7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level? 8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year. 9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
And where is the growth to come from? Where is the money to cancel taxes and increase benefits to come from? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government. 2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax. 3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt. 4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing. 5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway. 6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as: 7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level? 8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year. 9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
Deliveroo and Just Eats play as many games as possible to keep people self employed (i.e. not paid waiting for their next delivery) rather than employed as possible.
Its a bit swings and roundabouts, though, as with the current status drivers can work simultaneously for all three. Make them employ their drivers and they'll probably demand exclusivity.
For those interested in Ukraine, here's the announcement on UK multiple-launch rockets. Ukrainian troops will be trained in the UK. We are definitely invested in this.
The problem I see with this very expensive kit is that the battle for the Donbas is being decided now. It is going to arrive too late. Also the provision of such expensive systems without adequate air defence will make them the highest priority targets for the Russian airforce.
It was obvious to a complete amateur like me over a month ago that the current battles were going to be won by Russian artillary unless something was done to counterbalance that. This is what has happened and I fear that Ukranian casualties in May and early June will have been horrendous. We really need to move faster, welcome though this is.
It looks to me that we're firmly in the Breakthrough Defeated quadrant - Russian military is unable to co-ordinate an integrated attack in time and space leading to piecemeal attacks unsupported by combat enablers. Any gains come at a high price in troops and material. Success is tactical at best; campaign ends in numerous operational setbacks and strategic defeat.
Yes Russia is winning right now. And has been for over a month. The Ukranians are showing incredible courage but their best trained troops are being chewed to pieces by intense artillary bombardments that leave the recipients wounded, concussed, deafened and disorientated. It's brutal and they very largely cannot fight back until the Russians try to take the cities.
Have the Russians achieved what they wanted to achieve in this time? Of course not. Have their casualties been beyond their worst nightmares? Certainly. Have they shown that the Russian bear was in fact sclerotic, sick, starved by corruption and poorly trained? Undoubtedly. But to pretend that they are not winning is delusional. The Ukranians themselves are saying as much. They need heavy artillary and they needed it a month ago. They are hanging on until it comes. I hope it is not too late.
So you're saying that Russia has failed to achieve what it wanted and has suffered far heavier casualties then they thought possible during the last month ?
That's not winning.
And then there's the time factor - how has the military balance changed during the last month ? Which side is training up the most men and receiving the most equipment ? And how has that changed during the last month and how will it change in upcoming months ?
Does anyone know what would happen if there was a vonc in the commons which was carried? It seems it no longer forces a GE, but I can't find what the actual resulting situation would be.
PM either calls a GE or resigns and someone with the confidence of the house is summoned to lead If he doesnt resign HMQ dismisses him.
Last week, one MP told me this about the 1922 Ctte rules: “That the rules can be changed ‘in an afternoon’ is correct. The once-in-12 months is a false comfort. May was asked to name a date or the rules would be changed. She blinked. Boris might not."
what's the point? the new vote would get pretty much same result surely?
The point is that the next vote isn't on 6th June 2023 but can be at anytime the 1922 committee know the game is up.
They're not so much rules as guidance, as someone here is wont to say.
And given Johnson's lifelong attitude to rules, it is right and proper that the failure of a rule to protect him should form part of his downfall.
The morning after Wakefield and Tiverton?
What is our analysis of the balance of pro/anti Johnson on the 1922 committee? Yes, they can change the rules, but how likely are the current members to want to? I believe they are all backbenchers? - which should increase the chance. But the history of "we don't like the result, let's vote again" decisions is not encouraging, and associated by many Brexiteers with allegedly sneaky EU behaviour.
I don’t see how they could change the 12-month rule during the 12-month period, purely for immediate reasons. The point of the rule, is to give the leader a grace period and to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge.
Personally, I think he resigns after the 2023 local elections, and is voted out a year from now if that doesn’t happen.
If the point of the rule is to shut up the constant speculation about a challenge, it is apparent that the rule doesn't work, because there's still constant speculation about a challenge (there's just a bit more speculation about how it would work)! :-) That was true with May and it's been true so far with Johnson (albeit "so far" is only 13 hours...).
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
It is a natural rule, but it's clearly an inadequate one.
Yeah. Was kind of wondering if there needs to be a secondary bar? Like the old margin of 15%? Something like 60% or even two thirds and you continue. With an absolute bar on another challenge for a year. Less than half you're out as now. Between those figures, a leadership election. But one in which the incumbent is perfectly entitled to stand again. We'd have a leadership election now. But one including the PM. And Hunt, presumably. And, at least the Tory Party could have it out. Instead. We drift on. Like a zebra who has escaped the lions, but is bleeding out alone.
I think it either needs to be two-thirds, or a simple majority of backbenchers only. But I like the idea of two separate thresholds.
It's there as an unspoken rule that previous Conservative leaders have understood, albeit with some needing more help than others to arrive at that understanding. It's why Thatcher (quickly) and May (slowly) stood down and Major (just about) survived.
And unspoken but understood rules are a good thing, except when someone barges in with a "there's nothing written down, you can't make me" attitude. Which is roughly where we have been with the PM since he arrived on the public stage.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
Yep - I do. I understand that while the UK needs the EU more than they need us, EU member states would still like better access to the UK market than they get currently and that, generally, the EU is made stronger by having a smooth, trust-based relationship with the UK.
You do this stuff for a living, and you’re not prone to lying fantasies, so I am happy to take it on trust. I sincerely hope you are right
If Starmer can fix some of this shit it would be great. I have long thought it would be a Remainer that might make Brexit work, as so many Brexiteers are ideologically wedded to a Platonic ideal of Brexit, and the more pragmatic Leavers - eg Hannan - have generally left the scene
And we agree that none of this can happen until Boris goes. He REALLY needs to go.
A rare moment of concord on PB
But you are wrong about remoaner ultras. They exist in numbers. @Scott_xP is far from alone in his dogmatism
I do not come across them except on here and on Twitter. I agree with them that leaving the EU was a mistake, but we have to move on from that. If they can't do it, they are going to be permanently disappointed. It is no way to lead a life.
You don't read the Guardian, then. The Labour Party's very own newspaper
From Polly Toynbee to Nick Cohen to Martin Kettle to dozens of others, they are all Rejoiners, they are merely staying reasonably quiet for now, so as not to scare the horses.
That will change as Starmer gets nearer to power. I expect the first Guardian editorial or lead columnist to suggest rejoining the SM within the year
We will rejoin at some point unless the EU blows up. Staying out will make us poorer, and people don't like being poor. And anti-EU sentiment is far stronger in the generation that will die in the next 20 years than among those who will still be alive and voting. Aligning ourselves with the SM is an intelligent first step in that process. Of course we will have people advocating that - a Tory MP no less already has. None of this will happen quickly though. Perhaps you will have exited to the great free holiday in the sky by the time it happens. Perhaps I will have, too.
Nah. The EU is heading in a direction we can never accept and the longer we are out the more those differences will become apparent.
What I do think will happen at some point is we will join EFTA and probably the EEA. But I would say that as it has always been the best result in my view.
The EU is not heading very clearly in any direction at all. It is as likely to blow up as to become a coherent single federal state in my opinion, and more likely to continue to muddle along as a collection of sovereign states who make some decisions collectively. It will probably see an increasing division between an inner, more integrated, core and the rest. The UK could easily find a berth in that outer ring in ten or twenty years - a wasteful and damaging journey back to where we would have been anyway.
Why bother and suffer all the inevitable pain of the political and social problems associated with the EU when the trading partner route lies with EFTA and the EEA. If we will end up anywhere closer to the EU it is there. As long as EFTA exists it will always be viewed as preferable to full EU membership.
I am not bothered either way TBH but being a rule taker not a rule maker isn't without frustrations of its own (especially as the UK was pretty influential in writing the rules when it was an EU member).
Wrong in both instances. The 'rule taker' idea is simply a myth that was propagated by EU supporters who were worried that EFTA membership was seen as a viable alternative.
And given that so much of the decision making inside the EU is now by QMV the idea that we were influential in that is also a very dubious assertion.
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
I found something similar to this with languages. For about a decade I used to work for a French company in Norway on a rotation and then, on occasion, teach at the headquarters of the company in Paris. Norway work was in Norwegian and English, and teaching was either teach in French and explain in English of teach in English and explain in French.
My problem I found was that when I first arrived in either Paris or Norway after an extended period in the other country my brain had trouble adjusting to the change. English was fine but, for the first few days after arriving Paris, if someone spoke to me in French my brain would say 'ah, foreign language' and would default to Norwegian and I would answer in that language. The same for the first few days back in Norway, I would automatically default to French.
The effect never wore off even after a decade. It seems my brain can handle English and one other language but goes into meltdown when a second new language is introduced.
I suspect the answer is that when you learn something closely related to another that is already instinctive, the brain starts off by 'building out' or 'copying over' from the skills you already have and - like in that bike experiment - the last stage is the breaking of links between two similar but separate tasks, and to reach that stage requires a lot of practice. Until you reach that point there is some sharing of connections that means you risk confusing the two or find it harder to switch. Thus in your case the same connections were being used for both foreign languages, with the most recently used dominating the connections.
Certainly using Leon's example, I can relate to the early days of driving on the right where it was all too easy to forget and set off on the wrong side, or get a complicated junction wrong. And, later when I was more experienced abroad, still making the occasional reverse mistake at home in the days after returning.
Now, I can switch between one and the other without any difficulty of mishap, and the only time I even notice when away is if I run into some particularly fiendish road layout which needs working out from scratch - basically the same as if you encountered similar at home.
Telling someone it's 'easy', when you can already do it, isn't particularly helpful, any more than telling someone that since you learned piano, they can too.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
I didn't say Roger is witless. I said his remark is. And it is. There is no way Britain is "losing 4% of GDP every year because Brexit". So, no it was not "ad hominem"
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
An economist writes: Actually Roger is absolutely right and you have misunderstood what he has said. Since I don't engage in ad hominem remarks I won't call you witless. GDP is a flow concept. It measures the amount of output (or equivalently spending or income, the three are theoretically equivalent) produced in a given economy over a given period of time. The statement that Brexit has cost us x% of GDP per year (I won't comment on whether x is 4 or some other number as estimates differ, but FWIW 4 seems reasonable and is in the ballpark of the BOE and OBR estimates) means that the level of GDP is 4% below what it would have been if we hadn't Brexited, every year or every quarter. It doesn't imply lower GDP growth for ever, simply a permanently lower level of GDP vs this counterfactual. I hope this helps.
lol. So we Brexited six years ago and we've lost (on average?) 4% GDP a year and our economy is now about 20% smaller than it was in 2016? Crumbs!
Or is this from 2020 when we actually Brexited so we've lost 4% and counting, except that of course Covid intervened in 2020 and we lost about 10% of the economy due to that, then regained it, and how anyone can perceive actual Brexit effects in the middle of a global plague and now a war, fuck knows
And of course Roger said we are "losing 4% of GDP a year". Which means - in normal, sane English - 4% every year. If I say I earn about £30k a year, I mean every year. Otherwise I would specifiy "THIS year"
Apart from that, your comment is mere sophistry. I will refrain from calling it witless, in case I upset @Heathener
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
Yep - I do. I understand that while the UK needs the EU more than they need us, EU member states would still like better access to the UK market than they get currently and that, generally, the EU is made stronger by having a smooth, trust-based relationship with the UK.
You do this stuff for a living, and you’re not prone to lying fantasies, so I am happy to take it on trust. I sincerely hope you are right
If Starmer can fix some of this shit it would be great. I have long thought it would be a Remainer that might make Brexit work, as so many Brexiteers are ideologically wedded to a Platonic ideal of Brexit, and the more pragmatic Leavers - eg Hannan - have generally left the scene
And we agree that none of this can happen until Boris goes. He REALLY needs to go.
A rare moment of concord on PB
But you are wrong about remoaner ultras. They exist in numbers. @Scott_xP is far from alone in his dogmatism
I do not come across them except on here and on Twitter. I agree with them that leaving the EU was a mistake, but we have to move on from that. If they can't do it, they are going to be permanently disappointed. It is no way to lead a life.
You don't read the Guardian, then. The Labour Party's very own newspaper
From Polly Toynbee to Nick Cohen to Martin Kettle to dozens of others, they are all Rejoiners, they are merely staying reasonably quiet for now, so as not to scare the horses.
That will change as Starmer gets nearer to power. I expect the first Guardian editorial or lead columnist to suggest rejoining the SM within the year
We will rejoin at some point unless the EU blows up. Staying out will make us poorer, and people don't like being poor. And anti-EU sentiment is far stronger in the generation that will die in the next 20 years than among those who will still be alive and voting. Aligning ourselves with the SM is an intelligent first step in that process. Of course we will have people advocating that - a Tory MP no less already has. None of this will happen quickly though. Perhaps you will have exited to the great free holiday in the sky by the time it happens. Perhaps I will have, too.
Nah. The EU is heading in a direction we can never accept and the longer we are out the more those differences will become apparent.
What I do think will happen at some point is we will join EFTA and probably the EEA. But I would say that as it has always been the best result in my view.
The EU is not heading very clearly in any direction at all. It is as likely to blow up as to become a coherent single federal state in my opinion, and more likely to continue to muddle along as a collection of sovereign states who make some decisions collectively. It will probably see an increasing division between an inner, more integrated, core and the rest. The UK could easily find a berth in that outer ring in ten or twenty years - a wasteful and damaging journey back to where we would have been anyway.
Why bother and suffer all the inevitable pain of the political and social problems associated with the EU when the trading partner route lies with EFTA and the EEA. If we will end up anywhere closer to the EU it is there. As long as EFTA exists it will always be viewed as preferable to full EU membership.
I suspect it is as close as one can get to a compromise that would please most people. It would be hated by the serious headbangers and diehards on both sides which also commends it.
ComRes had some interesting polling out on yesterday and the relevant stuff around it Broadly - 'still an asset to the Tories? 30 yes 60 no but improved from 24/64 in January 'More likely to vote Tory if he goes? 23 more likely 51 no difference 16 less likely
Doesnt suggest a big vote shift on the cards either way to me. Biggest impact will be certainty to vote when he goes. Also suggests position is as we see, single digit lead that regardless of what happens leader wise should swingback to within MoE even stevens and lead to a minority Labour government
All caveated by CoL and the response
The above us my attempt at dispassionate analysis. Angry me wants to say feck the fat lying betrayer and then fine the curry prick and turf him out
He’s there till the next GE at least. Only 4 points behind in latest polling scarily.
They couldn’t manufacture another VONC just to produce this same result, that would make them a laughing stock.
Does anyone know what would happen if there was a vonc in the commons which was carried? It seems it no longer forces a GE, but I can't find what the actual resulting situation would be.
We're back to the situation before the Fixed Term Parliament Act. The losing PM would go to the monarch and tender their resignation. The losing PM would advise the monarch whether there was someone else who can command a majority of the house or, if not, that a general election should be held. The monarch could also take other advice as to whether there is someone else who can command a majority of the house or not.
If there is someone else who can or might be able to command a majority of the house, that person would be invited to the palace and asked to be PM. They would then be expected to demonstrate that they do command a majority of the house by winning a vote.
As the Commons library puts it: "The traditional position was that a Government that lost a confidence vote would resign in favour of an alternative administration, or the Prime Minister would request a dissolution from the Queen, triggering a general election."
The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Brexit can never work. That is why the misery continues
People like are the reason Brexit will continue to vex us. You cannot and will not accept Brexit. You are emotionally incapable of accepting it, that’s like expecting a 16th century Catholic to accept the Reformation. You would rejoin tomorrow, and rejoin is your aim
There are a lot of people like you in politics, especially (but not exclusively) on the Left. As and when Labour gain power they will make their move. Starmer will come under pressure to yield to their desires, in some form (Single Market access to start with). Brexit will therefore vex us for many years to come
If Starmer does make it to Downing Street, the current government's absolutely abysmal handling of Brexit means that there are likely to be a number of quick wins he can secure that will probably make a lot of the day to day stuff vexing people, such as long passport queues and long customs delays, go away.
How can Starmer secure wins on passport queues? We still let EU citizens use e-gates when they arrive in the UK - something the EU does not allow “Third Country” citizens do - so we don’t have any “concessions” to offer them - unless we withdraw EU citizens access.
Look at how countries secure wins inside the EU. They do not do it by trading on a like for like basis. They do it by trading what they can offer in return for what they want.
What do you suggest Starmer trade to improve EU tourism business?
Who knows? But the idea that the UK has nothing to offer seems a little far-fetched to me.
So you think Starmer can get easy wins….. but you actually have no clue what they are and how he will get them. Er, OK
There is a saying about not criticizing unless you have a better idea and guess what that is bollocks. Any decent team has what is known as an evaluator type person. They look for problems not solutions. It is a different skill. My wife who was in drug safety did just that role. Others with different skills would loo for the solutions.
It is entirely rational to point out what you are doing is not working and a different approach would be better.
So, the Leavers were right to say "the EU is shit and we will do better if we Leave", without going into detail?
lol
No. Try reading the post. An evaluator points out the problems. They don't just make them up. You clearly have no concept of project management. It is a proper role to identify real problems without having to identify solutions. It is not a proper role to say something doesn't work without evidence.
I can't believe you can't see that.
So if my wife spotted that a drug might kill, she didn't have to have a solution. However she didn't randomly say a drug might kill, she provided evidence.
Really it is depressing you can't see this.
But this is politics. Not project management. That's my point
The Leavers were allowed to get away with scant attention to detail of how Brexit would work and what it would look like - and people rightly criticized it. But in the same vein, @SouthamObserver can't airily say Oh Keir Starmer could solve this, this and this problem with Brexit, not without giving us hard practical examples of how and when Starmer would fix these glitches
You see every problem through the lens of your job (or your wife's job?). You have a deformation professionelle, as the French say
"Déformation professionnelle (French: [defɔʁmasjɔ̃ pʁɔfɛsjɔnɛl], professional deformation or job conditioning) is a tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession or special expertise, rather than from a broader perspective."
Basic project management applies across the board and actually I posted from my experience and training, but thought my wife's example was better than any I could give, but my simple point was that it is wrong to assume that you have to have a solution when identifying a problem. You do obviously then need a solution so any team made up of representatives from one project management skill is useless. In our house we are both evaluator types which leads to not making mistakes, but nothing getting done. There is nothing wrong with occasionally making mistakes. On the other side there are people like yourself which is just to say let's do it without any consideration of the how or the disasters you get yourself into because nobody is standing there going 'just hang on a minute' eg inventing a plane without wheels to land on, or a car without brakes.
But this isn't so. Retract
I am one of the few Leavers on here who was explicit from the start that Leaving would bring significant problems and economic pain, for quite a while. I was scathing about the Leavers who promised "the best deal ever in 3 minutes"; Laaving was obviously going to HURT
I didn't mean about the leaving the EU in general. I agree you said it would cause pain in the short term. I mean your outlook in general.
Just look at all your posts this morning. Everything thing is easy, just get over it, not a problem. Well for most people it isn't.
You have two passports (how?), you are single, you don't have an existing property abroad, you don't have a pet to travel with, you haven't been caught out accidently by the 90 day rule because your return trip wasn't recorded.
Lots of this stuff can't be solved by the average person here. For all of them they are stuffed by these changes. Lots of people worry more than you do about travel. They don't have your experience of travel.
Some truth in that, I guess
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
The brain re-wires itself when you learn a new task, such as driving on the right, and after a while anyone who has done it regularly will have neural connections separately for the tasks of left-side and right-side driving, such that with enough practice they can switch from one to the other without difficulty or confusion - essentially the brain has made them into separate 'jobs'.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
I found something similar to this with languages. For about a decade I used to work for a French company in Norway on a rotation and then, on occasion, teach at the headquarters of the company in Paris. Norway work was in Norwegian and English, and teaching was either teach in French and explain in English of teach in English and explain in French.
My problem I found was that when I first arrived in either Paris or Norway after an extended period in the other country my brain had trouble adjusting to the change. English was fine but, for the first few days after arriving Paris, if someone spoke to me in French my brain would say 'ah, foreign language' and would default to Norwegian and I would answer in that language. The same for the first few days back in Norway, I would automatically default to French.
The effect never wore off even after a decade. It seems my brain can handle English and one other language but goes into meltdown when a second new language is introduced.
High-level skills can quickly deteriorate when not used.
I once lived in Spain for six months, and on returning home through France realised I’d forgotten even basic French.
I’ve not flown a plane for a decade, there’s very good reasons that the next time I do, it will be several flights with an instructor before being allowed to go up solo.
Left and right handed cars though, no problem at all, even with manual gearboxes. Some skills eventually become so ingrained they get stored in the long term memory.
I have heard it said that one of the most perishable skills is landing a conventional aircraft on a carrier. That even after a few weeks off, refresher training is required.
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government. 2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax. 3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt. 4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing. 5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway. 6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as: 7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level? 8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year. 9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
4 is already largely done esp. for people who need help, which is why Private Rented property is now more energy efficient than owner occupied.
Owner Occupiers should be tax incentivised to do their own, although I trhink some stuff is still available free eg basic loft insulation to 250mm.
Introduce the same regulation for OO that has existed for PRS. Which I think is even in the current Govt Green Programme, though Boris seems to be sitting on his butt.
Extra band on Council tax for houses EPC<D band from 2025. There will be no impact on tenants because it is already in place aiui that renting properties below EPC D will be an offence from then.
7 I thought UC taper rate was changed in 2020 or 2021, wasn't it, to be more progressive?
8 I thought this was already Govt policy?
What will the overall tax / borrowing impact of these proposals be, given that the current Lab Leadership are on a 'this high tax government' campaign?
155 flights cancelled from British airports today. I'm sure Carlotta will be along to say it's better than every other country in the world but I'm not sure that will satisfy anyone.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Outside of trans rights or abolishing the monarchy, maybe the worst thing Starmer could do is talk about Brexit. It's a trap. He needs to focus on issues that unite actual and potential labour voters (cost of living crisis, Johnson broke all the rules and is a crook).
Really, just the cost of living. I need to see from SKS some actual policies that will make my life better in the next parliament. I wasn't able to see his statement yesterday and I can't find a transcript now, but my understanding is hwe said Labout have a plan. Great. Bully for you. What is it?
I sympathise - it is quite difficult to find out what Labour's plan is, for some reason newspapers and journalists don't seem to want to write it out neatly or talk about it, and Labour's website isn't very clear either. What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills. 2. Scrapping national insurance rise 3. Discount on business rates for SMEs 4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes 5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit: 6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift. 7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes 8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour 9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
I didn't say Roger is witless. I said his remark is. And it is. There is no way Britain is "losing 4% of GDP every year because Brexit". So, no it was not "ad hominem"
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
An economist writes: Actually Roger is absolutely right and you have misunderstood what he has said. Since I don't engage in ad hominem remarks I won't call you witless. GDP is a flow concept. It measures the amount of output (or equivalently spending or income, the three are theoretically equivalent) produced in a given economy over a given period of time. The statement that Brexit has cost us x% of GDP per year (I won't comment on whether x is 4 or some other number as estimates differ, but FWIW 4 seems reasonable and is in the ballpark of the BOE and OBR estimates) means that the level of GDP is 4% below what it would have been if we hadn't Brexited, every year or every quarter. It doesn't imply lower GDP growth for ever, simply a permanently lower level of GDP vs this counterfactual. I hope this helps.
Quite amazing to me there are so many Tory MPs too thick to realise the obvious. Namely, that excluding the weirdos, everyone wants to move on from the Brexit wars and no one wants to be reminded about covid for the rest of their lives.
It’s not fully his fault but Boris is the living embodiment of Brexit and Covid. Every time you see his face, your brain instinctively goes back to those two things. Ugh.
They are not the only politicians too thick to realise this of course. Ed Davey and Kier Starmer suffer from the same brain malfunction, with their campaign literature and public statements still variously dominated by “we opposed Brexit” and partygate.
Sod off the whole miserable lot of you. We all need to move on.
Thats already happened. The only mention we get of Brexit now is the need to make it work. Hard to ignore the thing when it is directly impacting people via its role in the CoL crisis. So its about solutions, not trying to replay the war.
Unfortunately for all of us, the only solutions anyone has come up with are either a further Brexit atop the Brexit, or to dilute the Brexit we have. Perhaps they are the only solutions that exist.
And as I just posted in response to Scott, those are the only solutions in town - a classic Euro fudge. The Good News is that the big part of that is already in place. We have ceded control of standards to the EU. We have unilaterally demolished customs checks on our side.
When you are both absolutely aligned and will remain so by default, it makes an agreement recognising this reality much easier than if both sides were sabre rattling beforehand. This government have given up their positions on customs and divergence. The only thing that matters is free movement and a fudge can be found there as well in exchange for "spiteful" EU nations like Spain abandoning the 3rd country restrictions on British economic migrants which we demanded.
I just heard Tobias Elwood saying that Brexit was costing us 4% of GDP a year and this was unsustainable. If this is now accepted then isn't it time one of the parties started facing the reality that either rejoining or joining one of the allied organisations is not just an option anymore its compulsory. It was said yesterday that the French and German growth figures are dwarfing ours. Is anyone adding 2+2 and making 4 yet?.
I don't think pointing at individual growth points is really valid. You'd need to look at manufacturing vs services, and also look at exports Vs trade within the EU-27.
There is a much larger discussion to be had about the UK's future economic direction.
But we have now wasted more than 6 years with all this Brexit nonsense when there were more pressing things to focus on.
History will not judge this period kindly
People continue to insist that Brexit is costing ever more absurd levels of GDP. It is plainly nonsense on several levels. Firstly, there are always far more significant effects on our economic performance. In the last couple of years we have had Covid, Ukraine, Russian sanctions and international disruption on trade from China. Identifying any underlying effect from something as trivial as Brexit in the face of all that noise is just impossible. Secondly, the noise is repeated in many other countries as well. So, any minor reduction in trade with the UK is dwarfed by the effect of economic sanctions with Russia for most EU countries. Demand in these countries has been significantly impacted, reducing the market for exports. Thirdly, as others have already pointed out, the UK is performing at least as well as the EU's major economies in highly distorted times. If the Brexit effects were anything like 4% GPD what they are saying is that we would be outgrowing these countries by absurd numbers.
But there is something in the distraction point. We are not addressing our underlying problems in productivity, investment, training and infrastructure. The potential wins in these areas again exceed any Brexit effect by an order of magnitude or more but they are rarely discussed. One of my many disappointments with this government is that levelling up, which could have started to address these problems, especially the last of them, has proved more of a soundbite than a policy.
This government has no clear purpose. It has no clear agenda. It has no focus on what can be done at the margins as we are buffeted by inflation, sanctions, Chinese disruption and many other factors. It is all about surviving the week. Not since the latter days of Gordon Brown have we had such chaos.
Roger is fundamentally clueless about economics.
"Brexit is costing us 4% of GDP every year". What even does this mean?? That without Brexit we'd be growing at 8% this year, much faster than China? Or that our GDP is shrinking 4% a year, so we are experiencing a devastating recession every year, which we clearly are not?
There should be a PB Threshold of Stupidity which, if you cross, you are suspended from PB for a week. I suggest Roger gets a 38 week ban
There is a difference between GDP and GDP Growth. Probably Roger is talking about the former and you the latter.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
There you go again. You just can't help but going Ad Hominem, can you? With everyone.
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
I didn't say Roger is witless. I said his remark is. And it is. There is no way Britain is "losing 4% of GDP every year because Brexit". So, no it was not "ad hominem"
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
An economist writes: Actually Roger is absolutely right and you have misunderstood what he has said. Since I don't engage in ad hominem remarks I won't call you witless. GDP is a flow concept. It measures the amount of output (or equivalently spending or income, the three are theoretically equivalent) produced in a given economy over a given period of time. The statement that Brexit has cost us x% of GDP per year (I won't comment on whether x is 4 or some other number as estimates differ, but FWIW 4 seems reasonable and is in the ballpark of the BOE and OBR estimates) means that the level of GDP is 4% below what it would have been if we hadn't Brexited, every year or every quarter. It doesn't imply lower GDP growth for ever, simply a permanently lower level of GDP vs this counterfactual. I hope this helps.
As a Leaver, I can confirm you are right (in theory) on the economics. GDP and GDP change are not the same, and fractions of a percentage lower growth over a decade could result in significantly lower GDP. The idea that 4% of GDP is the same as 4% per annum is preposterous and I can confirm that for you and that Carlotta misunderstood that.
But while the theory is correct, the evidence its actually happened is lacking to say the least. There are always short-term swings and variance in the figures, and the pandemic is clearly dwarfing everything, so you need to look over a substantial period pre-pandemic unfortunately to get any meaningful data.
Looking at the decade of 2010 - 2019, which incorporates the 2016 Referendum and its aftermath within that decade, shows that both GDP and GDP per capita grew in the UK more than in the Euro Area.
Had we voted differently, would we have had a further 4% growth more on top of the more growth we already had than they did? Its possible, but there isn't really much evidence for that. Indeed it seems pretty implausible that we would have outgrown the Euro Area by an additional 4% especially since they're economically behind us so ought to be 'catching up' with us economically and not falling further behind.
If there was any disruption in 2016 and its aftermath, it was a rounding error that didn't prevent us growing more than Europe. The evidence of a 4% hit to GDP is extremely weak, while it is theoretically possible.
boulay is angry and sad at how Boris has turned out as PM. I'm not because his character was there for all to see. You can't be disappointed by someone from whom you expect nothing less. He is shameless and always has been.
Very few here are arguing he might survive. It's seems to be accepted generally that it's a matter of when, not if, he gets ousted. However Betfair punters are less certain.
Boris to be PM at the next GE market
Yes 2.76-2.82 (36% chance) No 1.55-1.57 (64% chance)
Easy money to be made if you are sure he is going before the next GE.
An exccellent post and one of the very few -even among the civilised on here- to spot the huge hole in Boulay's post. It isn't even one of those 'but we thought he would get the trains running on time'. It's 'we thought he might know someone who would get the trains running on time"
"So what if he's a shameless liar". .........Until half his party noticed and then he was Shocked!
Comments
But the workers need to benefit by increased earnings from any productivity increases they initiate otherwise they're unlikely to happen.
I suspect in recent decades they haven't been and that the gains from worker inspired productivity increases have been used to boost business profits and director earnings instead.
When I scrapped my 2006, 250,000 mile Vectra it was shod in Hankook Evos. They were worth new three times the value of the car. Tyres maketh the man!
It doesn't, of course, help you get round the EU visa rules as entry and exit increasingly moves over to being recorded on a central database.
And if you're missing an exit stamp, that could be a problem whenever you tried to use that document again.
Not that I am cynical about some/many of the organizations I come across.
Firms need to start investing, whether it be in machinery, or R&D, or just their own staff, or something else, rather than thinking there's an endless pool of monkeys to throw peanuts at.
And before anyone chips in with "it's grim everywhere else, too".
Well, yes. That's my point.
It's F*cking Brexit! And it's about time the Labour Party started showing some leadership or Starmer should go and leave it to someone with some bottle
Bailing out failed businesses has never been a recipe for success.
This time the Tories are going to go into the next election asking us to trust the PM when 41% of their own MPs do not have confidence in him.
This does not seem to me to be a winning formula. But, hey, what do I know.
And so on to the next mess we go. It's like a Laurel and Hardy film - only without the charm or humour.
I was shocked by the PB-er who said "he's scared of driving on the right". To me that seems pathetically lame, but then I have spent a lifetime travelling, often to very remote places, so almost nothing phases me, travel-wise. But I am unusual, as you say. I actually get frustrated with more timorous friends and relations who say they want to travel but then quail at the "potential problems". To them "going to Tbilisi" seems impossibly difficult but it really isn't. It's easier than most places. Zero visa issues, you can stay a year, everything is cheap, the young speak English, the food is good the wine is ace and the sun shines reliably from May-October. Do it!
As for your other points, hmm. If you get a pet, or buy a 2nd home in the Algarve, or get married, you are making a conscious choice to make your life more rooted, and travel more tricky. You get great rewards, but you won't be able to zip around the world. I have chosen to be untramelled, and it does mean I am blissfully free to bugger off to anywhere that will let me in, but it also comes at a cost, it can be lonely, for a start (tho you make friends as you go, I have a new Mingrelian friend here in Tbilisi).
We all make these choices. We all have the freedom to choose
Presumably by Proxy
But they backed him for personal reasons or because they had even less confidence in the alternatives.
It's not a "natural" rule. You need a majority to win: that's a natural rule. You can't have a second VONC in 12 months. That was an arbitrary rule to achieve a purpose, and it doesn't even achieve that. It's a fairly recent rule. It's a rule that is easy to change. That's the realpolitik: it's not so much rules, as guidance, as was said above.
And an appeal to sticking to rules in the same breath as Boris Johnson is the ultimate irony.
There is no way of interpreting Roger's remark without concluding it is witless
Can't you just try and stop yourself? Your point about GDP may have been really valid but you chase people off this board, like Alastair Meekes, by being so flaming personally nasty all the time.
Currently, for example, the people in their 50s who have reduced their work hours are being bemoaned for reducing GDP.
Yet for them it must be a rational quality of life choice - a bit less money for a lot more free time.
For instance, we could increase productivity by closing down our least productive industries, but then we'd have lower GDP and a lot of ex-workers claiming unemployment benefit. If we left these firms open and replaced men with machines, as well as higher productivity, we might have the same GDP but we'd still have a lot of unemployed ex-workers driving up the benefits bill. And because the machines are made in Germany, we've worsened our trade deficit too. Of course, the holy grail is to redeploy the same resources from low to high productivity but that is not always easy.
The consensus this morning seems to be that Boris is toast. It's very unfortunate for him that the big talking point seems to be that he did worse than Thatcher, Major and May.
It's just a question of when he goes. But it could get very messy for the Conservative Party and he and his MPs have made matters a lot worse by not making a clean kill.
I'm not encouraging it. But if they are stupid enough not to install e-gates everywhere, making life better for everyone, then pff
As I say, the problem will be solved by the free market (or e-gates). Countries that want British tourists and need the money will make it easy for us to go there. Greece, Malta, Cyprus, Portugal, probably Spain
Well. The market said it was one in six. Plenty on here thought he might well, including myself, and in the end it was reasonably close.
Opinion, not analysis from him.
Very few here are arguing he might survive. It's seems to be accepted generally that it's a matter of when, not if, he gets ousted. However Betfair punters are less certain.
Boris to be PM at the next GE market
Yes 2.76-2.82 (36% chance)
No 1.55-1.57 (64% chance)
Easy money to be made if you are sure he is going before the next GE.
Starting out, however, you don't have those neural connections and the activity is daunting and not without risk, since you're having to think everything out from scratch. Hence Anne Sacoolas.
There was a fascinating experiment where they made a bike where the front wheel turned in the opposite direction from the way the handlebars were turned. To begin with, the subject found it impossible to ride, and it took a fair bit of practice before he was able to ride it, and even then, as soon as he encountered a novel situation his instinctive reactions kicked in and he fell off the bike. Eventually after hours of practice the motor skills began to be 'learned' and brain scans showed the areas of the brain being dedicated to the new task.
Interestingly some confusion between the new task and the old persisted, such that when the subject went back to riding a normal bike, he made new mistakes. It took longer for the two tasks to become separately instinctive.
p.s. my dog says he's been to twelve countries including 20 US states, and he's just four. Pets can travel!
I saw Piers Morgan at the cricket the same day that you were. So now every time I read one of your posts I hear it in his voice.
Some old bloke in retirement, obeying her in doors and putting the rubbish out.
Have the Russians achieved what they wanted to achieve in this time? Of course not. Have their casualties been beyond their worst nightmares? Certainly. Have they shown that the Russian bear was in fact sclerotic, sick, starved by corruption and poorly trained? Undoubtedly. But to pretend that they are not winning is delusional. The Ukranians themselves are saying as much. They need heavy artillary and they needed it a month ago. They are hanging on until it comes. I hope it is not too late.
Besides: what do you expect me to do? Ignore an obviously false statement out of politeness? Say "Well done Rog on your great insight", even though it is clearly and foolishly wrong?
If I say something as daft as that - and it hardly unknown - please feel free to call my remark witless. I won't complain, I will thank you for pointing out my egregious error
And I'm sure if you asked Mr Meeks why he left PB, his answer won't be "because people chased me off"
Something like 60% or even two thirds and you continue. With an absolute bar on another challenge for a year.
Less than half you're out as now.
Between those figures, a leadership election. But one in which the incumbent is perfectly entitled to stand again.
We'd have a leadership election now. But one including the PM. And Hunt, presumably. And, at least the Tory Party could have it out.
Instead. We drift on. Like a zebra who has escaped the lions, but is bleeding out alone.
What I have discovered from google:
1. Windfall tax on energy companies to give houses relief on energy bills.
2. Scrapping national insurance rise
3. Discount on business rates for SMEs
4. Rapid ramp-up of installing insulation into homes
5. Investigation by National Crime Agency into taxpayer money lost through fraud
And then from previous speech on universal credit:
6. Increase universal credit/keep pandemic uplift.
7. Reform to reduce universal credit taper rate/reduce marginal tax for those on low incomes
8. Increasing national minimum wage to £10/hour
9. Sick pay for all, right to flexible working, protection against unfair dismissal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61207802
https://www.independent.co.uk/money/labour-to-set-out-plans-for-replacing-universal-credit-b1906922.html
Although I accept that the Ukrainians probably don't have a better option at this point.
Broadly - 'still an asset to the Tories? 30 yes 60 no but improved from 24/64 in January
'More likely to vote Tory if he goes? 23 more likely 51 no difference 16 less likely
Doesnt suggest a big vote shift on the cards either way to me. Biggest impact will be certainty to vote when he goes.
Also suggests position is as we see, single digit lead that regardless of what happens leader wise should swingback to within MoE even stevens and lead to a minority Labour government
All caveated by CoL and the response
The above us my attempt at dispassionate analysis. Angry me wants to say feck the fat lying betrayer and then fine the curry prick and turf him out
One of the more interesting phenomena is the incredible growth and increases in productivity achieved by economic hubs or clusters where the supply of well trained labour becomes plentiful. I think the government should be trying hard to create these around the country, working with local universities and colleges as well as employers. Not all of these will work, of course, and it does have shades of picking winners, something that failed so badly in the past. But if governments focused on creating the capacity for growth rather than individual employers I think it would work.
My problem I found was that when I first arrived in either Paris or Norway after an extended period in the other country my brain had trouble adjusting to the change. English was fine but, for the first few days after arriving Paris, if someone spoke to me in French my brain would say 'ah, foreign language' and would default to Norwegian and I would answer in that language. The same for the first few days back in Norway, I would automatically default to French.
The effect never wore off even after a decade. It seems my brain can handle English and one other language but goes into meltdown when a second new language is introduced.
I measure them in Boris Johnsons. One Boris Johnson is after all a massive cock!
If he doesnt resign HMQ dismisses him.
But I'm not sure how much we can or should read into the glacial progress that Russia is making in some areas. The Ukrainians seem to be applying the time honoured strategy of choosing where to make their stands and making strategic retreats where necessary. See the current battle in Serenvodetsk (sp?) the Russians were able to advance to much of it, but then met fierce resistance and it was even visited by the Ukrainian President, something that wouldn't happen if it was all a one way grind like you're suggesting.
The cost to lives and buildings and communities is immense and tragic, but I don't think its possible to say Russia is "winning". Hopefully more and more artillery keeps finding its way to Ukraine though, as fast as possible.
GDP is a flow concept. It measures the amount of output (or equivalently spending or income, the three are theoretically equivalent) produced in a given economy over a given period of time. The statement that Brexit has cost us x% of GDP per year (I won't comment on whether x is 4 or some other number as estimates differ, but FWIW 4 seems reasonable and is in the ballpark of the BOE and OBR estimates) means that the level of GDP is 4% below what it would have been if we hadn't Brexited, every year or every quarter. It doesn't imply lower GDP growth for ever, simply a permanently lower level of GDP vs this counterfactual.
I hope this helps.
Certainly accords with my experience. I started driving abroad early in life - in my 20s, and it took maybe a decade to get completely used to it - ie to a place where I would never forget which side of the road to drive on, whether it was left or right
Now it is instinctive, and - more pertinent to your point - I can switch between them seamlessly, like using one hand over the other if you are ambidextrous. They do feel like two distinct but similarly easy tasks
The same applies to driving automatic or with a gearbox, I reckon. At first it can be tricky to switch between, but eventually it becomes reflexive
1. Terrible idea, hence its implementation by the government.
2. Good idea in theory, but how are they going to pay for things? This would be better as a major reform like unifying NI and income tax.
3. This isn't as good as it sounds on the surface as lots of small businessses are already business rate exempt.
4. Meh. This isn't something the government should be doing.
5. Complete waste of time and money. And if this is talking about pandemic-related fraud, Labour are just as culpable as the Tories anyway.
6. I wouldn't say no, but it's not as important as:
7. This is absolutely essential - but is it compatible with increasing the UC level?
8. Surely happening next year anyway - it want up from £8.91 to £9.50 this year.
9. How does this improve on the current situation? I assume this is aimed at shutting down companies like Uber and Deliveroo which ordinary people love but the Left has always hated.
Maybe a 4/10 grade at the moment. Not unpromising but needs a hell of a lot more work.
Boris Johnson is the personification of Brexit; a complete incompetent joke. Apologists for both just make themselves look more foolish by every protestation they ejaculate.
I once lived in Spain for six months, and on returning home through France realised I’d forgotten even basic French.
I’ve not flown a plane for a decade, there’s very good reasons that the next time I do, it will be several flights with an instructor before being allowed to go up solo.
Left and right handed cars though, no problem at all, even with manual gearboxes. Some skills eventually become so ingrained they get stored in the long term memory.
That's not winning.
And then there's the time factor - how has the military balance changed during the last month ? Which side is training up the most men and receiving the most equipment ? And how has that changed during the last month and how will it change in upcoming months ?
And unspoken but understood rules are a good thing, except when someone barges in with a "there's nothing written down, you can't make me" attitude. Which is roughly where we have been with the PM since he arrived on the public stage.
And given that so much of the decision making inside the EU is now by QMV the idea that we were influential in that is also a very dubious assertion.
Certainly using Leon's example, I can relate to the early days of driving on the right where it was all too easy to forget and set off on the wrong side, or get a complicated junction wrong. And, later when I was more experienced abroad, still making the occasional reverse mistake at home in the days after returning.
Now, I can switch between one and the other without any difficulty of mishap, and the only time I even notice when away is if I run into some particularly fiendish road layout which needs working out from scratch - basically the same as if you encountered similar at home.
Telling someone it's 'easy', when you can already do it, isn't particularly helpful, any more than telling someone that since you learned piano, they can too.
Or is this from 2020 when we actually Brexited so we've lost 4% and counting, except that of course Covid intervened in 2020 and we lost about 10% of the economy due to that, then regained it, and how anyone can perceive actual Brexit effects in the middle of a global plague and now a war, fuck knows
And of course Roger said we are "losing 4% of GDP a year". Which means - in normal, sane English - 4% every year. If I say I earn about £30k a year, I mean every year. Otherwise I would specifiy "THIS year"
Apart from that, your comment is mere sophistry. I will refrain from calling it witless, in case I upset @Heathener
They couldn’t manufacture another VONC just to produce this same result, that would make them a laughing stock.
It’s purgatory. 😱
If there is someone else who can or might be able to command a majority of the house, that person would be invited to the palace and asked to be PM. They would then be expected to demonstrate that they do command a majority of the house by winning a vote.
As the Commons library puts it: "The traditional position was that a Government that lost a confidence vote would resign in favour of an alternative administration, or the Prime Minister would request a dissolution from the Queen, triggering a general election."
Why bother? Why do we need to appoint people to the legislature in this way?
Owner Occupiers should be tax incentivised to do their own, although I trhink some stuff is still available free eg basic loft insulation to 250mm.
Introduce the same regulation for OO that has existed for PRS. Which I think is even in the current Govt Green Programme, though Boris seems to be sitting on his butt.
Extra band on Council tax for houses EPC<D band from 2025. There will be no impact on tenants because it is already in place aiui that renting properties below EPC D will be an offence from then.
7 I thought UC taper rate was changed in 2020 or 2021, wasn't it, to be more progressive?
8 I thought this was already Govt policy?
What will the overall tax / borrowing impact of these proposals be, given that the current Lab Leadership are on a 'this high tax government' campaign?
But they must have some more interesting eyecatching stuff they are hiding. Surely. Surely
*head::Georgian table*
But while the theory is correct, the evidence its actually happened is lacking to say the least. There are always short-term swings and variance in the figures, and the pandemic is clearly dwarfing everything, so you need to look over a substantial period pre-pandemic unfortunately to get any meaningful data.
Looking at the decade of 2010 - 2019, which incorporates the 2016 Referendum and its aftermath within that decade, shows that both GDP and GDP per capita grew in the UK more than in the Euro Area.
Had we voted differently, would we have had a further 4% growth more on top of the more growth we already had than they did? Its possible, but there isn't really much evidence for that. Indeed it seems pretty implausible that we would have outgrown the Euro Area by an additional 4% especially since they're economically behind us so ought to be 'catching up' with us economically and not falling further behind.
If there was any disruption in 2016 and its aftermath, it was a rounding error that didn't prevent us growing more than Europe. The evidence of a 4% hit to GDP is extremely weak, while it is theoretically possible.
"So what if he's a shameless liar". .........Until half his party noticed and then he was Shocked!
You don't post enough.
PS. I lost my £13 on your 8/1 Derby tip!