Culture Secretary John Whittingdale today admitted accepting free hospitality from a London lapdancing club while chairing an inquiry into its licensing regime.
Mr Whittingdale and two other MPs were treated to dinner with managers and two female performers.
The Cabinet minister insisted it was an official visit as part of an inquiry by the Culture, Media and Sport select committee into new laws cracking down on such establishments.
However, the evening was not recorded in the committee’s published records. Nor was the visit mentioned in the committee’s report, which came out against the proposed tougher laws, which aimed to curb the spread of lapdancing clubs by classing them as “sex encounter” venues.
After the further revelations in The Mail over the weekend, Whittingdale should go. Wrong person for the job, given his tangled love life and peccadilloes.
Mr. Eagles, I'm not a frequenter of lapdancing clubs, but was under the distinct impression that 'sex encounter' would be completely inaccurate as a classification for the establishments.
I once took a client to a meeting at Stringfellows.
They serve food there.
But you are right, you can't even touch the ladies, let alone bump uglies with the ladies, without the bouncers escorting you out head first
You weren't in charge of regulating Stringfellows though. Whittingdale is seen to have been compromised, he has to go.
He wasn't in charge of regulating clubs, he was an opposition MP chairing a parliamentary committee. It was an invitation to the whole committee, according to the article, and several MPs went ("Conservative MP Philip Davies and Labour’s Janet Anderson "). It seems pretty reasonable for a committee producing a report on a particular type of club to make such a visit and talk to the staff, surely?
I don't see much meat in this complaint, unless the visit wasn't properly disclosed.
From the post.
'However, the evening was not recorded in the committee’s published records.'
Message to whoever is running this at Vote Leave - I shouldn't need to be logged in to F***book to watch your speeches live. There's a million other options for live streaming an event that don't require such invasion of personal privacy.
My W7 laptop is having a fan crisis and if I can't fix it - its done. Took me days to get W8 to run. I'm so irked. W7 is great, worked better with my smart TV and I'm just worried about buying an op system free laptop now.
5yrs ago, I'd have no qualms. I've w7 discs but suspect all the drivers won't work.
Tech help required, I'm trying to buy a laptop but the choice seems incredibly small if I want one that allows me to play dvds or will let me use Windows media player.
My current W8 laptop is incredibly slow [4gb memory 500mb free space ] despite having no apps open bar Firefox. How much should I be paying?
I've totally lost faith in simply buying a laptop that works
Tech help required, I'm trying to buy a laptop but the choice seems incredibly small if I want one that allows me to play dvds or will let me use Windows media player.
My current W8 laptop is incredibly slow [4gb memory 500mb free space ] despite having no apps open bar Firefox. How much should I be paying?
I've totally lost faith in simply buying a laptop that works
Try upgrading to W10 - it is alot better than W8.
Unless you really need WMP, there are plenty of alternatives
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
What's the headline from all this Gove stuff? What's the punchline? Obnoxious, mendacious and ultimately self-destructive as Osborne's intervention yesterday was, the clear headline was £4,300 per household.
Thank you - interesting article - though I found this comment:
From a lead in the polling of about 10% at the start of the official campaign in June, Yes closed the gap to low single figures by the election day in September....... No actually ended up winning by 10.6%
Slightly confusing - was there a move to YES?*
I guess with the polling so banjaxed up we may never know...
*Cue plague of Nats defending their losing victorious campaign....
did the true state of opinion drop from about 17% to about 10%).
I wonder if the polls are again overstating those in favour of change?
We'll find out on the 24th.....
Depends on whether you mean the phone or online polls!
My instinct is that the phone polls have had a much better time of it for the last few years, after a period when YouGov was as good as anyone. But I need to check that out in more detail before committing to the thesis (not least because I'm wary of bias confirmation in favouring polls that produce what for me are 'better' results).
I too suspect the phone polls may be more accurate - but am at a loss as to why, as the traditional rationale -'oldies not online, youngsters not on landline' should be producing the opposite results to what we are seeing - phone 'favouring' remain, while online 'favouring' leave.....
I think it's fair to say that online polls are now suffering from immense difficulties in dealing with bias in their samples. The politically engaged/opinionated on all sides are disproportionally likely to be registered with online pollsters, and the pollsters struggle to separate the impartial from the activist when collating results.
Message to whoever is running this at Vote Leave - I shouldn't need to be logged in to F***book to watch your speeches live. There's a million other options for live streaming an event that don't require such invasion of personal privacy.
Mining facebook was one of the reason why the Tory targeting at the last election was so effective.
Perhaps that's why Vote Leave want you to log in via Facebok
Message to whoever is running this at Vote Leave - I shouldn't need to be logged in to F***book to watch your speeches live. There's a million other options for live streaming an event that don't require such invasion of personal privacy.
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
And remember most of our services exports go outside the EU, a trend that will only become marked as time goes on. It makes more sense to concentrate on improving access to non-EU markets where there is so much more growth potential and, in many cases perhaps, more enthusiasm for liberalisation as well.
Thank you - interesting article - though I found this comment:
From a lead in the polling of about 10% at the start of the official campaign in June, Yes closed the gap to low single figures by the election day in September....... No actually ended up winning by 10.6%
Slightly confusing - was there a move to YES?*
I guess with the polling so banjaxed up we may never know...
*Cue plague of Nats defending their losing victorious campaign....
did the true state of opinion drop from about 17% to about 10%).
I wonder if the polls are again overstating those in favour of change?
We'll find out on the 24th.....
Depends on whether you mean the phone or online polls!
My instinct is that the phone polls have had a much better time of it for the last few years, after a period when YouGov was as good as anyone. But I need to check that out in more detail before committing to the thesis (not least because I'm wary of bias confirmation in favouring polls that produce what for me are 'better' results).
I too suspect the phone polls may be more accurate - but am at a loss as to why, as the traditional rationale -'oldies not online, youngsters not on landline' should be producing the opposite results to what we are seeing - phone 'favouring' remain, while online 'favouring' leave.....
If the weightings are done correctly, that shouldn't matter too much - though I'm always sceptical of polls that need substantial uplifts / downgrades for particular groups.
I wonder whether it's that online polls tend to be activist-heavy. It's not so much that they have the wrong weightings as that the element of self-selection can't be entirely eliminated and that Leavers are more pumped up politically in general and more likely to join polling panels than Remainers?
What's more interesting about the Standard article on John Whittingdale is: why now? This visit took place eight years ago. Who is digging the dirt, and why?
My W7 laptop is having a fan crisis and if I can't fix it - its done. Took me days to get W8 to run. I'm so irked. W7 is great, worked better with my smart TV and I'm just worried about buying an op system free laptop now.
5yrs ago, I'd have no qualms. I've w7 discs but suspect all the drivers won't work.
You can still buy Windows 7 laptops. I buy mine from these guys
Sandpit - "I wonder if Cameron has his mind on a top EU job in the event that he delivers the referendum for Remain?" - very close to wondering if he has been promised a top job - could the Conservative party survive David Cameron appearing in an EU job after a vote to remain?
Think Cameron cares what happens to the tory party after he delivers the UK into the arms of his masters in the EU?
That is one of the lessons of this referendum for me. And a very bitter one it is too.
Unfortunately I have to agree. I didn't expect the behaviour of the PM on this, it's what made me think that he's 'on a promise' of the EU Presidency if he can deliver the result in June.
He's clearly an outstanding politician, after all he has held his party together for more than 10 years and won an unlikely majority less than a year ago. Much as I personally am losing faith in him over the referendum, I imagine that the EU would be happy to make use his skills and experience in the years to come. </blockquote
What's more interesting about the Standard article on John Whittingdale is: why now? This visit took place eight years ago. Who is digging the dirt, and why?
Papers are doubling down after previously playing the role of the three wise monkeys on him.
Message to whoever is running this at Vote Leave - I shouldn't need to be logged in to F***book to watch your speeches live. There's a million other options for live streaming an event that don't require such invasion of personal privacy.
Message to whoever is running this at Vote Leave - I shouldn't need to be logged in to F***book to watch your speeches live. There's a million other options for live streaming an event that don't require such invasion of personal privacy.
Mining facebook was one of the reason why the Tory targeting at the last election was so effective.
Perhaps that's why Vote Leave want you to log in via Facebok
Agree completely about the targeting, but the whole point of social media targeting is that those on the receiving end don't see what's going on.
Doing it nakedly is more likely to upset than to encourage, or maybe it's just me the IT guy who does a 60 minute lecture to schools and parents called "Why I'm Not On Facebook"!
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
And remember most of our services exports go outside the EU, a trend that will only become marked as time goes on. It makes more sense to concentrate on improving access to non-EU markets where there is so much more growth potential and, in many cases perhaps, more enthusiasm for liberalisation as well.
Liberalisation means that the benefits of economic growth are concentrated in fewer & fewer hands.
Michael he is not easy to listen to and he gives the impression of reading his speech. It is a bit rambling and not at all sure how he will impress the undecided. Boris is much better
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
Yes the EU has nurtured those impressive car emission regulations that have permitted diesil engines to cause massive harm to our city dwellers. But they are carbon friendly regulations with a side effect of deaths and chronic ill health....
Perhaps the most important piece of what we would now call environmental regulation in UK history was the Clean Air Act, which dates back to the 1950s. But apparently we now need to be told by the EU that thousands of people dying due to pollution is a bad thing.
Zero chance of either the UK devising and implementing different vehicle emissions standards or car manufacturers selling different lower spec ones in the UK
This is a faintly desperate story...
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
Sandpit - "I wonder if Cameron has his mind on a top EU job in the event that he delivers the referendum for Remain?" - very close to wondering if he has been promised a top job - could the Conservative party survive David Cameron appearing in an EU job after a vote to remain?
Think Cameron cares what happens to the tory party after he delivers the UK into the arms of his masters in the EU?
That is one of the lessons of this referendum for me. And a very bitter one it is too.
Unfortunately I have to agree. I didn't expect the behaviour of the PM on this, it's what made me think that he's 'on a promise' of the EU Presidency if he can deliver the result in June.
He's clearly an outstanding politician, after all he has held his party together for more than 10 years and won an unlikely majority less than a year ago. Much as I personally am losing faith in him over the referendum, I imagine that the EU would be happy to make use his skills and experience in the years to come.
My W7 laptop is having a fan crisis and if I can't fix it - its done. Took me days to get W8 to run. I'm so irked. W7 is great, worked better with my smart TV and I'm just worried about buying an op system free laptop now.
5yrs ago, I'd have no qualms. I've w7 discs but suspect all the drivers won't work.
You can still buy Windows 7 laptops. I buy mine from these guys
Yes, business laptops are still available with W7, in fact you can still buy W7 Pro licences, if you don't mind formatting your own PC and reinstalling all the drivers.
Gove – a man who once argued that all schools should be better than average, which is statistically impossible – and his allies are not treating us as though we are children, but as though we are thick.
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
And remember most of our services exports go outside the EU, a trend that will only become marked as time goes on. It makes more sense to concentrate on improving access to non-EU markets where there is so much more growth potential and, in many cases perhaps, more enthusiasm for liberalisation as well.
Liberalisation means that the benefits of economic growth are concentrated in fewer & fewer hands.
Liberalisation means lower costs and better quality good and services for all consumers, including other businesses.
What's more interesting about the Standard article on John Whittingdale is: why now? This visit took place eight years ago. Who is digging the dirt, and why?
Good point. It was no surprise that Newsnight were the first to go with last week's story.
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
Out of interest is there some kind of published standard or something so I can find out what grade of immigrant I am?
Michael he is not easy to listen to and he gives the impression of reading his speech. It is a bit rambling and not at all sure how he will impress the undecided. Boris is much better
I am disappointed in his presentation which is just the reading of a spech with no inspiration. While I am remain I want him to play a big role in the post referendum cabinet and I think he is more an Oliver Letwin than a Boris. My wife has just said he has lost her and is boring
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
No doubt winters would be colder, summers would be hotter and there would be pots of gold at the end of every rainbow, but I'm afraid that a bare assertion isn't going to cut it with me.
Yes the EU has nurtured those impressive car emission regulations that have permitted diesil engines to cause massive harm to our city dwellers. But they are carbon friendly regulations with a side effect of deaths and chronic ill health....
Perhaps the most important piece of what we would now call environmental regulation in UK history was the Clean Air Act, which dates back to the 1950s. But apparently we now need to be told by the EU that thousands of people dying due to pollution is a bad thing.
Zero chance of either the UK devising and implementing different vehicle emissions standards or car manufacturers selling different lower spec ones in the UK
This is a faintly desperate story...
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
He's since deleted that tweet, having noticed that Gibraltar uses a multiple-past-the-post system where voters have 10 votes each (and hence overestimating the rock's population by an entire order of magnitude).
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
And remember most of our services exports go outside the EU, a trend that will only become marked as time goes on. It makes more sense to concentrate on improving access to non-EU markets where there is so much more growth potential and, in many cases perhaps, more enthusiasm for liberalisation as well.
Liberalisation means that the benefits of economic growth are concentrated in fewer & fewer hands.
Liberalisation means lower costs and better quality good and services for all consumers, including other businesses.
It also means that income & wealth are concentrated. Until you can show me that reduced costs have a greater effect than that concentration, I stand by what I said.
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
What's the headline from all this Gove stuff? What's the punchline? Obnoxious, mendacious and ultimately self-destructive as Osborne's intervention yesterday was, the clear headline was £4,300 per household.
Gove's speech is aimed at As and Bs by showing thought has been given to the LEAVE arguments not just a reflex action.
As and Bs are heavily REMAIN at present so need to be persuaded by serious points and gravitas.
Boris will provide the populist arguments for the tabloid readers and Farage will provide the immigration arguments for the zero hours contract workers.
He's since deleted that tweet, having noticed that Gibraltar uses a multiple-past-the-post system where voters have 10 votes each (and hence overestimating the rock's population by an entire order of magnitude).
On topic, an interesting piece on the Labour doorstep reaction. Probably just the natural pessimism of some activists, but if Zac wins this is how it's happening: disproportionate turnout in outer London.
"Why Labour Members Are Finding it Hard to Sell Sadiq Khan to Voters"
He's since deleted that tweet, having noticed that Gibraltar uses a multiple-past-the-post system where voters have 10 votes each (and hence overestimating the rock's population by an entire order of magnitude).
On topic, an interesting piece on the Labour doorstep reaction. Probably just the natural pessimism of some activists, but if Zac wins this is how it's happening: disproportionate turnout in outer London.
"Why Labour Members Are Finding it Hard to Sell Sadiq Khan to Voters"
Sandpit - "I wonder if Cameron has his mind on a top EU job in the event that he delivers the referendum for Remain?" - very close to wondering if he has been promised a top job - could the Conservative party survive David Cameron appearing in an EU job after a vote to remain?
Think Cameron cares what happens to the tory party after he delivers the UK into the arms of his masters in the EU?
That is one of the lessons of this referendum for me. And a very bitter one it is too.
Unfortunately I have to agree. I didn't expect the behaviour of the PM on this, it's what made me think that he's 'on a promise' of the EU Presidency if he can deliver the result in June.
He's clearly an outstanding politician, after all he has held his party together for more than 10 years and won an unlikely majority less than a year ago. Much as I personally am losing faith in him over the referendum, I imagine that the EU would be happy to make use his skills and experience in the years to come.
As long as Britain's future membership status is unclear, I can't see any Brit getting a Presidential-level EU position, even someone as senior as Cameron (if he wanted it, which has to be doubted). Leaving aside West Lothian Questions about the Euro or Schengen, such a person would be hopelessly compromised if the UK changed its mind in a second referendum.
On topic, an interesting piece on the Labour doorstep reaction. Probably just the natural pessimism of some activists, but if Zac wins this is how it's happening: disproportionate turnout in outer London.
"Why Labour Members Are Finding it Hard to Sell Sadiq Khan to Voters"
Yes the EU has nurtured those impressive car emission regulations that have permitted diesil engines to cause massive harm to our city dwellers. But they are carbon friendly regulations with a side effect of deaths and chronic ill health....
Perhaps the most important piece of what we would now call environmental regulation in UK history was the Clean Air Act, which dates back to the 1950s. But apparently we now need to be told by the EU that thousands of people dying due to pollution is a bad thing.
Zero chance of either the UK devising and implementing different vehicle emissions standards or car manufacturers selling different lower spec ones in the UK
This is a faintly desperate story...
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
Take back control, obey laws made in California.
It would be the choice of UK politicians - not imposed by the EU Commission.
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
No doubt winters would be colder, summers would be hotter and there would be pots of gold at the end of every rainbow, but I'm afraid that a bare assertion isn't going to cut it with me.
well we would ban those romanian beggars that come over here for a few months at a time...
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
Out of interest is there some kind of published standard or something so I can find out what grade of immigrant I am?
Use the Australian points system as a surrogate until there is a UK points system after a BREXIT.
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
So the local farms staffed 99% by migrants who all have degrees & better? Pfft.
Yes the EU has nurtured those impressive car emission regulations that have permitted diesil engines to cause massive harm to our city dwellers. But they are carbon friendly regulations with a side effect of deaths and chronic ill health....
Perhaps the most important piece of what we would now call environmental regulation in UK history was the Clean Air Act, which dates back to the 1950s. But apparently we now need to be told by the EU that thousands of people dying due to pollution is a bad thing.
Zero chance of either the UK devising and implementing different vehicle emissions standards or car manufacturers selling different lower spec ones in the UK
This is a faintly desperate story...
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
Take back control, obey laws made in California.
It would be the choice of UK politicians - not imposed by the EU Commission.
But Scots don't want to be in the UK. How long before that is also true of the Welsh, and/or Londoners?
Yes the EU has nurtured those impressive car emission regulations that have permitted diesil engines to cause massive harm to our city dwellers. But they are carbon friendly regulations with a side effect of deaths and chronic ill health....
Perhaps the most important piece of what we would now call environmental regulation in UK history was the Clean Air Act, which dates back to the 1950s. But apparently we now need to be told by the EU that thousands of people dying due to pollution is a bad thing.
Zero chance of either the UK devising and implementing different vehicle emissions standards or car manufacturers selling different lower spec ones in the UK
This is a faintly desperate story...
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
Take back control, obey laws made in California.
It would be the choice of UK politicians - not imposed by the EU Commission.
While we have some influence in the EU.....how much do we have in Sacramento?
@Scott_P Seen the celebration chase field for Saturday ?
Un De Sceaux, Vautour, Douvan, Sprinter Sacre, Special Tiara, Dodging Bullets, Solar Impulse, Ulck Du Lin, Sire De Grugy, and Top Gamble
I really don't care who wins the championship but it does mean we get to see a lot of good horses -- though I expect some owners will be on the phone to say they'd rather go to Punchestown.
EEA members do not have to sign up to the Social Chapter. Much of our employment law would also not be covered. Basically we would be left with prohibitions against discrimination against EU citizens looking to work here.
If the UK stays in the EEA, the experience of Norway indicates that the UK will probably have to accept – without having any say – much of EU employment and social policy, including directives that cover: working time; acquired rights; part-time workers; collective redundancies; parental leave; and equal treatment. “Many employers would regard this as a high price to pay,” says Professor Barnard.
Hogan Lovells partner Elizabeth Slattery points out that this status could result in the UK still being bound by the Working Time Directive (WTD), with the added chance that the EU may remove the UK’s working time opt-out, “which many businesses would see as the worst of all worlds”. The opt-out allows workers who are 18 or over to choose to opt out of the 48-hour limit imposed by the Directive.
Your first link sets out the position correctly. Some directives have, by agreement, been incorporated into the EEA agreement and are applicable (or alternatively the State has undertaken to have equivalent provision) to EEA countries.
It is not correct to state that the EEA countries are obliged to implement any employment related nonsense that the EU comes up with. As you will see from the link the number of directives that are covered in this way is small and a tiny proportion of EU employment legislation.
In the same way they might agree to follow EU guidance on certain social matters although I am struggling to think of an example. Again that would be a matter on which the parties would have to agree.
I respectfully disagree with Elizabeth Slattery. We would only still be bound by the WTD as long as we chose to be and kept it as a part of our law. If we repeal it or amend it that would be a matter for us.
@megalomaniacs4u Britain's recent immigrants are twice as likely as the native-born to have completed education aged 21 or over. The idea that Britain is getting low grade immigrants is simply untrue.
The net quality of each immigrant should be even higher if we were outside the EU.
Out of interest is there some kind of published standard or something so I can find out what grade of immigrant I am?
Use the Australian points system as a surrogate until there is a UK points system after a BREXIT.
Culture Secretary John Whittingdale today admitted accepting free hospitality from a London lapdancing club while chairing an inquiry into its licensing regime.
Mr Whittingdale and two other MPs were treated to dinner with managers and two female performers.
The Cabinet minister insisted it was an official visit as part of an inquiry by the Culture, Media and Sport select committee into new laws cracking down on such establishments.
However, the evening was not recorded in the committee’s published records. Nor was the visit mentioned in the committee’s report, which came out against the proposed tougher laws, which aimed to curb the spread of lapdancing clubs by classing them as “sex encounter” venues.
I'm sure that the decision which he took in favour of the lapdancing club was not influenced at all by the hospitality that the club extended.
"Other visits made by the committee were recorded during the same period in official “sessional returns”. They included a visit to Torquay for four members costing £3,800, "
How the hell do you spend £4k going to Torquay? You could buy half of Torquay for that kind of money.
@Scott_P Seen the celebration chase field for Saturday ?
Un De Sceaux, Vautour, Douvan, Sprinter Sacre, Special Tiara, Dodging Bullets, Solar Impulse, Ulck Du Lin, Sire De Grugy, and Top Gamble
I really don't care who wins the championship but it does mean we get to see a lot of good horses -- though I expect some owners will be on the phone to say they'd rather go to Punchestown.
I hope they don't, that field must be the strongest 2 mile field in donkey's years.
It's certainly "no bet" right now though given Ruby Ricci Mullins previous..........
I respectfully disagree with Elizabeth Slattery. We would only still be bound by the WTD as long as we chose to be and kept it as a part of our law. If we repeal it or amend it that would be a matter for us.
Are you sure that's right? I'm not an expert, but from that article:
if the UK leaves and then becomes a member of the EEA and the European Free Trade Area (EFTA), says Adam Hartley [employment partner at DLA Piper], “the UK would remain subject to most aspects of EU social and employment policy, given that EEA member states are bound by, for example, the Acquired Rights, Collective Redundancies, Working Time and Agency Workers Directives.”
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
What's the headline from all this Gove stuff? What's the punchline? Obnoxious, mendacious and ultimately self-destructive as Osborne's intervention yesterday was, the clear headline was £4,300 per household.
Surely we need to take control of our own affairs if we are to do better.
Not quite as snappy as Osborne's effort but a lot more believable.
Can someone explain to me why Leave think that it's a fruitful line of diversion to be arguing why Britain shouldn't be triggering the exit clause from the EU if they win the referendum?
Did Michael Gove really say this, as reported by the Guardian?
Gove says there would be no need to trigger article 50 immediately. When Greenland left the EU, it did not trigger article 50 at all.
If so, what has he been smoking?
Greenland didn't trigger Article 50 because it didn't exist at the time (Article 50, not Greenland).
But that's a technicality. Certainly there might be some way of leaving that didn't involve Article 50 - as Greenland proved is possible - but why wouldn't you use it given that's what it's there for, and that not using it would send out very mixed signals?
Postal voting forms turned up in the post today for local elections. Had pathetic picture leaflet of Labour candidates with little information about their intentions at Council Level. Nothing from Conservatives, Lib Dems, UKIP et al.
Pity that the parties think that the local elections are merely a series of referenda on national issues. I'm not sure that that a lack of information at local level helps boost turnout.
I sometimes think that the In campaign appears to be operating to a script written by George R.R Martin and Stephen King - Brexit would mean a combination of a Feast for Crows and Misery.
It’s a deeply pessimistic view of the British people’s potential and a profoundly negative vision of the future which isn’t rooted in reality.
The idea that if Britain voted to leave the European Union we would instantly become some sort of hermit kingdom, a North Atlantic North Korea only without that country’s fund of international good will, is a fantasy, a phantom, a great, grotesque patronising and preposterous Peter Mandelsonian conceit that imagines the people of this country are mere children, capable of being frightened into obedience by conjuring up new bogeymen every night. LEAVING MEANS A FRES
I respectfully disagree with Elizabeth Slattery. We would only still be bound by the WTD as long as we chose to be and kept it as a part of our law. If we repeal it or amend it that would be a matter for us.
Are you sure that's right? I'm not an expert, but from that article:
if the UK leaves and then becomes a member of the EEA and the European Free Trade Area (EFTA), says Adam Hartley [employment partner at DLA Piper], “the UK would remain subject to most aspects of EU social and employment policy, given that EEA member states are bound by, for example, the Acquired Rights, Collective Redundancies, Working Time and Agency Workers Directives.”
They are because they have agreed to be. They were not obliged to agree and neither are we.
There are categories of regulations to do with the operation of the single market which are the rules of the game. If you want access to the single market you have to comply. Employment has always been on the edge of this (hence the current UK opt outs) on the basis of the argument that not having such standards might amount to unfair competition. As I say the number of directives in this category is relatively small. I cannot see any UK government repealing most of these basic rights although there may be some tweaking and, hopefully, simplification.
Cameron will win his dishonourable and tawdry campaign and then retire. His party damaged and his reputation and legacy irredeemably tarnished. Up there alongside Chamberlain and Heath.
I used to rate him as a decentish person. No longer. Now i rate him more as an effective politician.
There was talk upthread of Remain repeating the "mistakes" of the No campaign.
Leave seem determined to outdo them (again)
When a single indisputable fact exists in the public domain (no currency union, article 50) to continue to campaign as though there were an alternative robs you of credibility and authority
Although Gove put in a confident performance - he is one of the very best debaters in UK politics - some of his answers, particularly on economics, left quite a lot to be desired. For example, he had no plausible answer to the points Nick Robinson was making about non-tariff barriers and what French and German ministers are saying about trade. His response to the question about all major economic organisations saying the UK would be poorer if it left the EU was also fairly weak.
It would have been a better point if more than 20 years of trying from the inside had actually managed to create a free and open market in services within the EU. We have had some successes, notably the single passport on financial services, but boy, it has been hard work.
Services are what this country is really good at and the lack of enthusiasm for a single market in them is a major source of our deficit with the EU. It can of course be argued that the extension of the single market in services would be even less likely without the UK being at the table but I think we need to be realistic about what we have achieved to date.
What's the headline from all this Gove stuff? What's the punchline? Obnoxious, mendacious and ultimately self-destructive as Osborne's intervention yesterday was, the clear headline was £4,300 per household.
Surely we need to take control of our own affairs if we are to do better.
Not quite as snappy as Osborne's effort but a lot more believable.
A lot of people only ever hear the headline. It's great to have a great point to make, but it needs to be salient; it needs to get through people's carapace. Taking control of our own affairs is a heroic losing argument vs. 'from cradle to grave'. If Churchill lost with it after victory in WW2, I don't see how anyone expects to win with it.
I respectfully disagree with Elizabeth Slattery. We would only still be bound by the WTD as long as we chose to be and kept it as a part of our law. If we repeal it or amend it that would be a matter for us.
Are you sure that's right? I'm not an expert, but from that article:
if the UK leaves and then becomes a member of the EEA and the European Free Trade Area (EFTA), says Adam Hartley [employment partner at DLA Piper], “the UK would remain subject to most aspects of EU social and employment policy, given that EEA member states are bound by, for example, the Acquired Rights, Collective Redundancies, Working Time and Agency Workers Directives.”
They are because they have agreed to be. They were not obliged to agree and neither are we.
There are categories of regulations to do with the operation of the single market which are the rules of the game. If you want access to the single market you have to comply. Employment has always been on the edge of this (hence the current UK opt outs) on the basis of the argument that not having such standards might amount to unfair competition. As I say the number of directives in this category is relatively small. I cannot see any UK government repealing most of these basic rights although there may be some tweaking and, hopefully, simplification.
Cameron will win his dishonourable and tawdry campaign and then retire. His party damaged and his reputation and legacy irredeemably tarnished. Up there alongside Chamberlain and Heath.
I used to rate him as a decentish person. No longer. Now i rate him more as an effective politician.
Cameron steps down as the man who trashed the Tory party. Quite an epitaph. His old man would be proud.
Can someone explain to me why Leave think that it's a fruitful line of diversion to be arguing why Britain shouldn't be triggering the exit clause from the EU if they win the referendum?
The point is timing, rather than triggering.
Exit would need to be completed by March 2020 at the latest to meet the commitment to honour the referendum before the dissolution of Parliament.
Immediately after a Leave vote, there would surely be:
a) Steps to supply market reassurance and confirmation of the holding position:no change until Article 50 is served, then a two year period, out by March 2020 at the very latest:
b) Decision making regarding negotiating teams and the future of Cameron;
c) Pre-negotiation negotiations with the full range of global partners;
Can someone explain to me why Leave think that it's a fruitful line of diversion to be arguing why Britain shouldn't be triggering the exit clause from the EU if they win the referendum?
The point is timing, rather than triggering.
Exit would need to be completed by March 2020 at the latest to meet the commitment to honour the referendum before the dissolution of Parliament.
Immediately after a Leave vote, there would surely be:
a) Steps to supply market reassurance and confirmation of the holding position:no change until Article 50 is served, then a two year period, out by March 2020 at the very latest:
b) Decision making regarding negotiating teams and the future of Cameron;
c) Pre-negotiation negotiations with the full range of global partners;
I get all of that. But it's a complete blind alley for Leave. It's detail that the public is going to find baffling and irrelevant to their decision-making process. And it sounds as if Leave are frit of actually Leaving.
Did Michael Gove really say this, as reported by the Guardian?
Gove says there would be no need to trigger article 50 immediately. When Greenland left the EU, it did not trigger article 50 at all.
If so, what has he been smoking?
Greenland didn't trigger Article 50 because it didn't exist at the time (Article 50, not Greenland).
But that's a technicality. Certainly there might be some way of leaving that didn't involve Article 50 - as Greenland proved is possible - but why wouldn't you use it given that's what it's there for, and that not using it would send out very mixed signals?
Article 50 has pretty much been designed to make leaving the EU as difficult and as impractical as possible.
The Vote Leave stance is inevitable given the strategic confusion to date. They can't now abandon any part of their coalition so they have to promise all of it. So they have.
They at least have a degree of coherence now - the question is whether they can establish any plausibility for their prospectus.
Indeed, if you listen to some of those campaigning for Britain to stay in the European Union, you would think that for Britain to leave would be to boldly go where no man has gone before. In fact, of course, it would be to join the overwhelming majority of countries which choose to govern themselves.
The In campaign ask repeatedly ‘what does out look like?’ – as if the idea of governing ourselves is some extraordinary and novel proposition that requires a fresh a priori justification. Democratic self-government, the form of Government we in Britain actually invented, has been a roaring success for most of the nations who’ve adopted it.
Comments
After the further revelations in The Mail over the weekend, Whittingdale should go. Wrong person for the job, given his tangled love life and peccadilloes.
'However, the evening was not recorded in the committee’s published records.'
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/apr/19/eu-referendum-michael-goves-today-interview-politics-live
Who'll get Whittingdale's job in the post Brexit reshuffle ?
Perhaps that's why Vote Leave want you to log in via Facebok
Point still stands about the official link though - get yourselves a Youtube channel FFS!
https://shop.itxchange.com/OA_HTML/products-Lenovo-_80J2024SUK-01-812387.jsp
Doing it nakedly is more likely to upset than to encourage, or maybe it's just me the IT guy who does a 60 minute lecture to schools and parents called "Why I'm Not On Facebook"!
@chrisshipitv: Gove suggests the UK relationship with the EU after a LEAVE vote will be like Albania, Serbia and Bosnia
The UK could align its emision standards with those (more stringent) in the USA.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Microsoft-Windows-Pro-English-Pack/dp/B00H09BOXQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1461063808&sr=8-1&keywords=windows+7+pro
Gove – a man who once argued that all schools should be better than average, which is statistically impossible – and his allies are not treating us as though we are children, but as though we are thick.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/19/scaremongering-establishment-vote-leave-remain-fear-michael-gove
That's the considered Brexit view, right?
@LeaveEUOfficial: No, Michael Gove. Article 50 should be invoked immediately.
This should not be up for debate. #LeaveEU
So, the EU will be desperate to sign a new trade deal with us, while it is disintegrating...
Awesome!
Gove's speech is aimed at As and Bs by showing thought has been given to the LEAVE arguments not just a reflex action.
As and Bs are heavily REMAIN at present so need to be persuaded by serious points and gravitas.
Boris will provide the populist arguments for the tabloid readers and Farage will provide the immigration arguments for the zero hours contract workers.
From Canada to Switzerland in a single bound...
"Why Labour Members Are Finding it Hard to Sell Sadiq Khan to Voters"
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/labour-sadiq-kahn-canvasing-mayoral-race
@jordanjryan: Michael Gove is a fucking idiot. Article 50 is the only sensible way to leave the EU.
Going well so far...
Un De Sceaux, Vautour, Douvan, Sprinter Sacre, Special Tiara, Dodging Bullets, Solar Impulse, Ulck Du Lin, Sire De Grugy, and Top Gamble
@EdConwaySky: Critically, the Swiss have no passporting arrangement (basically single market for finance), which is a big deal for the City of London
Gove says there would be no need to trigger article 50 immediately. When Greenland left the EU, it did not trigger article 50 at all.
If so, what has he been smoking?
And yes, tricky to assess the value - should be a great race as you say.
It is not correct to state that the EEA countries are obliged to implement any employment related nonsense that the EU comes up with. As you will see from the link the number of directives that are covered in this way is small and a tiny proportion of EU employment legislation.
In the same way they might agree to follow EU guidance on certain social matters although I am struggling to think of an example. Again that would be a matter on which the parties would have to agree.
I respectfully disagree with Elizabeth Slattery. We would only still be bound by the WTD as long as we chose to be and kept it as a part of our law. If we repeal it or amend it that would be a matter for us.
The UK has had a points based system for 8 years:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-29594642
It's certainly "no bet" right now though given Ruby Ricci Mullins previous..........
if the UK leaves and then becomes a member of the EEA and the European Free Trade Area (EFTA), says Adam Hartley [employment partner at DLA Piper], “the UK would remain subject to most aspects of EU social and employment policy, given that EEA member states are bound by, for example, the Acquired Rights, Collective Redundancies, Working Time and Agency Workers Directives.”
Not quite as snappy as Osborne's effort but a lot more believable.
But negotiations with the rest of the EU on exit would be pragmatic and business-like...
But that's a technicality. Certainly there might be some way of leaving that didn't involve Article 50 - as Greenland proved is possible - but why wouldn't you use it given that's what it's there for, and that not using it would send out very mixed signals?
So no EFTA, No EEA......splendid isolation it is then....clarity at last....
Pity that the parties think that the local elections are merely a series of referenda on national issues. I'm not sure that that a lack of information at local level helps boost turnout.
There are categories of regulations to do with the operation of the single market which are the rules of the game. If you want access to the single market you have to comply. Employment has always been on the edge of this (hence the current UK opt outs) on the basis of the argument that not having such standards might amount to unfair competition. As I say the number of directives in this category is relatively small. I cannot see any UK government repealing most of these basic rights although there may be some tweaking and, hopefully, simplification.
Cameron will win his dishonourable and tawdry campaign and then retire. His party damaged and his reputation and legacy irredeemably tarnished. Up there alongside Chamberlain and Heath.
I used to rate him as a decentish person. No longer. Now i rate him more as an effective politician.
Leave seem determined to outdo them (again)
When a single indisputable fact exists in the public domain (no currency union, article 50) to continue to campaign as though there were an alternative robs you of credibility and authority
@georgeeaton: Vote Leave spokesmen confirm stance: free trade with no free movement, no budget contributions and no supremacy of EU law.
Exit would need to be completed by March 2020 at the latest to meet the commitment to honour the referendum before the dissolution of Parliament.
Immediately after a Leave vote, there would surely be:
a) Steps to supply market reassurance and confirmation of the holding position:no change until Article 50 is served, then a two year period, out by March 2020 at the very latest:
b) Decision making regarding negotiating teams and the future of Cameron;
c) Pre-negotiation negotiations with the full range of global partners;
If you sail away, do you drop off the sides?
They at least have a degree of coherence now - the question is whether they can establish any plausibility for their prospectus.