May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
And then despite lots of promoting and posssible examples from Mare she waffled, waffled, waffled on what that actually meant.
It certainly wasn't her saying "no end to the free movement of people", that's for sure. As for specifics, that is to come no doubt.
A50 served by the end of March 2017 The people want control on immigration and we will deliver that The great repeal bill will bring back sovereignty to the UK Parliament
He really is a horrible man, typical of the wet liberal "progressives" who hate the people and who no longer even pretend to support democracy.
Yes. I am trying to get the message across as to rightly or wrongly so many people vote for people like Farage or Trump.
Let me explain. I grew up in a south London inner suburb, three or four miles from Brixton.
In the 70s it was 95% white, a situation pretty well reversed now.
Generally my recollection was that most people rubbed along ok (I was in a Catholic School, we were all catholics so race didnt matter any more than hair colour).
Then around 1980 things changed. Hard left councillors got control and started stirring it, saying white people were horrible and racist.
At much the same time walking home became a frightening experience due to a minority of young afro carribean youths finding extorting money and valuables from us at knifepoint "mugging" renumerative.
As soon as the police find out they are black the kid gloves go on and tbey dont want to know as they are branded racist if they crack down. So we are now second class citizens.
Then the hard left orchestrated organised burning and looting. Shopkeepers if they were lucky, like Charles ancestors in Ireland, got 24 hours notice before the torching and murder which culminated in the Brixton Riots.
After the riots Lambeth Council distributed a newa sheetnwith a policemans helmet and "well done" as a headline.
In a way it was a bit like living in an occupied territory. The minority grew rapidly. If you got into a dispute with someone from an ethnic minority, if they were dishonest, they would likely play the race card which meant you lost. By the time I left I quite feared what would happen if I was in a car accident involving an aggressive afro carribean youth.
Im lucky, I went to University, met people of all races and all colours from all over the world who were good people. I now live in a nice place.
I know now, because of that education that there were two sides to the story in south London and some people from ethnic minorities were treated dreadfully.
But that is the point, there are two sides to every story but the progressives, child like, only saw one side, angelic ethnic minorities being oppressed by wicked white peopl
To finish. In the Thornton Heath riots a young man was dragged of a motorbike and murdered by black youths basically for being white. Unlike Stephen Lawrence, few have heard of him, I cant even remember his name and I lived only a mile or two away.
In summary, black people have and continue to suffer injustices at the hands of white people. Progressives care deeply.
Poorer white people in the same places have and continue to suffer injustices at the hands of black people. Progressives dont give a shit.
THAT is why the progressives are so despised and why a boor like Trump might win.
Asa Bennett #cpc16 protesters moved onto Labour- singing "There's only one Jeremy Corbyn" and "Owen Smith, always on TV/Owen Smith, who the hell is he?"
Note that trainloads of right-wing protestors did not descend on Liverpool last week.
The Left cares about noisy protest, the Right gets on with being in power.
A50 served by the end of March 2017 The people want control on immigration and we will deliver that The great repeal bill will bring back sovereignty to the UK Parliament
Pretty much 'Brexit means Brexit'
At the State Opening I am sure HM will be chuffed to read out the bit about her country becoming sovereign and independent again.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Europe producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before they stop.
That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.
Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.
Ee-I EE-I o.
Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.
But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence when all the country houses were burned and their land redistributed to their tenants.
Hardly surprising as he was educated by Irish Jesuits who were rather proud of what had happened.
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of small Farmers as a result of the Irish land acts, particularly the 1885 act. By the 1920's the Protestant Ascendancy was largely history already.
In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nationalism.
A free market with the Old Commonwealth would have pretty similar effect on post Brexit Britain. A lot of land would become idle. We could turn this to our advantage, as we would need fewer East European farm Labourers, and a lot of disused farms could be used for new housing.
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
@patrickwintourMay gave clarity today. Trigger Article 50 by March 2017 so UK out by 2019 and EU Repeal bill passed by then so UK has own legal framework
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
A50 served by the end of March 2017 The people want control on immigration and we will deliver that The great repeal bill will bring back sovereignty to the UK Parliament
Pretty much 'Brexit means Brexit'
At the State Opening I am sure HM will be chuffed to read out the bit about her country becoming sovereign and independent again.
Actually I sense that she will be very welcome to stating that. Watching her country's sovereignty be eroded surreptitiously, as the years have gone by cannot have been easy for her. I write that as a Republican.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Surely that'd make it even less likely? Given the most pro-europe bits would have been lopped off.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Neverendum then
To be fair, the anti-EU argument never went away. The pro-EU argument will always be there (unless or until the EU dissolves, anyway.)
It's all a matter of whether an anti-Ukip can get enough votes to force a future Government to consider going back in...
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Surely that'd make it even less likely? Given the most pro-europe bits would have been lopped off.
The most deluded bits will come to their senses after that.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Surely that'd make it even less likely? Given the most pro-europe bits would have been lopped off.
The most deluded bits will come to their senses after that.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
@patrickwintourMay gave clarity today. Trigger Article 50 by March 2017 so UK out by 2019 and EU Repeal bill passed by then so UK has own legal framework
And should the Commons or more likely the Lords try to hold things up, an election is not ruled out...
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Surely that'd make it even less likely? Given the most pro-europe bits would have been lopped off.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
A50 served by the end of March 2017 The people want control on immigration and we will deliver that The great repeal bill will bring back sovereignty to the UK Parliament
Pretty much 'Brexit means Brexit'
At the State Opening I am sure HM will be chuffed to read out the bit about her country becoming sovereign and independent again.
Will be interesting to see Phil's face this time. Normally at State Openings he sit's next to HMQ with that gramce on his face that suggests he'd like to absolutely anywhere than sitting here.
This time I wonder whether he might just have a faint smile on his lips...
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Not all "British" people wanted that, Scotland voted against and Britain will attempt to shove it down their throats regardless.
@patrickwintourMay gave clarity today. Trigger Article 50 by March 2017 so UK out by 2019 and EU Repeal bill passed by then so UK has own legal framework
And should the Commons or more likely the Lords try to hold things up, an election is not ruled out...
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
20 years from now, you'll be Jacobites toasting the King Over The Water in the late 18th century.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
@patrickwintourMay gave clarity today. Trigger Article 50 by March 2017 so UK out by 2019 and EU Repeal bill passed by then so UK has own legal framework
And should the Commons or more likely the Lords try to hold things up, an election is not ruled out...
Morning GIN, hope you are well.
Morning Malc. Yes, very well thanks.
Have been watching mega rich playboys go round and round in circles on telly (sounds a bit like our rulers in a lot of ways doesn't it? ) and now I'm off to enjoy the sunshine.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
Parliament website just says "spring 2017"
Oh! Thanks.
Perhaps they'll do it in March on the day of A50 being triggered?
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 289 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
Didn't realise that the Home Secretary only had one duty!
I suspect it's 3), although there will now be pressure to lower the figure regardless of any economic cost.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
There is another possibility: that she could not get the measures she thought necessary past Cameron/Clegg and more recently Cameron/Osborne. I expect we will have to wait for the memoirs to get to the bottom of it.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Not all "British" people wanted that, Scotland voted against and Britain will attempt to shove it down their throats regardless.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
Parliament website just says "spring 2017"
Oh! Thanks.
Perhaps they'll do it in March on the day of A50 being triggered?
"...and my government has just told the European Council where it can stuff it..."
That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.
Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.
Ee-I EE-I o.
Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.
But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence when all the country houses were burned and their land redistributed to their tenants.
Hardly surprising as he was educated by Irish Jesuits who were rather proud of what had happened.
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of small Farmers as a result of the Irish land acts, particularly the 1885 act. By the 1920's the Protestant Ascendancy was largely history already.
In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nationalism.
A free market with the Old Commonwealth would have pretty similar effect on post Brexit Britain. A lot of land would become idle. We could turn this to our advantage, as we would need fewer East European farm Labourers, and a lot of disused farms could be used for new housing.
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.
Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.
Ee-I EE-I o.
Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.
But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence when all the country houses were burned and their land redistributed to their tenants.
Hardly surprising as he was educated by Irish Jesuits who were rather proud of what had happened.
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of small Farmers as a result of the Irish land acts, particularly the 1885 act. By the 1920's the Protestant Ascendancy was largely history already.
In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nationalism.
A free market with the Old Commonwealth would have pretty similar effect on post Brexit Britain. A lot of land would become idle. We could turn this to our advantage, as we would need fewer East European farm Labourers, and a lot of disused farms could be used for new housing.
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
40 acres of agricultural land 5 minutes drive from a station 55 minutes from central London costs 260K (an example price).
There is one reason why we have a housing shortage....
That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.
Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.
Ee-I EE-I o.
Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.
But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence when all the country houses were burned and their land redistributed to their tenants.
Hardly surprising as he was educated by Irish Jesuits who were rather proud of what had happened.
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of small Farmers as a result of the Irish land acts, particularly the 1885 act. By the 1920's the Protestant Ascendancy was largely history already.
In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nationalism.
A free market with the Old Commonwealth would have pretty similar effect on post Brexit Britain. A lot of land would become idle. We could turn this to our advantage, as we would need fewer East European farm Labourers, and a lot of disused farms could be used for new housing.
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
It was all relative, Mr. Betting. In the property boom of the early seventies terraced houses off York Road, Wandsworth, not the most salubrious area, were changing hands for £19,000 a crazy sum at the time. Nowadays I expect those same houses sell for £1m plus, equally daft.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.
But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence when all the country houses were burned and their land redistributed to their tenants.
Hardly surprising as he was educated by Irish Jesuits who were rather proud of what had happened.
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of small Farmers as a result of the Irish land acts, particularly the 1885 act. By the 1920's the Protestant Ascendancy was largely history already.
In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nationalism.
A free market with the Old Commonwealth would have pretty similar effect on post Brexit Britain. A lot of land would become idle. We could turn this to our advantage, as we would need fewer East European farm Labourers, and a lot of disused farms could be used for new housing.
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
40 acres of agricultural land 5 minutes drive from a station 55 minutes from central London costs 260K (an example price).
There is one reason why we have a housing shortage....
Do you currently get CAP subsidies for land like that?
If so, presumably the value will reduce even further post-brexit (if it hasn't already).
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
For national referendums should get 1 vote per year you are under the average life expectancy down to a minimum of 1.
General elections should be the same but max number of votes you get is capped at 5.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
I don't remember him advocating that for SindyRef. Surprisingly.
I think that's about right. As a Remainer who wants the settlement to change as little as possible, I'm content with a starting point that we adopt Brussels law wholesale, and then consider at our leisure whether there's anything that we really want to change, with zero commitment to changing anything specific. It's a bit surprising that Leavers are chuffed, but I suppose they feel that any movement is better than nothing and that it's nice to have the option to change stuff even if we don't actually do it - like the Scottish devolution option to raise income tax.
Are you an eejit Dr Sven: You cannot reverse forty years of legislation overnight. Better to encase where we are and reverse at England's leisure.
Yet what most of you infantile Remainiacs/Meekoids miss is the simplist truth: No new EU legislation can be enforced through Westminster from now on. The ECJ-asshats may scream and shout but the de facto truth is that the EU writ is defunct.
May has drawn a line-in-the-sand: The EU Santiannas may seek to wreak vengence but we will all expect the same outcome. This is not a fight-to-the-death but a democratic solution that prevents a socialist cancer.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
For national referendums should get 1 vote per year you are under the average life expectancy down to a minimum of 1.
General elections should be the same but max number of votes you get is capped at 5.
Actually, I think voters who agree with me should get more votes than those who don't.
@Indigo His name is not McMao. It is Maodonnell. That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use. Ee-I EE-I o.
Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?
Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s...
Mugabe basically did what the IRA did in the Irish war of independence ...
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of sm.. In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nat.....
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
It was all relative, Mr. Betting. In the property boom of the early seventies terraced houses off York Road, Wandsworth, not the most salubrious area, were changing hands for £19,000 a crazy sum at the time. Nowadays I expect those same houses sell for £1m plus, equally daft.
A landlord in north london wanted to sell his terraced house in 1980. He paid 3 tenants just over £1,000 each to move out. He had to under the letting law then. £1,000 was a 25% pay rise for me!
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
20 years from now, you'll be Jacobites toasting the King Over The Water in the late 18th century.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
There is another possibility: that she could not get the measures she thought necessary past Cameron/Clegg and more recently Cameron/Osborne. I expect we will have to wait for the memoirs to get to the bottom of it.
It was the one weakness in R4's otherwise excellent programme yesterday about May, her background and her politics. The prog suggested she was actually very committed to the immigration issue and target, but then skipped completely over any explanation as to why so little was achieved.
The "Great" Bill fill falter in Committee stage, grind to a halt in the Lords and precipitate a constitutional crisis, either the end ofthe Lords powers or the end of Mrs May, probably the latter, maybe both.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests! Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
It is an odd society that does not believe that its elders are better informed.
I think that's about right. As a Remainer who wants the settlement to change as little as possible, I'm content with a starting point that we adopt Brussels law wholesale, and then consider at our leisure whether there's anything that we really want to change, with zero commitment to changing anything specific. It's a bit surprising that Leavers are chuffed, but I suppose they feel that any movement is better than nothing and that it's nice to have the option to change stuff even if we don't actually do it - like the Scottish devolution option to raise income tax.
Are you an eejit Dr Sven: You cannot reverse forty years of legislation overnight. Better to encase where we are and reverse at England's leisure.
Yet what most of you infantile Remainiacs/Meekoids miss is the simplist truth: No new EU legislation can be enforced through Westminster from now on. The ECJ-asshats may scream and shout but the de facto truth is that the EU writ is defunct.
May has drawn a line-in-the-sand: The EU Santiannas may seek to wreak vengence but we will all expect the same outcome. This is not a fight-to-the-death but a democratic solution that prevents a socialist cancer.
We haven't yet seen the wording, but from a legal perspective I would expect the proposal to be that EU legislation becomes UK legislation on the day we leave, agreed in advance. I do not think we would be able to escape any changes made over the next few years, pending actual Brexit, any more than we can skip paying the membership fee.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*"
*BBC Euope producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
Can't see us rejoining, especially as we'd lose the pound, no rebate, no national army (well, maybe!) etc.
Scotland first, then a reunified Ireland, then a diminished England and Wales.
Surely that'd make it even less likely? Given the most pro-europe bits would have been lopped off.
The most deluded bits will come to their senses after that.
That's a hell of a lack of self-awareness you've got there using a word like deluded...
I think that's about right. As a Remainer who wants the settlement to change as little as possible, I'm content with a starting point that we adopt Brussels law wholesale, and then consider at our leisure whether there's anything that we really want to change, with zero commitment to changing anything specific. It's a bit surprising that Leavers are chuffed, but I suppose they feel that any movement is better than nothing and that it's nice to have the option to change stuff even if we don't actually do it - like the Scottish devolution option to raise income tax.
Are you an eejit Dr Sven: You cannot reverse forty years of legislation overnight. Better to encase where we are and reverse at England's leisure.
Yet what most of you infantile Remainiacs/Meekoids miss is the simplist truth: No new EU legislation can be enforced through Westminster from now on. The ECJ-asshats may scream and shout but the de facto truth is that the EU writ is defunct.
May has drawn a line-in-the-sand: The EU Santiannas may seek to wreak vengence but we will all expect the same outcome. This is not a fight-to-the-death but a democratic solution that prevents a socialist cancer.
We haven't yet seen the wording, but from a legal perspective I would expect the proposal to be that EU legislation becomes UK legislation on the day we leave, agreed in advance. I do not think we would be able to escape any changes made over the next few years, pending actual Brexit, any more than we can skip paying the membership fee.
It is the "sticking plaster" approach that, ahem, some of us thought might happen. Everything as is then decide at leisure what we want or don't.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Not all "British" people wanted that, Scotland voted against and Britain will attempt to shove it down their throats regardless.
3 fifths of Scotland voted against. Funny how you casually dismiss the minority that voted for.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
For national referendums should get 1 vote per year you are under the average life expectancy down to a minimum of 1.
General elections should be the same but max number of votes you get is capped at 5.
Actually, I think voters who agree with me should get more votes than those who don't.
Reverse the Reform Act of 1832. Now *there* are some boundaries that MomentumLabour will like!
@Indigo His name is not McMao. It is Maodonnell. That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use. .
Actually by 1920 something like 80% of agricultural land in Ireland was already in the ownership of sm.. In large part this happened because of the long agricultural depression of late Victorian Britain making large agricultural estates unprofitable as much as desire to alleviate Irsh nat.....
As late as the 1970s the English countryside was littered with abandoned lodges and farm workers cottages. Most are now second homes for wealthy city dwellers.
Yes and in the 1970s London had a lot of run down property due to rent control, tenants rights and a duff economy.... If only I had bought then rather than mid 1980s...
It was all relative, Mr. Betting. In the property boom of the early seventies terraced houses off York Road, Wandsworth, not the most salubrious area, were changing hands for £19,000 a crazy sum at the time. Nowadays I expect those same houses sell for £1m plus, equally daft.
A landlord in north london wanted to sell his terraced house in 1980. He paid 3 tenants just over £1,000 each to move out. He had to under the letting law then. £1,000 was a 25% pay rise for me!
Noticeable change of tone from some of the Remoaner commentators. Before Mrs May's interview it was "oh the Great Repeal Act is a damp squib, not much change". "This isn't even close to the Brexit starting gun.*" .
Remainers are barely worth listening to. Whatever the government says or does It's either "too fast" or "too slow", or "the wrong kind of Brexit". I don't know when they will stop remoaning, but I think we will be out of the EU before the stop.
It'll never stop until the mistake of Brexit has been reversed.
20 years from now, you'll be Jacobites toasting the King Over The Water in the late 18th century.
Very apt.
Somewhere in my files I have a letter about a house which I bought in the laste 60’s and the bank manager commented that “in these inflationary times a price of £14, 000 may perhaps be paid.” Houses in that road are selling at about £500-600,000 now!
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Not all "British" people wanted that, Scotland voted against and Britain will attempt to shove it down their throats regardless.
3 fifths of Scotland voted against. Funny how you casually dismiss the minority that voted for.
The over-riding consideration is that the question of whether or not Scotland should be in the EU wasn't on the ballot paper. It was whether or not the United Kingdom should Leave or Remain, and every vote in the United Kingdom counted equally (Scotland already had a vote on leaving the UK, of course, in which EU membership was a live issue, and after Cameron had committed the Tories to an EU vote if they won the next election. Scotland said No regardless.)
Scotland was not the only part of the country that voted to Remain. Cambridge, for example, also did so. It doesn't follow that it ought either to secede, or to claim a right to special treatment.
Somewhere in my files I have a letter about a house which I bought in the laste 60’s and the bank manager commented that “in these inflationary times a price of £14, 000 may perhaps be paid.” Houses in that road are selling at about £500-600,000 now!
In 1995, I rented a room from a friend of mine who'd just bought a two bedroom flat in Pimlico. He paid, I think, £115,000 for it. So my rent paid for his mortgage.
Anyway. He sold it a decade later for about £700,000. And a very similar flat is now on the market for £1.5m.
A rise of 12-13x during which time nominal earnings have gone up perhaps 1.5x.
If we were to see a similar rate of wage and housing price increases in the next 20 years, the flat would cost £20m and graduate salaries might be £50,000.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
4) May's freedom of action was limited by the fact that the Chancellor was pro immigration and the PM was not a natural ally
It is the "sticking plaster" approach that, ahem, some of us thought might happen. Everything as is then decide at leisure what we want or don't.
Precisely (I think):
EU creates directive; Parliament considers. Parliament invokes GRA and Parliament moves on. Unlikely that any EU-directives will have an impact upon Westminster: We are moving on.
Mostly it stopped because of all seater stadiums. It was not easy identifying the culprits on terracing, and indeed the casual violence was considered more of a problem than language.
Nothing wrong with Britain in the 70's was there? Bring back the Black and White Minstrels and "Curry and Chips"
What I saw was a caricature of people who were free, who took decisions themselves without the state interfering, who were prepared to reproove (and even thump) people who were out of order, who could stand up for themselves and didn't need to go to nanny state crying that someone had insulted them and who looked like they were all having a far more enjoyable time than people do in modern workplaces where (in the public sector in particular) everyone has to tread on eggshells the whole time. Plus of course Eric Sykes and Spike Milligans brilliance.
With one exception. The left wing Labour Party Member shop steward, who did nothing but cause trouble and was also an out and out hardened racist of the worst sort.
As ever with progressives, the cure was far worse than the disease. I sometimes wonder if the problem with the left is that they though all British working class people carried on like Labour Party Activists.
Thanks for the link, I had never heard of that comedy series. I will watch the rest later.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
4) May's freedom of action was limited by the fact that the Chancellor was pro immigration and the PM was not a natural ally
Edit: Mr Llama snap
I think Cameron would have been grateful to have had a much bigger step to meeting his self proclaimed target.
But I am sure that you are right. All failures will be blamed on the old regime. New management always does that. The fact that Mrs May was in charge of immigration and sat in the cabinet happily all the last 6 years, and was a core part of the Cameron modernisation project is mere pedantry.
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Wasn't there a Leaver goon on here who said that said he was going to withdraw transport help from his frail & incapacitated mother on the day of the referendum so she wouldn't be able to vote Remain?
Very intersting piece by Will Hutton in The Observer. I'd warn Brexiters that it might not be to their taste. But what is more interesting is the politics. To quote:
'This conjunction of the economically and socially noxious horrifies not only me but also many Tories. Scotland’s Ruth Davidson, a bevy of ex-ministers, some in the cabinet and a large number of backbenchers are keenly aware of the slippery racist, culturally regressive and economically calamitous course their Brexiter colleagues are set on and are ready to fight for the soul of their party.'
All sounds good. I've never bought into the lefty line that all Tories are wicked, without scruples, sell their own grandmother etc. Then the killer line:
'George Osborne is positioning himself as their leader. It is an impending civil war, mirroring parallel feelings in the country at large.'
I think the reinvention of George Osborne from scheming Machiavellian to principled backbencher will be more fascinating than bruiser Balls turned prime time dancer. I'd guess the public will be less likely to buy it though. It's probably the smart move for him and his careerist mates though. Dress up leaving the single market in order to reduce immigration and the damage thereby done to wealthy individuals as an encouragment to racism and stand up for for 'decent' and 'tolerant' side of conservatism.
May is basically saying no end to the free movement of people.
Did she? She just said the UK government would decide what the rules are.
But she repeatedly avoided saying that there would be any restrictions and emphasised that the British government would decide as in that was going to make people happy.
She also talked about the "controls that the British people wanted".
The type of controls that don't change the number or type of people arriving?
Those aren't the ones that the people wanted. You really have to contort her words to suggest she was saying there would be no end to free movement.
What restrictions was she proposing?
"there was a clear message from the British people that they wanted us to control the movement of people into the UK so we will deliver on that"
What's TMay's record on delivering over British people's concerns about controlling movement of people into the UK? I can't quite recall.
Hard to do while you are in the EU.
Isn't migration from non EU countries higher?
Yes, but it is controlled. Anyone and their mother can come from the EU.
2015 Gross 293 000 non- EU migrants to the UK, 189 000 net. 13 000 deportations.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
4) May's freedom of action was limited by the fact that the Chancellor was pro immigration and the PM was not a natural ally
Correct and the irony is that Osborne' pro immigration moves helped facilitate the win for LEAVE. A just reward?
Matthew Paris complaining about democracy in Hungary.
Is liberalism compatible with democracy? Do the voters have the right to vote for illiberal policies, like curbing immigration, leaving the EU, or imposing tariff barriers?
Not the fundamentalist wing, which backs the EU to the hilt because its purpose is to enforce European unification against the will of pesky national electorates. That's all it's been about all along, really.
I've had a number of people suggesting to me that "we need to modify democracy" - stop old people voting, even intelligence tests!
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
Hugo Rifkind, among others, was opposed to old people having the right to vote in the EU referendum.
For national referendums should get 1 vote per year you are under the average life expectancy down to a minimum of 1.
General elections should be the same but max number of votes you get is capped at 5.
I expect Unionists (and Tories) would insist on life expectancy being estimated at a constituency level rather than nationally.
When is the next state opening our of interest? I know we had one in May but things have "developed" quite a bit since then so presumably we'll need another one quite soon?
Usually at the end of October, isn't it?
Last State Opening was in May I think.
The State opening used to take place around November, but the coalition government of 2010 moved it to May/June. It's taken place at that time of year ever since.
Mostly it stopped because of all seater stadiums. It was not easy identifying the culprits on terracing, and indeed the casual violence was considered more of a problem than language.
Nothing wrong with Britain in the 70's was there? Bring back the Black and White Minstrels and "Curry and Chips"
What I saw was a caricature of people who were free, who took decisions themselves without the state interfering, who were prepared to reproove (and even thump) people who were out of order, who could stand up for themselves and didn't need to go to nanny state crying that someone had insulted them and who looked like they were all having a far more enjoyable time than people do in modern workplaces where (in the public sector in particular) everyone has to tread on eggshells the whole time. Plus of course Eric Sykes and Spike Milligans brilliance.
With one exception. The left wing Labour Party Member shop steward, who did nothing but cause trouble and was also an out and out hardened racist of the worst sort.
As ever with progressives, the cure was far worse than the disease. I sometimes wonder if the problem with the left is that they though all British working class people carried on like Labour Party Activists.
Thanks for the link, I had never heard of that comedy series. I will watch the rest later.
The Shop Steward is a Powellite. Now voting UKIP I expect.
Enjoy, but please remember it is not a documentary.
I think the reinvention of George Osborne from scheming Machiavellian to principled backbencher will be more fascinating than bruiser Balls turned prime time dancer. I'd guess the public will be less likely to buy it though.
I'd be amazed if the public believed it. The best thing Osborne can do is leave parliament.
(a) The Hungarians are either mistaken or lying (b) The security threat posed by uncontrolled free movement of people has been demonstrated to be serious, and those who think we'd be off our rockers to listen to the No Borders lunatics have been vindicated by events
What a terribly misleading headline....It was workers at a franchise of a car washing company, who had paid for the rights to wash cars in a Tesco's car park. So the square root of f##k all to do with Tescos.
I think the reinvention of George Osborne from scheming Machiavellian to principled backbencher will be more fascinating than bruiser Balls turned prime time dancer. I'd guess the public will be less likely to buy it though.
I'd be amazed if the public believed it. The best thing Osborne can do is leave parliament.
George Osborne couldn't even win a popularity contest in his own family let alone the nation.
(a) The Hungarians are either mistaken or lying (b) The security threat posed by uncontrolled free movement of people has been demonstrated to be serious, and those who think we'd be off our rockers to listen to the No Borders lunatics have been vindicated by events
All the Paris attackers were EU citizens, so entitled to cross borders freely.
Indeed unless we plan to require visitors visas in advance for all EU citizens they (or their likely copycats) could freely enter Brexit Britain.
Mostly it stopped because of all seater stadiums. It was not easy identifying the culprits on terracing, and indeed the casual violence was considered more of a problem than language.
Nothing wrong with Britain in the 70's was there? Bring back the Black and White Minstrels and "Curry and Chips"
What I saw was a caricature of people who were free, who took decisions themselves without the state interfering, who were prepared to reproove (and even thump) people who were out of order, who could stand up for themselves and didn't need to go to nanny state crying that someone had insulted them and who looked like they were all having a far more enjoyable time than people do in modern workplaces where (in the public sector in particular) everyone has to tread on eggshells the whole time. Plus of course Eric Sykes and Spike Milligans brilliance.
With one exception. The left wing Labour Party Member shop steward, who did nothing but cause trouble and was also an out and out hardened racist of the worst sort.
As ever with progressives, the cure was far worse than the disease. I sometimes wonder if the problem with the left is that they though all British working class people carried on like Labour Party Activists.
Thanks for the link, I had never heard of that comedy series. I will watch the rest later.
The Shop Steward is a Powellite. Now voting UKIP I expect.
Enjoy, but please remember it is not a documentary.
He is dead now but his son is probably in maomentum.
Comments
A50 served by the end of March 2017
The people want control on immigration and we will deliver that
The great repeal bill will bring back sovereignty to the UK Parliament
Pretty much 'Brexit means Brexit'
Let me explain. I grew up in a south London inner suburb, three or four miles from Brixton.
In the 70s it was 95% white, a situation pretty well reversed now.
Generally my recollection was that most people rubbed along ok (I was in a Catholic School, we were all catholics so race didnt matter any more than hair colour).
Then around 1980 things changed. Hard left councillors got control and started stirring it, saying white people were horrible and racist.
At much the same time walking home became a frightening experience due to a minority of young afro carribean youths finding extorting money and valuables from us at knifepoint "mugging" renumerative.
As soon as the police find out they are black the kid gloves go on and tbey dont want to know as they are branded racist if they crack down. So we are now second class citizens.
Then the hard left orchestrated organised burning and looting. Shopkeepers if they were lucky, like Charles ancestors in Ireland, got 24 hours notice before the torching and murder which culminated in the Brixton Riots.
After the riots Lambeth Council distributed a newa sheetnwith a policemans helmet and "well done" as a headline.
In a way it was a bit like living in an occupied territory. The minority grew rapidly. If you got into a dispute with someone from an ethnic minority, if they were dishonest, they would likely play the race card which meant you lost. By the time I left I quite feared what would happen if I was in a car accident involving an aggressive afro carribean youth.
Im lucky, I went to University, met people of all races and all colours from all over the world who were good people. I now live in a nice place.
I know now, because of that education that there were two sides to the story in south London and some people from ethnic minorities were treated dreadfully.
But that is the point, there are two sides to every story but the progressives, child like, only saw one side, angelic ethnic minorities being oppressed by wicked white peopl
To finish. In the Thornton Heath riots a young man was dragged of a motorbike and murdered by black youths basically for being white. Unlike Stephen Lawrence, few have heard of him, I cant even remember his name and I lived only a mile or two away.
In summary, black people have and continue to suffer injustices at the hands of white people. Progressives care deeply.
Poorer white people in the same places have and continue to suffer injustices at the hands of black people. Progressives dont give a shit.
THAT is why the progressives are so despised and why a boor like Trump might win.
The Left cares about noisy protest, the Right gets on with being in power.
*BBC Europe producer. Impartial as ever (my arse).
On Tezza's interview meanwhile: a very straight bat.
By putting a bill through parliament that will require several parliamentary votes?
F1: rather good race. Shall set about writing the post-race piece, though it may take a while [I'll try not to forget anything important].
It's all a matter of whether an anti-Ukip can get enough votes to force a future Government to consider going back in...
This time I wonder whether he might just have a faint smile on his lips...
Only short odds, but still nice.
After 6 years of May at the Home Office:
3 possibilities:
1) May is useless at the one task she was given
2) May had no serious intention of reducing immigration.
3) Controlling immigration in a globalised world is not as simple as it seems.
Have been watching mega rich playboys go round and round in circles on telly (sounds a bit like our rulers in a lot of ways doesn't it?
You OK?
Perhaps they'll do it in March on the day of A50 being triggered?
I suspect it's 3), although there will now be pressure to lower the figure regardless of any economic cost.
There is one reason why we have a housing shortage....
Strangely my suggestions have not gone down well...
If so, presumably the value will reduce even further post-brexit (if it hasn't already).
General elections should be the same but max number of votes you get is capped at 5.
Yet what most of you infantile Remainiacs/Meekoids miss is the simplist truth: No new EU legislation can be enforced through Westminster from now on. The ECJ-asshats may scream and shout but the de facto truth is that the EU writ is defunct.
May has drawn a line-in-the-sand: The EU Santiannas may seek to wreak vengence but we will all expect the same outcome. This is not a fight-to-the-death but a democratic solution that prevents a socialist cancer.
Scotland was not the only part of the country that voted to Remain. Cambridge, for example, also did so. It doesn't follow that it ought either to secede, or to claim a right to special treatment.
Anyway. He sold it a decade later for about £700,000. And a very similar flat is now on the market for £1.5m.
A rise of 12-13x during which time nominal earnings have gone up perhaps 1.5x.
If we were to see a similar rate of wage and housing price increases in the next 20 years, the flat would cost £20m and graduate salaries might be £50,000.
Edit: Mr Llama snap
EU creates directive; Parliament considers. Parliament invokes GRA and Parliament moves on. Unlikely that any EU-directives will have an impact upon Westminster: We are moving on.
With one exception. The left wing Labour Party Member shop steward, who did nothing but cause trouble and was also an out and out hardened racist of the worst sort.
As ever with progressives, the cure was far worse than the disease. I sometimes wonder if the problem with the left is that they though all British working class people carried on like Labour Party Activists.
Thanks for the link, I had never heard of that comedy series. I will watch the rest later.
But I am sure that you are right. All failures will be blamed on the old regime. New management always does that. The fact that Mrs May was in charge of immigration and sat in the cabinet happily all the last 6 years, and was a core part of the Cameron modernisation project is mere pedantry.
That's one way of modifying democracy I guess.
'This conjunction of the economically and socially noxious horrifies not only me but also many Tories. Scotland’s Ruth Davidson, a bevy of ex-ministers, some in the cabinet and a large number of backbenchers are keenly aware of the slippery racist, culturally regressive and economically calamitous course their Brexiter colleagues are set on and are ready to fight for the soul of their party.'
All sounds good. I've never bought into the lefty line that all Tories are wicked, without scruples, sell their own grandmother etc. Then the killer line:
'George Osborne is positioning himself as their leader. It is an impending civil war, mirroring parallel feelings in the country at large.'
I think the reinvention of George Osborne from scheming Machiavellian to principled backbencher will be more fascinating than bruiser Balls turned prime time dancer. I'd guess the public will be less likely to buy it though. It's probably the smart move for him and his careerist mates though. Dress up leaving the single market in order to reduce immigration and the damage thereby done to wealthy individuals as an encouragment to racism and stand up for for 'decent' and 'tolerant' side of conservatism.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/malaysia-post-race-analysis-2016.html
It's taken place at that time of year ever since.
Enjoy, but please remember it is not a documentary.
Two possibilities:
(a) The Hungarians are either mistaken or lying
(b) The security threat posed by uncontrolled free movement of people has been demonstrated to be serious, and those who think we'd be off our rockers to listen to the No Borders lunatics have been vindicated by events
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-37499241
What a terribly misleading headline....It was workers at a franchise of a car washing company, who had paid for the rights to wash cars in a Tesco's car park. So the square root of f##k all to do with Tescos.
Indeed unless we plan to require visitors visas in advance for all EU citizens they (or their likely copycats) could freely enter Brexit Britain.
I did tell you he was a scary four-year old when he lived in Catford. His big brother deserves more respect.*
* But then I am biased.