Whichever way you try to model this, one thing sidles up and does a belly dance. If Labour hold firm on (i) opposing the Withdrawal Agreement and (ii) not getting dragged into a genuine search for alternatives, a Conservative PM will be forced to cancel Brexit via another referendum. And Labour will surely do this if they are confident that it will reap significant rewards in a subsequent general election. But are they? And if they are, are they right? Or to put it another way, if they aren't, are they wrong? This is the key to the puzzle.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The current system is effectively a capped grad tax. Most people pay 7% of their income over the threshold for their working life.
Only for 25 years, isn't it? Or was that one of the many previous systems?
Corbyn's argument for an early vote is that "the deal cannot be renegotiated"
!!
You what? Surely that is not right, his whole pretext for a GE is so he can renegotiate (since the obvious benefits of a Labour government in themselves do not justify calls for a new government). Is this signalling he is finally accepting it is time to go for a referendum, or is it just part of Labour's deliberate strategy of vagueness which will be 'clarified' later?
I suspect he is thinking that if Labour were in charge it would be an M&S renegotiation.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The current system is effectively a capped grad tax. Most people pay 7% of their income over the threshold for their working life.
Only for 25 years, isn't it? Or was that one of the many previous systems?
I can’t remember if it is 25 or 30, but yes. But you understand my point.
Corbyn's argument for an early vote is that "the deal cannot be renegotiated"
!!
You what? Surely that is not right, his whole pretext for a GE is so he can renegotiate (since the obvious benefits of a Labour government in themselves do not justify calls for a new government). Is this signalling he is finally accepting it is time to go for a referendum, or is it just part of Labour's deliberate strategy of vagueness which will be 'clarified' later?
He is clueless and has just sabotaged his own case
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
No, they've absolutely not done that. Corbyn is just trying to bring down the government.
Which in normal circumstances would be fair enough, but these are not normal circumstances.
I half agree, in that it is absurd to suggest that there are not many MPs still focusing on who is leader of which party and which party is in government if they approve or do not approve, and so partisan thinking is, without question, affecting their decision making more than is reasonable on this issue, which in its significance is far more important than that.
That being said, there are clearly huge concerns from both Labour members and Tories about the substance of the deal as well. Now, Mr the Punter is still only half right in that respect, since a great many Labour and Tory members have judged the merits of the deal vs unicorn options of renegotiations achieving at best difficult and at worse impossible outcomes, and therefore not, actually, judged it on its merits.
However, given the sheet extent of those against it, including most of those regarded as potential supporters across party lines, it is also not unreasonable to suggest the deal really is pretty darn crap.
Oh, now we have 'the wrong type of communism' argument.
Look, it doesn't work. It doesn't work for a reason. The reason is that Brexit makes no sense, and never did. So it isn't being implemented, because it can't be.
Got it?
Of course it makes sense. You might not like it or understand it but that is your failing not that of Brexit. Wanting to be out of a political construct which is becoming more and more pervasive in our political and legal system makes perfect sense. Particularly if the direction of travel is unacceptable to the majority of people in the country.
Perhaps you are one of those who thought we could 'change it from within'. Well we have failed to do that for 40 or more years and frankly it is both arrogant and impractical to expect that we should impose our view of what the EU should be on the other 27 countries.
Either we leave now under fairly benign circumstances or we are forced to leave later under for more difficult circumstances. Those are the choices.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
I think if those wanting to to STEM subjects choose to fund themselves on the basis that they are then exempt that would be a good thing.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
The big problem IMO is too many full time and living miles away from home. Need more part-time / flexible learning attached to jobs / careers.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Corbyn's argument for an early vote is that "the deal cannot be renegotiated"
!!
You what? Surely that is not right, his whole pretext for a GE is so he can renegotiate (since the obvious benefits of a Labour government in themselves do not justify calls for a new government). Is this signalling he is finally accepting it is time to go for a referendum, or is it just part of Labour's deliberate strategy of vagueness which will be 'clarified' later?
He is clueless and has just sabotaged his own case
But I bet the public do not notice. Starmer will be out shortly and say that all options are open and we must focus on how crap the government is, and someone else will make a comment about perhaps a referendum not being a great idea, as others talk about how we can still stop Brexit entirely.
I keep thinking that the two parties cannot keep holding vague, even contradictory opinions within their own positions, and yet they keep managing it.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
I reckon we could see some hardishline Brexiteers re-entering the Gov't once May's deal is defeated. Scott Mann and Marcus Fysh from the southwest...
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
The big problem IMO is too many full time and living miles away from home. Need more part-time / flexible learning attached to jobs / careers.
Certainly doesn't help but surely the bigger problem is the number of graduates who now take non graduate jobs earning no more than their compatriots who didn't spend 3 years getting drunk in the Student Union on apparently "free" cash.
No, they've absolutely not done that. Corbyn is just trying to bring down the government.
Which in normal circumstances would be fair enough, but these are not normal circumstances.
I half agree, in that it is absurd to suggest that there are not many MPs still focusing on who is leader of which party and which party is in government if they approve or do not approve, and so partisan thinking is, without question, affecting their decision making more than is reasonable on this issue, which in its significance is far more important than that.
That being said, there are clearly huge concerns from both Labour members and Tories about the substance of the deal as well. Now, Mr the Punter is still only half right in that respect, since a great many Labour and Tory members have judged the merits of the deal vs unicorn options of renegotiations achieving at best difficult and at worse impossible outcomes, and therefore not, actually, judged it on its merits.
However, given the sheet extent of those against it, including most of those regarded as potential supporters across party lines, it is also not unreasonable to suggest the deal really is pretty darn crap.
The point of negotiation is to build a deal people can support. A deal that people cannot support isn't a bad deal. It is no deal at all.
Dreadful stuff, I hope they can face punishment of some kind, but he still thinks Brexit created a situation rather than was an outlet for it, good and bad. Things don't get conjured out of the aether.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Indeed, it is the Tories minority that is sufficient to ensure it never passes. If the Tory party toed the line and persuaded a few opposition MPs to vote for it then it would be game over.
It may be the best deal available, but it is still an awful deal to too many MPs. TBF, many Leavers do not like it either and many Conservative Associations seem to be pushing the message that No Deal is what they want.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Yes, I'm sure Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt and Michael Gove have all had genuine, damascene conversions to Mrs May's defunct deal.
They will disavow, even as they stayed on board where, even if not fulsomely, they can all be presumed to be backing official policy. We've even had arguments that the PM announcing a policy to the House stated to be backed by the Cabinet did not count as government policy.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
The big problem IMO is too many full time and living miles away from home. Need more part-time / flexible learning attached to jobs / careers.
Certainly doesn't help but surely the bigger problem is the number of graduates who now take non graduate jobs earning no more than their compatriots who didn't spend 3 years getting drunk in the Student Union on apparently "free" cash.
The problem arises because degrees that were worth something in the labour market when only a minority of people had them become worth much less when almost anyone who fancies a go can get one. Yet the financing system was designed on the premise that nothing had changed.
Oh, now we have 'the wrong type of communism' argument.
Look, it doesn't work. It doesn't work for a reason. The reason is that Brexit makes no sense, and never did. So it isn't being implemented, because it can't be.
Got it?
Of course it makes sense. You might not like it or understand it but that is your failing not that of Brexit. Wanting to be out of a political construct which is becoming more and more pervasive in our political and legal system makes perfect sense. Particularly if the direction of travel is unacceptable to the majority of people in the country.
Perhaps you are one of those who thought we could 'change it from within'. Well we have failed to do that for 40 or more years and frankly it is both arrogant and impractical to expect that we should impose our view of what the EU should be on the other 27 countries.
Either we leave now under fairly benign circumstances or we are forced to leave later under for more difficult circumstances. Those are the choices.
Got it?
Yes, I've got it, because your conception of Brexit makes sense. But there is no consensus for that within the Leave side. If there were, you would have had a short and simple period of negotiation followed by a rapid exit.
What Brexiteers voted for was all manner of things, some very remote from what you have in mind, Richard, and much of it utterly unimplementable.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Yes, I'm sure Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt and Michael Gove have all had genuine, damascene conversions to Mrs May's defunct deal.
They probably take the view that getting some of what you want is better than getting none of it, however unpopular that point of view is in the Commons.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
The big problem IMO is too many full time and living miles away from home. Need more part-time / flexible learning attached to jobs / careers.
Certainly doesn't help but surely the bigger problem is the number of graduates who now take non graduate jobs earning no more than their compatriots who didn't spend 3 years getting drunk in the Student Union on apparently "free" cash.
They don't let you on the grad train if the South African Archbishop or the Lord of Westwell arrive
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Indeed, it is the Tories minority that is sufficient to ensure it never passes. If the Tory party toed the line and persuaded a few opposition MPs to vote for it then it would be game over.
It may be the best deal available, but it is still an awful deal to too many MPs. TBF, many Leavers do not like it either and many Conservative Associations seem to be pushing the message that No Deal is what they want.
If Labour judged it to be better than no deal and better than overturning the referendum result then it would pass even with 100+ Tories against it.
No, they've absolutely not done that. Corbyn is just trying to bring down the government.
Which in normal circumstances would be fair enough, but these are not normal circumstances.
I half agree, in that it is absurd to suggest that there are not many MPs still focusing on who is leader of which party and which party is in government if they approve or do not approve, and so partisan thinking is, without question, affecting their decision making more than is reasonable on this issue, which in its significance is far more important than that.
That being said, there are clearly huge concerns from both Labour members and Tories about the substance of the deal as well. Now, Mr the Punter is still only half right in that respect, since a great many Labour and Tory members have judged the merits of the deal vs unicorn options of renegotiations achieving at best difficult and at worse impossible outcomes, and therefore not, actually, judged it on its merits.
However, given the sheet extent of those against it, including most of those regarded as potential supporters across party lines, it is also not unreasonable to suggest the deal really is pretty darn crap.
The point of negotiation is to build a deal people can support. A deal that people cannot support isn't a bad deal. It is no deal at all.
I wasn't really speaking much as to the merits or not of the deal at all, other than noting that it is clearly pretty crap. But it is still notable that some people clearly have what should be irrelevant concerns in mind as well, indeed are prioritising those concerns, whether it comes from remarks that Labour don't think much negotiation is possible but still want a GE on that basis, or rumours some Tories would be more inclined to back it so long as May confirmed she would not fight the next election.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Yes, I'm sure Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt and Michael Gove have all had genuine, damascene conversions to Mrs May's defunct deal.
They probably take the view that getting some of what you want is better than getting none of it, however unpopular that point of view is in the Commons.
Do you believe that Michael Gove's support for May's deal is genuine? Because you're a more trusting man than I.
I think we can dispense with the idea of Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt thinking anything much at all.
I’m so glad my student fees were paid by the taxpayers.
Mind you the price for that was doing my A Levels when A Levels were hard.
Fake News. Harder than now yes, but not properly hard like when I did mine!
When did you do yours? I did mine late 50's. Then they were really hard!
1985. Still hard then! Regardless of the content, we both did them when grades were awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates, so you were competing against the other candidates as much as the paper. Once they adopted a no limits approach to how many As could be awarded, the whole system became devalued - hence the need to introduce an A* grade.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
It was another deeply flawed and illogical decision by Major. We don't need anywhere near 50% of our population with degrees. It simply devalues them. We need far greater emphasis on vocational skills and apprenticeships.
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
Another issue is that a grad tax needs to have a lifetime cap (otherwise those who reasonably foresee being high earners will take out private provision), but such a cap may prove difficult to sustain politically.
I actually think we've ended up with a fairly reasonable system, albeit one accompanied by a huge quantity of disingenuous politicised talk about debt, and also some heroic national accounting.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
It was another deeply flawed and illogical decision by Major. We don't need anywhere near 50% of our population with degrees. It simply devalues them. We need far greater emphasis on vocational skills and apprenticeships.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Yes, I'm sure Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt and Michael Gove have all had genuine, damascene conversions to Mrs May's defunct deal.
I don't understand your point. It doesn't matter how genuine their support for the deal is, they had the choice of quitting their jobs honourably and not backing it. They did not do so. It is ridiculous to just ignore their votes because you don't think they are sincere. When plenty of ministers, high and low, have quit over it, the idea the rest are being forced into retaining their support for it is insulting to them. And if they claim later, as I am sure they will given the leaking, that they didn't really back it, they will be insulting us, since there was no need for them to stay in post if they backed it. And indeed, that the deal is so clearly dead and they have stayed actually bolsters the argument they truly believe in it, since they have not taken the easy route and jumped overboard.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
Yes, I'm sure Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt and Michael Gove have all had genuine, damascene conversions to Mrs May's defunct deal.
They probably take the view that getting some of what you want is better than getting none of it, however unpopular that point of view is in the Commons.
Do you believe that Michael Gove's support for May's deal is genuine? Because you're a more trusting man than I.
I think we can dispense with the idea of Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt thinking anything much at all.
I don't consider Gove to be especially cynical, (he stuck the knife into Bojo, because like you, he concluded that the man was a disgraced sack of shit and amoral sociopathic snake) so I think that that would be his reasoning.
Mr. NorthWales, if May's deal fails, would you prefer no deal, revocation of Article 50 by the Commons, or a referendum of some variety?
Clean A50 revoke Referendum
There is no justification for a revocation prior to a referendum, that's just defaulting to remain when the outcome might be for leave and there is no need to reinvoke. An extension would be justified.
I’m so glad my student fees were paid by the taxpayers.
Mind you the price for that was doing my A Levels when A Levels were hard.
Fake News. Harder than now yes, but not properly hard like when I did mine!
When did you do yours? I did mine late 50's. Then they were really hard!
1985. Still hard then! Regardless of the content, we both did them when grades were awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates, so you were competing against the other candidates as much as the paper. Once they adopted a no limits approach to how many As could be awarded, the whole system became devalued - hence the need to introduce an A* grade.
I haven't seen any A level papers recently; it's some time since my elder grandchildren took them. I wonder, can one still buy books of pst papers; in my day they were standard VIth Form homework; answer two of the questions from Summer 52 or something like that. Must ask Grandson 2, who is doing O levels (or whatever) whether they have sample questions.
There are other arguments against a second referendum, but time is not one of them - it is a red herring when it comes down to it - the EU would be delighted to extend A50 for one.
I’m so glad my student fees were paid by the taxpayers.
Mind you the price for that was doing my A Levels when A Levels were hard.
Fake News. Harder than now yes, but not properly hard like when I did mine!
When did you do yours? I did mine late 50's. Then they were really hard!
1985. Still hard then! Regardless of the content, we both did them when grades were awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates, so you were competing against the other candidates as much as the paper. Once they adopted a no limits approach to how many As could be awarded, the whole system became devalued - hence the need to introduce an A* grade.
Yep. 83 for me. Certainly very different to what I am seeing students do these days. I was surprised to see how much of my O Level Chemistry and Physics has now been moved into A level.
No, that it cannot get the agreement accepted is because the opposition are playing silly games.
Actually, it is the ERG, DUP and Conservatives who are playing silly buggers. The Opposition lacks the votes to block it.
The DUP have judged it on its merits. The Tories have a majority in favour of it...
Not when you exclude the payroll...
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Which would be a very unfair thing to do. Plenty of people senior and not senior have quit the government at various points in protest at its Brexit direction. Those that have remained, happily or not, have made the choice to back it and their choice is not erased because they are on the payroll, not when they could have resigned.
I reckon we could see some hardishline Brexiteers re-entering the Gov't once May's deal is defeated. Scott Mann and Marcus Fysh from the southwest...
Would that be the Marcus Fysh who was on Radio 4 yesterday trotting out the Brexiteers myth about the EU being about to cave in and offer a great deal if only the UK makes a credible threat to crash out?
Have these people learned nothing over the past two years?
Will add £12bn to the budget deficit, apparently, which makes the extra expenditure that Hammond announced in the budget seem somewhat brave. It would also be fair to say that any "war chest" designed to protect the economy in the event of a no deal Brexit is now somewhat depleted.
Personally, I think that the current mess makes the argument for a much simpler graduate tax almost unanswerable. If 45% of student loans are never going to be repaid what is the point in such inefficiency?
I'm 2.7k away from the end of my loan. My other half never took one (She went to uni 2005-9 iirc). There best bloody not be a retrospective grad tax for us.
That is going to be a problem. It was a shambolic idea from the start and imposing a fairly harsh "commercial" interest rate on the debt seriously aggravated the problem.
The reality is that we are spending far too much money sending far too many people to University with the majority doing little, if anything, to boost their earning power with their degrees. When we could pretend that this was their problem and their choice you could just about make a case for that. Now nasty old reality has intruded we have some tough choices to make. For our University sector winter is coming after a long self indulgent and extravagant summer.
The big problem IMO is too many full time and living miles away from home. Need more part-time / flexible learning attached to jobs / careers.
Certainly doesn't help but surely the bigger problem is the number of graduates who now take non graduate jobs earning no more than their compatriots who didn't spend 3 years getting drunk in the Student Union on apparently "free" cash.
The problem arises because degrees that were worth something in the labour market when only a minority of people had them become worth much less when almost anyone who fancies a go can get one. Yet the financing system was designed on the premise that nothing had changed.
Added to which is the related problem of rampant grade inflation.
She's shamelessly running down the clock, isn't she.
She persistently refers to the referendum result as if she wants to blame the stupid voters for this mess, rather than the Government.
But it remains clear that she doesn't want no deal - not least because she continues repeatedly to call it 'no deal' rather than pivoting to the various new smokescreen terms the leavers have come up with - so it really is a gigantic game of chicken.
Dreadful stuff, I hope they can face punishment of some kind, but he still thinks Brexit created a situation rather than was an outlet for it, good and bad. Things don't get conjured out of the aether.
Brexit has legitimised it.
I’ve have had my Englishness/Britishness questioned a lot since June 2016.
If you don’t look Anglo Saxon or have an Anglo Saxon name then it isn’t pleasant.
Gove regrets the nasty side of the Leave campaign now.
She's shamelessly running down the clock, isn't she.
She persistently refers to the referendum result as if she wants to blame the stupid voters for this mess, rather than the Government.
Well we are partly to blame, but she cannot escape that she has been in charge of the negotiation and blew her own majority thus making it so much harder for herself.
But while I think her strategy at present is misplaced (and I expect it to change in the new year), one thing I will not criticise her for is trying to engineer her preferred option. It's exactly what practically every other MP is doing, and there is no clear alternative to pivot to which would command majority support anyway so her action while unhelpful is not egregious. So many other plans are reliant on unicorns and others doing precisely as the proposer wants, or the public playing ball exactly as they want, and May can demonstrate not everyone will play ball.
Certainly doesn't help but surely the bigger problem is the number of graduates who now take non graduate jobs earning no more than their compatriots who didn't spend 3 years getting drunk in the Student Union on apparently "free" cash.
The problem arises because degrees that were worth something in the labour market when only a minority of people had them become worth much less when almost anyone who fancies a go can get one. Yet the financing system was designed on the premise that nothing had changed.
The problem is that most degrees are worth nothing, and never were. Even in the 20th Century, it was just a shortcut to identify brighter job candidates. It made no difference whether your new graduate trainee had a BA in English or History or Mathematics: the point was that simply having been to university meant they were probably better prospects than their peers who had left with O- or A-levels. Now that almost everyone (poetic licence!) has a degree, they do not even serve that function.
I don't understand your point. It doesn't matter how genuine their support for the deal is, they had the choice of quitting their jobs honourably and not backing it.
Okay, fair point. But if you want to know the true feelings of the conservative party on the deal, I'd look at the backbenchers. Since they aren't being coerced into supporting the deal out of desire for personal advancement or not wanting to lose the ministerial limo, backbenchers are likely to demonstrate a much truer picture of what the party thinks of the deal.
There is no point to any parliamentary debate at this stage. MPs have already made up their mind to ignore the reality of the situation.
There can be no renegotiation along the lines that Corbyn wants - even if he were competent enough to actually carry out any negotiation given that he doesn't actually have any clue as to what he wants. You can't leave the Single Market and then expect to retain all the same benefits.
Hardliners on both sides are refusing to accept the reality that compromise is essential in any negotiation.
Very, very few actively want No Deal - and there is no prospect of a different deal. Indeed if the EU were willing to open things up again with a new government, the current deal would be the absolute best that could be achieved. Anything that might emerge would undoubtedly be worse than what is on offer now.
Parliament is posturing, posing and pontificating. It is not a constructive body at the moment. It thinks it is more important than it is. Parliament cannot negotiate with the EU or anyone else. It cannot set the terms for negotiations. It is trying to assume powers that it has never had and was never intended to have.
It is Parliament that is creating a constitutional crisis. All talk of debate is bogus. Debate achieves nothing with the current state of mind from too many MPs. Debate only works when people listen and change their views. Greening, Benn, Cooper, Corbyn et al aren't willing to listen. So what are they actually after?
Oh, now we have 'the wrong type of communism' argument.
Look, it doesn't work. It doesn't work for a reason. The reason is that Brexit makes no sense, and never did. So it isn't being implemented, because it can't be.
Got it?
Of course it makes sense. You might not like it or understand it but that is your failing not that of Brexit. Wanting to be out of a political construct which is becoming more and more pervasive in our political and legal system makes perfect sense. Particularly if the direction of travel is unacceptable to the majority of people in the country.
Perhaps you are one of those who thought we could 'change it from within'. Well we have failed to do that for 40 or more years and frankly it is both arrogant and impractical to expect that we should impose our view of what the EU should be on the other 27 countries.
Either we leave now under fairly benign circumstances or we are forced to leave later under for more difficult circumstances. Those are the choices.
Got it?
Yes, I've got it, because your conception of Brexit makes sense. But there is no consensus for that within the Leave side. If there were, you would have had a short and simple period of negotiation followed by a rapid exit.
What Brexiteers voted for was all manner of things, some very remote from what you have in mind, Richard, and much of it utterly unimplementable.
But you said that Brexit itself made no sense and never did. That was what I answered. To now say, oh yes but my version makes sense, is counter to what you originally posted. Nor is mine the only version that makes sense. The problem is not a lack of sensible versions of Brexit, it is the lack of a PM who is willing to actually take one of them up.
She's shamelessly running down the clock, isn't she.
She persistently refers to the referendum result as if she wants to blame the stupid voters for this mess, rather than the Government.
It's Labour and the other opposition parties who are running down the clock, along with their friends in the ERG. The PM's trying to get MPs to agree to stop running down the clock, admittedly without much sign of success so far at least.
Dreadful stuff, I hope they can face punishment of some kind, but he still thinks Brexit created a situation rather than was an outlet for it, good and bad. Things don't get conjured out of the aether.
Brexit has legitimised it.
I’ve have had my Englishness/Britishness questioned a lot since June 2016.
If you don’t look Anglo Saxon or have an Anglo Saxon name then it isn’t pleasant.
Gove regrets the nasty side of the Leave campaign now.
Dreadful stuff, I hope they can face punishment of some kind, but he still thinks Brexit created a situation rather than was an outlet for it, good and bad. Things don't get conjured out of the aether.
Brexit has legitimised it.
I’ve have had my Englishness/Britishness questioned a lot since June 2016.
If you don’t look Anglo Saxon or have an Anglo Saxon name then it isn’t pleasant.
Gove regrets the nasty side of the Leave campaign now.
I would say repeatedly characterising people wanting to be independent of the EU as nasty racists is not helping the situation.
Mr. NorthWales, if May's deal fails, would you prefer no deal, revocation of Article 50 by the Commons, or a referendum of some variety?
Clean A50 revoke Referendum
There is no justification for a revocation prior to a referendum, that's just defaulting to remain when the outcome might be for leave and there is no need to reinvoke. An extension would be justified.
There is, as unless we revoke prior to March 29th we may not remain within the EU the way we do at the moment.
Granted it's not a great reason, but it's a reason for revoking prior to a referendum rather than afterwards..
I’m so glad my student fees were paid by the taxpayers.
Mind you the price for that was doing my A Levels when A Levels were hard.
Fake News. Harder than now yes, but not properly hard like when I did mine!
When did you do yours? I did mine late 50's. Then they were really hard!
1985. Still hard then! Regardless of the content, we both did them when grades were awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates, so you were competing against the other candidates as much as the paper. Once they adopted a no limits approach to how many As could be awarded, the whole system became devalued - hence the need to introduce an A* grade.
I’m so glad my student fees were paid by the taxpayers.
Mind you the price for that was doing my A Levels when A Levels were hard.
Fake News. Harder than now yes, but not properly hard like when I did mine!
When did you do yours? I did mine late 50's. Then they were really hard!
1985. Still hard then! Regardless of the content, we both did them when grades were awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates, so you were competing against the other candidates as much as the paper. Once they adopted a no limits approach to how many As could be awarded, the whole system became devalued - hence the need to introduce an A* grade.
Indeed - the key change came at the end of the 1980s when Absolute Marking replaced Relative Marking.
Dreadful stuff, I hope they can face punishment of some kind, but he still thinks Brexit created a situation rather than was an outlet for it, good and bad. Things don't get conjured out of the aether.
Brexit has legitimised it.
I’ve have had my Englishness/Britishness questioned a lot since June 2016.
If you don’t look Anglo Saxon or have an Anglo Saxon name then it isn’t pleasant.
Gove regrets the nasty side of the Leave campaign now.
I would say repeatedly characterising people wanting to be independent of the EU as nasty racists is not helping the situation.
I don't understand your point. It doesn't matter how genuine their support for the deal is, they had the choice of quitting their jobs honourably and not backing it.
Okay, fair point. But if you want to know the true feelings of the conservative party on the deal, I'd look at the backbenchers. Since they aren't being coerced into supporting the deal out of desire for personal advancement or not wanting to lose the ministerial limo, backbenchers are likely to demonstrate a much truer picture of what the party thinks of the deal.
I think most of those backing it are doing so as reluctant supporters, most probably those most aghast at no deal. Given the numbers who voted for May in the confidence vote included a few no dealers, it seems pretty clear less than 200 were going to vote for the deal in the end, it is hugely unpopular.
It's why no matter how stubborn May is I believe she will change strategy in the new year. As IanB2 notes it is currently a big game of chicken and May and those afraid of no deal are far more likely to blink than the other side, since within the Tory ranks no deal is either preferred, the dangers of it not believed, or not thought as bad as predicted. More time to reflect won't make people suddenly fear no deal when they didn't before.
Comments
Which in normal circumstances would be fair enough, but these are not normal circumstances.
Apparently.....
I like it when he's angry.
They don't like the deal, that I know.
Is it a GE?
*Sincere look*
Whatever you want it to be, darling.
The moment it became "her" deal, she lost. Just as it was Cameron's deal.
That being said, there are clearly huge concerns from both Labour members and Tories about the substance of the deal as well. Now, Mr the Punter is still only half right in that respect, since a great many Labour and Tory members have judged the merits of the deal vs unicorn options of renegotiations achieving at best difficult and at worse impossible outcomes, and therefore not, actually, judged it on its merits.
However, given the sheet extent of those against it, including most of those regarded as potential supporters across party lines, it is also not unreasonable to suggest the deal really is pretty darn crap.
The only people who support May's deal are those whose job depends on it. And even then...
Perhaps you are one of those who thought we could 'change it from within'. Well we have failed to do that for 40 or more years and frankly it is both arrogant and impractical to expect that we should impose our view of what the EU should be on the other 27 countries.
Either we leave now under fairly benign circumstances or we are forced to leave later under for more difficult circumstances. Those are the choices.
Got it?
I keep thinking that the two parties cannot keep holding vague, even contradictory opinions within their own positions, and yet they keep managing it.
It may be the best deal available, but it is still an awful deal to too many MPs. TBF, many Leavers do not like it either and many Conservative Associations seem to be pushing the message that No Deal is what they want.
Chaos at the heart of Labour too.
What Brexiteers voted for was all manner of things, some very remote from what you have in mind, Richard, and much of it utterly unimplementable.
Referendum
I wonder why?
I do agree it'll be very polarising, although we're in a similar situation already.
I think we can dispense with the idea of Liam Fox and Penny Mordaunt thinking anything much at all.
She persistently refers to the referendum result as if she wants to blame the stupid voters for this mess, rather than the Government.
Have these people learned nothing over the past two years?
I’ve have had my Englishness/Britishness questioned a lot since June 2016.
If you don’t look Anglo Saxon or have an Anglo Saxon name then it isn’t pleasant.
Gove regrets the nasty side of the Leave campaign now.
But while I think her strategy at present is misplaced (and I expect it to change in the new year), one thing I will not criticise her for is trying to engineer her preferred option. It's exactly what practically every other MP is doing, and there is no clear alternative to pivot to which would command majority support anyway so her action while unhelpful is not egregious. So many other plans are reliant on unicorns and others doing precisely as the proposer wants, or the public playing ball exactly as they want, and May can demonstrate not everyone will play ball.
Killable only by career suicide of 7 Tory remainers.
There can be no renegotiation along the lines that Corbyn wants - even if he were competent enough to actually carry out any negotiation given that he doesn't actually have any clue as to what he wants. You can't leave the Single Market and then expect to retain all the same benefits.
Hardliners on both sides are refusing to accept the reality that compromise is essential in any negotiation.
Very, very few actively want No Deal - and there is no prospect of a different deal. Indeed if the EU were willing to open things up again with a new government, the current deal would be the absolute best that could be achieved. Anything that might emerge would undoubtedly be worse than what is on offer now.
Parliament is posturing, posing and pontificating. It is not a constructive body at the moment. It thinks it is more important than it is. Parliament cannot negotiate with the EU or anyone else. It cannot set the terms for negotiations. It is trying to assume powers that it has never had and was never intended to have.
It is Parliament that is creating a constitutional crisis. All talk of debate is bogus. Debate achieves nothing with the current state of mind from too many MPs. Debate only works when people listen and change their views. Greening, Benn, Cooper, Corbyn et al aren't willing to listen. So what are they actually after?
You hear talk about "low-information voters", but in this case, I think low-information Tory MPs have been a bigger and more persistent problem.
Granted it's not a great reason, but it's a reason for revoking prior to a referendum rather than afterwards..
It's why no matter how stubborn May is I believe she will change strategy in the new year. As IanB2 notes it is currently a big game of chicken and May and those afraid of no deal are far more likely to blink than the other side, since within the Tory ranks no deal is either preferred, the dangers of it not believed, or not thought as bad as predicted. More time to reflect won't make people suddenly fear no deal when they didn't before.