That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Speaking of big flags and wee dicks, I visited the newly refurbished Aberdeen Art Gallery today (nice, though a lot of it still closed, great view from new upper floor and balcony, coffee still reliably good). The Remembrance Hall (war memorial) which afaics hasn’t had much more than a lick of paint, has no fewer than four prominent stencilled messages stating ‘Supported by HM Treasury’. Obviously the really important act of remembrance is to remember who is paying for stuff.
Crass pricks.
Lol!
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?
Er, no. Three crosses, surely. (But don't google St Andrews Cross at work.)
On the last, I'm intrigued now, but on a work VPN so I'll save it for later!
Yes, three crosses. But aren't the diagonal crosses also saltires? I admit I'm way out of my depth here, having dropped both vexillology and heraldry before GCSE, so I'm probably wrong...
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
What the nutters on the Far Right never got is exactly what you say. Countries like France and Germany don't kow tow to Brussels. Never have and never will. When it suits them they do their own thing. We never really understood how membership of the club works when you're one of the most powerful members.
I'm afraid that's because the politicians concerned, who drove this Far Right agenda, were as incompetent and misguided as those like von der Leyen, Jacques Delors and Jean-Claude Junckers.
BBC news going big on Nissan and now Boris being interviewed, complete with Nissan branded jacket sporting 'prime minister'
He really knows how to speak to his red wall voters, and create fury with his opponents
Thats why he is hated so much on here, he is feared as a political opponent.
No, it is because he is a twat and an embarrassment.
Isn't that what you want in a political opponent? That would surely make him so much easier to beat.
One would have thought so if one believed the electorate had a decent choice. The problem at the last GE, as I have said before was the choice was between dumb and dumber and the electorate chose dumb. Fanbois of Johnson do crack me up though. They actually believe in him! He must be pissing himself.
I think the problem many opponents of Johnson have is that, in their dislike of him, they miss his appeal. They hate him, and therefore everyone else must as well. I mean, what's wrong with the voters? This sort of thinking is why so many of their attacks fail.
Personally, I quite like Boris Johnson; he has a certain appeal, and is *different* to other politicians - which again, can be appealing. Then again, I like our postman, but wouldn't want him to be PM. (I did not vote Conservative at 2019 GE.)
Boris is different to most other politicians, and attacks that would floor other politicians leave him unscathed. His opponents need to find a way to counter that - and fast.
And there is hope - "Teflon Tony's" coating eventually wore off: but much of that was his own doing, not his opponents'.
To an extent, that's always been the case- Maggie was unassailable until she started to believe her own hype. Something similar happened to Cameron.
What's slightly different about Boris is that the flaws were obvious before he even became PM. They were also obvious during 2020, hence the steady fall for his party over the year.
Therefore, Labour might as well stick with Starmer. Yes, he got less than nowhere in the first half of 2020, but it's not obvious that anyone else would have done any better. And I stick to my theory that, when we have collectively had our fill of BoJo (5 years, plus or minus 5 years), someone boring, hard-working and... Starmer-like will be just the ticket, rather than a left-wing gob on a stick.
Labour’s problems are way beyond Starmer. What is their offering? What are they selling that is so different to the Tories that it’s worth taking a punt on a party that elected a terrorist-hugging Marxist as a leader, very recently?
The Tories are now peddling quasi-socialist economics - everyone is, around the world, it’s like a war. Keynes is back
Labour can only offer more of the same, but with the added toxicity of their ID politics
‘Vote Labour! We are the same as the Tories but unlike them we also think you’re racist scum’
‘And we think people with penises are often women’
Ha - I was just trying to come up with a way of making the same point. Except it wasn't as succinct.
Those willing to consider voting Conservative don't, as @Nigel_Foremain suggested earlier, venerate Boris. They may find him amusing, but that doesn't translate him being their ideal Prime Minister. They just prefer him to the alternative, for the reasons Leon neatly sets out above.
Though those who underestimate him neglect to understand that many do genuinely like Boris - or understand why they do.
Boris consistently has high gross approval ratings, much higher than Cameron had at this stage of the 2010-15 Parliament.
Oh, sure. But on your final para, I contend that that is only to a quite small extent due to the Boris persona. More significant is the graph the other day showing where people where on a left/right/up/down axis, which showed the current incarnation of Boris is significantly closer to the centre of gravity of the British electorate than any of the party leaders have been for some time. Since Tony Blair, perhaps.
Speaking of big flags and wee dicks, I visited the newly refurbished Aberdeen Art Gallery today (nice, though a lot of it still closed, great view from new upper floor and balcony, coffee still reliably good). The Remembrance Hall (war memorial) which afaics hasn’t had much more than a lick of paint, has no fewer than four prominent stencilled messages stating ‘Supported by HM Treasury’. Obviously the really important act of remembrance is to remember who is paying for stuff.
Crass pricks.
Lol!
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?
Er, no. Three crosses, surely. (But don't google St Andrews Cross at work.)
On the last, I'm intrigued now, but on a work VPN so I'll save it for later!
Yes, three crosses. But aren't the diagonal crosses also saltires? I admit I'm way out of my depth here, having dropped both vexillology and heraldry before GCSE, so I'm probably wrong...
Oh yes, sorry, I just meant three crosses rather than one. Indeed two of the crosses are of the saltire subvariety!
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
The point is, honesty, competence and moral purpose isn't important to many people. I might find that reprehensible but it is what it is.
You appear to be blaming the voters.
All political parties show dishonesty, incompetence and a certain lack of moral purpose. I believe you're a Lib Dem - in which case, I'd argue the Michael Brown case covers all three of those for that party. Worse, it was all for sweet, sweet lucre.
If voters see such traits in all the parties, it rather reduces the power of the argument.
I am not blaming the voters. I am saying a critically large number of voters are uninterested in honesty, competence and moral purpose and therefore an offer on that basis won't win it for you. To the point the others are making about whether Labour is actually more honest, competent and moral, it doesn't matter we're not getting to Square One on that - those people aren't interested.
You do seem to be blaming the voters. How very dare they!
But as I said: all parties can be accused of similar things. It's just that supporters of a particular party seem to ignore it when it's their side.
I feel you are missing the point here. Johnson doesn't stand up and say, vote for me because I am honest, competent and morally sound; Starmer does. You can argue that Starmer is every bit as dishonest, incompetent and immoral as Johnson ( I don't think he is, but that's irrelevant). The point is Johnson doesn't need to be honest, competent and morally sound. The discussion never gets to: "I would vote for Starmer if only I believed him".
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
Speaking of big flags and wee dicks, I visited the newly refurbished Aberdeen Art Gallery today (nice, though a lot of it still closed, great view from new upper floor and balcony, coffee still reliably good). The Remembrance Hall (war memorial) which afaics hasn’t had much more than a lick of paint, has no fewer than four prominent stencilled messages stating ‘Supported by HM Treasury’. Obviously the really important act of remembrance is to remember who is paying for stuff.
Crass pricks.
Lol!
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?
The Cross of St George slapped over the Scottish & Irish saltires and Wales not even represented is certainly a cracking metaphor.
A metaphor for an imaginary and completely non-existent arrangement.
It's "certainly" not a metaphor for the fact that Scottish representation in senior political, financial, and media circles in London has long exceeded English representation in said circles in Edinburgh.
Perhaps the convention of showing Scotland as above England on the map, pushing it downwards, is a giveaway though?
Got to wonder whether in the future an English independence movement may arise, with values such as diversity and small-L liberalism.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
Not sure what's happening with us north of the border but, according to the BBC tracker we have 4 out of the top 5 council areas for Covid. Dundee is over 700 per 100,000. Mid and East Lothian over 600.
Demographics? Does deep-fried batter harbour the virus?
Even if you support the EU, you don't have to try really, really hard to find ways it is really, really flawed. A lot of opposition to Brexit comes from the intuitive judgment that the EU is on the right side of history, but what if it isn't?
Nope.
You don't have to be fan of all things EU to think that being in it is better than being out of it.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
I was initially very pro-European, and even at the time pro-Maastricht and L'Acte Unique. My support for leave has more to do with the need at every level to be more agile in a rapidly changing world, than being against the EU. With its half-baked decision-making processes, and it's deeply flawed democratic mechanisms, the EU's is not the governance structure that will succeed going forwards, and it is ill-equipped for making the needed structural changes to enable it to adapt and adjust as required.
I have backed Labour at about 5/1, it seems crazy they are such a big price. They should be favourites really. It is a case of the market being so different to what I think it should be that I must be missing something massively important, but have to have a small bet at the price.
All about Galloway. If Alastair Meeks was around, he’d be pointing out that betting markets tend to overestimate the potential of far right candidates.
Spot on! The only way to understand GG is to realise that he is in fact a far right candidate. All the lefty posturing is simply clever marketing.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Galloway describes himself as a revolutionary. A useful catch-all if you think about it without having to answer what kind of revolution. Angry muslim who wants someone to stand up for Palestine and your right to protect your kids from western morals? Vote Galloway. Angry WWC who thinks Labour have sold out and the Tories cut every service there is? Vote Galloway. Don't normally vote think they're all shit and lets give them a kicking? Vote Galloway.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Speaking of big flags and wee dicks, I visited the newly refurbished Aberdeen Art Gallery today (nice, though a lot of it still closed, great view from new upper floor and balcony, coffee still reliably good). The Remembrance Hall (war memorial) which afaics hasn’t had much more than a lick of paint, has no fewer than four prominent stencilled messages stating ‘Supported by HM Treasury’. Obviously the really important act of remembrance is to remember who is paying for stuff.
Crass pricks.
Lol!
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?
The Cross of St George slapped over the Scottish & Irish saltires and Wales not even represented is certainly a cracking metaphor.
A metaphor for an imaginary and completely non-existent arrangement.
It's "certainly" not a metaphor for the fact that Scottish representation in senior political, financial, and media circles in London has long exceeded English representation in said circles in Edinburgh.
Perhaps the convention of showing Scotland as above England on the map, pushing it downwards, is a giveaway though?
Scotland has always been massively overrepresented in the British establishment, particularly in days of Empire. Nothing the Scots loved more than a bit of repression of other nations! In fact in those days a lot of Scots used to refer to themselves as "English" lol
Not sure what's happening with us north of the border but, according to the BBC tracker we have 4 out of the top 5 council areas for Covid. Dundee is over 700 per 100,000. Mid and East Lothian over 600.
Demographics? Does deep-fried batter harbour the virus?
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
You must have a very low view of the country to consider 52% of the nation "Far Right" 🙄
Why is £350mn a week going to the NHS instead of Brussels not an economic choice? Especially when the reality is more than £400mn a week in fact.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
The EU gave protection to the rights of ordinary people, and set some limits on the power of potentially corrupt and even criminal political leaders. That is why these political leaders wanted to "take back control". Ordinary people have been the losers, and are now having to pay the price.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
What the nutters on the Far Right never got is exactly what you say. Countries like France and Germany don't kow tow to Brussels. Never have and never will. When it suits them they do their own thing. We never really understood how membership of the club works when you're one of the most powerful members.
I'm afraid that's because the politicians concerned, who drove this Far Right agenda, were as incompetent and misguided as those like von der Leyen, Jacques Delors and Jean-Claude Junckers.
It was an institutional problem. Whatever our partners want - give it to them. Often without bothering to get a quid pro quo.
A minor example - Beal Aerospace, Sombrero Island & the Foreign Office.
I have backed Labour at about 5/1, it seems crazy they are such a big price. They should be favourites really. It is a case of the market being so different to what I think it should be that I must be missing something massively important, but have to have a small bet at the price.
All about Galloway. If Alastair Meeks was around, he’d be pointing out that betting markets tend to overestimate the potential of far right candidates.
Spot on! The only way to understand GG is to realise that he is in fact a far right candidate. All the lefty posturing is simply clever marketing.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Galloway describes himself as a revolutionary. A useful catch-all if you think about it without having to answer what kind of revolution. Angry muslim who wants someone to stand up for Palestine and your right to protect your kids from western morals? Vote Galloway. Angry WWC who thinks Labour have sold out and the Tories cut every service there is? Vote Galloway. Don't normally vote think they're all shit and lets give them a kicking? Vote Galloway.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
That's him - forever going round in circles.
(sorry)
Martin Amis described Galloway as a "political entrepreneur" when reflecting on Galloway's feud with The Hitch. I think that's an acute description.
He can be formidable. He monstered an ill-advised BBC interviewer on the B&S campaign trail a few days ago. Can be viewed on Twitter.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
We now elect, or throw out, those who rule us. That’s it. That’s the Brexit bonus. But it is exhilarating and it will, in the long run, be enormously beneficial
We now elect, or throw out, those who rule us. That’s it. That’s the Brexit bonus. But it is exhilarating and it will, in the long run, be enormously beneficial
All else is trivia
Ask the Northern Irish how well that is working out.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
We now elect, or throw out, those who rule us. That’s it. That’s the Brexit bonus. But it is exhilarating and it will, in the long run, be enormously beneficial
All else is trivia
This is the key benefit - as you say, the *only* benefit, and it is not trivial.
But we need a government who wishes to deliver that to us as well.
Boris detests actual accountability and is engaged on an insidious project to reserve ever greater powers to himself.
This sounds slightly pointy-headed, but there’s a theme here which Labour could grab, popularise and persuade on here. If they weren’t so shit.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
On Brexit Night in 2016 when the Sunderland leave result came in and it dawned on Britain that we might not be staying in the EU after all, I got a phone call from a remainer friend who launched into an enebriated tirade along the lines of
''F8cking Sunderland......F8cking Sunderland.......don't those ignorant northerners realise they would lose everything if we left, their entire city relies on staying in the EU, that City would turn into a waste land....''
He never mentions it now and I simply don't have the heart to bring it up.
Not sure what's happening with us north of the border but, according to the BBC tracker we have 4 out of the top 5 council areas for Covid. Dundee is over 700 per 100,000. Mid and East Lothian over 600.
Demographics? Does deep-fried batter harbour the virus?
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
“ £10 billion per annum better off.”. That’s a long way short of £340M a day 😮. And that’s even before the £££ extra in extra costs on business Brexit has introduced that also needs to be subtracted from the £10B. And also the other bits of the £10B not saved because we didn’t opt out, security, policing, science etc.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?
Somewhat related to what Bill Gunston said of military jets - "Swiss watches by the ton"
They are staggeringly complicated, staggeringly big *and* manipulate matter at quantum scale, require near perfection at every stage....
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
And from the POV of Red Wall voters, labour shortages are a pretty good thing.
It will certainly be fun to watch. All of those jobs that the poor downtrodden English didn't want to do are now available again now that Harry Hun has been sent packing. Rural Anglia where the food industry had a shortage of labour even with a big eastern European contigent now gets to offer to the good people of Wisbech a job in the food factories.
What do you mean you don't want to work in a factory? Didn't you vote to get rid of the forrin so these jobs could be yours again like they weren't before?
The question is whether the issue was the nature of the job itself or the pay. If the former, agreed, it will be interesting. However, it is basic economics, that if you increase the supply of labour - especially cheap labour - wages are bound to go down. Maybe we see wages go to a level that starts to attract people.
Another question of course is whether many of these jobs which were done by cheap foreign labour are now automated.
Two of my former employers had factories in that area. Wages and conditions were already well above where they had been. OK so its 4 years back now but one factory manager told me that they couldn't hire labour at any price to do night shifts, which capped capacity and allowed competition into the market from the EU.
My suspicion is that the person to blame is Simon Cowell. We have raise at least one generation who don't want to do the kind of work that is available because its beneath them and anyway they're really talented or whatever.
Before anyone asks. I have worked in a call centre. I have worked in a warehouse. I have worked in a food factory slicing cucumbers all day. I have stacked shelves in a supermarket. I have done night shifts. All honest work that (for the time) payed decently.
I've done all those jobs! Except I was chucking pepperoni on frozen pizza bases as they whipped by me, not slicing cucumber. Hated all of it. Especially nights. Awful things, night shifts.
A lad I know works in a glassworks, on 12 hour shifts which switch from nights to days (the continental shifts pattern) and play havoc with the body clock. The work is dull, repetitive and mind numbingly boring.
The upside is that with the continental shift pattern you get loads of time off, and he gets paid £17 an hour for dull, but easy, work. It's the place where you have a job for life. And he's fairly new, the wage will increase the longer he stays. Managers are probably on £60k, shift supervisors/QC bods £40k, something like that.
So if we end up paying that kind of money for farming, labouring, all the jobs the forrins did for minimum wage, what will the wider long term impact be on food prices, inflation, the general UK economy? Will it be a Good Thing or a Bad Thing?
Even as a right-of-centre person on economic issues, I see many benefits in a rebalancing of labour vs capital in favour of labour in our economy. By raising pay at the lower end of the workforce, you do more to raise the speed of money in the economy than similar increases at the top end, thus benefiting the entire economy. That is not to say it might come at the cost of some jobs, or even some businesses. But the impact of that should be either to drive productivity and innovation, or to refocus investments in line with our comparative advantage.
In short, I don't know, but don't think the answer is clear cut either way.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
“ £10 billion per annum better off.”. That’s a long way short of £340M a day 😮. And that’s even before the £££ extra in extra costs on business Brexit has introduced that also needs to be subtracted from the £10B. And also the other bits of the £10B not saved because we didn’t opt out, security, policing, science etc.
“We control our own borders” delta variant says “it don’t work like that Phil” 😆 “ We control our own laws,” Pirate Libertarians don’t want any laws! Just the law of the pirate ship.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
“ £10 billion per annum better off.”. That’s a long way short of £340M a day 😮. And that’s even before the £££ extra in extra costs on business Brexit has introduced that also needs to be subtracted from the £10B. And also the other bits of the £10B not saved because we didn’t opt out, security, policing, science etc.
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
The EU gave protection to the rights of ordinary people, and set some limits on the power of potentially corrupt and even criminal political leaders. That is why these political leaders wanted to "take back control". Ordinary people have been the losers, and are now having to pay the price.
Politicians whom the public can sack are, in general, less corrupt and criminal than politicians whom the public cannot.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Why was the application left to the last minute? And if she came here in 1963 why has she never applied for citizenship?
Considering the scheme has been open for years and 5.6 million people had filled it in before yesterday, I won't believe any crocodile tears looking for attention on Twitter by people with an axe to grind.
Paperwork gets filled in from time to time. This has had years to be filled in and seems to be rather simple from balanced and independent reports. Simply enough for nearly six million to fill it in just fine.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?
Somewhat related to what Bill Gunston said of military jets - "Swiss watches by the ton"
They are staggeringly complicated, staggeringly big *and* manipulate matter at quantum scale, require near perfection at every stage....
In conditions of absolute cleanliness and no static charges.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
Although less applause for Brexiteers, who could have predicted this, I mean we held all the cards right, but it is nothing to worry about, not like the banking and financial services is the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh wait.
Chancellor confirms that UK has given up trying to secure greater access to EU markets for financial services firms.
City of London has been largely cut off since Brexit completed at end of last year.
Sunak says deal on equivalence “has not happened”.
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.
The fact that the financial sector is the largest contributor to the Exchequer seems to me to be a good reason for Westminster to write the rules for the sector, not Strasbourg or Brussels. Don't you agree?
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
Philip’s MO is to tell the housing economists they are wrong, tell the hauliers they are mistaken, the planners they are stupid, and the financiers they are deluded.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Philip is the Mrs Thatcher de nos jours. (Always speaking French was Mrs T.) If something disruptive happens then the market will adjust, and by definition the new market equilibrium must be for the best because you can't buck the markets.
If you accept that premise, then Philip is right. Further, we do not need to know anything, forecast anything or care about anything. It is not that the experts are wrong so much as they are wrong to care. If cornflakes go up we will eat more shredded wheat. All hail "the market".
Although less applause for Brexiteers, who could have predicted this, I mean we held all the cards right, but it is nothing to worry about, not like the banking and financial services is the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh wait.
Chancellor confirms that UK has given up trying to secure greater access to EU markets for financial services firms.
City of London has been largely cut off since Brexit completed at end of last year.
Sunak says deal on equivalence “has not happened”.
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.
The fact that the financial sector is the largest contributor to the Exchequer seems to me to be a good reason for Westminster to write the rules for the sector, not Strasbourg or Brussels. Don't you agree?
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
Philip’s MO is to tell the housing economists they are wrong, tell the hauliers they are mistaken, the planners they are stupid, and the financiers they are deluded.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Not all. Only those with vested interests that I disagree with.
Just because someone has a vested interest in something doesn't mean they're automatically right. Quite the opposite sometimes.
Cf all the virologists angrily arguing against ‘lab leak’ as a hypothesis. To the extent they denounce it as a ‘racist conspiracy theory’
Why do they do this? The more thoughtful might accept they have a huge hidden bias. If ‘lab leak’ is ever proven, or close to proven, their entire science will be hideously tainted. They will be the mad scientists that caused a global plague. Many careers might end, as funding instantly dries up
They are incapable of neutrality, even though they are the ‘experts’. A fascinating test-case
The vast majority of virologists have continued to acknowledge the lab leak hypothesis as possible, even if they don't think it likely. But it's entirely true that they fell into the trap (as I have on occasion too) of criticising false certainty as conspiracy theory - which enabled claims like your current one.
You made great play last night of the deleted sequence data recovered by the Bloom Lab as proof of a conspiracy to hide a lab leak. And yet this is what they posted about that.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1408161515606138883 I am getting lots of questions if my pre-print about some #SARSCoV2 sequences that were removed from Sequence Read Archive tell us anything about lab accident versus natural zoonosis. I posted summary of pre-print below, but did not directly address this point explicitly (1/n) The answer is NO. The people using it to strongly support either argument are those that have become so emotionally invested in their opinion that they have lost the ability to analyze anything objectively outside of the framework of that argument. (2/n) First, there may be additional relevant data in obscure locations that aren't the places where we are accustomed to looking (e.g., on the Google Cloud, in table 1 of a paper on diagnostics, etc): https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1407445643547746305… (3/n) Second, in my opinion, anybody doing phylogenetics on early #SARSCoV2 sequences from China should spend as much time on metadata as algorithms. Sequences in databases may be non-representative. Sequences collected in Guangdong might be from infections from Wuhan. Etc. (4/n) Third, preprint provides modestly more evidence for progenitor being in clade A (not market clade), & substantially more evidence it might have T at site 29095. However, current inferences are likely based on incomplete data...
And from the POV of Red Wall voters, labour shortages are a pretty good thing.
It will certainly be fun to watch. All of those jobs that the poor downtrodden English didn't want to do are now available again now that Harry Hun has been sent packing. Rural Anglia where the food industry had a shortage of labour even with a big eastern European contigent now gets to offer to the good people of Wisbech a job in the food factories.
What do you mean you don't want to work in a factory? Didn't you vote to get rid of the forrin so these jobs could be yours again like they weren't before?
The question is whether the issue was the nature of the job itself or the pay. If the former, agreed, it will be interesting. However, it is basic economics, that if you increase the supply of labour - especially cheap labour - wages are bound to go down. Maybe we see wages go to a level that starts to attract people.
Another question of course is whether many of these jobs which were done by cheap foreign labour are now automated.
Two of my former employers had factories in that area. Wages and conditions were already well above where they had been. OK so its 4 years back now but one factory manager told me that they couldn't hire labour at any price to do night shifts, which capped capacity and allowed competition into the market from the EU.
My suspicion is that the person to blame is Simon Cowell. We have raise at least one generation who don't want to do the kind of work that is available because its beneath them and anyway they're really talented or whatever.
Before anyone asks. I have worked in a call centre. I have worked in a warehouse. I have worked in a food factory slicing cucumbers all day. I have stacked shelves in a supermarket. I have done night shifts. All honest work that (for the time) payed decently.
I've done all those jobs! Except I was chucking pepperoni on frozen pizza bases as they whipped by me, not slicing cucumber. Hated all of it. Especially nights. Awful things, night shifts.
A lad I know works in a glassworks, on 12 hour shifts which switch from nights to days (the continental shifts pattern) and play havoc with the body clock. The work is dull, repetitive and mind numbingly boring.
The upside is that with the continental shift pattern you get loads of time off, and he gets paid £17 an hour for dull, but easy, work. It's the place where you have a job for life. And he's fairly new, the wage will increase the longer he stays. Managers are probably on £60k, shift supervisors/QC bods £40k, something like that.
So if we end up paying that kind of money for farming, labouring, all the jobs the forrins did for minimum wage, what will the wider long term impact be on food prices, inflation, the general UK economy? Will it be a Good Thing or a Bad Thing?
Even as a right-of-centre person on economic issues, I see many benefits in a rebalancing of labour vs capital in favour of labour in our economy. By raising pay at the lower end of the workforce, you do more to raise the speed of money in the economy than similar increases at the top end, thus benefiting the entire economy. That is not to say it might come at the cost of some jobs, or even some businesses. But the impact of that should be either to drive productivity and innovation, or to refocus investments in line with our comparative advantage.
In short, I don't know, but don't think the answer is clear cut either way.
A couple of things will occur if low end jobs rise above minimum wage
- A bigger differential between low paid jobs and benefit. - More investment in automation - productivity will go up - Several business models will die. Deliveroo et al depend on ridiculously low wages for their workers.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
“ £10 billion per annum better off.”. That’s a long way short of £340M a day 😮. And that’s even before the £££ extra in extra costs on business Brexit has introduced that also needs to be subtracted from the £10B. And also the other bits of the £10B not saved because we didn’t opt out, security, policing, science etc.
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.
NHS funding in real terms: 2016 £137.4 bn 2021 £159bn [excluding Covid expenditure]
One interesting aspect of Brexit is around immigration.
In fact, since 2016 net immigration has stayed pretty constant. All we’ve done is replace Europeans (say, Poles) with non-Europeans (say, Indians).
This surprises me, to be honest. It suggests immigration is v largely driven by the needs of the economy itself, and then conditioned by policy mix.
Immigration has come right down as a politically salient issue since Brexit, but the impact of immigration on our culture hasn’t changed.
According to the some analysis I saw, the government’s proposed changes to immigration policy were expected to liberalise immigration further, so we should expect numbers to continue to increase.
One interesting aspect of Brexit is around immigration.
In fact, since 2016 net immigration has stayed pretty constant. All we’ve done is replace Europeans (say, Poles) with non-Europeans (say, Indians).
This surprises me, to be honest. It suggests immigration is v largely driven by the needs of the economy itself.
Immigration has come right down as a politically salient issue, but the impact of immigration on our culture hasn’t changed.
According to the some analysis I saw, the government’s proposed changes to immigration policy were expected to liberalise immigration further, so we should expect numbers to continue to increase.
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
Brexiters continue to maintain on here that the impact of Brexit is mild or trivial.
Nope. No It’s the biggest, and most momentous thing to happen to the U.K. since the original entry, and before that - WW2.
Yes it’s hard to see right now because of Covid, but the mists will clear.
Yes, it will take time for the full benefits to be realised, getting rid of stupid regulation and the expansion of free trade, will boost GDP growth each and every year above that which it would others wise have been. what will seem small fir the first few years will compounded and then it will be truly visible.
Lol.
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’
Oh
“'The confidence they expressed in their own country when they voted for Brexit has been justified'
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng praises the people of Sunderland, after Nissan announced a £1bn investment which will create around 1,600 jobs in the region.”
Brexit is big, and like all big things it will be good and bad. It is too big and sui generis to confidently predict exact outcomes. But generally more democracy is better for economies
You are too smart not to realise this. You have a lingering bias of silly Remainerism
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.
As I said upthread, there are certain totemic icons which Brexiters are desperate to maintain lest the Emperor’s nakedness be revealed.
I’d put Nissan in that list; the reality of the Irish border also — and probably also the Australian trade deal.
I disagree. I'm no supporter of either this government or Brexit, but the Nissan deal makes good sense. It certainly comes nowhere near to the stupidity of the Irish border arrangements.
Although less applause for Brexiteers, who could have predicted this, I mean we held all the cards right, but it is nothing to worry about, not like the banking and financial services is the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh wait.
Chancellor confirms that UK has given up trying to secure greater access to EU markets for financial services firms.
City of London has been largely cut off since Brexit completed at end of last year.
Sunak says deal on equivalence “has not happened”.
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.
The fact that the financial sector is the largest contributor to the Exchequer seems to me to be a good reason for Westminster to write the rules for the sector, not Strasbourg or Brussels. Don't you agree?
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
Philip’s MO is to tell the housing economists they are wrong, tell the hauliers they are mistaken, the planners they are stupid, and the financiers they are deluded.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Philip is the Mrs Thatcher de nos jours. (Always speaking French was Mrs T.) If something disruptive happens then the market will adjust, and by definition the new market equilibrium must be for the best because you can't buck the markets.
If you accept that premise, then Philip is right. Further, we do not need to know anything, forecast anything or care about anything. It is not that the experts are wrong so much as they are wrong to care. If cornflakes go up we will eat more shredded wheat. All hail "the market".
One interesting aspect of Brexit is around immigration.
In fact, since 2016 net immigration has stayed pretty constant. All we’ve done is replace Europeans (say, Poles) with non-Europeans (say, Indians).
This surprises me, to be honest. It suggests immigration is v largely driven by the needs of the economy itself.
Immigration has come right down as a politically salient issue, but the impact of immigration on our culture hasn’t changed.
According to the some analysis I saw, the government’s proposed changes to immigration policy were expected to liberalise immigration further, so we should expect numbers to continue to increase.
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.
I haven’t read about this in detail, but at face value this appears to be true. Surprised it has not received more attention.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?
They work at a level of precision that is basically inconceivable.
And they have to do it at scale, to produce thousands of chips. You can't do what they do in a boutique manner.
Brexiters continue to maintain on here that the impact of Brexit is mild or trivial.
Nope. No It’s the biggest, and most momentous thing to happen to the U.K. since the original entry, and before that - WW2.
Yes it’s hard to see right now because of Covid, but the mists will clear.
Yes, it will take time for the full benefits to be realised, getting rid of stupid regulation and the expansion of free trade, will boost GDP growth each and every year above that which it would others wise have been. what will seem small fir the first few years will compounded and then it will be truly visible.
Lol.
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’
Oh
“'The confidence they expressed in their own country when they voted for Brexit has been justified'
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng praises the people of Sunderland, after Nissan announced a £1bn investment which will create around 1,600 jobs in the region.”
Brexit is big, and like all big things it will be good and bad. It is too big and sui generis to confidently predict exact outcomes. But generally more democracy is better for economies
You are too smart not to realise this. You have a lingering bias of silly Remainerism
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.
As I said upthread, there are certain totemic icons which Brexiters are desperate to maintain lest the Emperor’s nakedness be revealed.
I’d put Nissan in that list; the reality of the Irish border also — and probably also the Australian trade deal.
I disagree. I'm no supporter of either this government or Brexit, but the Nissan deal makes good sense. It certainly comes nowhere near to the stupidity of the Irish border arrangements.
I’m not saying it doesn’t.
I’m noting though the government will and probably has made damn sure Nissan isn’t going anywhere.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off. 2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections. 3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement. 4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
“ £10 billion per annum better off.”. That’s a long way short of £340M a day 😮. And that’s even before the £££ extra in extra costs on business Brexit has introduced that also needs to be subtracted from the £10B. And also the other bits of the £10B not saved because we didn’t opt out, security, policing, science etc.
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.
NHS funding in real terms: 2016 £137.4 bn 2021 £159bn [excluding Covid expenditure]
Difference = £21.6bn = £416mn per week.
Funding the NHS instead of the EU ✅
I don’t recall the EU suppressing our funding of the NHS, do you?
Actually; as a result of repressed GDP growth since Brexit; we have less money for the NHS 😫
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?
They work at a level of precision that is basically inconceivable.
And they have to do it at scale, to produce thousands of chips. You can't do what they do in a boutique manner.
Well, you can - the processes are invented in smaller labs. Just that the yield and price for what you get at small scale makes the end product ridiculously expensive.
The big scale of the fabs is an interesting case - as you scale up the size, costs rise. But slower than the output. So at a certain size and volume you can make chips that people can afford to buy....
I have backed Labour at about 5/1, it seems crazy they are such a big price. They should be favourites really. It is a case of the market being so different to what I think it should be that I must be missing something massively important, but have to have a small bet at the price.
All about Galloway. If Alastair Meeks was around, he’d be pointing out that betting markets tend to overestimate the potential of far right candidates.
Spot on! The only way to understand GG is to realise that he is in fact a far right candidate. All the lefty posturing is simply clever marketing.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Galloway describes himself as a revolutionary. A useful catch-all if you think about it without having to answer what kind of revolution. Angry muslim who wants someone to stand up for Palestine and your right to protect your kids from western morals? Vote Galloway. Angry WWC who thinks Labour have sold out and the Tories cut every service there is? Vote Galloway. Don't normally vote think they're all shit and lets give them a kicking? Vote Galloway.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
That's him - forever going round in circles.
(sorry)
Martin Amis described Galloway as a "political entrepreneur" when reflecting on Galloway's feud with The Hitch. I think that's an acute description.
He can be formidable. He monstered an ill-advised BBC interviewer on the B&S campaign trail a few days ago. Can be viewed on Twitter.
Although less applause for Brexiteers, who could have predicted this, I mean we held all the cards right, but it is nothing to worry about, not like the banking and financial services is the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh wait.
Chancellor confirms that UK has given up trying to secure greater access to EU markets for financial services firms.
City of London has been largely cut off since Brexit completed at end of last year.
Sunak says deal on equivalence “has not happened”.
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.
The fact that the financial sector is the largest contributor to the Exchequer seems to me to be a good reason for Westminster to write the rules for the sector, not Strasbourg or Brussels. Don't you agree?
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
Philip’s MO is to tell the housing economists they are wrong, tell the hauliers they are mistaken, the planners they are stupid, and the financiers they are deluded.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Philip is the Mrs Thatcher de nos jours. (Always speaking French was Mrs T.) If something disruptive happens then the market will adjust, and by definition the new market equilibrium must be for the best because you can't buck the markets.
If you accept that premise, then Philip is right. Further, we do not need to know anything, forecast anything or care about anything. It is not that the experts are wrong so much as they are wrong to care. If cornflakes go up we will eat more shredded wheat. All hail "the market".
Precisely. If I saw off your leg, you will purchase a crutch. A new equilibrium!!
We now elect, or throw out, those who rule us. That’s it. That’s the Brexit bonus. But it is exhilarating and it will, in the long run, be enormously beneficial
All else is trivia
Ask the Northern Irish how well that is working out.
Or the Scots.
Or the Welsh.
Little Englanders might be happy, for now...
That wheel too will turn.
I and my Welsh family are very content that we are out of the EU
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
£100m seems quite restrained.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
A one off £100m is basically nothing in this context. Japan is offering a ¥1tn (£8bn) subsidy to Sony to build out semi-conductor fabs. Our subsidy scheme is laughable in the face of what's happening everywhere else in the world.
What those objecting, from both right and left, don't seem to get is that if there was ever a time for an industrial policy, it is right now. I don't have massive confidence in the current government (or any likely near term alternatives) to do it well, but they are at least making a stab at it, and not without some successes.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Why was the application left to the last minute? And if she came here in 1963 why has she never applied for citizenship?
Perhaps more aptly, given her clearly significant contributions and longevity in the country, why is the bureaucracy of an advanced country asking her to prove anything at all ?
For the answer, one has to look at the procedural distortions in the way the Home Office operates as a bureaucracy, and the political distortions at the heart of Brexit as an ideology.
Not sure what's happening with us north of the border but, according to the BBC tracker we have 4 out of the top 5 council areas for Covid. Dundee is over 700 per 100,000. Mid and East Lothian over 600.
Demographics? Does deep-fried batter harbour the virus?
Fitba.
Not Manchester?
No, the Rangers visit was years ago. This time they marched through Glasgow instead. Thoiugh the Euros seem to have been the main or at least most numerically salient factor (leaves open how much seeding the Ibrox match caused to be mutliplied more recently - I couldn't guess one way or another).
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
The reason appears to be that she has lived in the country for 59 years and apparently never regularised her status.
Although less applause for Brexiteers, who could have predicted this, I mean we held all the cards right, but it is nothing to worry about, not like the banking and financial services is the largest contributor to the Exchequer, oh wait.
Chancellor confirms that UK has given up trying to secure greater access to EU markets for financial services firms.
City of London has been largely cut off since Brexit completed at end of last year.
Sunak says deal on equivalence “has not happened”.
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.
The fact that the financial sector is the largest contributor to the Exchequer seems to me to be a good reason for Westminster to write the rules for the sector, not Strasbourg or Brussels. Don't you agree?
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
Philip’s MO is to tell the housing economists they are wrong, tell the hauliers they are mistaken, the planners they are stupid, and the financiers they are deluded.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Philip is the Mrs Thatcher de nos jours. (Always speaking French was Mrs T.) If something disruptive happens then the market will adjust, and by definition the new market equilibrium must be for the best because you can't buck the markets.
If you accept that premise, then Philip is right. Further, we do not need to know anything, forecast anything or care about anything. It is not that the experts are wrong so much as they are wrong to care. If cornflakes go up we will eat more shredded wheat. All hail "the market".
Precisely. If I saw off your leg, you will purchase a crutch. A new equilibrium!!
Pretty much sums up the entire fatuity of Philip.
Must be slightly worrying for Brexiters that he is has become the main advocate for Brexit on this site.
Especially since he - with admirable frankness - hopes for the dissolution of the Union and the concreting over of the much of SE England.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided. By the sounds of it the provider being used is the same one revolut uses to confirm your id, others use video and a manual process (but that either isn't being used or was disabled given the time scales remaining).
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
Total bollocks a lot of the economically active people are now getting payrises due to the fact companies have to compete for our labour rather than have a huge pool of people they can drag in for less. The fact that people that are senior in businesses don't like this is purely icing on our cake.
Till Brexit my job was paying much the same as it did in 2004 even if you applied to new companies. If pay had kept pace with inflation I would have been earning 41% more.In the last year the posted remuneration in job adverts are already showing a 7% uplift in pay offered
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
Total bollocks a lot of the economically active people are now getting payrises due to the fact companies have to compete for our labour rather than have a huge pool of people they can drag in for less. The fact that people that are senior in businesses don't like this is purely icing on our cake.
Till Brexit my job was paying much the same as it did in 2004 even if you applied to new companies. If pay had kept pace with inflation I would have been earning 41% more.In the last year the posted remuneration in job adverts are already showing a 7% uplift in pay offered
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Brexiters continue to maintain on here that the impact of Brexit is mild or trivial.
Nope. No It’s the biggest, and most momentous thing to happen to the U.K. since the original entry, and before that - WW2.
Yes it’s hard to see right now because of Covid, but the mists will clear.
Yes, it will take time for the full benefits to be realised, getting rid of stupid regulation and the expansion of free trade, will boost GDP growth each and every year above that which it would others wise have been. what will seem small fir the first few years will compounded and then it will be truly visible.
Lol.
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’
Oh
“'The confidence they expressed in their own country when they voted for Brexit has been justified'
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng praises the people of Sunderland, after Nissan announced a £1bn investment which will create around 1,600 jobs in the region.”
Brexit is big, and like all big things it will be good and bad. It is too big and sui generis to confidently predict exact outcomes. But generally more democracy is better for economies
You are too smart not to realise this. You have a lingering bias of silly Remainerism
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.
As I said upthread, there are certain totemic icons which Brexiters are desperate to maintain lest the Emperor’s nakedness be revealed.
I’d put Nissan in that list; the reality of the Irish border also — and probably also the Australian trade deal.
I disagree. I'm no supporter of either this government or Brexit, but the Nissan deal makes good sense. It certainly comes nowhere near to the stupidity of the Irish border arrangements.
I agree. It’s exactly the sort of thing government should be doing to protect us from ongoing globalisation.
My only concern, tied in with Brexit, how long term is this deal and investment?
One interesting aspect of Brexit is around immigration.
In fact, since 2016 net immigration has stayed pretty constant. All we’ve done is replace Europeans (say, Poles) with non-Europeans (say, Indians).
This surprises me, to be honest. It suggests immigration is v largely driven by the needs of the economy itself.
Immigration has come right down as a politically salient issue, but the impact of immigration on our culture hasn’t changed.
According to the some analysis I saw, the government’s proposed changes to immigration policy were expected to liberalise immigration further, so we should expect numbers to continue to increase.
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.
I haven’t read about this in detail, but at face value this appears to be true. Surprised it has not received more attention.
The question I'd like to have an answer to is does that mean that there are that many fewer Brits, or is our population a million or two higher than we thought?
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well. Surprisingly the government doesn't know anywhere near as much about the population of you might think, partly because different areas of the state can't freely share information about our whole lives (and that is probably overall a good thing)....and why it seems you end up filling in the same information multiple times to different parts of the state.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to (or as I suspect from his twitter he is looking to make a scene). And his language of "scanning faces", FFS, he had to take a photo is what he had to do.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
As I said, perhaps if the son had done that months ago it would have been possible to have done things that way.
But given that he had left it to the last day he was presented with the only system that could do things in the timescale he had given himself which was via a third party computerised system that has a particular way of confirming identity checks (and I can't be arsed to check which company is the one that was used), But the purpose is to confirm that the person using the electronic system is the same person as the paperwork relates to.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
So not today then - the information needs to be published within 6 months (more than enough time to get a few more deals out the door before the figures are revealed, and hopefully saving us a few quid).
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to.
Although I think it regrettable such persons need to prove anything to anybody, I was left wondering just what kind of torture device he was employing for the face-on and side-on photography.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to (or as I suspect from his twitter he is looking to make a scene). And his language of "scanning faces", FFS, he had to take a photo is what he had to do.
A census has a completely different cause ; the government bureaucracy wants to keep a tab on what is changing. This is a political issue of a bureaucracy not being empowered to review details that haven't changed in many, many years ; and particularly in the case of elderly people, which it can usually check much more easily.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
That's exactly what happened to the Windrush cases. Almost certainly entitled to live in the UK, but didn't have the paperwork to prove it. Surprising you want to repeat that mistake.
She has a passport, so they were obviously prepared to engage with German bureaucracy. (I presume they are not issued for life). Just not the country she was living in.
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
So not today then - the information needs to be published within 6 months (more than enough time to get a few more deals out the door before the figures are revealed, and hopefully saving us a few quid).
The question is how long, if ever, do Germany and France take to publish these figures
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
The EU gave protection to the rights of ordinary people, and set some limits on the power of potentially corrupt and even criminal political leaders. That is why these political leaders wanted to "take back control". Ordinary people have been the losers, and are now having to pay the price.
Politicians whom the public can sack are, in general, less corrupt and criminal than politicians whom the public cannot.
But with our pathetic voting system, we can't actually sack them. They have a blue rosette, and that is enough to see them through.
Until even traditional Conservative voters turn against them. That happened in C&A, and I would very much like to see it happen again today.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to.
Although I think it regrettable such persons need to prove anything to anybody, I was left wondering just what kind of torture device he was employing for the face-on and side-on photography.
He makes it sound like some kind of CAT-scan.
It isn't its probably little different to the roll your head clockwise approach that an iphone uses. The issue is that its hard to get someone who isn't 100% with it to do things the way a computer program insists in it being done.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
Total bollocks a lot of the economically active people are now getting payrises due to the fact companies have to compete for our labour rather than have a huge pool of people they can drag in for less. The fact that people that are senior in businesses don't like this is purely icing on our cake.
Till Brexit my job was paying much the same as it did in 2004 even if you applied to new companies. If pay had kept pace with inflation I would have been earning 41% more.In the last year the posted remuneration in job adverts are already showing a 7% uplift in pay offered
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.
Constant numbers dont mean anything, immigration has changed now you have to be coming for a job which pays over I think 27k. Also if immigration has stayed the same how do you square that with the likes of Rochdale pioneers whinging that lorry driver pay is rising....think its you talking bollocks and I get emails from recruiters all the time and I can see the pay offers rising so I don't really care if you think its bollocks because I can see the reality
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
As always you know best in your Cheshire bubble. Hard to say "no real downside if you are Norn Irish. Or supply NI. Or export. Or import. Or have a second home abroad. Or like to go stay with relatives abroad. Or don't want to pay £dollah for using your phone
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
So not today then - the information needs to be published within 6 months (more than enough time to get a few more deals out the door before the figures are revealed, and hopefully saving us a few quid).
Indeed. It is very important to Nissan that the subsidy deal doesn't get successfully challenged. The EU has powerful sanctions (as does the UK going the other way, but that doesn't help Nissan). The key thing to stick within the rules, which shouldn't be difficult as they allow plenty of leeway anyway.
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to (or as I suspect from his twitter he is looking to make a scene). And his language of "scanning faces", FFS, he had to take a photo is what he had to do.
A census has a completely different reason ; the government bureaucracy wants to keep a tab on what is changing. This is a political issue of a bureaucracy not being empowered to review details that haven't changed in many, many years, and particularly with elderly people, which it usually can check much more easily.
FFS. I am a permanent resident of the US. I have to fill out a ton of paperwork every five years and go for interview. Brexit is a one-off thing that requires, both in the UK and the EU, citizens of the other party to fill out paperwork once.
It is true that organizations should be able to work with commonsense, but it is also unreasonable to expect that, at a national government scale, no-one will just follow the rules blindly. And while that might aggrieve us, we have to share responsibility if the situation arises because we have not followed the rules in a timely fashion.
That's true, but that's why the flaws need to be properly acknowledged and addressed, not dealt with in a defensive manner, otherwise they aren't resolved and gives and gave ammunition to opponents. I've been on both sides of the issue.
It's also why being in the room, having a seat at the table, making the rules, is better than running away and hoping nobody hurts you, like we did.
Except we're massively better off out.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
Total bollocks a lot of the economically active people are now getting payrises due to the fact companies have to compete for our labour rather than have a huge pool of people they can drag in for less. The fact that people that are senior in businesses don't like this is purely icing on our cake.
Till Brexit my job was paying much the same as it did in 2004 even if you applied to new companies. If pay had kept pace with inflation I would have been earning 41% more.In the last year the posted remuneration in job adverts are already showing a 7% uplift in pay offered
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.
Constant numbers dont mean anything, immigration has changed now you have to be coming for a job which pays over I think 27k. Also if immigration has stayed the same how do you square that with the likes of Rochdale pioneers whinging that lorry driver pay is rising....think its you talking bollocks and I get emails from recruiters all the time and I can see the pay offers rising so I don't really care if you think its bollocks because I can see the reality
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
Everybody has to fill in forms all the time. We just had to do the census....i presume this guy also did that for his mother as well.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to (or as I suspect from his twitter he is looking to make a scene). And his language of "scanning faces", FFS, he had to take a photo is what he had to do.
A census has a completely different cause ; the government bureaucracy wants to keep a tab on what is changing. This is a political issue of a bureaucracy not being empowered to review details that haven't changed in many, many years, and particularly with elderly people, which it can check much more easily.
I think you are confusing what the check here is for as I think there are two separate checks / stages involved:-
1) the paperwork itself 2) confirming that the person presenting the paperwork is the person the paperwork relates to. And given that this is being done via a machine rather than in person software needs to do some work and that software differs from supplier to supplier (as I've said before some use videos with you saying XYZ, others use photos).
How dare they! It is one of the basic tenets of western democracy that taxpayers are entitled to know how and where their money is being spent.
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.
The last thing you want to do in those circumstances is tell everyone what you are offering - for one reason it would allow other countries to offer more and see a company currently happy with £50m say insisting they get the £100m Nissan just got given.
Under the TCA the UK granting authorities are obliged (as the EU already does) to publish full details of the subsidy on a public website. This is so any injured parties can challenge it (in UK courts as the first step).
So not today then - the information needs to be published within 6 months (more than enough time to get a few more deals out the door before the figures are revealed, and hopefully saving us a few quid).
Indeed. It is very important to Nissan that the subsidy deal doesn't get successfully challenged. The EU has powerful sanctions (as does the UK going the other way, but that doesn't help Nissan). The key thing to stick within the rules, which shouldn't be difficult as they allow plenty of leeway anyway.
Can you even start to imagine if the EU attempted to interfere with the UK investment in Nissan and try to sanction HMG
A truly disgraceful account of the traumatic effect of the Home Office's "Settled Status" process, post-Brexit, on one vulnerable old lady here, who's contributed a huge amount to the country over almost 60 years :
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
The onus would be on Brexiters is to prove why an 80-year old woman, who's contributed a vast amount to society over 60 year, should have to go through any process remotely like that, not on him as her advocate to demonstrate why his allusions are proportionate.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If the requirement is what I think it is - the requirement is there because it's the easiest way of identifying that you match the paperwork you've provided.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
That won't do. The bureaucracy is quite capable of assessing her place and longevity in society before needing to challenge her on any front at all. The reason it can't operate like that, of course, is political.
That's exactly what happened to the Windrush cases. Almost certainly entitled to live in the UK, but didn't have the paperwork to prove it. Surprising you want to repeat that mistake.
She has a passport, so they were obviously prepared to engage with German bureaucracy. (I presume they are not issued for life). Just not the country she was living in.
I must say I think the original John Lilburne would have preferred the moral principle over the procedural, judging by his ideas.
Comments
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Yes, three crosses. But aren't the diagonal crosses also saltires? I admit I'm way out of my depth here, having dropped both vexillology and heraldry before GCSE, so I'm probably wrong...
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
I'm afraid that's because the politicians concerned, who drove this Far Right agenda, were as incompetent and misguided as those like von der Leyen, Jacques Delors and Jean-Claude Junckers.
But on your final para, I contend that that is only to a quite small extent due to the Boris persona. More significant is the graph the other day showing where people where on a left/right/up/down axis, which showed the current incarnation of Boris is significantly closer to the centre of gravity of the British electorate than any of the party leaders have been for some time. Since Tony Blair, perhaps.
2: We control our own laws, so we pass whichever laws our Parliament decides at our elections.
3: We control our own borders, not something I ever cared about but since we don't have a free market in housing and NIMBYs are still doing all they can to halt construction it seems in hindsight I was wrong to support free movement.
4: The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.
A few massive benefits.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
It's "certainly" not a metaphor for the fact that Scottish representation in senior political, financial, and media circles in London has long exceeded English representation in said circles in Edinburgh.
Perhaps the convention of showing Scotland as above England on the map, pushing it downwards, is a giveaway though?
Got to wonder whether in the future an English independence movement may arise, with values such as diversity and small-L liberalism.
Demographics? Does deep-fried batter harbour the virus?
(sorry)
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
Why is £350mn a week going to the NHS instead of Brussels not an economic choice? Especially when the reality is more than £400mn a week in fact.
A minor example - Beal Aerospace, Sombrero Island & the Foreign Office.
The only way such populists are defeated is by linking them directly with the chaos and corruption they inevitably cause.
He can be formidable. He monstered an ill-advised BBC interviewer on the B&S campaign trail a few days ago. Can be viewed on Twitter.
All else is trivia
Or the Scots.
Or the Welsh.
Little Englanders might be happy, for now...
That wheel too will turn.
But we need a government who wishes to deliver that to us as well.
Boris detests actual accountability and is engaged on an insidious project to reserve ever greater powers to himself.
This sounds slightly pointy-headed, but there’s a theme here which Labour could grab, popularise and persuade on here. If they weren’t so shit.
''F8cking Sunderland......F8cking Sunderland.......don't those ignorant northerners realise they would lose everything if we left, their entire city relies on staying in the EU, that City would turn into a waste land....''
He never mentions it now and I simply don't have the heart to bring it up.
They are staggeringly complicated, staggeringly big *and* manipulate matter at quantum scale, require near perfection at every stage....
Listen to one of his objections to the necessity of getting residency in the UK
‘Oh no, I had to scan her face from side to side like an inmate in a concentration camp’
Yes. He had to take a photo of his Mum JUST LIKE THE NAZIS DID AT AUSCHWITZ
Then, along with literally trillions of other house-bound EU citizens she was stripped and led naked to a pretend underground disco while John Redwood MARCHED UP AND DOWN IN LEATHER TROUSERS SHOUTING ‘SCHNELL! SCHNELL!!’ only in Welsh
In short, I don't know, but don't think the answer is clear cut either way.
“ We control our own laws,” Pirate Libertarians don’t want any laws! Just the law of the pirate ship.
Paperwork gets filled in from time to time. This has had years to be filled in and seems to be rather simple from balanced and independent reports. Simply enough for nearly six million to fill it in just fine.
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
If you accept that premise, then Philip is right. Further, we do not need to know anything, forecast anything or care about anything. It is not that the experts are wrong so much as they are wrong to care. If cornflakes go up we will eat more shredded wheat. All hail "the market".
Recall that it's well over a year since Mike Pompeo was promising 'conclusive evidence' of a lab leak:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-03/pompeo-says-enormous-evidence-links-virus-to-wuhan-laboratory
The scientists' pushback was against that false certainty.
The vast majority of virologists have continued to acknowledge the lab leak hypothesis as possible, even if they don't think it likely. But it's entirely true that they fell into the trap (as I have on occasion too) of criticising false certainty as conspiracy theory - which enabled claims like your current one.
You made great play last night of the deleted sequence data recovered by the Bloom Lab as proof of a conspiracy to hide a lab leak. And yet this is what they posted about that.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1408161515606138883
I am getting lots of questions if my pre-print about some #SARSCoV2 sequences that were removed from Sequence Read Archive tell us anything about lab accident versus natural zoonosis. I posted summary of pre-print below, but did not directly address this point explicitly (1/n)
The answer is NO. The people using it to strongly support either argument are those that have become so emotionally invested in their opinion that they have lost the ability to analyze anything objectively outside of the framework of that argument. (2/n)
First, there may be additional relevant data in obscure locations that aren't the places where we are accustomed to looking (e.g., on the Google Cloud, in table 1 of a paper on diagnostics, etc): https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1407445643547746305… (3/n)
Second, in my opinion, anybody doing phylogenetics on early #SARSCoV2 sequences from China should spend as much time on metadata as algorithms. Sequences in databases may be non-representative. Sequences collected in Guangdong might be from infections from Wuhan. Etc. (4/n)
Third, preprint provides modestly more evidence for progenitor being in clade A (not market clade), & substantially more evidence it might have T at site 29095. However, current inferences are likely based on incomplete data...
- A bigger differential between low paid jobs and benefit.
- More investment in automation - productivity will go up
- Several business models will die. Deliveroo et al depend on ridiculously low wages for their workers.
2016 £137.4 bn
2021 £159bn [excluding Covid expenditure]
Difference = £21.6bn = £416mn per week.
Funding the NHS instead of the EU ✅
In fact, since 2016 net immigration has stayed pretty constant. All we’ve done is replace Europeans (say, Poles) with non-Europeans (say, Indians).
This surprises me, to be honest. It suggests immigration is v largely driven by the needs of the economy itself, and then conditioned by policy mix.
Immigration has come right down as a politically salient issue since Brexit, but the impact of immigration on our culture hasn’t changed.
According to the some analysis I saw, the government’s proposed changes to immigration policy were expected to liberalise immigration further, so we should expect numbers to continue to increase.
I'm no supporter of either this government or Brexit, but the Nissan deal makes good sense.
It certainly comes nowhere near to the stupidity of the Irish border arrangements.
And they have to do it at scale, to produce thousands of chips. You can't do what they do in a boutique manner.
I’m noting though the government will and probably has made damn sure Nissan isn’t going anywhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms
Actually; as a result of repressed GDP growth since Brexit; we have less money for the NHS 😫
The big scale of the fabs is an interesting case - as you scale up the size, costs rise. But slower than the output. So at a certain size and volume you can make chips that people can afford to buy....
I don't have massive confidence in the current government (or any likely near term alternatives) to do it well, but they are at least making a stab at it, and not without some successes.
For the answer, one has to look at the procedural distortions in the way the Home Office operates as a bureaucracy, and the political distortions at the heart of Brexit as an ideology.
Must be slightly worrying for Brexiters that he is has become the main advocate for Brexit on this site.
Especially since he - with admirable frankness - hopes for the dissolution of the Union and the concreting over of the much of SE England.
Which is something that is very simple to do if you are young, rather more difficult if you are older and vulnerable.
My response to his complaint would really be that he's had 5 years to sort this out for his mum why did he leave it to the very last day at which point all the other options were no longer available because he had left it to the last possible second.
Till Brexit my job was paying much the same as it did in 2004 even if you applied to new companies. If pay had kept pace with inflation I would have been earning 41% more.In the last year the posted remuneration in job adverts are already showing a 7% uplift in pay offered
My only concern, tied in with Brexit, how long term is this deal and investment?
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to (or as I suspect from his twitter he is looking to make a scene). And his language of "scanning faces", FFS, he had to take a photo is what he had to do.
But given that he had left it to the last day he was presented with the only system that could do things in the timescale he had given himself which was via a third party computerised system that has a particular way of confirming identity checks (and I can't be arsed to check which company is the one that was used), But the purpose is to confirm that the person using the electronic system is the same person as the paperwork relates to.
He makes it sound like some kind of CAT-scan.
She has a passport, so they were obviously prepared to engage with German bureaucracy. (I presume they are not issued for life). Just not the country she was living in.
Until even traditional Conservative voters turn against them. That happened in C&A, and I would very much like to see it happen again today.
It is true that organizations should be able to work with commonsense, but it is also unreasonable to expect that, at a national government scale, no-one will just follow the rules blindly. And while that might aggrieve us, we have to share responsibility if the situation arises because we have not followed the rules in a timely fashion.
1) the paperwork itself
2) confirming that the person presenting the paperwork is the person the paperwork relates to. And given that this is being done via a machine rather than in person software needs to do some work and that software differs from supplier to supplier (as I've said before some use videos with you saying XYZ, others use photos).