politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hung Parliaments are becoming the norm and we have to get used

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Today in Brexit Britain:

https://twitter.com/naomiohreally/status/900255267056693248

Her LinkedIn says she is currently at Helsinki Uni as and Academy Research fellow studying 'Travel and Self-Description in Seventeenth-Century English Culture, 1.9. 2016-31.8.2021'

The local paper has covered her story - and correct me if I'm mistaken, but that doesn't look like Brighton behind her....

http://www.hs.fi/ulkomaat/art-2000005336613.html?share=ae0acaea3dacda415e88e73cd81e20eb

. Here's another piece of evidence that you might wish to consider:

http://www.history.qmul.ac.uk/staff/profile/dr-eva-johanna-holmberg

Neither of you are considering the more basic question. Is this really someone who Britain should need or want to deport?

You see but you do not observe:

Academy of Finland Research Fellow, Visiting Fellow

How can we deport someone who isn't here?

Better get more facts eh?

Or do you prefer a rush to judgment - like in Irene Clennell's case?

"Visiting Fellow" is an academic title. As usual, your reading skills are letting you down.

And well done for ducking the question directly asked of you (which could also be applied to Ms Clennell).

As you're clearly not in possession of all the facts, but seem to subscribe to the 'Hard cases make good laws' and 'Rush to Judgment' schools of thought I'll leave you to your Brexit fantasies.

If only we could turn the clock back a year when the Home Office reached sound decisions based on accurately submitted paperwork, everything would be so much nicer eh?

I look forward to all of the facts emerging.....

Well ducked again. One day you'll give a straight answer to a straight question instead of throwing up dust in a too-transparent manner.

Got a mirror, dear?

Alistair said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alistair said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sean_F said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Johnno, agree entirely on Marshal. Top chap. (Can recommend Asbridge's biography of him).

Mr. Eagles, saying there are others worthier of a statue is not the same as justifying tearing statues down.

The Lionheart was a successful war leader. When he was alive, we advanced, when he died, we were beaten back.

We need an equestrian statue of Edward I, riding over a heap of dead Scots.

I've said all monopoly moneyScottish bank notes should have pictures of old Longshanks on them.

Also on all Scottish pound coins should have 'Malleus Scotorum' on them instead of 'Nemo me impune lacessit.'

Obvs an image of Longshanks on them would be a bonus.

The correct way to remember Edward the First is the only way - shitting himself to death at the thought of facing Robert the Bruce.

You ruined my productivity yesterday.

The WeWantPlates twitter account has me mesmerised.

Out of all the horrific horrors on there only 2 made me actually angry.

Charged over 3 Euros for this

twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/763401319457644544

then there was this one, served to a child. A three year old child!

twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/733721914355666944

The dog bowl one made me gag.

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/894849732165722113

The Tonka Truck had me shaking my head, but this one had me angry, you can't do this to a book.

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/889570334017560576

TheScreamingEagles said:

The dog bowl one made me gag.

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/894849732165722113/

In favour of the dog bowl I am at least happy that the kitchen staff can clean it to an acceptable level of hygiene and is fundamentally a bowl.

This on the other hand was not something I needed to see whilst recovering from food poisoning,

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/664927129268838401

TheScreamingEagles said:

The dog bowl one made me gag.

In favour of the dog bowl I am at least happy that the kitchen staff can clean it to an acceptable level of hygiene and is fundamentally a bowl.

This on the other hand was not something I needed to see whilst recovering from food poisoning,

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/664927129268838401

Alistair said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The dog bowl one made me gag.

In favour of the dog bowl I am at least happy that the kitchen staff can clean it to an acceptable level of hygiene and is fundamentally a bowl.

This on the other hand was not something I needed to see whilst recovering from food poisoning,

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/664927129268838401

I have no words.

ydoethur said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

ydoethur said:

rottenborough said:

In contrast:

"Gordon Brown is not a popular figure among readers of the Daily Telegraph...Yet to his credit, Brown was also a man of big ideas, an attribute which seems sadly lacking in the mediocrity of today’s political landscape."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/22/britain-surely-doomed-doesnt-urgently-start-upping-investment/

I'm puzzled by this comment. What big ideas did Brown have? I can't come up with any.

H

I do agree that no current politician has imagination or vision. But that was true in the 1950s and 1960s as well, or indeed the 1880s and 1890s. The bigger issue is that steady as she goes will hardly cut it now.

He nationalised the banks. This helped resolve the banking crisis, here and in many other countries which followed the basic idea. He managed to persuade the other world leaders (including newly elected Barack Obama) that this was not just a solution, but the only one. He was right, and had he failed to persuade them, the consequences for us alll would have been much more severe,

He was a crap PM, but this one idea stands to his eternal credit. And it certainly qualifies as a big one.

Was it his idea though? How much input did the likes of Darling and Vadera have into it?

True, it worked. But if he had forced the Treasury and the Bank of England to work together effectively in the previous five years on banking regulation, it might not have been necessary or at least not on such a scale.

My post has been criticised from two contradictory viewpoints. You and Cyclefree say the policy was sound, but attribute it to others, notably Darling, and another poster who reckons it was a crap idea anyway.

I think we can disregard the latter, but as regards you and Miss C I have to defer, except to the extent that it would have been difficult for the policy to be implemented without the active support of the PM. There's also the well-document accounts of Brown's active role at the G20 Summit which was taking place at the height of the crisis.

Oh, and I readily concede that Brown's spending policies contributed to the problem, so to some extent he was guilty of encouraging the fire he later helped to put out. He contribution to the conflagration should not be overestimated however. The problem really did start in the USA, and the amount of dodgy debt knocking around at the time was colossal and dwarfed Brown's own profligacy.

(The spivs in London Square Mile are of course not so easily exonerated but that's another story - It's well-documented in Silver's book The Signal and The Noise, if you are interested.)

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

I was joking. You are virtue signalling. I don't want this lady deported, I was just sure there would be more to it than the initial outrageux indicated.

How we Brexit is down to the elected government of the day, one that I didn't vote for.

r.i.p. Sunday Politics

https://twitter.com/afneil/status/900299207172644864

rkrkrk said:

That Wewantplates twitter feed is fantastic...

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/895000426344534016

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

williamglenn said:

rkrkrk said:

That Wewantplates twitter feed is fantastic...

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/895000426344534016

https://twitter.com/WeWantPlates/status/889512885029924865

Really made me laugh.
Clearly the Camden Hell's lager wasn't hipster enough on its own...

Mr. 43, there have been many tales here of the UKBA's woeful ways.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

That too. The immigrants that are most put off are those that are most marketable and have choices about where they go.

isam said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

I was joking. You are virtue signalling. I don't want this lady deported, I was just sure there would be more to it than the initial outrageux indicated.

How we Brexit is down to the elected government of the day, one that I didn't vote for.

This is the core of Leavers' cognitive dissonance. You (not just you) say it's down to the government of the day, but I'm guessing you would cry blue murder if the government of the day said: we're staying in the single market.

You can't have your cake and eat it, no matter what implement it is served upon.

Home Office sources said it seemed the letter was sent “in error”.
The plot thickens.

It's time for anyone who mocked the promise of 'global Britain' to eat humble pie.
https://twitter.com/tkbeynon/status/900300471746912257

williamglenn said:

It's time for anyone who mocked the promise of 'global Britain' to eat humble pie.
https://twitter.com/tkbeynon/status/900300471746912257

er, no.

TOPPING said:

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

isam said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:

Brexit has caused ructions for many Finns in Britain and Brits in Finland, and on Wednesday HS takes a look at one case in some detail. Researcher Eva Johanna Holmberg received a letter from the Home Office this month telling her that she had no right to be in Britain and had one month to leave the country.


This is not yet a necessary step for EU citizens in the UK, but Holmberg decided to do it anyway for peace of mind and to get the admin out of the way. The website looked simple, she tells HS, so she sent in her application. Unfortunately it was rejected and the UK government told her to leave.

She immediately contacted lawyers, who said the removal letter was almost certainly without foundation but difficult to rescind. Her partner contacted the local MP, the Green Party's Caroline Lucas, and she promised to help.

But despite legal eagles and a prominent politician in her corner, Holmberg remains in limbo. Her advocates are unsure why exactly her application was rejected but suspect it might be to do with her employment situation. Although she works for Queen Mary University in London, her employer is technically Helsinki University--and that might not suffice for UK authorities.

In any case, she has legal bills of 3,800 euros and counting and considerably less peace of mind than she had when she entered the Kafkaesque bureaucracy around Britain's chaotic plans for a life after Brexit.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

So it was her fuck up. What a surprise

The best solution would be to let her re-apply w the correct details. Otherwise we could be one academic fellow studying British travel in the 17th century short!

I'd forgotten that Leavers despise experts. With that in mind, she's lucky she's not being subjected to ordeal by fire.

It is a sad indictment of Britain today that our kids have neither the drive nor the work ethic to go into the fields and pick the 'Travel and Self-Description in Seventeenth-Century English Culture'

yeah we're better off without her and her foreign "enquiring mind".

I am here as a resource to make people feel better about themselves, you are welcome.

isam said:

TOPPING said:

isam said:

AlastairMeeks said:

isam said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:

Brexit has caused ructions for many Finns in Britain and Brits in Finland, and on Wednesday HS takes a look at one case in some detail. Researcher Eva Johanna Holmberg received a letter from the Home Office this month telling her that she had no right to be in Britain and had one month to leave the country.


This is not yet a necessary step for EU citizens in the UK, but Holmberg decided to do it anyway for peace of mind and to get the admin out of the way. The website looked simple, she tells HS, so she sent in her application. Unfortunately it was rejected and the UK government told her to leave.

She immediately contacted lawyers, who said the removal letter was almost certainly without foundation but difficult to rescind. Her partner contacted the local MP, the Green Party's Caroline Lucas, and she promised to help.

But despite legal eagles and a prominent politician in her corner, Holmberg remains in limbo. Her advocates are unsure why exactly her application was rejected but suspect it might be to do with her employment situation. Although she works for Queen Mary University in London, her employer is technically Helsinki University--and that might not suffice for UK authorities.

In any case, she has legal bills of 3,800 euros and counting and considerably less peace of mind than she had when she entered the Kafkaesque bureaucracy around Britain's chaotic plans for a life after Brexit.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

So it was her fuck up. What a surprise

The best solution would be to let her re-apply w the correct details. Otherwise we could be one academic fellow studying British travel in the 17th century short!

I'd forgotten that Leavers despise experts. With that in mind, she's lucky she's not being subjected to ordeal by fire.

It is a sad indictment of Britain today that our kids have neither the drive nor the work ethic to go into the fields and pick the 'Travel and Self-Description in Seventeenth-Century English Culture'

yeah we're better off without her and her foreign "enquiring mind".

I am here as a resource to make people feel better about themselves, you are welcome.

And to my second point?

foxinsoxuk said:

FF43 said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

That too. The immigrants that are most put off are those that are most marketable and have choices about where they go.

On that subject:

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/employment/600-overseas-gps-to-be-recruited-for-english-practices-by-april/20035133.article

And a campaign to recruit GPs from Australia? ROFL! there are 350 fewer GPs than 2015, despite Hunt's promised 5000 recruits.

Lots of undergraduate medical school places in clearing too. Nearly all medical schools unable to fill their courses.

Its almost as if our country is governed by incompetents...

It's more chilling than that. They're ideologues.

The aim is zero tax, zero state, zero regulation.

Burn the state.

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

I loved presenting Sunday Politics, it was a privilege and honour to hold the political discourse up to the light for all those years and while I will miss it greatly I am delighted to continue to work for the BBC on This Week, Daily Politics and other projects.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/aug/23/andrew-neil-steps-down-as-sunday-politics-host

trans: "I want a lie-in and pub lunch (with the Sunday Roast served on a plate, obvs) like most of the rest of the country."

I thought it was Carlotta Vance resigning!

FeersumEnjineeya said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

The peanut in your pocket has not been devalued.

It still buys just as much when spent in the UK (on UK products and services).

isam said:

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

I loved presenting Sunday Politics, it was a privilege and honour to hold the political discourse up to the light for all those years and while I will miss it greatly I am delighted to continue to work for the BBC on This Week, Daily Politics and other projects.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/aug/23/andrew-neil-steps-down-as-sunday-politics-host

trans: "I want a lie-in and pub lunch (with the Sunday Roast served on a plate, obvs) like most of the rest of the country."

I thought it was Carlotta Vance resigning!

Misunderstanding 'Visiting Fellow' would be enough to shame the most hardened spin-merchant into taking a long break.

williamglenn said:

It's time for anyone who mocked the promise of 'global Britain' to eat humble pie.
/twitter.com/tkbeynon/status/900300471746912257

Is the humble pie served in a collander or on a garden hose? if not then I am not interested.

geoffw said:

nigel4england said:

Genuine question, who funds her studies here? I presume she does so herself?

She's a post-doc research fellow of the Academy of Finland.

Surely the underlying issue is why Helsinki Uni would pay for this research?

ThreeQuidder said:

rkrkrk said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

My post has been criticised from two contradictory viewpoints. You and Cyclefree say the policy was sound, but attribute it to others, notably Darling, and another poster who reckons it was a crap idea anyway.

I think we can disregard the latter, but as regards you and Miss C I have to defer, except to the extent that it would have been difficult for the policy to be implemented without the active support of the PM. There's also the well-document accounts of Brown's active role at the G20 Summit which was taking place at the height of the crisis.

Oh, and I readily concede that Brown's spending policies contributed to the problem, so to some extent he was guilty of encouraging the fire he later helped to put out. He contribution to the conflagration should not be overestimated however. The problem really did start in the USA, and the amount of dodgy debt knocking around at the time was colossal and dwarfed Brown's own profligacy.

(The spivs in London Square Mile are of course not so easily exonerated but that's another story - It's well-documented in Silver's book The Signal and The Noise, if you are interested.)

His conduct post-premiership also looks a lot better than what Tony Blair has been up to.

Brown's spending is a complete red herring. His major failing was light touch bank regulation - he was hardly alone in that - but as a Labour politician he really should have known better.

His major failing was believing his rhetoric about having abolished boom and bust.

His second biggest failing was in bank regulation - not the amount as such, but that he heavily regulated all the wrong things.

And that he moved individual Bank regulation from the Bank of England to a new body (The FSA) which was incompetent, ignorant and responsible for the bank crash in the UK.

One by one, the brittle positions on Brexit set out by the Prime Minister over the past year are crumbling. No longer does any Cabinet minister repeat her mantra that “no deal is better than a bad deal”; no more does the Government pretend that European citizens won’t be able to move freely to the UK.

It turns out that Britain’s initial salvos are far from unstoppable when confronted with the immovable objects of the EU’s negotiating discipline and the lack of a parliamentary majority. This is a welcome reality check on the rigid dogma that has infected too much Brexiteer talk and which soured the tone of the negotiations from the start.

We see further evidence of that flexibility today as the Government publishes its ideas on the future judicial oversight of our on-going relationship with our European neighbours once we leave the EU. Back at last year’s Conservative Conference Theresa May claimed that Britain would no longer be subject to “supranational institutions that can override national parliaments and courts”. Today, her Government confirms that Britain will indeed subject itself to a supranational institution that can override our Parliament and our court in resolving disputes with the EU.

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-a-brexit-reality-check-on-the-european-court-a3618091.html

David_Evershed said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

The peanut in your pocket has not been devalued.

It still buys just as much when spent in the UK (on UK products and services).

Devaluation caused (RPI) inflation to rise from 0-1% to 3-4%/y. Hence butter up from 89p to £1.39 in a year and other slightly less dramatic rises.

williamglenn said:

nigel4england said:

williamglenn said:

It's time for anyone who mocked the promise of 'global Britain' to eat humble pie.
https://twitter.com/tkbeynon/status/900300471746912257

Sad to say that this really sums you up

You don't think it's revealing that it's the finance deal from the government they're bigging up rather than the alleged contract?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-41011700

"Our ability to offer finance from UK Export Finance in Mexican pesos was a significant benefit to our buyer, helping us win this major contract."

Sounds like vendor financing underwritten by the UK government. Is the government going to get its money back?

It is at the least insuring vendor financing. The government will lose money on the insurance but hopes to make more from the various taxes raised from the extra business generated.

ThreeQuidder said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

ydoethur said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

ydoethur said:

rottenborough said:

In contrast:

"Gordon Brown is not a popular figure among readers of the Daily Telegraph...Yet to his credit, Brown was also a man of big ideas, an attribute which seems sadly lacking in the mediocrity of today’s political landscape."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/22/britain-surely-doomed-doesnt-urgently-start-upping-investment/

I'm puzzled by this comment. What big ideas did Brown have? I can't come up with any.

H

I do agree that no current politician has imagination or vision. But that was true in the 1950s and 1960s as well, or indeed the 1880s and 1890s. The bigger issue is that steady as she goes will hardly cut it now.

He nationalised the banks. This helped resolve the banking crisis, here and in many other countries which followed the basic idea. He managed to persuade the other world leaders (including newly elected Barack Obama) that this was not just a solution, but the only one. He was right, and had he failed to persuade them, the consequences for us alll would have been much more severe,

He was a crap PM, but this one idea stands to his eternal credit. And it certainly qualifies as a big one.

Was it his idea though? How much input did the likes of Darling and Vadera have into it?

True, it worked. But if he had forced the Treasury and the Bank of England to work together effectively in the previous five years on banking regulation, it might not have been necessary or at least not on such a scale.

My post has been criticised from two contradictory viewpoints. You and Cyclefree say the policy was sound, but attribute it to others, notably Darling, and another poster who reckons it was a crap idea anyway.

I think we can disregard the latter, but as regards you and Miss C I have to defer, except to the extent that it would have been difficult for the policy to be implemented without the active support of the PM. There's also the well-document accounts of Brown's active role at the G20 Summit which was taking place at the height of the crisis.

"He didn't resist doing the obvious and necessary thing" isn't perhaps as great a recommendation as you seem to think.

Note the word 'active' in the last sentence.

David_Evershed said:

geoffw said:

nigel4england said:

Genuine question, who funds her studies here? I presume she does so herself?

She's a post-doc research fellow of the Academy of Finland.

Surely the underlying issue is why Helsinki Uni would pay for this research?

Why not? Attitudes to travel in 17C England is valid historical research, and probably quite interesting.

FF43 said:

David_Evershed said:

geoffw said:

nigel4england said:

Genuine question, who funds her studies here? I presume she does so herself?

She's a post-doc research fellow of the Academy of Finland.

Surely the underlying issue is why Helsinki Uni would pay for this research?

Why not? Attitudes to travel in 17C England is valid historical research, and probably quite interesting.

Why would Finland have this special interest though?

foxinsoxuk said:

On that subject:

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/employment/600-overseas-gps-to-be-recruited-for-english-practices-by-april/20035133.article

And a campaign to recruit GPs from Australia? ROFL! there are 350 fewer GPs than 2015, despite Hunt's promised 5000 recruits.

Lots of undergraduate medical school places in clearing too. Nearly all medical schools unable to fill their courses.

Its almost as if our country is governed by incompetents...

Do you think EU doctors and nurses will leave post-Brexit?
There was a poll that suggested 4/10 were considering it... but I think it's a very difficult question to research... in practice many will have family ties etc. here - leaving won't be so easy/tempting.

Surprised courses aren't being filled...
My understanding is Hunt has backed down on forcing NHS trained doctors to stay for four years.

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

Isn't it simply she made a mistake and the Home Office responded with a "computer says no" mentality. Worthy of criticism, yes, but any connection to Brexit is merely circumstantial

Richard_Nabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

I see George is onto the Finnish historian case:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/leading-finnish-historian-threatened-with-detention-and-deportation-in-absurd-brexit-ruling-by-home-a3618176.html

And, tucked in at the end of the article, is the revelation that it's a non-story:

A Home Office spokesman said Dr Holmberg’s letter should not have been sent, adding hers was not the only case.

He said: “A limited number of letters were issued in error and we have been urgently looking into why this happened.

"We are contacting everyone who received this letter to clarify that they can disregard it."

Sorry, Alastair - this is an old-fashioned Home Office screw-up, not an example of Brexit over-enthusiasm.

Nasty Amber Rudd, those Brexiteer swivel eyed loons are all the same. Bet she's a racist too, and so is her boyfriend probably

foxinsoxuk said:

FF43 said:

FeersumEnjineeya said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

FF43 said:

geoffw said:

re Holmberg deportation case:


https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/wednesdays_papers_turku_stabbing_investigation_brexit_problems_and_johaugs_tears/9792490

Btw if you try Google translate the Helsingin Sanomat article referred to earlier you'll be totally befuddled because Google translate cannot cope with the lack of a distinction between "he" and "she" in Finnish.

In that case the UKBA is almost certainly acting unlawfully, even if acting according to their procedures. Ms Sanomat has an absolute right to residence under EU FoM rules. After Brexit she would have no guarantees or recourse to the courts under UK proposals even if she nominally had the rights to be here under treaty. These are significant issues.

What we need is a strong advocate of Britain remaining in the EU at the Home Office

You are deflecting. We are brexiting. We can choose to do that in an openminded, competent way or we can do it the way the government is doing it, urged on by certain Leavers. One thing I have learnt since the referendum is that you can get immigration numbers down by being unpleasant to would be immigrants. It isn't "control" in any meaningful sense but if you want to be closed rather than open, it works.

We can also get immigration numbers down by trashing the pound, currently at an 8-year low against the euro aside from the flash crash last October. People aren't going to come if they can only earn peanuts.

That too. The immigrants that are most put off are those that are most marketable and have choices about where they go.

On that subject:

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/practice-topics/employment/600-overseas-gps-to-be-recruited-for-english-practices-by-april/20035133.article

And a campaign to recruit GPs from Australia? ROFL! there are 350 fewer GPs than 2015, despite Hunt's promised 5000 recruits.

Lots of undergraduate medical school places in clearing too. Nearly all medical schools unable to fill their courses.

Its almost as if our country is governed by incompetents...

In the case of nurses though more training places are being provided to address the historic oversupply of applicants to places

williamglenn said:

nigel4england said:

williamglenn said:

It's time for anyone who mocked the promise of 'global Britain' to eat humble pie.
https://twitter.com/tkbeynon/status/900300471746912257

Sad to say that this really sums you up

You don't think it's revealing that it's the finance deal from the government they're bigging up rather than the alleged contract?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-41011700

"Our ability to offer finance from UK Export Finance in Mexican pesos was a significant benefit to our buyer, helping us win this major contract."

Sounds like vendor financing underwritten by the UK government. Is the government going to get its money back?

A huge proportion of international trade from all countries is financed like this

Richard_Nabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

I see George is onto the Finnish historian case:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/leading-finnish-historian-threatened-with-detention-and-deportation-in-absurd-brexit-ruling-by-home-a3618176.html

And, tucked in at the end of the article, is the revelation that it's a non-story:

A Home Office spokesman said Dr Holmberg’s letter should not have been sent, adding hers was not the only case.

He said: “A limited number of letters were issued in error and we have been urgently looking into why this happened.

"We are contacting everyone who received this letter to clarify that they can disregard it."

Sorry, Alastair - this is an old-fashioned Home Office screw-up, not an example of Brexit over-enthusiasm.

Yes - Home Office screw-up I think.
We've had a few of these screw-ups before though - surely it can't be that hard to alter the system so that they do more thorough checks before sending out deportation notices?

Apart from anything else - it generates terrible press. Amber Rudd needs to get a grip.

Doesn't fill me with confidence for the considerable additional workload the Home Office will receive post-Brexit.

Richard_Nabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

I see George is onto the Finnish historian case:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/leading-finnish-historian-threatened-with-detention-and-deportation-in-absurd-brexit-ruling-by-home-a3618176.html

Sorry, Alastair - this is an old-fashioned Home Office screw-up, not an example of Brexit over-enthusiasm.

Sentence First! Verdict afterwards!

Who needs the facts when its a good old bash the proles BREXIT story?

Reading the Finnish lecturers tweets, I think its fair to say she has never been a fan of the current government - which of course is absolutely her right - though it might help explain the alacrity with which her, partial, side of the story has been disseminated....

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/900314343488860163

Don't worry, Mrs May will disown that soon too.

Richard_Nabavi said:

If the Irish PM doesn't want a hard border, then he needs to address himself to persuading his EU colleagues of the obvious truth: that they need to get on with agreeing a comprehensive trade deal with the UK that will make such a border unnecessary. This really isn't hard to understand, especially since it will be the EU which will be insisting on the border checks.

Does Canada not have a comprehensive trade deal with the US of the kind you are suggesting the EU needs to give us? Yet they still have a hard border.

Clearly this is needs a political solution and it is unrelated to trade discussions. It really isn't hard to understand...

Latest position paper:

67. There is no precedent, and indeed no imperative driven by EU, UK or international law, which demands that enforcement or dispute resolution of future UK-EU agreements falls under the direct jurisdiction of the CJEU.

68. The precedents examined in this paper demonstrate that there are a number of additional means by which the EU has entered into agreements which offer assurance of effective enforcement and dispute resolution and, where appropriate, avoidance of divergence, without necessitating the direct jurisdiction of the CJEU over a third party. Such an arrangement, whereby the highest court of one party would act as the means of enforcing or interpreting an agreement between the two parties, would be exceptional in international agreements.

69. The UK will therefore engage constructively to negotiate an approach to enforcement and dispute resolution which meets the key objectives of both the UK and the EU in underpinning the effective operation of a new, deep and special partnership.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/639609/Enforcement_and_dispute_resolution.pdf