Are we missing the obvious in Batley & Spen – Hancock and a narrowing of the poll gap? – politicalbe
Options
Comments
-
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.kle4 said: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.
2 -
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.0 -
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.0 -
On the last, I'm intrigued now, but on a work VPN so I'll save it for later!Carnyx said:
Er, no. Three crosses, surely. (But don't google St Andrews Cross at work.)Selebian said:
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?Carnyx said:
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?Theuniondivvie said:
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.Leon said:
Lol!Theuniondivvie said: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.
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9525378,-3.1830501,3a,75y,100.65h,110.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2vyfsaRdYr5p3qT_eDi9Rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
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...0 -
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.0 -
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.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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'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.2 -
Oh, sure.Philip_Thompson said:
Though those who underestimate him neglect to understand that many do genuinely like Boris - or understand why they do.Cookie said:
Ha - I was just trying to come up with a way of making the same point. Except it wasn't as succinct.Leon said:
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?Stuartinromford said:
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.JosiasJessop said:
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.Nigel_Foremain said:
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.NerysHughes said:
Isn't that what you want in a political opponent? That would surely make him so much easier to beat.Nigel_Foremain said:
No, it is because he is a twat and an embarrassment.NerysHughes said:
Thats why he is hated so much on here, he is feared as a political opponent.Big_G_NorthWales said: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
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'.
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.
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’
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.
Boris consistently has high gross approval ratings, much higher than Cameron had at this stage of the 2010-15 Parliament.
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.1 -
Oh yes, sorry, I just meant three crosses rather than one. Indeed two of the crosses are of the saltire subvariety!Selebian said:
On the last, I'm intrigued now, but on a work VPN so I'll save it for later!Carnyx said:
Er, no. Three crosses, surely. (But don't google St Andrews Cross at work.)Selebian said:
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?Carnyx said:
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?Theuniondivvie said:
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.Leon said:
Lol!Theuniondivvie said: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.
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9525378,-3.1830501,3a,75y,100.65h,110.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2vyfsaRdYr5p3qT_eDi9Rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
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...1 -
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.1 -
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".JosiasJessop said:
You do seem to be blaming the voters. How very dare they!FF43 said:
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.JosiasJessop said:
You appear to be blaming the voters.FF43 said: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.
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.
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.0 -
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.2 -
A metaphor for an imaginary and completely non-existent arrangement.Theuniondivvie said:
The Cross of St George slapped over the Scottish & Irish saltires and Wales not even represented is certainly a cracking metaphor.Selebian said:
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?Carnyx said:
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?Theuniondivvie said:
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.Leon said:
Lol!Theuniondivvie said: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.
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9525378,-3.1830501,3a,75y,100.65h,110.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2vyfsaRdYr5p3qT_eDi9Rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
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.
0 -
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.2 -
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.kle4 said:
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.Scott_xP said:
Nope.williamglenn said: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?
You don't have to be fan of all things EU to think that being in it is better than being out of it.2 -
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?
1 -
That's him - forever going round in circles.RochdalePioneers said:
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.Charles said:
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.StuartDickson said:
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.tlg86 said:
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.isam said: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.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
(sorry)0 -
LOL 😆CarlottaVance said:The Socialist Campaign Group met last night and concluded that they couldn't get the 40 MP nominations needed to challenge Starmer, I'm told.
But a left candidate would only need 20 nominations if Starmer resigned.
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1410580765637763074?s=200 -
What time is the Batley and Spen declaration expected?0
-
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.1 -
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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/14102742751944581140 -
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" lolGnud said:
A metaphor for an imaginary and completely non-existent arrangement.Theuniondivvie said:
The Cross of St George slapped over the Scottish & Irish saltires and Wales not even represented is certainly a cracking metaphor.Selebian said:
Well, technially that's (parts of) two big saltires and a cross, no?Carnyx said:
Do you remember seeing any saltires on Government buildings? Big ones? Like this?Theuniondivvie said:
Big flags, wee dicks AND non specific whataboutery, a classic combo.Leon said:
Lol!Theuniondivvie said: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.
Because the SNP never goes in for ludicrous saltire-branding to drum up support and stoke grievance?
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.9525378,-3.1830501,3a,75y,100.65h,110.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2vyfsaRdYr5p3qT_eDi9Rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
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?0 -
Fitba.Burgessian said: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?0 -
You must have a very low view of the country to consider 52% of the nation "Far Right" 🙄Cocky_cockney said:
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the 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.0 -
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.Cocky_cockney said:
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.1 -
It was an institutional problem. Whatever our partners want - give it to them. Often without bothering to get a quid pro quo.Cocky_cockney said:
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.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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'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.
A minor example - Beal Aerospace, Sombrero Island & the Foreign Office.1 -
Johnson (and Trump, and Berlusconi) were/are popular because they stand against the “rules” that “middle class” people impose on “ordinary people”.
The only way such populists are defeated is by linking them directly with the chaos and corruption they inevitably cause.1 -
Martin Amis described Galloway as a "political entrepreneur" when reflecting on Galloway's feud with The Hitch. I think that's an acute description.MattW said:
That's him - forever going round in circles.RochdalePioneers said:
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.Charles said:
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.StuartDickson said:
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.tlg86 said:
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.isam said: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.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
(sorry)
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.0 -
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?Malmesbury said:
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.0 -
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 beneficialeek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
All else is trivia1 -
Ask the Northern Irish how well that is working out.Leon said: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
Or the Scots.
Or the Welsh.
Little Englanders might be happy, for now...
That wheel too will turn.0 -
This is the key benefit - as you say, the *only* benefit, and it is not trivial.Leon said:
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 beneficialeek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
All else is trivia
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.0 -
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 ofMaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
''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.5 -
Not Manchester?Carnyx said:
Fitba.Burgessian said: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?0 -
“ £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.Philip_Thompson said:
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.0 -
Why was the application left to the last minute? And if she came here in 1963 why has she never applied for citizenship?WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/14102742751944581142 -
Somewhat related to what Bill Gunston said of military jets - "Swiss watches by the ton"moonshine said:
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?Malmesbury said:
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
They are staggeringly complicated, staggeringly big *and* manipulate matter at quantum scale, require near perfection at every stage....2 -
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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 Welsh4 -
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.northern_monkey said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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.MrEd said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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.Sean_F said:And from the POV of Red Wall voters, labour shortages are a pretty good thing.
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?
Another question of course is whether many of these jobs which were done by cheap foreign labour are now automated.
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.
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?
In short, I don't know, but don't think the answer is clear cut either way.1 -
“We control our own borders” delta variant says “it don’t work like that Phil” 😆gealbhan said:
“ £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.Philip_Thompson said:
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.
“ We control our own laws,” Pirate Libertarians don’t want any laws! Just the law of the pirate ship.0 -
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.gealbhan said:
“ £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.Philip_Thompson said:
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.0 -
Politicians whom the public can sack are, in general, less corrupt and criminal than politicians whom the public cannot.ClippP said:
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.Cocky_cockney said:
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.1 -
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.JohnLilburne said:
Why was the application left to the last minute? And if she came here in 1963 why has she never applied for citizenship?WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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.1 -
In conditions of absolute cleanliness and no static charges.Malmesbury said:
Somewhat related to what Bill Gunston said of military jets - "Swiss watches by the ton"moonshine said:
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?Malmesbury said:
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
They are staggeringly complicated, staggeringly big *and* manipulate matter at quantum scale, require near perfection at every stage....1 -
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.3 -
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.Gardenwalker said:
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.TheScreamingEagles said:
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.Philip_Thompson said:
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.TheScreamingEagles said: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”.
https://twitter.com/ITVJoel/status/1410518270319468545
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?
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
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".2 -
Except that is not a true characterisation of what happened.Leon said:
Cf all the virologists angrily arguing against ‘lab leak’ as a hypothesis. To the extent they denounce it as a ‘racist conspiracy theory’Philip_Thompson said:
Not all. Only those with vested interests that I disagree with.Gardenwalker said:
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.TheScreamingEagles said:
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.Philip_Thompson said:
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.TheScreamingEagles said: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”.
https://twitter.com/ITVJoel/status/1410518270319468545
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?
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
Just because someone has a vested interest in something doesn't mean they're automatically right. Quite the opposite sometimes.
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
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...1 -
A couple of things will occur if low end jobs rise above minimum wageTimT said:
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.northern_monkey said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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.MrEd said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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.Sean_F said:And from the POV of Red Wall voters, labour shortages are a pretty good thing.
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?
Another question of course is whether many of these jobs which were done by cheap foreign labour are now automated.
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.
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?
In short, I don't know, but don't think the answer is clear cut either way.
- 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.3 -
NHS funding in real terms:gealbhan said:
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.gealbhan said:
“ £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.Philip_Thompson said:
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.
2016 £137.4 bn
2021 £159bn [excluding Covid expenditure]
Difference = £21.6bn = £416mn per week.
Funding the NHS instead of the EU ✅2 -
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.0 -
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.Gardenwalker said: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.0 -
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
I disagree.Gardenwalker said:
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.Leon said:
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’Gardenwalker said:
Lol.BigRich said:
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.Gardenwalker said: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.
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.”
https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1410516867488362498?s=21
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
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'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.0 -
👏👏👏✅✅✅DecrepiterJohnL said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
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.TheScreamingEagles said:
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.Philip_Thompson said:
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.TheScreamingEagles said: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”.
https://twitter.com/ITVJoel/status/1410518270319468545
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?
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
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".1 -
I haven’t read about this in detail, but at face value this appears to be true. Surprised it has not received more attention.Philip_Thompson said:
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.Gardenwalker said: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.0 -
They work at a level of precision that is basically inconceivable.moonshine said:
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?Malmesbury said:
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
And they have to do it at scale, to produce thousands of chips. You can't do what they do in a boutique manner.2 -
I’m not saying it doesn’t.Nigelb said:
I disagree.Gardenwalker said:
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.Leon said:
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’Gardenwalker said:
Lol.BigRich said:
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.Gardenwalker said: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.
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.”
https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1410516867488362498?s=21
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
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'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 noting though the government will and probably has made damn sure Nissan isn’t going anywhere.0 -
Alas, it appears he never said it. Worth watching to the end ...gealbhan said:
I understand Johnners did get wish. He said it 🙂Anabobazina said:
Would surely have been the other way around if it was ever uttered at all.TimT said:Seeing David Willey in the England line up reminds me of that classic piece of Test Cricket commentary: "The batsman's Holding the bowler's Willey."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms0 -
I don’t recall the EU suppressing our funding of the NHS, do you?Philip_Thompson said:
NHS funding in real terms:gealbhan said:
“ The NHS has gained over £400mn a week in real terms. More than meeting that £350mn promised.”. Whaaaaaaaaaaat? That needs explaining.gealbhan said:
“ £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.Philip_Thompson said:
1: We control our own money, so we're about £10 billion per annum better off.eek said:
In what ways are we better off? Can you name any?Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
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.
2016 £137.4 bn
2021 £159bn [excluding Covid expenditure]
Difference = £21.6bn = £416mn per week.
Funding the NHS instead of the EU ✅
Actually; as a result of repressed GDP growth since Brexit; we have less money for the NHS 😫0 -
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.Alistair said:
They work at a level of precision that is basically inconceivable.moonshine said:
Why are semi conductor foundries so expensive?Malmesbury said:
The American government will effectively pay for the lab they are getting built in the US, IIRC.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
That will make that Japanese subsidy look like a tip.
And they have to do it at scale, to produce thousands of chips. You can't do what they do in a boutique manner.
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....0 -
Indeed. And then rinse, and repeat. CirclesBurgessian said:
Martin Amis described Galloway as a "political entrepreneur" when reflecting on Galloway's feud with The Hitch. I think that's an acute description.MattW said:
That's him - forever going round in circles.RochdalePioneers said:
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.Charles said:
Nah. It just demonstrates that “far left” and “far right” obscure more than they illuminate.StuartDickson said:
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.tlg86 said:
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.isam said: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.
(Antifrank’s departure is a huge loss to this blog.)
Let’s just leave it as extremist.
Lets hope there aren't that many people mesmerised by his tune this time.
(sorry)
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.
0 -
Precisely. If I saw off your leg, you will purchase a crutch. A new equilibrium!!DecrepiterJohnL said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
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.TheScreamingEagles said:
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.Philip_Thompson said:
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.TheScreamingEagles said: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”.
https://twitter.com/ITVJoel/status/1410518270319468545
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?
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
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".3 -
I and my Welsh family are very content that we are out of the EUScott_xP said:
Ask the Northern Irish how well that is working out.Leon said: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
Or the Scots.
Or the Welsh.
Little Englanders might be happy, for now...
That wheel too will turn.0 -
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.MaxPB said:
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.MattW said:
£100m seems quite restrained.eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.
All the pantomime dames on the Outrage Bus must be very disappointed.
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.4 -
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 ?JohnLilburne said:
Why was the application left to the last minute? And if she came here in 1963 why has she never applied for citizenship?WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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.0 -
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).Burgessian said:
Not Manchester?Carnyx said:
Fitba.Burgessian said: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?0 -
The reason appears to be that she has lived in the country for 59 years and apparently never regularised her status.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.0 -
Pretty much sums up the entire fatuity of Philip.IshmaelZ said:
Precisely. If I saw off your leg, you will purchase a crutch. A new equilibrium!!DecrepiterJohnL said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
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.TheScreamingEagles said:
You're like an incel virgin trying to tell a porn star that is the financial services sector how to perform.Philip_Thompson said:
Most of the finance sector seems to have moved on and realised they don't need equivalence to thrive.TheScreamingEagles said: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”.
https://twitter.com/ITVJoel/status/1410518270319468545
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?
Please desist.
I mean there was a reason why Rishi and others were trying to get equivalence.
There appears to be no end to Philip’s genius OR fantasy. PBers will judge.
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".
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.2 -
Anabob has destroyed the Urban Myth.TimT said:
Alas, it appears he never said it. Worth watching to the end ...gealbhan said:
I understand Johnners did get wish. He said it 🙂Anabobazina said:
Would surely have been the other way around if it was ever uttered at all.TimT said:Seeing David Willey in the England line up reminds me of that classic piece of Test Cricket commentary: "The batsman's Holding the bowler's Willey."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms
1 -
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).WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.1 -
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.Gardenwalker said:
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
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 offered1 -
I love that the letter came from Miss Test Tickle.gealbhan said:
Anabob has destroyed the Urban Myth.TimT said:
Alas, it appears he never said it. Worth watching to the end ...gealbhan said:
I understand Johnners did get wish. He said it 🙂Anabobazina said:
Would surely have been the other way around if it was ever uttered at all.TimT said:Seeing David Willey in the England line up reminds me of that classic piece of Test Cricket commentary: "The batsman's Holding the bowler's Willey."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms0 -
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.Pagan2 said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
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 offered0 -
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.0 -
I agree. It’s exactly the sort of thing government should be doing to protect us from ongoing globalisation.Nigelb said:
I disagree.Gardenwalker said:
I daresay I could persuade Nissan to set up in my back garden if I had several millions to bung.Leon said:
I remember when Brexit meant the ‘end of Nissan in Sunderland’Gardenwalker said:
Lol.BigRich said:
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.Gardenwalker said: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.
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.”
https://twitter.com/gbnews/status/1410516867488362498?s=21
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
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'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.
My only concern, tied in with Brexit, how long term is this deal and investment?0 -
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?Gardenwalker said:
I haven’t read about this in detail, but at face value this appears to be true. Surprised it has not received more attention.Philip_Thompson said:
Though we've discovered through this registration scheme over a million extra EU citizens living in the UK than we knew we had.Gardenwalker said: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.0 -
It was just nice believing it happened.TimT said:
I love that the letter came from Miss Test Tickle.gealbhan said:
Anabob has destroyed the Urban Myth.TimT said:
Alas, it appears he never said it. Worth watching to the end ...gealbhan said:
I understand Johnners did get wish. He said it 🙂Anabobazina said:
Would surely have been the other way around if it was ever uttered at all.TimT said:Seeing David Willey in the England line up reminds me of that classic piece of Test Cricket commentary: "The batsman's Holding the bowler's Willey."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms0 -
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.1 -
The question was whether they are happy not being able to vote out the Little Englanders currently in chargeBig_G_NorthWales said:I and my Welsh family are very content that we are out of the EU
0 -
Indeed. Now I am wondering if Coleman ever did say "Filbert Bays is opening his legs and showing his class"gealbhan said:
It was just nice believing it happened.TimT said:
I love that the letter came from Miss Test Tickle.gealbhan said:
Anabob has destroyed the Urban Myth.TimT said:
Alas, it appears he never said it. Worth watching to the end ...gealbhan said:
I understand Johnners did get wish. He said it 🙂Anabobazina said:
Would surely have been the other way around if it was ever uttered at all.TimT said:Seeing David Willey in the England line up reminds me of that classic piece of Test Cricket commentary: "The batsman's Holding the bowler's Willey."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0a-FOoM9ms1 -
You have lost it but then we know that alreadyScott_xP said:
The question was whether they are happy not being able to vote out the Little Englanders currently in chargeBig_G_NorthWales said:I and my Welsh family are very content that we are out of the EU
0 -
As I said, perhaps if the son had done that months ago it would have been possible to have done things that way.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.
1 -
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).FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to.
He makes it sound like some kind of CAT-scan.0 -
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.0 -
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.1 -
The question is how long, if ever, do Germany and France take to publish these figureseek said:
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).FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.Cookie said:
Politicians whom the public can sack are, in general, less corrupt and criminal than politicians whom the public cannot.ClippP said:
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.Cocky_cockney said:
That argument is wearing thin with the evidence.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
This was never an economic decision. It was a political one pumped by people on the Far Right.
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.0 -
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.Gardenwalker said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
He has 5 years to sort this out, he chose not to.
He makes it sound like some kind of CAT-scan.0 -
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 realityGardenwalker said:
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.Pagan2 said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
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 offered1 -
Why should we do that? Just because its in a treaty which we negotiated, signed and lauded in triumph doesn't mean that we have to do what it says.FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
Is there a suggestion that the statistics won't be published when they are required? They certainly aren't required now.RochdalePioneers said:
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 phonePhilip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Why should we do that? Just because its in a treaty which we negotiated, signed and lauded in triumph doesn't mean that we have to do what it says.FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.eek said:
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).FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.
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.0 -
My numbers pre-date the pandemic.Pagan2 said:
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 realityGardenwalker said:
As I note above, net immigration has stayed constant, so you talk much bollocks.Pagan2 said:
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.Gardenwalker said:
By special interest whingers you mean two of the four nations, and most of the economically active population.Philip_Thompson said:
Except we're massively better off out.Scott_xP said:
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.kle4 said: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.
We've taken our money with us and our law making is our own. There is no real downside, besides special interest whingers.
Still, it is refreshingly honest of you to confess you don’t give a fuck about the union, farming, fishing or “the arts”.
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 offered0 -
I think you are confusing what the check here is for as I think there are two separate checks / stages involved:-WhisperingOracle said:
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.
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).0 -
Can you even start to imagine if the EU attempted to interfere with the UK investment in Nissan and try to sanction HMGFF43 said:
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.eek said:
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).FF43 said:
Article 3.7.1eek said:
Really? where is that mentioned in https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/948119/EU-UK_Trade_and_Cooperation_Agreement_24.12.2020.pdfFF43 said:
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).eek said:
Really when you are competing against other countries and are trying to encourage other companies to come to the UK based on similar offerings.StuartDickson said:
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.Scott_xP said:So how much of the billion pounds to be invested by Nissan is being paid by taxpayer?
‘It would be irresponsible to say’
Kwasi Kwarteng
- #r4today
No it wouldn’t. It would be honest. (Answer seems to be £100m)
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1410497318768594944
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.0 -
I must say I think the original John Lilburne would have preferred the moral principle over the procedural, judging by his ideas.JohnLilburne said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.eek said:
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.WhisperingOracle said:
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.Leon said:
What a twat. This is why I despise Remoaners.WhisperingOracle said: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 :
https://twitter.com/mikegoulden/status/1410274275194458114
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
It's quite simply morally wrong, and both the Home Office and arguably other entire parts of the Brexit process itself are at fault.
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.
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.0
This discussion has been closed.