Vibeshift update – politicalbetting.com

Benpointer said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Sorry for the constantly cutting-off posts.
Mobile posting problems again, unfortunately.

Don't worry abo

..tit

Benpointer said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Sorry for the constantly cutting-off posts.
Mobile posting problems again, unfortunately.

Don't worry abo

I wo !

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

nico67 said:

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/Peston/status/1924526954847326624

Keir Starmer has tonight told his MPs: “The Conservatives are not our principal opponent. Reform are our main rivals for power. We have a moral responsibility to make sure Farage never wins.”

And PM takes off gloves: “We have to be clear that every opportunity he has had in this Parliament to back working people he’s voted against. Telling the workers at Jaguar Land Rover they deserve to go bust. A state-slashing, NHS-privatising, Putin apologist. Without a single patriotic bone in his body. We will take to fight to him. We will fight as Labour.”

I’m happy to hear that. Farage is a fraud and it’s time he was held to account . Labour need to stop messing around and go for the jugular .

Labour very, very particularly need to mention Farage's responsibility for the huge post-Brexit rise in immigration, if they're finally going to say the truth.

Boris owns the Boriswave. It would be difficult to pin it on Farage.

I wouldn't agree there. Farage would have had no choice but to do the same, had been in power then, or watch the economy go into a depressing.

It shouldn't be too diffucult to highlight the actual figures of the number of sectors left dangerously short after Brexit , as referenced in detail in past discussions on here.

Nonsense, those sectors could have put up pay instead of bringing in people for minimum wage.

And importing people doesn't solve shortages as lump of labour is a fallacy.

We had a detailed discussion on all this on here, about a year ago, with figures from the Migration Observatory about the number of sectors struggling after Brexit.

Farage will well know that he would have faced exactly the same problem as Johnson, and the Tory Brexit ideologues around him ; to retran enougb workers from home is a long-term project , whereas economic
danage and recession comes tomorrow.

Was Trudeau also dealing with Brexit? The same policy mistake of massively opening the floodgates was made simultaneously by several Anglosphere countries, which suggests something deeper than Brexit as a root cause.

This is a year later than the British big rise in 2020, suggesting a different cause.
I will dig out some of the graphs.

2020 was Covid when there was a drop.

Genuine question, @williamglenn - you've indentified a definite pattern. in Anglosphere countries. Might be a Gazette article in it, for the Butt Plug Supplement, which focuses a lot on global migration, and stone butt plugs

What's your take? Why did this happen?

I’d previously assumed it was groupthink driven by economic policymakers but looking at the graph of visas being issued throughout the lockdowns maybe it was simply bureaucratic incompetence because the system carried on issuing visas and then everyone arrived at once when the pandemic was over.

In every developed country there was a crunch in labour costs post COVID.

In a number of places, such as the US and the U.K., I think this relates to people in shitty jobs being forced to find new ones during COVID. Normally not adventurous, they had to find new jobs - or retire early and drop out of the labour force.

Whatever the reason, the result was a massive inflationary shock. Governments were desperate to hold down wages. Enter immigration as the fix….

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

Wait, he didn't even get passport queues? What?



And they haven't even allowed us to be considered for this defence fund, they have said they will 'explore ways in which we might be considered'



I mean the utter pillock.

And he's told his suicidal lemming MPs to 'take the fight to Reform!' on this basis.

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

How many times now has Starmer fooled you (the smartest guy in the room)?

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

Wait, he didn't even get passport queues? What?



And they haven't even allowed us to be considered for this defence fund, they have said they will 'explore ways in which we might be considered'



I mean the utter pillock.

And he's told his suicidal lemming MPs to 'take the fight to Reform!' on this basis.

Yes, he didn't even get the e-gates

lol

What a desperate little fuck he is

Yesterday: Starmer is going to sell the silver for e-gates which are meaningless since queues are being eliminated anyway.

Today : Starmer didn't get e-gates, what a disappointment.

Got to love consistency.

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

Foxy said:

another_richard said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

nico67 said:

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/Peston/status/1924526954847326624

Keir Starmer has tonight told his MPs: “The Conservatives are not our principal opponent. Reform are our main rivals for power. We have a moral responsibility to make sure Farage never wins.”

And PM takes off gloves: “We have to be clear that every opportunity he has had in this Parliament to back working people he’s voted against. Telling the workers at Jaguar Land Rover they deserve to go bust. A state-slashing, NHS-privatising, Putin apologist. Without a single patriotic bone in his body. We will take to fight to him. We will fight as Labour.”

I’m happy to hear that. Farage is a fraud and it’s time he was held to account . Labour need to stop messing around and go for the jugular .

Labour very, very particularly need to mention Farage's responsibility for the huge post-Brexit rise in immigration, if they're finally going to say the truth.

Boris owns the Boriswave. It would be difficult to pin it on Farage.

I wouldn't agree there. Farage would have had no choice but to do the same, had been in power then, or watch the economy go into a depressing.

It shouldn't be too diffucult to highlight the actual figures of the number of sectors left dangerously short after Brexit , as referenced in detail in past discussions on here.

Nonsense, those sectors could have put up pay instead of bringing in people for minimum wage.

And importing people doesn't solve shortages as lump of labour is a fallacy.

We had a detailed discussion on all this on here, about a year ago, with figures from the Migration Observatory about the number of sectors struggling after Brexit.

Farage will well know that he would have faced exactly the same problem as Johnson, and the Tory Brexit ideologues around him ; to retran enougb workers from home is a long-term project , whereas economic
danage and recession comes tomorrow.

Was Trudeau also dealing with Brexit? The same policy mistake of massively opening the floodgates was made simultaneously by several Anglosphere countries, which suggests something deeper than Brexit as a root cause.

This is a year later than the British big rise in 2020, suggesting a different cause.
I will dig out some of the graphs.

If you're saying that immigration would be lower if the UK had been in the EU then which groups would not have migrated here ?

Students (paying hefty fees) ?
Ukrainian refugees ?
Hong Kongers with money ?
Health workers ?
Care workers ?
Asylum seekers ?

On the other hand there would certainly have been higher immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe if the UK had still been in the EU.

So is the big complaint that we had a few thousand more health and care workers from Nigeria rather than from Romania ?

Isn't it not so much those categories as them bringing multiple dependents, and also coming permanently, while the Southern and Eastern europeans came alone and often returned home after a few years.

Certainly that's the case where I work.

You think that Eastern Europeans have never brought dependents nor stayed permanently ?

Or that Africans always do so ? Remember that Kemi was an emigrant for most of her childhood.

Although its irrelevant if Eastern and Southern Europeans did return home after a few years if they're replaced by others from their countries - it would just be swapping like for like and have no effect on the overall numbers.

Whereas to get an increase in health and care workers it required an increase in immigration and its that increase that the UK has achieved.

Now whether that increase in health and care workers was worth doing is another question.

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

Which of the member nations might prefer to keep staff levels up on security desks just to stop Brits using e-gates?

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

Yes

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?

A conversation with his friends Chardonnay, Jack Daniel, Jim Beam and I'm not sure the name of the fourth friend but she's a true Conservative-blue nun.

BartholomewRoberts said:

Yesterday: Starmer is going to sell the silver for e-gates which are meaningless since queues are being eliminated anyway.

Today : Starmer didn't get e-gates, what a disappointment.

Got to love consistency.

Earlier: Starmer has sold the crown jewels for a slightly more advantageous queue when you go on your holibobs.

Now: Oh whoops, he hasn't actually even managed that.

I see zero inconsistency apart from Starmer surprising us by being even more useless than previously assumed.

Loving your cheerleading for him though - very small state libertarian vibes.

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

Last time I was in Paris I used an E-gate.

Will do so again on Thursday via Schiphol and then next month again at CDG..

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

This kind of stuff sets the EU in a very bad light. It is totally irrelevant to major issues around trade if 4 blokes in a transit van can do some gigs without a mountain of paperwork. I totally understand the EU wanting to protect their trading block and that the UK doesn't get to choose cakeism, but these are the kind of issues than for instance in business deals if where you give and take as it shows good will on both sides.

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

But they can already agree to it - I believe Portugal does. So unless member states are compelled, the effect is...

Portugal reaction to everything Brexit seems to have been entirely sensible. Unlike Spain they made it very simple for ex-pats to continue living there and my experience travelling there they always ensure fast processing including putting UK passport holders through the EU lanes.

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

He's been on X, and adopted the mood of whatever it is he reads these days.

Benpointer said:

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

Yes

Also, Starmer has threatened his new bestie Farage.

The e-gates is a big distraction in terms of travel.

If they ever get it off the ground, UK passports holders were down for having to apply / pay for the EU equivalent of the American's ESTA system. I presume Starmer didn't get a carve out from that.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

eek said:

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

Last time I was in Paris I used an E-gate.

Will do so again on Thursday via Schiphol and then next month again at CDG..

Effectively what Starmer has got is what already exists in practise.

I went to Spain a couple of years ago and used e-gates.

Nigelb said:

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

He's been on X, and adopted the mood of whatever it is he reads these days.

Or, I've read the analysis of the Guardian, the Economist, the Telegraph, the FT, the Spectator, Wolfgang Munchau in eurointelligence, and various economists and pundits on Substack

Starmer caved: he had one big stick to wield, fishing - and he surrendered it for basically nothing, and he's given all that leverage away for twelve years which is - as has been noted - far worse than the worst case predictions made by, well, anyone

I'd say it's the worst deal in recent British history, but then there's Chagos, isn't there?

Luckyguy1983 said:

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

But they can already agree to it - I believe Portugal does. So unless member states are compelled, the effect is...

From Sam Coates report the member nations will get a letter telling them they can let Brits use egates if they wish. There’s no legal bar. SKS really has done well there to get that out of them.

Gardenwalker said:

I am less worried about the “ifs” of the deal than others, because multiple elements simply require more negotiation, from both parties’ perspectives.

But the e-gates thing is simply…odd.
Almost feels like bait and switch by the EU.

Yes - as a statement of intent it's broadly uncontroversial. If anything it's a little bit too light on agreement.

I hadn't realised that, re e-gates, to be honest (I don't think I've used one since Brexit or had one be available to me).

The egates issue is like buying a house and judging if you got a good deal if you got the previous owners to chuck in the lawnmower when you know they are moving to flat.

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

Benpointer said:

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

Which of the member nations might prefer to keep staff levels up on security desks just to stop Brits using e-gates?

France and Germany come to mind. Three times I've been through Berlin airport in the last few months and each time they ask me a bunch of detailed questions about my reason for visiting and each time it's the same, I'm consulting for a German company - or to put it bluntly I'm helping the German economy - and yet it takes them ages each time for every single person.

Everywhere else in Europe a British passport basically gets a cursory look and a stamp, but not Berlin, no, they'll fastidiously run through their script when it's blatantly obvious that I have zero intention if overstaying the 90 days.

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

He's been on X, and adopted the mood of whatever it is he reads these days.

Or, I've read the analysis of the Guardian, the Economist, the Telegraph, the FT, the Spectator, Wolfgang Munchau in eurointelligence, and various economists and pundits on Substack

Starmer caved: he had one big stick to wield, fishing - and he surrendered it for basically nothing, and he's given all that leverage away for twelve years which is - as has been noted - far worse than the worst case predictions made by, well, anyone

I'd say it's the worst deal in recent British history, but then there's Chagos, isn't there?

It's not a 'big stick'; it's an economic irrelevance.
It's has done sort of talismanic status, but insufficient to do much.

The proof of the deals - this won't be the last - will be over the next few years.
Your winner/loser narrative is far from everything.

Again, you don't understand, whatevs

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

It definitely didn't unlock the agreement on SPS, that was always available on the basis of dynamic alignment. The idea was to get mutual recognition of standards which would allow for a reasonable amount of variation as we have in the TCA and still get light touch import checks. The dynamic alignment deal was on the table previously and was never taken off, it's zero concessions from the EU in return for 12 years of fishing rights.

I don't particularly rate the value of our fishing rights, though I can see the symbolism that once again they've been sold out for zero gain. The worst part of this is that our nascent agritech industry has also been sold out and as I said earlier, we're giving up a potential $10bn industry for the UK to export £3-4bn of low margin agricultural goods to Europe. It doesn't, on the face of it, seem like a good trade.

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

Except Britain always had the 'right' to agree to dynamic alignment. We hadn't done so, because its a bad idea, and we have a growing biotech industry which will probably suffer now thanks to the agreement to export agriculture.

Not sure where you think fisheries comes into play there?

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Taz said:

Leon said:

OK I've seen enough articulate analysis now

Starmer's EU deal is, indeed, a piece of excrement. He succeeded in fooling me because i was blind. It's bad, possibly terrible

He didn't even get e-gates. Fuck him, let Reform destroy him and his party, forever

It’s only e-gates if, and when, the member nation agrees to it.

But they can already agree to it - I believe Portugal does. So unless member states are compelled, the effect is...

Portugal reaction to everything Brexit seems to have been entirely sensible. Unlike Spain they made it very simple for ex-pats to continue living there and my experience travelling there they always ensure fast processing including putting UK passport holders through the EU lanes.

Not when we arrived into Faro in 2023. Queued for ages.

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

The French were absolutely terrified of losing these fishing rights (as I explained yesterday). If you think fishing is stupidly totemic in the UK (it is) then fishing and farming are even stupidly bigger in French politics. We had massive leverage. We could have extracted a much better deal for four more years..... but we got fuck all.... for twelve???

Starmer is either howlingly inept or a weird quasi-traitor. Chagos suggests both

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

The French were absolutely terrified of losing these fishing rights (as I explained yesterday). If you think fishing is stupidly totemic in the UK (it is) then fishing and farming are even stupidly bigger in French politics. We had massive leverage. We could have extracted a much better deal for four more years..... but we got fuck all.... for twelve???

Starmer is either howlingly inept or a weird quasi-traitor. Chagos suggests both

I think he has a very warped sense of priorities were international agreements are considered a very good thing, regardless of whether those agreements are actually good for Britain or not.

The Chagos agreement does nothing for the UK, but it keeps international lawyers happy so he's happy.

As an aside, Mrs Stodge and I went on a two week cruise of the western Med.

We were told in the Spanish ports we didn't need passports - just the cruise card. In France, we needed a digital copy of the passport. Apart from the usual security checks, nothing too serious and frankly not much different from when we were in the EU.

Sometimes it's not about how much leaving the EU has changed things but how little.

I guess we need to add all of Sean's sockpuppets to the right hand column

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

The French were absolutely terrified of losing these fishing rights (as I explained yesterday). If you think fishing is stupidly totemic in the UK (it is) then fishing and farming are even stupidly bigger in French politics. We had massive leverage. We could have extracted a much better deal for four more years..... but we got fuck all.... for twelve???

Starmer is either howlingly inept or a weird quasi-traitor. Chagos suggests both

Starmer, like Dave, has the inability to walk away from a bad deal. He is too wedded to the European project to see that the nation is being fucked over and instead of doing what good negotiators do and walk away from it he caved when the demand for 12 years arrived. He should have just told them "nah mate, we agreed four so it's four or nothing" and just let it expire at the end of this year. The rest of the TCA would have stayed in place anyway.

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Malmesbury said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

nico67 said:

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/Peston/status/1924526954847326624

Keir Starmer has tonight told his MPs: “The Conservatives are not our principal opponent. Reform are our main rivals for power. We have a moral responsibility to make sure Farage never wins.”

And PM takes off gloves: “We have to be clear that every opportunity he has had in this Parliament to back working people he’s voted against. Telling the workers at Jaguar Land Rover they deserve to go bust. A state-slashing, NHS-privatising, Putin apologist. Without a single patriotic bone in his body. We will take to fight to him. We will fight as Labour.”

I’m happy to hear that. Farage is a fraud and it’s time he was held to account . Labour need to stop messing around and go for the jugular .

Labour very, very particularly need to mention Farage's responsibility for the huge post-Brexit rise in immigration, if they're finally going to say the truth.

Boris owns the Boriswave. It would be difficult to pin it on Farage.

I wouldn't agree there. Farage would have had no choice but to do the same, had been in power then, or watch the economy go into a depressing.

It shouldn't be too diffucult to highlight the actual figures of the number of sectors left dangerously short after Brexit , as referenced in detail in past discussions on here.

Nonsense, those sectors could have put up pay instead of bringing in people for minimum wage.

And importing people doesn't solve shortages as lump of labour is a fallacy.

We had a detailed discussion on all this on here, about a year ago, with figures from the Migration Observatory about the number of sectors struggling after Brexit.

Farage will well know that he would have faced exactly the same problem as Johnson, and the Tory Brexit ideologues around him ; to retran enougb workers from home is a long-term project , whereas economic
danage and recession comes tomorrow.

Was Trudeau also dealing with Brexit? The same policy mistake of massively opening the floodgates was made simultaneously by several Anglosphere countries, which suggests something deeper than Brexit as a root cause.

This is a year later than the British big rise in 2020, suggesting a different cause.
I will dig out some of the graphs.

2020 was Covid when there was a drop.

Genuine question, @williamglenn - you've indentified a definite pattern. in Anglosphere countries. Might be a Gazette article in it, for the Butt Plug Supplement, which focuses a lot on global migration, and stone butt plugs

What's your take? Why did this happen?

I’d previously assumed it was groupthink driven by economic policymakers but looking at the graph of visas being issued throughout the lockdowns maybe it was simply bureaucratic incompetence because the system carried on issuing visas and then everyone arrived at once when the pandemic was over.

In every developed country there was a crunch in labour costs post COVID.

In a number of places, such as the US and the U.K., I think this relates to people in shitty jobs being forced to find new ones during COVID. Normally not adventurous, they had to find new jobs - or retire early and drop out of the labour force.

Whatever the reason, the result was a massive inflationary shock. Governments were desperate to hold down wages. Enter immigration as the fix….

There was clearlt a post-Covid effect in many places. But the stats showing the UK figures changing earlier, a few months after Brexit while lockdown was still going on, than the example given of Canada, are real.

https://images.app.goo.gl/9sdY8

That chart clearly shows the rise happening in late 2021, the same as Canada.

No, it starts in the middle of 2020, during lockdown.

The Canadian change is not at the same time.

No, the trough is in 2020, as you'd expect during lockdown, but in June 2021 the figure is still below the pre-Covid figures.

It kicks off beyond the pre-Covid figures after June 2021, so late 2021.

See the Migration Watch graph. Entrances for work at the end of 2020 are much higher than the level of previous year.

https://images.app.goo.gl/jzzWg

The other interesting thing there is that arrivals from family and dependents allowed in in 2020 seemed to be almost exactly making up for the decline of family and dependents coming at 2019. Sehr interesisch.

Nigelb said:

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

He's been on X, and adopted the mood of whatever it is he reads these days.

Also, Commentators' Curse. Even if a commentator wants to be responsible, they can't because of competition from the next one along.

In the Brexit media space, there's not much room for "small but meaningful improvement in the situation, let's see what happens next." The only lines that get clicks are "rejoin now it there's no point in anything" and "Brexit betrayed".

And once the bellwethers start bleating about gimp masks (because they have to stay relevant by going over-the-top) all the beta sheep have to follow them.

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

Malmesbury said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

WhisperingOracle said:

williamglenn said:

WhisperingOracle said:

nico67 said:

williamglenn said:

https://x.com/Peston/status/1924526954847326624

Keir Starmer has tonight told his MPs: “The Conservatives are not our principal opponent. Reform are our main rivals for power. We have a moral responsibility to make sure Farage never wins.”

And PM takes off gloves: “We have to be clear that every opportunity he has had in this Parliament to back working people he’s voted against. Telling the workers at Jaguar Land Rover they deserve to go bust. A state-slashing, NHS-privatising, Putin apologist. Without a single patriotic bone in his body. We will take to fight to him. We will fight as Labour.”

I’m happy to hear that. Farage is a fraud and it’s time he was held to account . Labour need to stop messing around and go for the jugular .

Labour very, very particularly need to mention Farage's responsibility for the huge post-Brexit rise in immigration, if they're finally going to say the truth.

Boris owns the Boriswave. It would be difficult to pin it on Farage.

I wouldn't agree there. Farage would have had no choice but to do the same, had been in power then, or watch the economy go into a depressing.

It shouldn't be too diffucult to highlight the actual figures of the number of sectors left dangerously short after Brexit , as referenced in detail in past discussions on here.

Nonsense, those sectors could have put up pay instead of bringing in people for minimum wage.

And importing people doesn't solve shortages as lump of labour is a fallacy.

We had a detailed discussion on all this on here, about a year ago, with figures from the Migration Observatory about the number of sectors struggling after Brexit.

Farage will well know that he would have faced exactly the same problem as Johnson, and the Tory Brexit ideologues around him ; to retran enougb workers from home is a long-term project , whereas economic
danage and recession comes tomorrow.

Was Trudeau also dealing with Brexit? The same policy mistake of massively opening the floodgates was made simultaneously by several Anglosphere countries, which suggests something deeper than Brexit as a root cause.

This is a year later than the British big rise in 2020, suggesting a different cause.
I will dig out some of the graphs.

2020 was Covid when there was a drop.

Genuine question, @williamglenn - you've indentified a definite pattern. in Anglosphere countries. Might be a Gazette article in it, for the Butt Plug Supplement, which focuses a lot on global migration, and stone butt plugs

What's your take? Why did this happen?

I’d previously assumed it was groupthink driven by economic policymakers but looking at the graph of visas being issued throughout the lockdowns maybe it was simply bureaucratic incompetence because the system carried on issuing visas and then everyone arrived at once when the pandemic was over.

In every developed country there was a crunch in labour costs post COVID.

In a number of places, such as the US and the U.K., I think this relates to people in shitty jobs being forced to find new ones during COVID. Normally not adventurous, they had to find new jobs - or retire early and drop out of the labour force.

Whatever the reason, the result was a massive inflationary shock. Governments were desperate to hold down wages. Enter immigration as the fix….

There was clearlt a post-Covid effect in many places. But the stats showing the UK figures changing earlier, a few months after Brexit while lockdown was still going on, than the example given of Canada, are real.

https://images.app.goo.gl/9sdY8

That chart clearly shows the rise happening in late 2021, the same as Canada.

No, it starts in the middle of 2020, during lockdown.

The Canadian change is not at the same time.

No, the trough is in 2020, as you'd expect during lockdown, but in June 2021 the figure is still below the pre-Covid figures.

It kicks off beyond the pre-Covid figures after June 2021, so late 2021.

See the Migration Watch graph. Entrances for work at the end of 2020 are much higher than the level of previous year.

https://images.app.goo.gl/jzzWg

The other interesting thing there is that arrivals from family and dependents allowed in in 2020 seemed to be almost exactly making up for the decline of family and dependents coming at 2019. Sehr interesisch.

You do know that's a line chart, right? The data points are clearly marked and that is a rise in 2021 with a connection then drawn between 2020 and 2021 as is drawn between the data points of every year.

2020 is well below the trend. 2021 is above it. So the rise happened in 2021, as I said and as demonstrated by the other chart you linked to before.

You're not very good at reading your own charts.

E-Gates are one of those things that people notice . The problem for Starmer is that many will notice they still have to queue .

There’s no timeframe on implementation and it’s not a legal requirement for EU countries to do this .

The fisheries furore is understandable to a point . There are some winners and of course losers but the fact is this is a tiny fraction of economic output , the Brits don’t eat enough fish , most of what’s eaten is imported , most of what gets caught gets exported so you need a market to sell that to so it’s a nonsense that the UK could just tell the EU to do one on this .

The rest of the deal really shouldn’t be controversial, the UK already has high food standards so aligning with EU ones will make little difference .

What seem likely to happen is a series of deals will happen over the next few years in Reeves desperate search for growth .

The other big news of the week comes when the ONS publish the latest migration data. One suspects that Starmers further attempts to lower that were to give some leeway to account for the youth mobility scheme .

Stuartinromford said:

Nigelb said:

Gardenwalker said:

Why has @Leon changed his mind?
Or is he just pissed?

He's been on X, and adopted the mood of whatever it is he reads these days.

Also, Commentators' Curse. Even if a commentator wants to be responsible, they can't because of competition from the next one along.

In the Brexit media space, there's not much room for "small but meaningful improvement in the situation, let's see what happens next." The only lines that get clicks are "rejoin now it there's no point in anything" and "Brexit betrayed".

And once the bellwethers start bleating about gimp masks (because they have to stay relevant by going over-the-top) all the beta sheep have to follow them.

Oh god what fucking nonsense


I think for myself. I don’t give a toss what Boris says. He’s the idiot that gave us the Boriswave and I hope he is driven from politics forever because of it

I’m saying the deal is really quite bad because, on reflection, it is really quite bad

Most important about the deal though - Will @Roger now be able to get to his Cote D Azur mansion without having to queue up with the riff raff at passport control?

Luckyguy1983 said:

GIN1138 said:

Most important about the deal though - Will @Roger now be able to get to his Cote D Azur mansion without having to queue up with the riff raff at passport control?

NO!

LOL!

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Leon said:

Gardenwalker said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Just catching up on the FT.
Yes, I see European countries reserve the right to maintain e-gates for European citizens. So that so-called new freedom doesn’t amount to much of anything.

I note that Britain also failed to solve the touring musicians problem, which is v disappointing. Nobody could seriously think that maintaining the status quo is anything more than a pissy, mean-spirited stance by the EU.

4 years more fish was mooted. Then 10 years was briefed out as some sort of maximalist worst case scenario. Starmer has given them (or fondly imagines he has) another 12 YEARS.

Does he literally like every other country in the world more than the UK? I feel we should be told.

I actually think that component is good.
It unhooks fisheries from SPS, and is no worse on fisheries than the status quo?

No, you don't understand

The fisheries deal was regarded as terrible for Britain when Boris made it, But we were desperate and Boris argued we could come back and change it in five years and demand total 100% fishing rights if we wanted - and everyone in the EU was well aware of this. They were fearful of what we would do, we had real leverage (as I explained earlier today, from getting to know the Breton fishing industry)

The best case scenario for the EU then was - for them - keep this shit deal (from the UK's perspective) going for another few years, Pressure us into 4 years more if poss. The EU keeps 75% of the take from UK waters for four more years....

Starmer has given them twelve more years

It is bewilderingly, staggeringly bad

I fully understand.

I posted this morning about how the current fisheries agreement is a world away from, say, Norway’s.
However, it is actually better than that which pertained inside the CFP, and Britain retains the ability to improve it in the future, even if 12 years hence.

It return it gets to restore agricultural exports, which have fallen a full third to the EU since Brexit.

The French were absolutely terrified of losing these fishing rights (as I explained yesterday). If you think fishing is stupidly totemic in the UK (it is) then fishing and farming are even stupidly bigger in French politics. We had massive leverage. We could have extracted a much better deal for four more years..... but we got fuck all.... for twelve???

Starmer is either howlingly inept or a weird quasi-traitor. Chagos suggests both

Starmer, like Dave, has the inability to walk away from a bad deal. He is too wedded to the European project to see that the nation is being fucked over and instead of doing what good negotiators do and walk away from it he caved when the demand for 12 years arrived. He should have just told them "nah mate, we agreed four so it's four or nothing" and just let it expire at the end of this year. The rest of the TCA would have stayed in place anyway.

We have to remember here, that Starmer was the Shadow Brexit Secretary that blocked every deal proposed in 2018-19 even, according to Gavin Barwell, one that he thought up himself.

In 2019 he demanded a second referendum on any deal Boris got, and said he would campaign for Remain, as matter of principle, no matter what the deal was.

So he’s not going to play hardball with the EU now is he? And he hasn’t.

Gallowgate said:

I see the usual right wing whoppers don’t understand that less trade red tape is good for business. The closer we are to the EU the better

Dynamic alignment is more red tape, not less.

We're now signed up to any and all red tape the EU comes up with, whether its a good idea or not.

You seem to mean the delta between our red tapes being lower is good. I'm not convinced.

Gallowgate said:

I see the usual right wing whoppers don’t understand that less trade red tape is good for business. The closer we are to the EU the better

These guys don't realise it's the damage that's the problem, not the limitation of it.

MaxPB said:

Gallowgate said:

I see the usual right wing whoppers don’t understand that less trade red tape is good for business. The closer we are to the EU the better

And you don't seem to understand that we've just traded in regulatory freedom for not very much in return. The sum total of the deal seems to be the ability export an additional £3-4bn in low margin agricultural goods to the EU. It's not very clear what, if any, other benefits there are. Even the e-gates "deal" seems to be a fiction.

Less red tape is good for business, you're right, yet this isn't less red tape it's just red tape written in Brussels over which we will have little to no say. If anything this will be a net increase in regulation and we may find that the higher cost structure imposed by EU regulations will far outweigh any additional exports, this is my expectation.

The alignment is only on food and drink . It’s not clear whether the UK will legislate its own equivalent rules or whether it will be a copy and paste of EU rules into UK law .