homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Shake it all about: Brexit thread II (Page 28)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  ...  46  47  48 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Shake it all about: Brexit thread II
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
"The figures, which show a fall in income inequality to levels last seen in 1986"

any other arguments you think I'm making are happening in your head.

What arguments are you making? The bit I quoted, by itself, is rather anemic. It isn't OTT to assume it means what I thought it did.
The article linked, on the whole, stills says the poor are fucked. The reasons for the narrowing of the gap are pensions, which are not universal nor guaranteed for younger folk and a slight pinch on the rich. (But not the super rich)

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16541 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The White Paper is very short considering the magnitude and complexity of leaving the EU. But, at least it provides an adequate description of what the government is aiming for to allow the UK to judge whether or not that is what we want. A pity this wasn't available before the electorate as a whole had a say on it, and even more so that we're now faced with this or some other undefined version of Brexit (and, therefore this version is going to be very likely to go forward, after all who wants the uncertainty of some undefined Brexit? Oh, I forgot, millions chose that in June).

I still wonder whether there would have been a majority for this plan if it had been presented before the vote in June. I suspect the answer would be "no" - there would have been a lot of people voting for a much harder Brexit (who may have accepted it anyway on the basis that a soft Brexit would be more acceptable than no Brexit), and others who were expecting a much softer Brexit (who possibly would have rejected it), and others voting for £350m per week to the NHS (which doesn't get a mention at all).

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sipech:
quote:
For those with an eye for detail, have a read of the Brexit white paper and tell me what is odd about chart 7.1 on the top of page 32. [Two face]
15 weeks' paid holiday? In our dreams.

Pity the poor overworked civil servant who had to write that report. Perhaps it is a coded message begging for help?

[ 03. February 2017, 08:20: Message edited by: Jane R ]

Posts: 3838 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I presume that if at least one person in the UK is entitled to 15 weeks annual leave then that's alright, because the chart is correct in showing the maximum amount available in the UK.

But, even so it's an odd thing to include. What's it showing, that within the EU the UK government (and individual businesses) could set annual leave and maternity entitlements that are higher than the minimum set elsewhere in the EU? Why? You're claiming that the UK post-Brexit will have gained all these extra legislative powers that we already have within the EU? If you want to illustrate the ability of the UK outwith the EU to set legislation, at least pick an example where EU regulations prevent the UK from passing the laws we want. Good luck with finding an example (that isn't setting workers protection etc below the minimum level set by EU regulations).

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I presume that if at least one person in the UK is entitled to 15 weeks annual leave then that's alright, because the chart is correct in showing the maximum amount available in the UK.

I dunno, can that really be true? There can't be a legal maximum to the amount of holiday one is allowed to take can there? I bet if one looked hard enough it would be possible to find someone who had a paid year off.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9712 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Apparently some companies have an "unlimited vacation" policy - where time off is not counted and instead it is about delivery of results.

It must therefore be possible that one could be paid full time but only actually work every other day (or one day a week?) with all the rest as vacation provided the work was completed.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9712 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I presume that if at least one person in the UK is entitled to 15 weeks annual leave then that's alright, because the chart is correct in showing the maximum amount available in the UK.

I dunno, can that really be true? There can't be a legal maximum to the amount of holiday one is allowed to take can there? I bet if one looked hard enough it would be possible to find someone who had a paid year off.
Some might suggest that some of our representatives in Westminster and the European Parliament act as though they're just on one long paid vacation. And, those people who had earned the average UK annual salary by the 3rd January can presumably afford unpaid leave for most of the year.

I very much doubt there's a legal maximum - it would be pretty pointless to set one IMO. If a business thinks it can maintain competitiveness while allowing it's staff very long periods of paid leave then they can set that. A legal minimum, however, is a very necessary thing to have set.

Maybe the chart was including other types of paid leave as well - allowances for paid sick leave, compassionate leave, leave for jury service and the like. Which most people will only take a day or two (usually sick) in the year, but in theory is there if needed.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Can anyone explain how we leave the customs union, and maintain the free movement of goods with the EU? One solution is to construct a duplicate of regulations within the customs union, so our mythical truck can still drive from Hungary to Manchester smoothly, or 'frictionlessly' as Mrs May has it.

I suppose the point of this duplication is that we can avoid any immigration issues. As Osborne said in the Commons, the govt is subordinating the economy to this. I think he was being rather catty. Presumably, he will be there, saying 'told you so', if it goes pear shaped.

But even then, immigration has to follow labour shortages. Oh I forgot, we are taking back control, that's it.

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9474 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Can anyone explain how we leave the customs union, and maintain the free movement of goods with the EU? One solution is to construct a duplicate of regulations within the customs union, so our mythical truck can still drive from Hungary to Manchester smoothly, or 'frictionlessly' as Mrs May has it.

As far as I can work out, that's only possible with either (a) a completely new trade agreement between the UK and the EU that allows free movement of things but not people or (b) some kind of new membership of the EEA.

I'm not sure the latter is totally impossible as Switzerland has a form of "virtual" membership of the EEA and relations with the EA. But then it doesn't have the restrictions on movement that British politicians seem to think is non-negotiable, so that's going to be tricky.

quote:
I suppose the point of this duplication is that we can avoid any immigration issues. As Osborne said in the Commons, the govt is subordinating the economy to this. I think he was being rather catty. Presumably, he will be there, saying 'told you so', if it goes pear shaped.

But even then, immigration has to follow labour shortages. Oh I forgot, we are taking back control, that's it.

To me this is a much bigger issue. It might be possible to negotiate something sensible with the EU, but we're going to have to put a LOT more on the table than at present. I think there is only a moderate amount of fear within the Eastern-EU countries about the return of their nationals post-Brexit, I think pragmatically they believe that nothing much will change because the UK market needs low paid labour to get agricultural produce picked. Even if the UK did put in migration rules, at worst that'd just mean that the workers had to look elsewhere in the EU for work.

Of course, more of a threat is that this ridiculous policy irredeemably hurts the British economy. I think the EU leaders think there is nothing much they can do if the UK insists on shooting itself in the nads, but it isn't something that they're very likely to want to share in the risk of (or do a whole lot to help the UK limit the pain from).

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9712 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Apparently some companies have an "unlimited vacation" policy - where time off is not counted and instead it is about delivery of results.

Yes there are - a previous place I worked at ran such a policy.

Anyway the original point is moot - the '14 weeks' figure has already been acknowledged to be an error (possibly caused by last minute editing):

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-white-paper-embarassing-error-chart-14-weeks-holiday-a7559561.html

Though going back to those overworked civil servants - a large number of the usual service companies are currently making out like bandits by supplementing them with freshly minted grads on consultancy level rates. The fixed deadline and the undersupply of qualified people means that this is the best the UK can hope for.

Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

I think there is only a moderate amount of fear within the Eastern-EU countries about the return of their nationals post-Brexit, I think pragmatically they believe that nothing much will change because the UK market needs low paid labour to get agricultural produce picked.

Not just seasonal labour for agriculture itself, but a lot of the industries that consume agricultural produce (food service companies, packing/canning facilities and so on).
Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

I think there is only a moderate amount of fear within the Eastern-EU countries about the return of their nationals post-Brexit, I think pragmatically they believe that nothing much will change because the UK market needs low paid labour to get agricultural produce picked.

Not just seasonal labour for agriculture itself, but a lot of the industries that consume agricultural produce (food service companies, packing/canning facilities and so on).
Certainly the food service industry. I work in the "machinery of government" and many of the staff employed in our restaurant, café and shop are from Eastern EU states. Some of our cleaners too. Mostly way over qualified for the jobs.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 23878 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Right, sorry, I wasn't intending that list to be exhaustive.

I think quite a large proportion of our economy depends - directly or indirectly - on cheap labour, which is almost inevitably linked to low paid migrants.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9712 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We're all aware that your list wasn't exhaustive. I believe it is virtually inexhaustible. There are also IT staff, nurses, scientists and engineers, doctors ... and they are just people I can name.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 23878 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, no, no, no! All those jobs can be filled by the lazy, unemployed. Duh.

"You there, benefits scrounger. Do you want to be a doctor, vegetable picker or IT professional?
Scratch that, the NHS can't afford doctors anymore. Vegetables or IT? Perhaps you'd care to be an engineer?"


[ 03. February 2017, 13:16: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16541 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Alan:
quote:
Maybe the chart was including other types of paid leave as well - allowances for paid sick leave, compassionate leave, leave for jury service and the like. Which most people will only take a day or two (usually sick) in the year, but in theory is there if needed.

The explanation is probably simpler than that. The bars on the right show entitlement to maternity leave, the ones on the left show entitlement to annual leave. It looks as if whoever created the report slapped the chart together at the last minute without considering whether it was *really* a good idea to merge two charts like this.

The chart isn't even accurate; entitlement to maternity leave in the UK is currently 52 weeks.

I'm going with 'coded cry for help from civil servants chained to their desks in Whitehall'...

Posts: 3838 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And probably the govt is being coy about the requirements for immigrants in many fields. They don't want the racists to realize that high immigration will continue.

An expanding economy tends to produce labour shortages, and then you either fill them, or close down the labour market, producing closures of businesses.

So the notion of 'control' of immigration is rather nominal, but I suppose Mrs May will hope to distract people somehow.

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9474 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
No, no, no, no! All those jobs can be filled by the lazy, unemployed. Duh.

"You there, benefits scrounger. Do you want to be a doctor, vegetable picker or IT professional?
Scratch that, the NHS can't afford doctors anymore. Vegetables or IT? Perhaps you'd care to be an engineer?"

[Big Grin]
But .... some of the IT staff, scientists and engineers I know are also in the pesky public sector. Don't tell the Daily Mail!

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 23878 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Right, sorry, I wasn't intending that list to be exhaustive.

I think quite a large proportion of our economy depends - directly or indirectly - on cheap labour, which is almost inevitably linked to low paid migrants.

Yes, I realise you didn't mean to be exhaustive. I was trying to point out how far into everyday life these decisions would actually intrude (and yes, while some of these jobs pay the minimum wage, not all of them do).
Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331

 - Posted      Profile for Jane R   Email Jane R   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
...wait, paid maternity leave is 39 weeks. OK, I'll let them off the charge of not knowing maternity leave entitlement.

Most EU countries have more public holidays than we do. France has 11, Germany has about 12 (depending which state you're in). England and Wales have 8.

Posts: 3838 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
...wait, paid maternity leave is 39 weeks. OK, I'll let them off the charge of not knowing maternity leave entitlement.

There is an additional 13 weeks (bringing the total to 52) of unpaid maternity leave that a mother may take if she wishes. So, the graph is technically correct, even if most people don't think of unpaid leave entitlements.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Interesting Panorama (BBC1), tonight from Slough, which is booming, partly because of immigration. Many different voices, employers who love having immigrant labour, not because they're cheap, but very hard working. Low unemployment, high wages.

But also white English people complaining, too many people, services stretched and so on. White flight happening.

Who knows what will happen after Brexit?

Probably on iplayer.

[ 27. February 2017, 20:08: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9474 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've not seen the Panorama programme, I'll look it up on iPlayer at some point when I have time. But that does sound similar to the data collected on immigration over the last few decades.

Immigration is well known to boost the economy. The idea that immigrants take jobs from locals has been conclusively disproved - when Poland etc joined the EU and the government didn't enact the options available under the EU treaties to restrict immigration from new member states there was a very rapid influx of new immigrants taking up jobs in the UK didn't reduce the number of UK citizens in work nor increase unemployment rates, in fact the data show that rather than take jobs each immigrant finding work here resulted in the generation of at least one new job.

Immigrants also bring tax revenue - estimates of income tax and NI are about £2b per year. That excludes council tax, vehicle excise, VAT, duties on alcohol, tobacco, business taxes from increased productivity and all the rest which are probably incalculable.

Areas with large immigrant populations also tend to have better public services, such as health care. Which reflects those services being provided based on population, but with immigrants being younger and not needing these services to the same extent as the local population.

The "problem" with immigration is basically people not wanting to see brown faces and hear Polish being spoken. Which is racism, plain and simple. Probably often racism in ignorance or through the deliberate misinformation of racists - being lead to believe that immigrants pose a danger.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Interesting Panorama (BBC1), tonight from Slough, which is booming, partly because of immigration. Many different voices, employers who love having immigrant labour, not because they're cheap, but very hard working. Low unemployment, high wages.

Thing is Slough has peculiar issues that have tended to exacerbate any problems.

It's badly laid out with little or no thought. All transport links bottle neck into a very small area near the centre of town. The town centre itself was always on the run down side, and after the 2000 downturn employees started to move away from the centre of town to further out along the A4 and to other towns along the M4.

Absent immigration helped by it's proximity to Heathrow it would have probably hollowed out.

Development since then has followed the path of being poorly planned - the basic strategy seems to be to dump a large rectangle somewhere that's completely out of scale with it's surroundings and figure out the transport and other implications later. Re-developing office blocks along the main arterial routes as housing has generally added to the congestion and reduced quality of life.

Incidentally, even prior to the recent immigration wave from Eastern Europe, there was a significant asian population living in the area (largely from pakistan and india).

Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I was briefly chatting to someone the other day who was until very recently high up in the echelons of the NHS, whose structure I must confess I know nothing about. They seemed quite convinced that after Brexit there wouldn't be an NHS. Their reasoning was mainly to do with the free movement of people (or lack thereof after Brexit). They mentioned something else about European research funding and financial markets and speculators....at which point I glazed over. Anyway, they seemed very convinced of their own apocalyptic scenario for the NHS but interestingly claimed that it would collapse, not on the basis of money, but on the requirement of skill. They claimed (and this is the bit that I have no idea of it is true) that the UK had not invested properly in skilled labour for the NHS and instead sought overseas skill to prop it all up, and because they have allowed this to continue for decades the UK will face a crisis in which the current NHS wage and hours will simply not be attractive enough to compete on the world market in getting the skill required from outside of the EU.

I don;t know, it could be total nonsense, but it was interesting to hear their perspective. On a brighter note, they felt Brexit would simply never happen and this would be one of the reasons. Over time as these elements of consequences become more and more apparent, the stage will be set to put it to the vote once again.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5159 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
He's not far off. If the current path is followed, the NHS will be privatised out of existence and the U.K. will have the same, disgraceful system as the US.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 16541 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Over time as these elements of consequences become more and more apparent, the stage will be set to put it to the vote once again.

Though, as most of these consequences were predicted prior to the referendum they shouldn't make a case for another vote. The good people of the UK have had their say, and chose to destroy the NHS (and, all the other effects on our education system, agriculture, industry at all levels etc). Assuming of course you accept the government argument that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave under the scheme they subsequently developed.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
anteater

Ship's pest-controller
# 11435

 - Posted      Profile for anteater   Email anteater   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Back again after a relegation break (the thread not me).

Re the NHS I still think David Owen is illuminating (as on most things - I'm afraid I'm quite a fan). He believes the EU is damaging to the NHS, but not that he in any way recommends the way is has been treated by successive Tory and Labour governments.

As I understand it, so long as the NHS had remained a true public service, it is out of the remit of Brussels, as are all state run services. But once you try to introduce privatisation, Brussels tends to push you even further. So the sort of half-way house which Ken Clarke tried is very unstable.

Basically the EU seems to recognise public services, and a neo-liberal market- fundamentalist private sector (to quote Stiglitz).

Apparently Jeremy wants to roll the clock back completely. I wish somebody would but I'm not holding my breath.

--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.

Posts: 2510 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643

 - Posted      Profile for Cod     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Over time as these elements of consequences become more and more apparent, the stage will be set to put it to the vote once again.

Though, as most of these consequences were predicted prior to the referendum they shouldn't make a case for another vote. The good people of the UK have had their say, and chose to destroy the NHS (and, all the other effects on our education system, agriculture, industry at all levels etc). Assuming of course you accept the government argument that a vote to Leave was a vote to Leave under the scheme they subsequently developed.
I was in the midst of typing a long reply to disagree with you, and then I realised you were right. However, I only agree cautiously. For example, while there was discussion about the detriment caused to the City of London, there was no discussion at all about loss of financial passporting, which would be the main reason for this. While I agree that holding a second referendum on the same question is (and will be rightly decried as) having another go at getting the "right answer" surely there is a point at which it becomes legitimate to say that the low quality of the previous debate, together with ermergence of issues since makes a second vote appropriate. I think the very pragmatic and sensible Lib Dem proposal of a second referendum on final separation terms would be the way to do this.

... although I agree that the outcome might not be different. I note your points on immigration. Being a resident of a country with proportionally much higher immigration than the UK I will point out that sure, the economy has expanded, the tax take has gone up, the Gvt has eliminated the deficit - and it crows about the result. To the average person facing increased rents, house prices, traffic and pressure on services, this looks very much like sleight of hand.

--------------------
"Line dancing is as sinful as any other type of dancing, with its sexual gestures and touching. It is an incitement to lust."
Rev Dr Ian Paisley

Posts: 4215 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
fletcher christian

Mutinous Seadog
# 13919

 - Posted      Profile for fletcher christian   Email fletcher christian   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The campaign was quite something to behold from the outside. The claims being hurled around were quite remarkable and that X-Fctor style public debate.....

....but I think there has to be a second vote. As far as I understand it, looking at the various stats and commentary, quite a significant proportion of people seemed to genuinely believe they were voting to save the NHS and inject essential funding into it (precisely 350 million as a figure, or something like that). Of course they actually voted to leave the EU, but somehow all these things became conflated in their minds and I don't think it can be argued that they were voting to collapse the NHS, but this does seem like it might be more than just a 'possible' outcome of the vote.

--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan

Posts: 5159 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643

 - Posted      Profile for Cod     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
For me the limit was watching Nigel Farage and Eddie Izzard trying to talk over each other until a member of the audience told them both to shut up.

Seriously. A comedian and a comedian, responsible participating in a debate on the most important political decision in a generation.

I saw it again in a recent Guardian article about a group protesting about Trump's forthcoming UK visit: a couple of has-been politicians, a couple of nobodies and a bunch of celebs, clicktivists and talk-is-cheap columnists. No one of any moral stature at all.

--------------------
"Line dancing is as sinful as any other type of dancing, with its sexual gestures and touching. It is an incitement to lust."
Rev Dr Ian Paisley

Posts: 4215 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
He's not far off. If the current path is followed, the NHS will be privatised out of existence and the U.K. will have the same, disgraceful system as the US.

Privatised or public sector, medical staff will still have to be trained within it and there won't be enough trained medical staff, so the immigrant worker issue won't go away in this as in so many other industries and business sectors.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 23878 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
re: a second referendum. This would be something I would welcome.

Clearly we can't just have a referendum on the same question. Even if we could pretend the last few months didn't happen and there wasn't an outline plan for Brexit it would be wrong to do that. First because it would look like just asking the question until you get the right answer, which is an even more stupid way of doing things than having a referendum as the start and end of the political process. And, of course, it would just be repeating the stupidity of asking a stupid question in the first place.

Since we now have an outline plan for Brexit the obvious question to ask the people of the UK is whether we want the government to enter negotiations to seek an agreement as close as possible to this plan. That would, of course, need to be asked before the government starts negotiating. I would like to see the alternative option of Remaining in the EU on the ballot, but that might be seen as against the "we've already voted to Leave" political fantasy that seems to rule the roost in Westminster at the moment. So, probably the alternative option would be an Opposition plan for Brexit (which given the non-functional nature of Labour at the moment would need to be drawn up by the SNP with the LibDems and Green as the closest thing to an Opposition at the moment) - presumably a "soft" Brexit that retains our position in the Single Market with freedom of movement and most of the current benefits of EU membership.

But, I'm not seeing Mrs May wanting to give us such a referendum, delaying calling Article 50 while we spend the next 2 years discussing the issues in a reasonable manner.

Which leaves us with 18 months of negotiation, and a referndum on whether to accept the deal that Mrs May comes up with. Which gives us the big question of what if we say no? Do we stay in the EU? Or, exit on even less favourable terms? I don't really see that happening either.

Which basically means Mrs May has an open door to just choose here vision of Brexit without any democratic accountability or mandate. But, blustering on as though she does have such a mandate.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
He's not far off. If the current path is followed, the NHS will be privatised out of existence and the U.K. will have the same, disgraceful system as the US.

Privatised or public sector, medical staff will still have to be trained within it and there won't be enough trained medical staff, so the immigrant worker issue won't go away in this as in so many other industries and business sectors.
Just with extra costs involved. Because I'm not expecting the UK government to issue visas to allow EU nationals to live and work in the UK free of charge, even for people coming to work in the NHS. So, either employers will need to pay those extra costs, or the employees will quite reasonably expect a little extra to pay them.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Which gives us the big question of what if we say no? Do we stay in the EU? Or, exit on even less favourable terms? I don't really see that happening either.

My understanding is that article 50 is irrevocable. Once you've invoked it, you're on the way out and can't change lane.

Of course, the UK could always apply to join again...

Posts: 4679 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Whereas, sometime before Christmas the BBC (at least in Scotland) carried an interview with one of the lawyers who wrote the treaty, saying that it is possible to revoke an Article50 declaration prior to the end of the negotiating period and remain within the EU. Though (I assume, I don't recall him saying it) with considerable impact on good will and reputation with the other EU nations and practically zero political capital when it comes to future negotiations within the EU.

So, ISTM, if there is to be a referendum on whether the UK electorate want the sort of deal our government wants then that should be done as soon as possible, and before we start the negotiating process - though ongoing dilly-dallying will have it's own impact on our future within the EU.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You have to laugh. Millions were promised to the NHS, in lieu of EU contributions. Now the chancellor is saving up billions, to deal with the uncertainties caused by Brexit.

Now come on, you have to have a heart of stone not to smile at least.

--------------------
no path

Posts: 9474 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah, but the long term will be much better (ha bloody ha) -if of course Britannia hasn't sunk between the waves as a result of the short to medium term.

And of course there may not even be a Britannia to sink, if the Scots, justifiably, get so fed up with being marginalised in Brexit negotiations that they split the UK asunder.

Now remind me. It was 52%-48% in favour of this bloody stupid idea. Which is now unstoppable because "the people have spoken".

[ 07. March 2017, 13:12: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 20839 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
alienfromzog

Ship's Alien
# 5327

 - Posted      Profile for alienfromzog   Email alienfromzog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Whereas, sometime before Christmas the BBC (at least in Scotland) carried an interview with one of the lawyers who wrote the treaty, saying that it is possible to revoke an Article50 declaration prior to the end of the negotiating period and remain within the EU. Though (I assume, I don't recall him saying it) with considerable impact on good will and reputation with the other EU nations and practically zero political capital when it comes to future negotiations within the EU.

So, ISTM, if there is to be a referendum on whether the UK electorate want the sort of deal our government wants then that should be done as soon as possible, and before we start the negotiating process - though ongoing dilly-dallying will have it's own impact on our future within the EU.

This is one I've been thinking about.

My current boss in German (One of the EU nationals being held to ransom in Mrs May gets her way). I asked him a few months back about the other European nations' perspective on the UK. Now, obviously that's only one voice but it was helpful nonetheless. The impression I have is that the rest of Europe does really want the UK to remain. As a net-contributor to the budget, a long-standing relationship with the US and the biggest military expenditure in the EU, as well as long-standing historical ties across Europe, there are many ways in which Britain is good for the EU. (Of course being part of the EU is good for Britain but that's a different point).

As such, if handled properly, I do believe Europe would look favourably on the UK revoking article 50.

For that to happen I think the UK domestic politics will depend on
1) A realisation of how bad leaving the EU really is.
2) Thus the loud and ridiculous shrill voices of Leavers who won't shut up about it will become less relevant
3) (Probably) a general election
4) A second referendum

I think steps 1-3 are necessary to get to 4 and 4 is vital to deal with the democratic situation. Such a vote could easily be 60% plus for remain and a higher turnout would be useful too. The demographics are favourable, as this would be around 2019-2020 - i.e. all those annoyed 16-18 year olds who were so angry about the 2016 vote will now be able to vote.

I don't necessarily think the above scenario is likely but I do think it possible.

As such, all of us who believe (with very good reason) that leaving the EU is a really stupid idea need to argue, debate, discuss, lobby and support the moves that can make it happen.

So far, the House of Lords seem to be doing a good job.... Oh, the irony...

AFZ

--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]

An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)

Posts: 2097 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The problem with waiting for the next election, and all the 16-18 year olds who were so angry in June getting to cast their vote (and, for that matter the 14-15 year olds as well) is that by the next election in 2020 the Brexit negotiations will be over and we'll be out of the EU. Since the government is consistently denying the opportunity to get a mandate for their planned hard brexit direct from the people (presumably because they know the people of the UK will, if given the choice, vote for a much softer Brexit that keeps us in the single market - even if staying in the EU isn't on the cards) I don't see them suddenly caving in to give an early election. And, for whatever bizarre reason, the Commons has largely rolled over and given the government carte blanche to do what they want.

Good on the Lords for putting up some sensible amendments. A futile gesture, since the Commons will reject them and pass it back for the rubber stamp. But, it shows the value of a second chamber not beholden to party politics in quite the same way, in getting some of the questions that the Commons didn't even ask raised.

Meanwhile the government continues to grind the country into the ground with the uncertainty of Brexit, and the probability of a hard Brexit that no one wants. And, like today at work, coffee rooms across the country resound to the discussions from members of staff worried that after living and working in the UK for 11 years they might have to leave, and if so will their husband and infant daughter be able to emigrate to the EU after Brexit? Just in the university sector (which, of course, I'm most familiar with) we're already seeing a drop-off in students and staff drifting away to more certain futures elsewhere in the EU. Personally, I keep looking to see what jobs are available in Ireland.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Whereas, sometime before Christmas the BBC (at least in Scotland) carried an interview with one of the lawyers who wrote the treaty, saying that it is possible to revoke an Article50 declaration prior to the end of the negotiating period and remain within the EU.

Perhaps you (and he) are right. I see that this is also the opinion of Mr. Tusk.

Article 50 does explicitly require a unanimous agreement of the European Council to extend the two-year negotiation clock, but is silent on whether the leaving member state may unilaterally revoke its declaration, leaving it up to interpretation (which probably means lots of lawyers, followed by some kind of a deal to make the lawyers stop talking.)

I agree, of course, that leaving and then not-leaving is not a great way to make friends and influence people.

Posts: 4679 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
anteater

Ship's pest-controller
# 11435

 - Posted      Profile for anteater   Email anteater   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
AlanC:
I think the difference with the Lords is not about independence from party olitics so much as freedom from being elected. Plus most are independently wealthy.

I don't say that's a bad thing so long as their powers are limited.

It harder for remainer Labour MPs who are fearful of losing their seats, although Stoke shows it is not definite. But "as evry foole know" the Labour leadership is largely anti-EU, so they're in a double bind.

--------------------
Schnuffle schnuffle.

Posts: 2510 | From: UK | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by anteater:
I think the difference with the Lords is not about independence from party olitics so much as freedom from being elected.

Well, I never said anything about independence from party politics. What I said was the Lords aren't beholden to party politics in the same way as the Commons - and, freedom from being elected is part of that. But, as Hesseltine has found out there are still jobs such as government advisors that can be at risk if peers don't vote as their party want.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

But, I'm not seeing Mrs May wanting to give us such a referendum, delaying calling Article 50 while we spend the next 2 years discussing the issues in a reasonable manner.

It is fairly evident that the direction of travel at this point is to make a series of contradictory demands and then walk away from negotiations once they aren't accepted (hence the repeated 'no deal is better than a bad deal' language going into the negotiations).

With foreign stubborness being blamed for a lack of a deal so that the Tories can double down and win another election.

Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Since the government is consistently denying the opportunity to get a mandate for their planned hard brexit direct from the people (presumably because they know the people of the UK will, if given the choice, vote for a much softer Brexit that keeps us in the single market - even if staying in the EU isn't on the cards) I don't see them suddenly caving in to give an early election.

Do you REALLY believe that, Alan? I think that if the government were to go to the country now, it would get an overwhelming majority in favour of Mrs May's style of Brexit. It's the very small majority the government now has that is the best safeguard against its excesses. But let's not make the mistake of believing that membership of the Single Market will even be on offer from the rest of the EU. It won't.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6379 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's always about stopping the blue rinsers going fully fascist.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16377 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
alienfromzog

Ship's Alien
# 5327

 - Posted      Profile for alienfromzog   Email alienfromzog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Given how totally spineless the Commons has been, a lot depends on how resilient the Lords is to pressure. They don't have to pass the bill without amendments.

Ironically a bigger majority (not that I want that: I want rid of this awful government now) might make the Brexit policy more sane. May is pandering only to the extreme of her own party.

Making ridiculous demands and then walking away from negotiations will not result in a good situation for the UK at all. However I agree that it may well be the strategy in order to scapegoat 'unreasonable Europeans.'

History will not be kind to any of them. We are being led by fools.

AFZ

--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]

An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)

Posts: 2097 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Since the government is consistently denying the opportunity to get a mandate for their planned hard brexit direct from the people (presumably because they know the people of the UK will, if given the choice, vote for a much softer Brexit that keeps us in the single market - even if staying in the EU isn't on the cards) I don't see them suddenly caving in to give an early election.

Do you REALLY believe that, Alan? I think that if the government were to go to the country now, it would get an overwhelming majority in favour of Mrs May's style of Brexit. It's the very small majority the government now has that is the best safeguard against its excesses. But let's not make the mistake of believing that membership of the Single Market will even be on offer from the rest of the EU. It won't.
Since 48% wanted in the EU (and, a year later with more young voters and less older voters the deomographics are that the support for Remain would be higher), it only takes a few percent of those who voted Leave to want a soft exit that retains access to the single market for that position to be in the majority. We have had a year of major manufacturers (most recently car manufacturers) saying that loss of free access to the European market (to buy components and sell products) will increase their costs and decrease competitiveness. That will have resulted in the message to the electorate that not having free access to the European markets is a bad thing. Given a vote, I do believe that the majority of the UK would opt for a form of Brexit that maintains free access to the European market rather than Mrs Mays hard Brexit plan which will cut us out of the free trade area.

--------------------
Don't Brexit if you haven't a scooby how to fix it.

Posts: 31928 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
But let's not make the mistake of believing that membership of the Single Market will even be on offer from the rest of the EU. It won't.

Primarily because the UK won't accept the current set of obligations that being in the Single Market would place on the UK.
Posts: 3699 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541

 - Posted      Profile for Rocinante   Email Rocinante   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's difficult to work out what May is up to at the moment. An early election seems to offer so many advantages to her, not least no longer being held to ransom by her own Brexit Berserkers.

Her brexit strategy seems to be "give people what they say they want and see how they like it", which smacks of Nanny, and children learning lessons the hard way.

Not even particularly appropriate: as has been said many times, no-one voted for hard Brexit. Some people may actually want it, but we can be fairly certain they are in a smaller minority than Remainers.

The clues may have been there all along; "Brexit means brexit" (with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight) implied that if we leave, we leave everything. If that had been made clear before the referendum, I suspect the result would have been very different.

Posts: 331 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  ...  46  47  48 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools