I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
I don't know what the data show, but I suspect that a greater proportion of the non-EU immigration is the sort that we wouldn't want to end (i.e. nurses). But I might be wrong.
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
@CarlottaVance But we're already being told EUCO will agree Trade Talks at the December meeting. Which means this ' insufficient progress ' decision is actually a 2 months delay to burn further A50 time and remind us who is in charge. The Big Picture is since A50 invocation the government has lost it's majority AND decided to ask for a 2 year Status Quo transition. It's clear to anyone but the more florid Brexiters that our negotiations position is weakening not strengthening. The EU27 are being bloody awkward and yanking our chain because they can. It's about power. Are we really going to walk out over a 2 month delay ? After we've just asked ourselves for a 2 *year* delay in leaving in anything but name only ? How can we credibly threaten ' No Deal ' when we've just asked to delay leaving for 2 years and offered to pay £20bn for the honour ?
Which isn't to say the EU27 can demand anything or that we'll give it to them. But they've judged our position is weak enough that we'll swallow a 2 month delay rather than walk. And the evidence so far suggests that they are right.
It's a shame we couldn't have had a second referendum on EEA vs WTO. I reckon EEA would have won on 55-60% and the government would have had a clear mandate.
Maybe it's not too late?
EEA and WTO both involve leaving the customs union, so where would the customs border with Ireland be?
Norway and Sweden seem to do OK.
There is no peace process between Norway and Sweden, and as we've discussed, the UK and EU's position already rules out copying their arrangements.
It is apparent that a land border across Ireland may be unavoidable. I expect it will take the form of conventional customs posts, at least to begin with. Ireland could of course leave the EU and form a free trade area with the UK (ith which it does the great majority of its trade) and then there need be no hard border.
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland, It's likely not really a viable smuggling route for most products given the transport costs vs tariff saved. The ports in NI also probably don't have the capacity for truly material quantities of product to be shipped into Ireland, moved across the border and then shipped to UK or the reverse. The government just needs to oppose any out-size development of the ports to prevent it becoming too big an issue. If we left the border completely as it is today, and the result was NI having cheap French wine and people doing booze cruises to Belfast rather than Calais, why would that be a disaster?
And if we are really worried about customs duties, there are enforcement methods that don't impact the border. We could deal with people not declaring imports properly with really heavy fines for anyone caught, might not be as effective as a hard border, but it's a viable solution.
As for immigration, anyone coming across will have had to get through Irish immigration anyway. It's unlikely we'd be denying tourist visas to EU citizens that Ireland would let in and for non-EU migrants, Dover seems to be the preferred route at the moment - nothing in Brexit would fundamentally change that.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
Peace is more than the absence of war, it is a positive act of engagement with neighbours to resolve issues, to share benefits as well as difficulties. The EU has spread democracy, human rights, respect for the rule of law across Southern and Eastern Europe into places that well within my lifetime were brutal tyrannies. We played our part in that, and while our continent is a better place than probably any time in history, the job is not yet complete.
The tedious but valid point needs to be made that correlation is not causation, and that in the EU case we don't really have even a correlation; correlation = a being associated with b in more cases than one would expect by chance, and we only have one case to look at. NATO, the bomb and a feeling that having more than two WWs in the same century would be greedy probably have more to do with it than the EU.
Matthew Holehouse @mattholehouse · 10m May = Karensky, attempting to lead Provisional Government. Not sure whether it's Corbyn or S Baker steaming into Finland Station
Ew he's got the timeline all wrong there.
May as Prince Lvov, the mere figurehead being pulled about by the whims of her Foreign Secretary, works well too though.
I'd have Boris as Kornilov, his movements could bring the whole thing down
Nobody in their senses would put Boris in charge of an army, which lets out Kornilov.
Kerensky might be a better parallel - the drug-ridden egotist with a messianic sense of his own destiny that was rather rudely interrupted by a still more egotistical Communist with a handful of fanatics behind him and no clue of what to do next?
Idle anecdote - my mum's family knew the Kerenskys - my great-grandfather was his legal adviser, and I met Mrs K a few times during her exile in London. The family didn't mention anything about drugs (if they knew) but saw him as a sort of Keith Joseph figure - plesant enough, but preoccupied with theories of democracy when people wanted simple things like peace and food.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
If immigration is the issue this makes perfect sense. However, if sovereignty is the issue it doesn't. This is why we have hard-core Brexiteers explaining that when all the Eastern European nurses return home to Poland after Brexit, we can make up the shortfall by inviting our friends from the Indian Subcontinent to fill the vacancies.
It's a shame we couldn't have had a second referendum on EEA vs WTO. I reckon EEA would have won on 55-60% and the government would have had a clear mandate.
Maybe it's not too late?
EEA and WTO both involve leaving the customs union, so where would the customs border with Ireland be?
Norway and Sweden seem to do OK.
There is no peace process between Norway and Sweden, and as we've discussed, the UK and EU's position already rules out copying their arrangements.
It is apparent that a land border across Ireland may be unavoidable. I expect it will take the form of conventional customs posts, at least to begin with. Ireland could of course leave the EU and form a free trade area with the UK (ith which it does the great majority of its trade) and then there need be no hard border.
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland, It's likely not really a viable smuggling route for most products given the transport costs vs tariff saved. The ports in NI also probably don't have the capacity for truly material quantities of product to be shipped into Ireland, moved across the border and then shipped to UK or the reverse. The government just needs to oppose any out-size development of the ports to prevent it becoming too big an issue. If we left the border completely as it is today, and the result was NI having cheap French wine and people doing booze cruises to Belfast rather than Calais, why would that be a disaster?
And if we are really worried about customs duties, there are enforcement methods that don't impact the border. We could deal with people not declaring imports properly with really heavy fines for anyone caught, might not be as effective as a hard border, but it's a viable solution.
As for immigration, anyone coming across will have had to get through Irish immigration anyway. It's unlikely we'd be denying tourist visas to EU citizens that Ireland would let in and for non-EU migrants, Dover seems to be the preferred route at the moment - nothing in Brexit would fundamentally change that.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
I don't know what the data show, but I suspect that a greater proportion of the non-EU immigration is the sort that we wouldn't want to end (i.e. nurses). But I might be wrong.
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
We don’t have to end non-EU immigration but we can reduce it. And, yes, it would mean that there would be no automtic right to bring all your family to Britain but so be it. We could do more to deport those who have arrived here illegally or who have committed crimes and are otherwise undesirable etc.
I suspect that what infuriates some people is that the government is so inept at controlling the immigration which it can control so they have lashed out at FoM instead.
It is actually the vast majority of Leavers who want to end free movement as a result of Brexit and a clear majority of voters as a whole who do not want to pay large sums to the EU. It is only a small elite of Leave voters who are quite happy to leave the EU and go straight to the EEA while leaving immigration untouched, in the short term at least the Leave victory means that is not possible
Did you even read the piece? It doesn't argue about free movement at all.
The point is that it's the government's red lines of the ECJ and "independent" trade deals that have made a deal far more complicated than it needed to be - and what's more, those red lines were democratically totally unnecessary, since the average Leave voter in the Doncasters of the world didn't care about them. A handful of Tory politicians are the ones who mostly cared about the ECJ and trade deals, and it's their desires who seem to be dictating the government's whole negotiating strategy rather than the public's desires.
You cannot stay in the single market without free movement and payments so at best that is an argument for staying in the customs union alone
Who says? By "you cannot", you mean the EU hasn't allowed it hitherto. But the EU has also hitherto never allowed (as far as I know) no hard border between themselves and a non-Single Market/Customs Union country, yet that is exactly what the government is asking for, so....
If it's a choice between two unprecedented bids from the UK side, we may as well bid for one that the British public actually wants rather than one a few Tory MPs want, no?
Freedom of Movement is written into the treaties that underpin the whole of the EU. Even if the EU was to agree it as part of the Brexit negotiations it would be shot down by the ECJ as it is a fundamental part of what the EU is.
To change it would require a whole new treaty to rewrite the whole basis of the EU. How long exactly do you think that is going to take? And that will require unanimity from all 27 countries. There isn't a snowball in hell's chance it will ever be agreed.
But again, all you've done is show that a "Single Market minus free movement + extra contributions" deal would be breaking new ground. But no border between SingleMarket/CustomsUnion countries and non-SM/CU countries would be breaking new ground as well, yet that idea is one of the lynchpins of the government's whole negotiating strategy.
One of them is against treaty law, the other is not. That is the difference.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
I don't know what the data show, but I suspect that a greater proportion of the non-EU immigration is the sort that we wouldn't want to end (i.e. nurses). But I might be wrong.
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
Cyclefree.
but it's not just spain's nurses moving here is it,don't get me wrong we get plenty of positive EU immigration,we also have negative EU immigration that this country does not need.
We must have control who comes to live and work here.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
I suspect the Irish Republic will lose their financial services to Frankfurt in years to come, Germany will make it happen.
I suspect it will go the other way around, but we shall see.
(Actually, I suspect that financial services will fragment across Europe. Advisory work - like M&A - will end up happening in regional centres: London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Milan. Asset management will likely fragment too, as it has done in the US. The interesting question is whether sales & trading will remain in London, or whether there will be a new hub.)
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
@Cyclefree Because what seems to have finally tipped the British electorate over the edge is the high quality of EU immigration. Mattuesz is a threat in the way Mohammed isn't. EU immigrants are better educated and more likely to be in work than the host population. For all the moral panic on benefit tourism a JSA claiming Nigerian doesn't compete with you like the Polish Plumber does. People who don't speak English can't challenge your place in the pecking order.
A chunk of the electorate finds EU immigrants particularly objectionable because they've integrated too well.
I am optimistic it will sort itself out eventually. You voted to leave the EU because you don't like the remote bureaucracy and would like to get it out of your life. You have the idea of taking control, saving a wad of money and deciding what's what. Following your successful vote you end up instead with that unappealing organisation impinging more than it did before, you still have pay out and now have essentially no say. It's now take it or leave it, do what you are told. That's disappointing. It's hard to accept. But it's where it has to end up. We live in the real world. It will take time but we will accept it, I believe.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
Customs Union means we cannot negotiate our own trade deals for a start.
More importantly the Government has decided (wrongly I believe) that the majority of people are only interested in immigration. As such the obvious destination of EFTA/EEA which is what you are actually proposing (minus the Customs Union) is a non starter as far as they are concerned.
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
I have managed to stem the accumulation a little by means of a kindle. So, I now tend to buy e-versions of any novel I want to read. A Kindle also has the advantage of generally being easier to manoeuvre on a packed Tube.
@Cyclefree Because what seems to have finally tipped the British electorate over the edge is the high quality of EU immigration. Mattuesz is a threat in the way Mohammed isn't. EU immigrants are better educated and more likely to be in work than the host population. For all the moral panic on benefit tourism a JSA claiming Nigerian doesn't compete with you like the Polish Plumber does. People who don't speak English can't challenge your place in the pecking order.
A chunk of the electorate finds EU immigrants particularly objectionable because they've integrated too well.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
At present my other half is waiting to see whether sufficient progress has been made on the subject of kitchen size before he is willing to open discussions on the subjects of a study and a home gym.
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland.
Against WTO rules apparently.
WTO just says you have to have the same rules, not how you enforce them in any particular location
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
At present my other half is waiting to see whether sufficient progress has been made on the subject of kitchen size before he is willing to open discussions on the subjects of a study and a home gym.
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
LOL. I hope you have someone better than we do running the negotiations.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
Don't ask me how many I have actually read though. I have never had the courage (or time) to work that one out. I know I always intended reading them all but I also know that if I sat down and worked out my likely remaining life span compared to the number of books still to read in my collection I would get very upset at the answer.
If you want to end up in a WTO tribunal and then lose, of course, you can. The basic WTO rule is that you cannot discriminate between countries unless you have a Trade agreement. Therefore, the Irish Republic and, say, Belgium or any other EU country has to be treated in the same way - FTA or no FTA.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
Wow 20k. I have circa 6000 football programmes. I have only added 2 this season ie from new grounds.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
At present my other half is waiting to see whether sufficient progress has been made on the subject of kitchen size before he is willing to open discussions on the subjects of a study and a home gym.
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
I could not care less about kitchen size. You can cook perfectly well in a small kitchen. But bookshelves are an absolute red line. As is a garden. I forgive my beloved much because he has bought me extra land thus doubling the size of our garden. I will be able to spend the next few years creating a haven of joy and beauty - with a garden building into which I can retreat with my books, music and citrus (for drinks). Really, what else does one need?
YellowSubmarine - 20% eu citizens are unemployed in the uk - not the workaholics you portray them as.
"While the distinction might not sound like much, it does have a big impact on how we understand the 600,000 figure. According to the European Commission, only 28% of the total is made up of jobseekers, less than the proportion accounted for by pensioners (30%). The 600,000 figure will also capture students and the disabled. "
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
Wow 20k. I have circa 6000 football programmes. I have only added 2 this season ie from new grounds.
I see the EU are preparing to agree to "exploration" of the next stage from December. So far, it's all proceeding as usual, with last-minute fudges. Both Remainers and Leavers should avoid getting too worked up at every stage - it's bad for your blood pressure, and something fudgey will emerge in the end.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
My former boss had a system where he lined his very grand staircase with bookshelves. When he or his wife finished reading a book they would place it on the shelf at the top of the staircase and from time to time shift the books already there further down the stair.. The books at the bottom of the stair would be taken off to Oxfam. So there was a migration from top to bottom and if there was a particular book they wanted to keep or read again, they put it back up at the top before it fell off the bottom. He seemed happy with the system.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
My former boss had a system where he lined his very grand staircase with bookshelves. When he or his wife finished reading a book they would place it on the shelf at the top of the staircase and from time to time shift the books already there further down the stair.. The books at the bottom of the stair would be taken off to Oxfam. So there was a migration from top to bottom and if there was a particular book they wanted to keep or read again, they put it back up at the top before it fell off the bottom. He seemed happy with the system.
It's a good job my other half doesn't read pb. I wouldn't want him getting ideas.
I see the EU are preparing to agree to "exploration" of the next stage from December. So far, it's all proceeding as usual, with last-minute fudges. Both Remainers and Leavers should avoid getting too worked up at every stage - it's bad for your blood pressure, and something fudgey will emerge in the end.
@Cyclefree Because what seems to have finally tipped the British electorate over the edge is the high quality of EU immigration. Mattuesz is a threat in the way Mohammed isn't. EU immigrants are better educated and more likely to be in work than the host population. For all the moral panic on benefit tourism a JSA claiming Nigerian doesn't compete with you like the Polish Plumber does. People who don't speak English can't challenge your place in the pecking order.
A chunk of the electorate finds EU immigrants particularly objectionable because they've integrated too well.
If we're going to have immigration, young, gorgeous, friendly women from Eastern Europe is as good as it gets.
I know. I'm married to one.
But, that doesn't mean I think such immigration should be unlimited.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
I see the EU are preparing to agree to "exploration" of the next stage from December. So far, it's all proceeding as usual, with last-minute fudges. Both Remainers and Leavers should avoid getting too worked up at every stage - it's bad for your blood pressure, and something fudgey will emerge in the end.
Completely OT Nick, since you are on at the moment. Have you been to the Board Game Café Ludorati on Maid Marian Way yet? It is well worth a visit.
Jake Berry, the Northern Powerhouse minister, disclosed that he discussed the plans for a new "Brexit-annia" with Liam Fox, the International Trade secretary, this week. https://twitter.com/Usherwood/status/918575648804884480
@Cyclefree Because what seems to have finally tipped the British electorate over the edge is the high quality of EU immigration. Mattuesz is a threat in the way Mohammed isn't. EU immigrants are better educated and more likely to be in work than the host population. For all the moral panic on benefit tourism a JSA claiming Nigerian doesn't compete with you like the Polish Plumber does. People who don't speak English can't challenge your place in the pecking order.
A chunk of the electorate finds EU immigrants particularly objectionable because they've integrated too well.
If we're going to have immigration, young, gorgeous, friendly women from Eastern Europe is as good as it gets.
I know. I'm married to one.
But, that doesn't mean I think such immigration should be unlimited.
I could not care less about kitchen size. You can cook perfectly well in a small kitchen. But bookshelves are an absolute red line. As is a garden. I forgive my beloved much because he has bought me extra land thus doubling the size of our garden. I will be able to spend the next few years creating a haven of joy and beauty - with a garden building into which I can retreat with my books, music and citrus (for drinks). Really, what else does one need?
When the young 'un came along, we lost one of our two studies (his and hers). I therefore removed several bookcases, and decided that as the garage was already stuffed full of books, I would get rid of most of the ones on those shelves.
Any rare or difficult to replace ones remained (mainly non-fiction), along with any that were signed. But I got rid of scores (perhaps hundreds) of novels. Only a few of these have made their way back onto Kindle.
The good side to this is that I feel able to buy more books, especially when they're odd. Library sales are always potential goldmines.
In fact, I'd reckon the PB collective collection of books would shame many libraries in terms of breadth of subjects.
Jake Berry, the Northern Powerhouse minister, disclosed that he discussed the plans for a new "Brexit-annia" with Liam Fox, the International Trade secretary, this week. https://twitter.com/Usherwood/status/918575648804884480
Hopefully she will navigate the EU-Boat menace with ease!
One thing I am beginning to get a little worried about, is that over the past few days I've become increasingly aware on social media and on phone ins on the radio, an increasing number of people starting to talk about ditching the monarchy. OK, there's always one or two going off on a wee rant, and everyone tut tuts or has a giggle at them, but not now. There seems to be a mood change, and our political class are missing it.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
Customs Union means we cannot negotiate our own trade deals for a start.
More importantly the Government has decided (wrongly I believe) that the majority of people are only interested in immigration. As such the obvious destination of EFTA/EEA which is what you are actually proposing (minus the Customs Union) is a non starter as far as they are concerned.
As OpenEurope have said, if you're going to Leave the EU, leaving the Customs Union is a no-brainer:
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
At present my other half is waiting to see whether sufficient progress has been made on the subject of kitchen size before he is willing to open discussions on the subjects of a study and a home gym.
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
Heh, I'm "trying" to move at the moment, waiting for our seller to buy, and hoping our buyer still wants to move in when the chain is sorted. I alternate between phoning the solicitor and estate agent for faint hopes of any sort of movement on our purchase & sale ^^; It's a trial
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
Wow 20k. I have circa 6000 football programmes. I have only added 2 this season ie from new grounds.
Ever been to valley parade ?
Yes 276 different grounds and counting. Non league has now passed League grounds. Some good ones in or around Bradford. I like Albion Sports.
One thing I am beginning to get a little worried about, is that over the past few days I've become increasingly aware on social media and on phone ins on the radio, an increasing number of people starting to talk about ditching the monarchy. OK, there's always one or two going off on a wee rant, and everyone tut tuts or has a giggle at them, but not now. There seems to be a mood change, and our political class are missing it.
Probably a Momentum inspired 'astro-turf' campaign.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
There's a film where she's doing it to Stephen Fry, in character, from the early 90s I think.
One thing I am beginning to get a little worried about, is that over the past few days I've become increasingly aware on social media and on phone ins on the radio, an increasing number of people starting to talk about ditching the monarchy. OK, there's always one or two going off on a wee rant, and everyone tut tuts or has a giggle at them, but not now. There seems to be a mood change, and our political class are missing it.
Probably a Momentum inspired 'astro-turf' campaign.
Probably because of the SNP's motion about defunding them. Hardly spontaneous.
I see the EU are preparing to agree to "exploration" of the next stage from December. So far, it's all proceeding as usual, with last-minute fudges. Both Remainers and Leavers should avoid getting too worked up at every stage - it's bad for your blood pressure, and something fudgey will emerge in the end.
I thought getting worked up at every stage was what pb.com was about?
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
That is grounds for divorce.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
At present my other half is waiting to see whether sufficient progress has been made on the subject of kitchen size before he is willing to open discussions on the subjects of a study and a home gym.
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
Heh, I'm "trying" to move at the moment, waiting for our seller to buy, and hoping our buyer still wants to move in when the chain is sorted. I alternate between phoning the solicitor and estate agent for faint hopes of any sort of movement on our purchase & sale ^^; It's a trial
Its not good we have decided to build rather than move
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
As you might expect, popbitch this week is indispensable reading on this subject:
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
If immigration is the issue this makes perfect sense. However, if sovereignty is the issue it doesn't. This is why we have hard-core Brexiteers explaining that when all the Eastern European nurses return home to Poland after Brexit, we can make up the shortfall by inviting our friends from the Indian Subcontinent to fill the vacancies.
Freedom of movement is racist against citizens of non-EU nations.
I also note that @Beverley_C has appointed herself PB Empress of Womens’ Shoes.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
In our flat, the spare room is crammed full with pairs of my wife's shoes and handbags. I don't complain though, for fear of objections to the quantity of books that fill every other available recess in the flat.
I am guilty on the books front as well, I’m afraid.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
My other half is threatening to introduce a "one in, one out" rule for books. We're contemplating a move and one of the bones of contention is that I want a study. Since I have a very big study in Hungary, that is apparently excessive.
I have managed to stem the accumulation a little by means of a kindle. So, I now tend to buy e-versions of any novel I want to read. A Kindle also has the advantage of generally being easier to manoeuvre on a packed Tube.
I've given up on Kindle for non-fiction where I want to flip back and forwards between chapters to review arguments or facts presented in earlier chapters but referenced in later ones. That said, I have about 300 books on the kindle, so that's at least one fewer bookcase.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
There's a film where she's doing it to Stephen Fry, in character, from the early 90s I think.
"Peter's Friends"?
But, it was a comedy. Apparently.
It’s all very well coming out now about Weinstein and expressing solidarity with victims and all the rest of it. But if others have behaved equally badly why doesn’t she and all the others have the balls to name names?
That would do more to help than all this wailing about their suffering. Point fingers and say what happened, who dit it and why they didn’t speak up. Otherwise it’s a lot of emoting and scapegoating one man for the ills of an industry and absolutely nothing will be different in future.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
The answer is in the question. There may be votes in the commons for it, but not in the Brexit Ultras.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
There's a film where she's doing it to Stephen Fry, in character, from the early 90s I think.
"Peter's Friends"?
But, it was a comedy. Apparently.
Doubt it's Peter's Friends. From what I recall of that film, she was an old friend who had always fancied/loved him, and had no position of power over him. That's quite a different, and in some ways sadder, situation.
ISTR she said a line something like: "Fill me with your little babies."
I quite liked that film. At least it was better than Bladerunner.
Funnily enough I had the misfortune to sit next to a full on Brexit (really quite famous after I wikied him) Peer historian at my local....in Oxford this very evening.
The only argument he was able to give about Brexit was Parliamentary sovereignty.
I tried to explain to him as amicably as possible that Brexit has already cost me where I live, thousands upon thousands of squidlies, caused my wife and her family undue anxiety and the rest....
and for what. For fucking Parliamentary sovereignty over the spectre of EU regulation..he couldn't even give me one example where Parliamentary sovereignty would make one iota of a smidgen of a bit of interest in my life. Not one. Not one repeat. Not one. Do I need to repeat that again.
So my conclusion...you Brexiteers who quote Parliamentary sovereignty are a bunch of nihilistic, destructive, ideological numpties.
The rest of the Brexit voters who don't give a shit about Parliament are just simply racist and narrow minded, or illiterate. Take your pick where you stand.
Funnily enough I had the misfortune to sit next to a full on Brexit (really quite famous after I wikied him) Peer historian at my local....in Oxford this very evening.
The only argument he was able to give about Brexit was Parliamentary sovereignty.
I tried to explain to him as amicably as possible that Brexit has already cost me where I live, thousands upon thousands of squidlies, caused my wife and her family undue anxiety and the rest....
and for what. For fucking Parliamentary sovereignty...he couldn't even give me one example where Parliamentary sovereignty would make one iota of a smidgen of a bit of interest in my life. Not one. Not one repeat. Not one. Do I need to repeat that again.
So my conclusion...you Brexiteers who quote Parliamentary sovereignty are a bunch of nihilistic, destructive, ideological numpties.
The rest of the Brexit voters who don't give a shit about Parliament are just simply racist and narrow minded, or illiterate. Take your pick where you stand.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
If immigration is the issue this makes perfect sense. However, if sovereignty is the issue it doesn't. This is why we have hard-core Brexiteers explaining that when all the Eastern European nurses return home to Poland after Brexit, we can make up the shortfall by inviting our friends from the Indian Subcontinent to fill the vacancies.
Freedom of movement is racist against citizens of non-EU nations.
You’ve said this before. And, sorry, don’t mean to be rude but it’s absolute bollocks.
Funnily enough I had the misfortune to sit next to a full on Brexit (really quite famous after I wikied him) Peer historian at my local....in Oxford this very evening.
The only argument he was able to give about Brexit was Parliamentary sovereignty.
I tried to explain to him as amicably as possible that Brexit has already cost me where I live, thousands upon thousands of squidlies, caused my wife and her family undue anxiety and the rest....
and for what. For fucking Parliamentary sovereignty...he couldn't even give me one example where Parliamentary sovereignty would make one iota of a smidgen of a bit of interest in my life. Not one. Not one repeat. Not one. Do I need to repeat that again.
So my conclusion...you Brexiteers who quote Parliamentary sovereignty are a bunch of nihilistic, destructive, ideological numpties.
The rest of the Brexit voters who don't give a shit about Parliament are just simply racist and narrow minded, or illiterate. Take your pick where you stand.
As pleasant as ever!
Brexit is the definition off unpleasant shitness...in the future it'll only be associated with nasty horrible stuff, akin to other nihilistic political philosophies that send us backwards.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
If immigration is the issue this makes perfect sense. However, if sovereignty is the issue it doesn't. This is why we have hard-core Brexiteers explaining that when all the Eastern European nurses return home to Poland after Brexit, we can make up the shortfall by inviting our friends from the Indian Subcontinent to fill the vacancies.
Freedom of movement is racist against citizens of non-EU nations.
You’ve said this before. And, sorry, don’t mean to be rude but it’s absolute bollocks.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
I don't know what the data show, but I suspect that a greater proportion of the non-EU immigration is the sort that we wouldn't want to end (i.e. nurses). But I might be wrong.
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
We don’t have to end non-EU immigration but we can reduce it. And, yes, it would mean that there would be no automtic right to bring all your family to Britain but so be it. We could do more to deport those who have arrived here illegally or who have committed crimes and are otherwise undesirable etc.
I suspect that what infuriates some people is that the government is so inept at controlling the immigration which it can control so they have lashed out at FoM instead.
Who specifically would you reduce?
Ending the right to bring your family over is I believe incompatible with EU membership as "right to a family life" is a "human right" we have to respect as EU members and that is how the relevant European courts have interpreted that right to mean.
Secondly the government has for repeated years made it tougher and tougher to get a visa already. If you want to bring a spouse over you have to earn enough to support them, if you want to come here on a job visa you have to earn much more than you used to etc, etc - none of that applies to the EU Freedom of Movement.
How much tougher should we be and to whom from the 93% of the world's population that don't come from the EU?
Should a skilled Canadian teacher be told they can't come over to make room for free movement from Europe? How do you justify it?
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland.
Against WTO rules apparently.
WTO just says you have to have the same rules, not how you enforce them in any particular location
I suspect, and I could be wrong, that a deliberate policy of not enforcing tariffs on goods from a certain country would allow other countries to bring a case at the WTO that they were being discriminated against relative to Ireland.
The other issue, of course, is that a deliberate policy of non-enforcement would create some (errr) interesting cross border businesses.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
As you might expect, popbitch this week is indispensable reading on this subject:
Pobitch not a publication I’d ever heard of TBH. I shall read later.
Mind you, the Bar when I was a young lawyer had plenty of practitioners who thought female pupils were for the taking. Oily gits. Still, for many of them it was probably the only way they’d have got any sex at all.
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
Sure - we lose the ability to have our own trade deals but in the real world (a) how important is that to voters and (b) we will be the weaker party so that freedom is probably more apparent than real.
Sure - we will still face ECJ jurisdiction but any agreement we have with anyone is going to need some final court of adjudication. The ECJ is not notably so much worse than any other possible court.
I simply do not understand why the government does not put forward a proposal that would go some way to reconciling those who voted Remain, would put our relations with the EU on a better footing (they are not going to go away, after all) and would not cause unnecessary and potentially very serious economic disruption.
It would also have the benefit of giving us time to think about what our European strategy should be over the long-term and does not burn our bridges with the EU should changes happen within it that might make us want to reconsider.
Well, I do - the government has painted itself into a corner and is scared of the hard Brexiteers. But surely there are the votes in the Commons for such an outcome?
Or am I being thick / naive / a dreamer / insanely optimistic?
If immigration is the issue this makes perfect sense. However, if sovereignty is the issue it doesn't. This is why we have hard-core Brexiteers explaining that when all the Eastern European nurses return home to Poland after Brexit, we can make up the shortfall by inviting our friends from the Indian Subcontinent to fill the vacancies.
Freedom of movement is racist against citizens of non-EU nations.
You’ve said this before. And, sorry, don’t mean to be rude but it’s absolute bollocks.
How is it not discriminatory to tell a skilled worker from another continent that they can't come while anyone unskilled or unemployed from our own continent can? It is by definition discrimination.
rcs1000 - do you see a distinction between job seeker's allowance for people who will never work and the student loan system for people that will never repay their loans?
I am, possibly, being a bit thick here but why can’t we stay in the Single Market, Customs Union with FoM and reduce non-EU immigration?
If what people care about is reducing immigration and having control over it, why not take steps to reduce that over which we indisputably do have control? And parts of which, frankly, create more problems for the country than allowing all of Spain’s nurses to move here.
I don't know what the data show, but I suspect that a greater proportion of the non-EU immigration is the sort that we wouldn't want to end (i.e. nurses). But I might be wrong.
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
We don’t have to end non-EU immigration but we can reduce it. And, yes, it would mean that there would be no automtic right to bring all your family to Britain but so be it. We could do more to deport those who have arrived here illegally or who have committed crimes and are otherwise undesirable etc.
I suspect that what infuriates some people is that the government is so inept at controlling the immigration which it can control so they have lashed out at FoM instead.
Who specifically would you reduce?
Ending the right to bring your family over is I believe incompatible with EU membership as "right to a family life" is a "human right" we have to respect as EU members and that is how the relevant European courts have interpreted that right to mean.
Secondly the government has for repeated years made it tougher and tougher to get a visa already. If you want to bring a spouse over you have to earn enough to support them, if you want to come here on a job visa you have to earn much more than you used to etc, etc - none of that applies to the EU Freedom of Movement.
How much tougher should we be and to whom from the 93% of the world's population that don't come from the EU?
Should a skilled Canadian teacher be told they can't come over to make room for free movement from Europe? How do you justify it?
You see, this was the problem for me. As soon as the EU (via the ECJ) started to actively legislate/adjudicate on crime & justice and human rights through rolling the ECHR into its Charter of Fundamental Rights, it was game over for me. And it won't stop there.
I'm afraid for me, and I appreciate others disagree, that stuff is a dealbreaker. It is simply incompatible with being a sovereign democracy.
Such decisions must be made by accountable elected national politicians we can elect and eject.
I've never understood why much smaller countries like Canada and Australia can make these decisions, and we can't.
If you want to end up in a WTO tribunal and then lose, of course, you can. The basic WTO rule is that you cannot discriminate between countries unless you have a Trade agreement. Therefore, the Irish Republic and, say, Belgium or any other EU country has to be treated in the same way - FTA or no FTA.
I would be treating every country the same way though - if you bring your goods in by land follow set of rules X, if by air or by sea follow set of rules Y.
I see that Emma Thompson is now claiming that she suffered similar abuse to that alleged against Weinstein from “many other” men in the film industry. Is she going to name them, one wonders?
There's a film where she's doing it to Stephen Fry, in character, from the early 90s I think.
"Peter's Friends"?
But, it was a comedy. Apparently.
Doubt it's Peter's Friends. From what I recall of that film, she was an old friend who had always fancied/loved him, and had no position of power over him. That's quite a different, and in some ways sadder, situation.
ISTR she said a line something like: "Fill me with your little babies."
I quite liked that film. At least it was better than Bladerunner.
(runs).
Yep. That's the one.
I hope you realise I was being slightly tongue in cheek.
I could not care less about kitchen size. You can cook perfectly well in a small kitchen. But bookshelves are an absolute red line. As is a garden. I forgive my beloved much because he has bought me extra land thus doubling the size of our garden. I will be able to spend the next few years creating a haven of joy and beauty - with a garden building into which I can retreat with my books, music and citrus (for drinks). Really, what else does one need?
I love cooking, but you are right about kitchen size - past a certain point there is no advantage to a giant kitchen. As long as I have a prep area and a cooking area and the sink, fridge etc then it is big enough.
Gardens, OTOH, are full of strange, green, usually inedible plants so I tend to stay out of them or at least do no gardening in them.
Books! Another great love of my life but with me packing up to leave I am thinning out my books. I have given quite a few away and I have more friends coming around at the weekend to cart some more away.
Am I the only one that doesn't get why does the Irish border need to be a problem? Deal or no deal, there is nothing to force the UK to put up any hard infrastructure, is there? The Irish government, I believe, also opposes a hard border? Any posts that did go up would likely to get vandalised in short order, so what would be the point?
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland.
Against WTO rules apparently.
WTO just says you have to have the same rules, not how you enforce them in any particular location
I suspect, and I could be wrong, that a deliberate policy of not enforcing tariffs on goods from a certain country would allow other countries to bring a case at the WTO that they were being discriminated against relative to Ireland.
The other issue, of course, is that a deliberate policy of non-enforcement would create some (errr) interesting cross border businesses.
We rely on individuals arriving at airports to self-sort into nothing to declare and the red channel. How about an honour system for goods crossing the Irish border?
Comments
Certainly questioning the amount of non-EU immigration is fair enough.
Hmm.....
Just as well I was not on earlier as I might have had something to say about that. My shoe collection, my love of and desire for shoes ..... well, it’s incomprehensible to all the men I know.
Still, as my Italian Mama rightly said: “One can never have too many shoes or handbags or gloves.”
Which isn't to say the EU27 can demand anything or that we'll give it to them. But they've judged our position is weak enough that we'll swallow a 2 month delay rather than walk. And the evidence so far suggests that they are right.
On customs, one viable solution is to just not even try to collect customs for goods landed in NI. Unless your end customer is in Northern Ireland, It's likely not really a viable smuggling route for most products given the transport costs vs tariff saved. The ports in NI also probably don't have the capacity for truly material quantities of product to be shipped into Ireland, moved across the border and then shipped to UK or the reverse. The government just needs to oppose any out-size development of the ports to prevent it becoming too big an issue. If we left the border completely as it is today, and the result was NI having cheap French wine and people doing booze cruises to Belfast rather than Calais, why would that be a disaster?
And if we are really worried about customs duties, there are enforcement methods that don't impact the border. We could deal with people not declaring imports properly with really heavy fines for anyone caught, might not be as effective as a hard border, but it's a viable solution.
As for immigration, anyone coming across will have had to get through Irish immigration anyway. It's unlikely we'd be denying tourist visas to EU citizens that Ireland would let in and for non-EU migrants, Dover seems to be the preferred route at the moment - nothing in Brexit would fundamentally change that.
Edit - and skilled immigration: http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/non-european-labour-migration-to-the-uk/
I suspect that what infuriates some people is that the government is so inept at controlling the immigration which it can control so they have lashed out at FoM instead.
but it's not just spain's nurses moving here is it,don't get me wrong we get plenty of positive EU immigration,we also have negative EU immigration that this country does not need.
We must have control who comes to live and work here.
Every time I ask my builder to build me more shelves he asks me why I don’t get rid of my books. Then he looks at me. Then he starts measuring up.
(Actually, I suspect that financial services will fragment across Europe. Advisory work - like M&A - will end up happening in regional centres: London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Milan. Asset management will likely fragment too, as it has done in the US. The interesting question is whether sales & trading will remain in London, or whether there will be a new hub.)
A chunk of the electorate finds EU immigrants particularly objectionable because they've integrated too well.
More importantly the Government has decided (wrongly I believe) that the majority of people are only interested in immigration. As such the obvious destination of EFTA/EEA which is what you are actually proposing (minus the Customs Union) is a non starter as far as they are concerned.
I was fortunate to grow up in a bookshop owned by my Mum. At the last count I have something over 20,000 books in my house, a situation helped by the fact my wife was also an avid reader/collector so the combined collection required a dedicated library when we moved in together.
https://twitter.com/LawDavF/status/918470445753667585
https://twitter.com/LawDavF/status/918471980906672128
20,000? When your collection of books is creating its own gravitational field you may have a problem...
I'm trying to argue that no deal is better than a bad deal but he's not falling for that at all.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/12/brexit-talks-at-disturbing-deadlock-over-divorce-bill-says-eu-negotiator
https://twitter.com/LawDavF/status/918470899929673728
If you want to end up in a WTO tribunal and then lose, of course, you can. The basic WTO rule is that you cannot discriminate between countries unless you have a Trade agreement. Therefore, the Irish Republic and, say, Belgium or any other EU country has to be treated in the same way - FTA or no FTA.
https://fullfact.org/europe/are-there-600000-unemployed-eu-migrants-uk/
(Ducks....)
https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/918515454360084480
Hmmmm. Fudge.
I know. I'm married to one.
But, that doesn't mean I think such immigration should be unlimited.
Jake Berry, the Northern Powerhouse minister, disclosed that he discussed the plans for a new "Brexit-annia" with Liam Fox, the International Trade secretary, this week.
https://twitter.com/Usherwood/status/918575648804884480
Just heard it on the radio now. Forgot how good it was.
A nicer way of ethnic cleansing in Eastern Europe.
£1 = € 1.3022 on June 23rd 2016
£1 = € 1.1210 today.
The dollar has also gone pear-shaped since Dec 20th 2016. After Trump got elected.
Any rare or difficult to replace ones remained (mainly non-fiction), along with any that were signed. But I got rid of scores (perhaps hundreds) of novels. Only a few of these have made their way back onto Kindle.
The good side to this is that I feel able to buy more books, especially when they're odd. Library sales are always potential goldmines.
In fact, I'd reckon the PB collective collection of books would shame many libraries in terms of breadth of subjects.
https://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/post-brexit-leaving-customs-union-no-brainer/
https://openeurope.org.uk/today/blog/priorities-for-the-new-department-for-international-trade-post-brexit/
I could live with EFTA/EEA.
It's a trial
Why ? We have the M2 and the M20. 6 lanes of concrete on each for 80 miles. That should do it.
Probably a Momentum inspired 'astro-turf' campaign.
"Peter's Friends"?
But, it was a comedy. Apparently.
https://twitter.com/popbitch/status/918559118557933573
I found much of this shocking.
3-0
3-0
3-0
Conservative!
That would do more to help than all this wailing about their suffering. Point fingers and say what happened, who dit it and why they didn’t speak up. Otherwise it’s a lot of emoting and scapegoating one man for the ills of an industry and absolutely nothing will be different in future.
If May proposed it, she would be dispatched.
ISTR she said a line something like: "Fill me with your little babies."
I quite liked that film. At least it was better than Bladerunner.
(runs).
The only argument he was able to give about Brexit was Parliamentary sovereignty.
I tried to explain to him as amicably as possible that Brexit has already cost me where I live, thousands upon thousands of squidlies, caused my wife and her family undue anxiety and the rest....
and for what. For fucking Parliamentary sovereignty over the spectre of EU regulation..he couldn't even give me one example where Parliamentary sovereignty would make one iota of a smidgen of a bit of interest in my life. Not one. Not one repeat. Not one. Do I need to repeat that again.
So my conclusion...you Brexiteers who quote Parliamentary sovereignty are a bunch of nihilistic, destructive, ideological numpties.
The rest of the Brexit voters who don't give a shit about Parliament are just simply racist and narrow minded, or illiterate. Take your pick where you stand.
You’ve said this before. And, sorry, don’t mean to be rude but it’s absolute bollocks.
If the former, you are saying that EU citizens have a much higher rate of employment than native Brits (c. 60%).
If the latter, you are saying that EU citizens claim JSA at a much higher rate than Brits.
Which is it?
(See: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS for World Bank data on employment to population ratios.)
Ending the right to bring your family over is I believe incompatible with EU membership as "right to a family life" is a "human right" we have to respect as EU members and that is how the relevant European courts have interpreted that right to mean.
Secondly the government has for repeated years made it tougher and tougher to get a visa already. If you want to bring a spouse over you have to earn enough to support them, if you want to come here on a job visa you have to earn much more than you used to etc, etc - none of that applies to the EU Freedom of Movement.
How much tougher should we be and to whom from the 93% of the world's population that don't come from the EU?
Should a skilled Canadian teacher be told they can't come over to make room for free movement from Europe? How do you justify it?
The other issue, of course, is that a deliberate policy of non-enforcement would create some (errr) interesting cross border businesses.
Mind you, the Bar when I was a young lawyer had plenty of practitioners who thought female pupils were for the taking. Oily gits. Still, for many of them it was probably the only way they’d have got any sex at all.
https://twitter.com/ons/status/918061445828501504
I'm afraid for me, and I appreciate others disagree, that stuff is a dealbreaker. It is simply incompatible with being a sovereign democracy.
Such decisions must be made by accountable elected national politicians we can elect and eject.
I've never understood why much smaller countries like Canada and Australia can make these decisions, and we can't.
I hope you realise I was being slightly tongue in cheek.
Gardens, OTOH, are full of strange, green, usually inedible plants so I tend to stay out of them or at least do no gardening in them.
Books! Another great love of my life but with me packing up to leave I am thinning out my books. I have given quite a few away and I have more friends coming around at the weekend to cart some more away.