I disagree entirely. If anything the events of the last 48 hours have increases the likelihood of a Davis premiership and Tory leadership. If we do now get a FTA deal, as seems increasingly likely, then both May and Davis will take some credit and if Boris and Gove having backed the deal will have little scope of any to challenge Davis on a hard Brexit ticket (Boris is particular said the EU could 'go whistle' for any money at all let alone £50 million). The only man who does is Mogg who has made clear he will vote against the payments and a deal.
That means either Davis or Mogg are likely to succeed May as Tory leader. If Mogg gets through to the membership he may well win. However I think MPs would orchestrate a Davis v Rudd contest which Davis as the Leaver in that scenario would win.
You used to disagree when I said lay Boris.
How’d that turn out ?
If it is Boris v Rudd or Hammond or Hunt sent to members even Boris would win
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
There will be a large pile of fudge on NI. There always has been.
NI is not about fudge. This is the EU getting a head start on forcing the UK as a whole to maintain compliance with EU regulations after Brexit. Which is a problem because we should only have to do this if we stay in the SM and absolutely should not do this if we are going CETA, which is what they are saying we will offer. They will get the UK to make the concession now in relation to NI knowing that it will have to apply to the whole UK.
The worst of all World's is an FTA with a limit on regulatory divergence, but it suits the EU perfectly. And of course, once we agree to retain EU regulation we will have to agree to ECJ jurisdiction on these matters.
This is far worse than no deal.
As long as we get a FTA that ends free movement the Leave vote is respected and nothing else matters even sone compliance with EU regulation as the government is already incorporating much EU law into UK law. Remember 48% voted Leave because of economic comcerns so a FTA has to be done while Leave only won over 50% because of free movement concerns not sovereigntyists, Leaving the EU and ending free movement is therefore fine.
But there’s plenty of Conservative backbenches (and members) who are sovereigntiests, for whom any trade deal that constrains future British regulations or our ability to do trade deals elsewhere after Brexit will be a very thick red line.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
Indeed Mr 13; my wife asked me this morning about plans for my 80th birthday party next year.
More seriously, I think that everyone reasonably thoughtful, Remainers and Leavers, fears that we are getting ourselves into a fine mess. As either Laurel or Hardy used to say.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
There will be a large pile of fudge on NI. There always has been.
NI is not about fudge. This is the EU getting a head start on forcing the UK as a whole to maintain compliance with EU regulations after Brexit. Which is a problem because we should only have to do this if we stay in the SM and absolutely should not do this if we are going CETA, which is what they are saying we will offer. They will get the UK to make the concession now in relation to NI knowing that it will have to apply to the whole UK.
The worst of all World's is an FTA with a limit on regulatory divergence, but it suits the EU perfectly. And of course, once we agree to retain EU regulation we will have to agree to ECJ jurisdiction on these matters.
This is far worse than no deal.
As long as we get a FTA that ends free movement the Leave vote is respected and nothing else matters even sone compliance with EU regulation as the government is already incorporating much EU law into UK law. Remember 48% voted Leave because of economic comcerns so a FTA has to be done while Leave only won over 50% because of free movement concerns not sovereigntyists, Leaving the EU and ending free movement is therefore fine.
So you are saying that all that matters is free movement, but @Carlotta assures us that it is sovereignty.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
Yes that’s a good point. Which is why the documents should be either classified or released privately under Privy Council terms. Mr Starmer’s attempt to play party politics with international treaty negotiations is deeply unedifying.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
Indeed Mr 13; my wife asked me this morning about plans for my 80th birthday party next year.
More seriously, I think that everyone reasonably thoughtful, Remainers and Leavers, fears that we are getting ourselves into a fine mess. As either Laurel or Hardy used to say.
Leavers promised us all the benefits of EU membership without the costs. But they are delivering the costs without the benefits.
HMG has to obtain some meaningful freedom of action on trade, regulation and immigration for the UK within any UK-EU deal.
If it does, then the divorce bill will be seen as a price worth paying. Especially if spread over 40 years. If it does not, and all the money is just a heavy fee to lock us into most EU regulations and ECJ rulings without any votes or say in exchange for a deal, it will fall.
Long way to go yet.
I doubt anyone outside a tiny minority cares about trade and regulation, or the role of the ECJ. Some limits on current freedom of movement will be enough for most voters.
I suspect you underestimate the ECJ importance ('sovereignty' was the principal reason given by Leave voters) - but then again since (it is to be hoped) we are still in the ECHR 'foreign courts' won't have 'gone away'.....
Now that the ECJ red line has gone, my guess is that we’ll see it have some kind of post-Brexit role in a number of important sectors that voters know very little about, but which are pretty important to the regular functioning of the country. No-one will notice beyond the Rees Mogg faction and no-one will care. The impending NI fudge will inevitably involve the ECJ, too.
The key thing is to get to the trade talks. Once that happens everything changes - including the mood music and even the body language -?as both sides will be actively invested in securing a positive outcome. If Mrs May can see through this facing down of the Brextremists I think it will set her free. I am sure there is a majority in Parliament and the country for a slow, considered disengagement that involves a continuing close relationship with the Single Market and Customs Union. The key issue is limitations on freedom of movement.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
The problem in Brexit discussion is that you have vindictive ignoramuses among MPs and a pro-Remain media who is unwilling to scrutinise those attacking Brexit, repeating their claims without fact checking or context.
In other news, I see one of the EU's five presidents is being selected today amid back room horse-trading with no hint of democracy: the EPP have agreed to back the PES candidate, without clarity in what they are getting in return.
I disagree entirely. If anything the events of the last 48 hours have increases the likelihood of a Davis premiership and Tory leadership. If we do now get a FTA deal, as seems increasingly likely, then both May and Davis will take some credit and if Boris and Gove having backed the deal will have little scope of any to challenge Davis on a hard Brexit ticket (Boris is particular said the EU could 'go whistle' for any money at all let alone £50 million). The only man who does is Mogg who has made clear he will vote against the payments and a deal.
That means either Davis or Mogg are likely to succeed May as Tory leader. If Mogg gets through to the membership he may well win. However I think MPs would orchestrate a Davis v Rudd contest which Davis as the Leaver in that scenario would win.
You used to disagree when I said lay Boris.
How’d that turn out ?
Also Boris said go whistle for €100bn, not for any money at all. This was another the thing the media misrepresented, but you can check his original remarks. It is the bonkers nature of our politics that he got more flack for this than his bumbling over Iran.
Mr. Felix, that was a possibility mentioned here in the past but, as you say, there was no political appetite for it whatsoever.
If we end up with a departure in name only that will not be a good thing. It'll entrench divisions over the EU and cause them to fester, rather than allowing them to heal up.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
HMG has to obtain some meaningful freedom of action on trade, regulation and immigration for the UK within any UK-EU deal.
If it does, then the divorce bill will be seen as a price worth paying. Especially if spread over 40 years. If it does not, and all the money is just a heavy fee to lock us into most EU regulations and ECJ rulings without any votes or say in exchange for a deal, it will fall.
Long way to go yet.
I doubt anyone outside a tiny minority cares about trade and regulation, or the role of the ECJ. Some limits on current freedom of movement will be enough for most voters.
I suspect you underestimate the ECJ importance ('sovereignty' was the principal reason given by Leave voters) - but then again since (it is to be hoped) we are still in the ECHR 'foreign courts' won't have 'gone away'.....
Now that the ECJ red line has gone, my guess is that we’ll see it have some kind of post-Brexit role in a number of important sectors that voters know very little about, but which are pretty important to the regular functioning of the country. No-one will notice beyond the Rees Mogg faction and no-one will care. The impending NI fudge will inevitably involve the ECJ, too.
The key thing is to get to the trade talks. Once that happens everything changes - including the mood music and even the body language -?as both sides will be actively invested in securing a positive outcome. If Mrs May can see through this facing down of the Brextremists I think it will set her free. I am sure there is a majority in Parliament and the country for a slow, considered disengagement that involves a continuing close relationship with the Single Market and Customs Union. The key issue is limitations on freedom of movement.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
And rightly so.
We're a benevolent nation. The idea of large numbers of our own people starving and homeless because they hadn't contributed, almost certainly because of our own society and government's failings, is fundamentally unacceptable.
HMG has to obtain some meaningful freedom of action on trade, regulation and immigration for the UK within any UK-EU deal.
If it does, then the divorce bill will be seen as a price worth paying. Especially if spread over 40 years. If it does not, and all the money is just a heavy fee to lock us into most EU regulations and ECJ rulings without any votes or say in exchange for a deal, it will fall.
Long way to go yet.
I doubt anyone outside a tiny minority cares about trade and regulation, or the role of the ECJ. Some limits on current freedom of movement will be enough for most voters.
I suspect you underestimate the ECJ importance ('sovereignty' was the principal reason given by Leave voters) - but then again since (it is to be hoped) we are still in the ECHR 'foreign courts' won't have 'gone away'.....
Now that the ECJ red line has gone, my guess is that we’ll see it have some kind of post-Brexit role in a number of important sectors that voters know very little about, but which are pretty important to the regular functioning of the country. No-one will notice beyond the Rees Mogg faction and no-one will care. The impending NI fudge will inevitably involve the ECJ, too.
The key thing is to get to the trade talks. Once that happens everything changes - including the mood music and even the body language -?as both sides will be actively invested in securing a positive outcome. If Mrs May can see through this facing down of the Brextremists I think it will set her free. I am sure there is a majority in Parliament and the country for a slow, considered disengagement that involves a continuing close relationship with the Single Market and Customs Union. The key issue is limitations on freedom of movement.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
That would have been incredibly unfair on graduates joining the workforce in a recession and also not really reduced immigration, which is polarising our politics so much.
I also think Remain voters are underestimating the ECJ angle. More Leave voters cited getting rid of EU courts and laws ruling over us than immigration. It's not something May can cave over. She will need a symbolic bone to allow the EU to save face that doesn't have any effect.
The Northern Ireland deal in the making sounds quite intelligent (this is turning into a "be nice to the Tories" week for me). The thing is that in the areas in question, especially agriculture, there is I believe far more Ulster-Eire trade than Britain-Ulster, and if these areas are excluded then the Ulster-Eire trade is minor. So having Ulster stick with EU rules for agriculture could be a way out of the trade dilemma, although it does mean that what British-Ulster agriculture trade exists will become subject to border controls and/or special labelling requirements. It's an anomaly, but not a huge one, and I think unlikely to trigger a strong DUP reaction.
On my specialist subject, the reports that Gove is one of the key Ministers involved in improving the Tory imag by strengthening their record on nvironment and animal welfare make sense, as he has made a really good start, but should be seen with caution. The baffling intransigence over the apparently easy issue of retaining legal recognition of animal sentience is doing serious damage to the general welcome that Gove has had from non-usual suspects: if it isn't resolved, it will really damage his other efforts. I know it sounds obscure, but there are now over half a million signatures on related petitions out there: for this niche audience, a solution needs to be found.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
Unfortunately, you make the huge assumption it's simply about access to benefits. It isn't.
For many who come here, it's simply about working, earning money and sending that back to their family. Our seemingly unlimited demand for cheap labour means there will always be those offering work and money.
None of that is, of course, within any kind of system. It's cash in hand work, the workers live in our brand new slums - 12-14 in a semi-detached three bedroom house. They work within and associate only within their own group - if they are lucky, there is a food store with the taste of back home on offer.
In a sense, we have only repeated the Gastarbeiter experience of West Germany in the 60s and 70s. At one point, the West German Government offered to pay the unemployed migrants to return home but most decided being jobless in Germany was better than working in their own country.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Quite right. It wasn't until the referendum that I realised, not being hugely impacted by immigration myself, just how freedom of movement has kept down wages, increased competition for public services, and broken the social contract between government, employers and the British people. It's not just the experience of it, but that it can be seen to be unfair on those to whom we owe a deeper duty of care, our own citizens, that really galls the British people.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
The problem in Brexit discussion is that you have vindictive ignoramuses among MPs and a pro-Remain media who is unwilling to scrutinise those attacking Brexit, repeating their claims without fact checking or context.
In other news, I see one of the EU's five presidents is being selected today amid back room horse-trading with no hint of democracy: the EPP have agreed to back the PES candidate, without clarity in what they are getting in return.
Yes, shame on them for not demanding a billion or so in ransom like the DUP...
Remember a couple of weeks back when it was shown that UK retail sales were lower in October 2017 than in October 2016 (though still higher than in Septemeber 2017) and it was hailed by some as the coming of the end of days ?
Well the French and German retail sales for October have now been released and you'll never believe this but their annual falls are rather larger than that of the UK and without a monthly increase either:
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
Great news Mr OKC and with an 80th birthday party to come. All the very best
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
Great news Mr OKC and with an 80th birthday party to come. All the very best
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
After a slight fall in net migration in the first three months of the year, there was a larger fall in April to June, mostly driven by a reduction in the number of people coming from the EU15 countries (Germany, France, etc.).
HMG has to obtain some meaningful freedom of action on trade, regulation and immigration for the UK within any UK-EU deal.
If it does, then the divorce bill will be seen as a price worth paying. Especially if spread over 40 years. If it does not, and all the money is just a heavy fee to lock us into most EU regulations and ECJ rulings without any votes or say in exchange for a deal, it will fall.
Long way to go yet.
I doubt anyone outside a tiny minority cares about trade and regulation, or the role of the ECJ. Some limits on current freedom of movement will be enough for most voters.
I suspect you underestimate the ECJ importance ('sovereignty' was the principal reason given by Leave voters) - but then again since (it is to be hoped) we are still in the ECHR 'foreign courts' won't have 'gone away'.....
Now that the ECJ red line has gone, my guess is that we’ll see it have some kind of post-Brexit role in a number of important sectors that voters know very little about, but which are pretty important to the regular functioning of the country. No-one will notice beyond the Rees Mogg faction and no-one will care. The impending NI fudge will inevitably involve the ECJ, too.
The key thing is to get to the trade talks. Once that happens everything changes - including the mood music and even the body language -?as both sides will be actively invested in securing a positive outcome. If Mrs May can see through this facing down of the Brextremists I think it will set her free. I am sure there is a majority in Parliament and the country for a slow, considered disengagement that involves a continuing close relationship with the Single Market and Customs Union. The key issue is limitations on freedom of movement.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
And rightly so.
We're a benevolent nation. The idea of large numbers of our own people starving and homeless because they hadn't contributed, almost certainly because of our own society and government's failings, is fundamentally unacceptable.
Nonsense - there aren't large numbers starving and homeless in Spain. It is a poorer country overall but your picture is simply unreal.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
HMG has to obtain some meaningful freedom of action on trade, regulation and immigration for the UK within any UK-EU deal.
If it does, then the divorce bill will be seen as a price worth paying. Especially if spread over 40 years. If it does not, and all the money is just a heavy fee to lock us into most EU regulations and ECJ rulings without any votes or say in exchange for a deal, it will fall.
Long way to go yet.
I doubt anyone outside a tiny minority cares about trade and regulation, or the role of the ECJ. Some limits on current freedom of movement will be enough for most voters.
I suspect you underestimate the ECJ importance ('sovereignty' was the principal reason given by Leave voters) - but then again since (it is to be hoped) we are still in the ECHR 'foreign courts' won't have 'gone away'.....
Now that the ECJ red line has gone, my guess is that we’ll see it have some kind of post-Brexit role in a number of important sectors that voters know very little about, but which are pretty important to the regular functioning of the country. No-one will notice beyond the Rees Mogg faction and no-one will care. The impending NI fudge will inevitably involve the ECJ, too.
The key thing is to get to the trade talks. Once that happens everything changes - including the mood music and even the body language -?as both sides will be actively invested in securing a positive outcome. If Mrs May can see through this facing down of the Brextremists I think it will set her free. I am sure there is a majority in Parliament and the country for a slow, considered disengagement that involves a continuing close relationship with the Single Market and Customs Union. The key issue is limitations on freedom of movement.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
There will be a large pile of fudge on NI. There always has been.
NI is not about fudge. This is the EU getting a head start on forcing the UK as a whole to maintain compliance with EU regulations after Brexit. Which is a problem because we should only have to do this if we stay in the SM and absolutely should not do this if we are going CETA, which is what they are saying we will offer. They will get the UK to make the concession now in relation to NI knowing that it will have to apply to the whole UK.
The worst of all World's is an FTA with a limit on regulatory divergence, but it suits the EU perfectly. And of course, once we agree to retain EU regulation we will have to agree to ECJ jurisdiction on these matters.
This is far worse than no deal.
As long as we get a FTA that ends free movement the Leave vote is respected and nothing else matters even sone compliance with EU regulation as the government is already incorporating much EU law into UK law. Remember 48% voted Leave because of economic comcerns so a FTA has to be done while Leave only won over 50% because of free movement concerns not sovereigntyists, Leaving the EU and ending free movement is therefore fine.
So you are saying that all that matters is free movement, but @Carlotta assures us that it is sovereignty.
You two need to retune your crystal balls.
Technically leaving the EU is all that matters on sovereignty
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
The whole FOM issue has always been the key problem and frustratingly it could have been solved outside the whole membership issue by a universal limit to benefit access without contributions. that is the way it is here in Spain - 'sin trabajo - sin beneficios'. Sadly there is no stomach for this in the UK.
Unfortunately, you make the huge assumption it's simply about access to benefits. It isn't.
For many who come here, it's simply about working, earning money and sending that back to their family. Our seemingly unlimited demand for cheap labour means there will always be those offering work and money.
None of that is, of course, within any kind of system. It's cash in hand work, the workers live in our brand new slums - 12-14 in a semi-detached three bedroom house. They work within and associate only within their own group - if they are lucky, there is a food store with the taste of back home on offer.
In a sense, we have only repeated the Gastarbeiter experience of West Germany in the 60s and 70s. At one point, the West German Government offered to pay the unemployed migrants to return home but most decided being jobless in Germany was better than working in their own country.
You are correct - but I do feel that a lot of the resentment stems from the sense, right or wrong, that immigrants can access benefits and queue jump housing ahead of the indigenous population.
Thank you, gentlemen. That’s two cancers now sorted, thanks to the NHS!
Huzzah for the NHS under the benign stewardship of Jeremy Hunt. Any relation to 100/1 betting slips Hunt for next PM is entirely coincidental.
When I was given the all-clear, I left the hospital elated and emptied my pockets to a homeless man. Then the heavens opened and I spent the next 15 minutes getting soaked at the bus stop, staring wistfully at the taxi rank opposite.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
There will be a large pile of fudge on NI. There always has been.
NI is not about fudge. This is the EU getting a head start on forcing the UK as a whole to maintain compliance with EU regulations after Brexit. Which is a problem because we should only have to do this if we stay in the SM and absolutely should not do this if we are going CETA, which is what they are saying we will offer. They will get the UK to make the concession now in relation to NI knowing that it will have to apply to the whole UK.
The worst of all World's is an FTA with a limit on regulatory divergence, but it suits the EU perfectly. And of course, once we agree to retain EU regulation we will have to agree to ECJ jurisdiction on these matters.
This is far worse than no deal.
As long as we get a FTA that ends free movement the Leave vote is respected and nothing else matters even sone compliance with EU regulation as the government is already incorporating much EU law into UK law. Remember 48% voted Leave because of economic comcerns so a FTA has to be done while Leave only won over 50% because of free movement concerns not sovereigntyists, Leaving the EU and ending free movement is therefore fine.
So you are saying that all that matters is free movement, but @Carlotta assures us that it is sovereignty.
You two need to retune your crystal balls.
Technically leaving the EU is all that matters on sovereignty
So if we leave the EU and voluntarily submit to the ECJ for approval all requests for naming children born in the UK to British parents, that is cool bananas?
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ? Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Its also a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Mrs May herself, when she rushed off tot he USA to hold Mr Trump`s hand. But then she was a desperate woman. And still is. But perhaps now she has seen the damage that she did to her cause.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
So there was 107,000 more EU immigrants than there was a year ago.
Or approximately ten times as many as the government forecast in 2003 would come to the UK each year.
I think that shows the 'fields are going unharvested for lack of workers' stories to be lies.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
The work permits system suggested as an alternative is still not free movement or ending all immigration to the UK now is it? In fact it is basically a points system in all but name
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
We've now had a year of figures since the referendum. I suspect we'll now get a few quarters of "net migration is up", though we probably won't return to the levels pre-referendum.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
I'm not sure who these "some" are but I'm sure you can find some quote from someone somewhere to help build your straw man.
I'd like us to think beyond a "points system" and put more of the responsibility for the housing of migrant workers on employers. If company X wants to bring in 1,000 workers for a major construction project, that company should provide and pay for their accommodation while they are working.
Back to the Gastarbeiter principle I mentioned earlier and that could be a model for the low skill end of the market. A points system may work perfectly well for those areas of the economy where we have clearly defined skills shortages and requirements.
The problem is there is currently a population of migrant workers who are below the radar, working cash in hand and living exclusively within their own national group. We also know there are people from countries yet to fully join the EU who are seeking to come here.
This is one of the issues with the Irish border. There's no point sealing up Calais if people can get in at Castlereagh - those who care or dare will make the journey on ferries to Ireland from Spain or France and then over the border into Ulster. I'm sure Dublin doesn't want to see Sangatte-style camps along its border with the UK.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
We are and should remain allies - particularly in the struggle between democracy and dictatorship.
But the idea that shadowing America as closely as possible is in our best interests has been exploded by Trump - but to be honest it wasn't ever really true for Bush, Obama or perhaps even Clinton.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
Actually, I expect that it means that there's more than that because UK citizens moving abroad reduce the figure (though UK citizens returning might increase it again, depending on how they're classified - though I expect that they don't outnumber those emigrating).
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
Indeed, there’s a delicate balance to be drawn in ensuring that businesses can get the staff they need while at the same time not leaving behind or underemploying local workers. It’s politically very difficult, but the ending of FoM will remove one huge constraint on the issue.
My post was mainly aimed at the language in the tweet, using the words “fallen”, “decrease”, “fall”, “Since the Brexit vote” to describe something that is going up not down. Rather like a fall in the inflation rate still representing an increase in prices, it’s a derivative statistic.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
There's no change in the direction. What's been reported is a change in the rate of change, i.e. a deceleration. The number of migrants is still increasing, fast. But not quite as fast as before.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Mr Meeks, the use of words like “hate” is beneath you.
There are millions of Britons who are working long hours in multiple part time and insecure jobs in order to feed their families, earning less in a week than a top city lawyer earns in an hour.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
The work permits system suggested as an alternative is still not free movement or ending all immigration to the UK now is it? In fact it is basically a points system in all but name
Yeah it's a points system that is not a points system.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Mr Meeks, the use of words like “hate” is beneath you.
There are millions of Britons who are working long hours in multiple part time and insecure jobs in order to feed their families, earning less in a week than a top city lawyer earns in an hour.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
The Germans manage it very well. They have high levels of immigration and have seen significant wage increases over recent years. What are they doing right that we are doing wrong?
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
As long as free movement and the inability to discriminate between British and European nationals (for entitlements) end, I really can't get too worked up about 'shadowing' the EU for trade purposes.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
Ending FOM is not going to stop people moaning about immigrants taking our jobs/benefits/public services.
There are some who even want to end all immigration to the UK and evict all EU citizens but that is in a completely different league to ending free movement and replacing it with a points system which has far more support.
The work permits system suggested as an alternative is still not free movement or ending all immigration to the UK now is it? In fact it is basically a points system in all but name
Yeah it's a points system that is not a points system.
Come to the UK as a tourist, get a job, get a permit. It's freedom of movement with a bit more red tape. But it does make it much harder - if not impossible - for people to come to the UK solely to claim benefits.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
There's no change in the direction. What's been reported is a change in the rate of change, i.e. a deceleration. The number of migrants is still increasing, fast. But not quite as fast as before.
It seems that the fall is largely in the number of skilled people coming (and staying). The non-skilled rate remains very high.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
The Germans manage it very well. They have high levels of immigration and have seen significant wage increases over recent years. What are they doing right that we are doing wrong?
I believe that their benefit system is less open than that of the UK and i'm sure there is much to learn from them in other respects. However, they have not been immune to 'immigration' problems in the past, notably with the gastarbeiters from Turkey and of course the recent German election was hardly a ringing endorsement of Frau Merkel's open door policy. A key factor in the Brexit vote was immigration and for everyone's sake it would be good for that to become less of a dividing factor in the UK.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
I'm guessing everyone is too embarrassed to now admit that the bust of Churchill thing was ENTIRELY MEANINGLESS.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
There's no change in the direction. What's been reported is a change in the rate of change, i.e. a deceleration. The number of migrants is still increasing, fast. But not quite as fast as before.
It seems that the fall is largely in the number of skilled people coming (and staying). The non-skilled rate remains very high.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
The Germans manage it very well. They have high levels of immigration and have seen significant wage increases over recent years. What are they doing right that we are doing wrong?
It will be interesting to see what happens to low skill wage rates in Germany in the next few years.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
The Germans manage it very well. They have high levels of immigration and have seen significant wage increases over recent years. What are they doing right that we are doing wrong?
The Germans, like other Western European nations, are committing slow-motion demographic (and eventually cultural) suicide. The fact they are doing it in an orderly manner should hardly be a surprise.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
I will take TSE's advice on this matter and take a small profit off Williamson at 50-1.In general,I am not confident what the Tories might do as they are gradually moving from complacency to a full-blown panic attack which sees the party implode like function in Javascript.Given the current state of the Tory membership I cannot see a "Remoaner Saboteur" like Rudd.Hammond,Hunt or Ruth Davidson as a bet either.Maybe next time for RD. In this layers' market I'm also ditching JRM and Andrea Leadsom for more small profit. When the Tory party starts hyper-ventilating and seeing starships in the sky,it remains as unpredicatable as delirium tremens.Who knows who they'll end up with,bunch of losers the lot of them.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
So has May annoyed Trump more than any UKPM has annoyed any POTUS since Wilson said no to LBJ about Vietnam ?
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
Boris accused Obama of being an uppity African who hates the UK. He calls the most openly anti-British president in living memory a great global brand. Good old Boris. He's hilarious.
The Northern Ireland deal in the making sounds quite intelligent (this is turning into a "be nice to the Tories" week for me). The thing is that in the areas in question, especially agriculture, there is I believe far more Ulster-Eire trade than Britain-Ulster, and if these areas are excluded then the Ulster-Eire trade is minor. So having Ulster stick with EU rules for agriculture could be a way out of the trade dilemma, although it does mean that what British-Ulster agriculture trade exists will become subject to border controls and/or special labelling requirements. It's an anomaly, but not a huge one, and I think unlikely to trigger a strong DUP reaction. [snip]
I think this is right (I seem to be making a bit of a habit of agreeing with you!). Since all sides agree that we don't want a hard border, don't want to disrupt Ulster-Eire trade (especially agricultural trade which is highly integrated), there's a very high degree of common interest in putting a sensible fudge together. What's more, there's nothing unusual about having special arrangements for Ireland; we already have very special arrangements for cross-border cooperation ('interference', in a sense) in the Good Friday Agreement, and of course the Common Travel Area is a very special deal. Given that the island is not very big, and is not in any case a good route for bulk smuggling into the rest of the EU, it really shouldn't be hard to come up with something which works in practice even if it's not administratively and legally tidy. It just requires political will from the UK, the EU, the Republic, and NI. (The lack of an NI government is a bit of a problem, though).
On the specific issue of EU rules for agriculture, I think this can be addressed by something along the lines of NI (and perhaps the Republic?) adhering to the stricter of EU and UK-wide rules.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Does having controlled immigration equate to hating foreigners in your view?
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
The Germans manage it very well. They have high levels of immigration and have seen significant wage increases over recent years. What are they doing right that we are doing wrong?
It will be interesting to see what happens to low skill wage rates in Germany in the next few years.
If I were a Syrian in Germany now, and it looked like my country was going to get back on it’s feet I’d seriously consider returning. Well, not at my age, obviously, but if I were a 30 something Syrian with useful skills.
Mr. Eagles, vielleicht. I don't think it'll make much change either way. People who love Communism will still be in Corbyn's corner. People who are worried about Communism will still back the Conservatives as The Alternative. There won't be much change.
The row ongoing, however, provides continuous PR for Britain First.
@BBCDomC: BREAKING: Net migration has fallen to 230,000 in the year ending June 2017 - the largest annual decrease recorded. Three quarters of the fall is down to changes in EU migration in the 12 months since the Brexit vote.
Just to be clear, those numbers mean there’s a net 230,000 MORE immigrants in the UK this year than last year.
The direction of travel is good in a general sense but of course we need a system to ensure there is migration where there is a clear economic need and rather less of the kind which simply suppresses wages which are already low.
There's no change in the direction. What's been reported is a change in the rate of change, i.e. a deceleration. The number of migrants is still increasing, fast. But not quite as fast as before.
It seems that the fall is largely in the number of skilled people coming (and staying). The non-skilled rate remains very high.
I don't think that is right. If you go to the ONS source and look for the table entitled "EU citizens coming to the UK for work reasons, years ending December 2007 to June 2017" you will see a sharp drop in the number of EU immigrants looking for a job while those that are coming to a prearranged job is steady, though maintained at a peak. Sorry I was unable to embed the chart into this post.
Mr. Eagles, vielleicht. I don't think it'll make much change either way. People who love Communism will still be in Corbyn's corner. People who are worried about Communism will still back the Conservatives as The Alternative. There won't be much change.
The row ongoing, however, provides continuous PR for Britain First.
I wasn't thinking about a movement in voting intention, just Mrs May's ratings.
Comments
The assessments probably do exist, but like all assessments, they'll have plenty of caution in them. An ignoramus can easily pick things out of context, ignore the massive error bars, and concentrate only om the most extreme case.
In the ignoramus category, you can put most MPs, and you have to add in the vindictive element. I've always thought that science is too dangerous for people with a political agenda. As was said about statistics ... they use them like a blind man uses a lamp post - for support not illumination.
We already have Labour MPs talking about a £100 billion bill from the EU.
And very good news. Mr OKC, you take some getting rid of!
More seriously, I think that everyone reasonably thoughtful, Remainers and Leavers, fears that we are getting ourselves into a fine mess. As either Laurel or Hardy used to say.
You two need to retune your crystal balls.
In other news, I see one of the EU's five presidents is being selected today amid back room horse-trading with no hint of democracy: the EPP have agreed to back the PES candidate, without clarity in what they are getting in return.
thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/it-took-six-months-and-a-lot-of-work-but-weve-caved-completely-says-david-davis-20171129140020
Edit: "nobody could have fought harder or achieved less than he did."
ROTFLMAO
What’s not to love ?
If we end up with a departure in name only that will not be a good thing. It'll entrench divisions over the EU and cause them to fester, rather than allowing them to heal up.
I may be a minority amongst the PB Brexiteers, but I think my attitude is more prevalent in the country amongst Leavers. Let's not forget that a decent chunk of Remainers are no fans of FoM.
We're a benevolent nation. The idea of large numbers of our own people starving and homeless because they hadn't contributed, almost certainly because of our own society and government's failings, is fundamentally unacceptable.
I also think Remain voters are underestimating the ECJ angle. More Leave voters cited getting rid of EU courts and laws ruling over us than immigration. It's not something May can cave over. She will need a symbolic bone to allow the EU to save face that doesn't have any effect.
The Northern Ireland deal in the making sounds quite intelligent (this is turning into a "be nice to the Tories" week for me). The thing is that in the areas in question, especially agriculture, there is I believe far more Ulster-Eire trade than Britain-Ulster, and if these areas are excluded then the Ulster-Eire trade is minor. So having Ulster stick with EU rules for agriculture could be a way out of the trade dilemma, although it does mean that what British-Ulster agriculture trade exists will become subject to border controls and/or special labelling requirements. It's an anomaly, but not a huge one, and I think unlikely to trigger a strong DUP reaction.
On my specialist subject, the reports that Gove is one of the key Ministers involved in improving the Tory imag by strengthening their record on nvironment and animal welfare make sense, as he has made a really good start, but should be seen with caution. The baffling intransigence over the apparently easy issue of retaining legal recognition of animal sentience is doing serious damage to the general welcome that Gove has had from non-usual suspects: if it isn't resolved, it will really damage his other efforts. I know it sounds obscure, but there are now over half a million signatures on related petitions out there: for this niche audience, a solution needs to be found.
https://twitter.com/MrJCrouch/status/936165263627743232
For many who come here, it's simply about working, earning money and sending that back to their family. Our seemingly unlimited demand for cheap labour means there will always be those offering work and money.
None of that is, of course, within any kind of system. It's cash in hand work, the workers live in our brand new slums - 12-14 in a semi-detached three bedroom house. They work within and associate only within their own group - if they are lucky, there is a food store with the taste of back home on offer.
In a sense, we have only repeated the Gastarbeiter experience of West Germany in the 60s and 70s. At one point, the West German Government offered to pay the unemployed migrants to return home but most decided being jobless in Germany was better than working in their own country.
Well the French and German retail sales for October have now been released and you'll never believe this but their annual falls are rather larger than that of the UK and without a monthly increase either:
https://www.insee.fr/en/statistiques/3280039
https://www.destatis.de/EN/PressServices/Press/pr/2017/11/PE17_434_45212.html
We're all doomed. Or perhaps not.
Mr. Richard, I'm sure that'll get as much coverage as the end-of-days did...
https://1drv.ms/x/s!Av4jQcUMVtBpiBtBI6GQaRTA-_MO
After a slight fall in net migration in the first three months of the year, there was a larger fall in April to June, mostly driven by a reduction in the number of people coming from the EU15 countries (Germany, France, etc.).
Its a refreshing change from the yearning lapdoggery of Blair to Clinton and Bush or Brown and Cameron to Obama.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/11/28/american-professor-denmark-says-shes-being-targeted-immigration-officials-delivering
When I was given the all-clear, I left the hospital elated and emptied my pockets to a homeless man. Then the heavens opened and I spent the next 15 minutes getting soaked at the bus stop, staring wistfully at the taxi rank opposite.
Or approximately ten times as many as the government forecast in 2003 would come to the UK each year.
I think that shows the 'fields are going unharvested for lack of workers' stories to be lies.
I'd like us to think beyond a "points system" and put more of the responsibility for the housing of migrant workers on employers. If company X wants to bring in 1,000 workers for a major construction project, that company should provide and pay for their accommodation while they are working.
Back to the Gastarbeiter principle I mentioned earlier and that could be a model for the low skill end of the market. A points system may work perfectly well for those areas of the economy where we have clearly defined skills shortages and requirements.
The problem is there is currently a population of migrant workers who are below the radar, working cash in hand and living exclusively within their own national group. We also know there are people from countries yet to fully join the EU who are seeking to come here.
This is one of the issues with the Irish border. There's no point sealing up Calais if people can get in at Castlereagh - those who care or dare will make the journey on ferries to Ireland from Spain or France and then over the border into Ulster. I'm sure Dublin doesn't want to see Sangatte-style camps along its border with the UK.
But the idea that shadowing America as closely as possible is in our best interests has been exploded by Trump - but to be honest it wasn't ever really true for Bush, Obama or perhaps even Clinton.
My post was mainly aimed at the language in the tweet, using the words “fallen”, “decrease”, “fall”, “Since the Brexit vote” to describe something that is going up not down. Rather like a fall in the inflation rate still representing an increase in prices, it’s a derivative statistic.
There are millions of Britons who are working long hours in multiple part time and insecure jobs in order to feed their families, earning less in a week than a top city lawyer earns in an hour.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
Which in a sense is progress.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/muslim-population-uk-could-triple-13m-following-record-influx/
This prediction is far more important for the long term future of the UK than anything to do with Brexit.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
In this layers' market I'm also ditching JRM and Andrea Leadsom for more small profit.
When the Tory party starts hyper-ventilating and seeing starships in the sky,it remains as unpredicatable as delirium tremens.Who knows who they'll end up with,bunch of losers the lot of them.
On the specific issue of EU rules for agriculture, I think this can be addressed by something along the lines of NI (and perhaps the Republic?) adhering to the stricter of EU and UK-wide rules.
PS Very pleased to see OKC's news.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/britain-reluctantly-defends-may-against-insane-fascist-20171130140069
Does having controlled immigration equate to hating foreigners in your view?
I'm expecting a bump for Mrs May in the next set of polls.
The row ongoing, however, provides continuous PR for Britain First.
Sorry I was unable to embed the chart into this post.
Does Zac resent his sister marrying a Pakistani?
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596826/IPOL_STU(2017)596826_EN.pdf
One key point is below. Does what has been leaked from the UK side go far enough?
https://twitter.com/hayward_katy/status/935404154863935489
In fact she might be PM already.
2017 - whatever you want
2018 - 8/1
2019 - 3/1
2020 - 25/1
2021-5 - 3/1
None - 7/4
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/30/britain-needs-help-irelands-young-inexperienced-leader-back/
EDIT - Ignore me