Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Things are so bad with Mrs May that some Tory MPs want Nick Ti

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited February 11 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Things are so bad with Mrs May that some Tory MPs want Nick Timothy back to provide direction

Well this is how bad Mrs May's indecision over Brexit is, some Tory MPs want her to bring back Nick Timothy. Top scoop as usual from @ShippersUnbound. https://t.co/OM7N4jXzRO pic.twitter.com/oAoe2tWbZP

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    edited February 11
    Thirst.

    This has to be a joke, hasn't it?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601
    Labour hardly needs an away minute for "oppose everything", let alone a day.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,431
    Do they think Nick Timothy is a kind of emotional support animal for May?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,439

    Do they think Nick Timothy is a kind of emotional support animal for May?

    Wasn't an emotional support hamster flushed down an airport loo recently ?
    Just thinking aloud....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,439
    The procrastination from Mrs May is all about keeping her as PM for as long as possible ...

    I don't think that's entirely accurate - procrastination seems to be Mrs May's default state of mind.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,431
    Nigelb said:

    The procrastination from Mrs May is all about keeping her as PM for as long as possible ...

    I don't think that's entirely accurate - procrastination seems to be Mrs May's default state of mind.

    It's government by gaslighting. May stretches reality until no-one knows what's really happening and everyone doubts their own sanity.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    The letters may go in, but what if if she wins?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 21,962
    Sean_F said:

    The letters may go in, but what if if she wins?

    I would think that's quite likely.

    Mrs May is, ultimately, more acceptable to the Soubry's, Clarke's, and Hammond's of this world than (say) JRM. And Mrs May is more acceptable to the JRMs, Fox's, etc of this world than Amber Rudd.

    If there were an alternative to Mrs May that had "star quality", and who was a proven vote winner (and who wasn't Boris), then it might be different. But Conservative MPs - above all - wish to be re-elected. It is not clear who would be a better vote winner than Mrs May.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,501
    Sean_F said:

    The letters may go in, but what if if she wins?

    Snap election to get a thumping majority.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    But people have different ideas what constitutes the national interest.

    I saw the sickening sight of Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubrey joined at the hip on Marr this morning. I really really hope Soubrey loses her seat next time. Their interview could be summarised thus:

    "Of course we accept the referendum result of 2016 (sincere and hurt look on Soubrey's face at the very idea that she does not). Of course Brexit will happen -(although it may not) because the People were wrong deceived and misguided to vote for it. We (Chuka and Anna) know better than the People what is in the national interest. All that we do we do for the country and for our constituents (although Anna's constituency and the country voted Leave) because we know better than they what is good for them.

    So, (continues Anna Umunna) we believe that although people voted for Brexit, what they really voted for Brexit in name only. What the People were really voting for in the referendum was to stay completely under the EU's control via the Single Market and Customs Union. People in June 2016 were demanding that Freedom of Movement continues, that the UK has no control over her borders or laws. And People were also demanding in 2016 that the EU controls who we trade with via the Customs Union.

    The People did not really vote for independence from the EU in 2016. Goodness me no. Its only fanatics like Mogg and Gove who want that. So we Chuka Soubrey, who know better than the People what is in the national interest will be doing our best to ensure that that what we want happens."

    Arrogance personified with two talking heads. Ms Soubrey, I will raise my glass to you losing your seat in 2022.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    The letters may go in, but what if if she wins?

    I would think that's quite likely.

    Mrs May is, ultimately, more acceptable to the Soubry's, Clarke's, and Hammond's of this world than (say) JRM. And Mrs May is more acceptable to the JRMs, Fox's, etc of this world than Amber Rudd.

    If there were an alternative to Mrs May that had "star quality", and who was a proven vote winner (and who wasn't Boris), then it might be different. But Conservative MPs - above all - wish to be re-elected. It is not clear who would be a better vote winner than Mrs May.
    And current polls (and by-elections) indicate no pressing need to replace her.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    stevef said:

    But people have different ideas what constitutes the national interest.

    I saw the sickening sight of Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubrey joined at the hip on Marr this morning. I really really hope Soubrey loses her seat next time. Their interview could be summarised thus:

    "Of course we accept the referendum result of 2016 (sincere and hurt look on Soubrey's face at the very idea that she does not). Of course Brexit will happen -(although it may not) because the People were wrong deceived and misguided to vote for it. We (Chuka and Anna) know better than the People what is in the national interest. All that we do we do for the country and for our constituents (although Anna's constituency and the country voted Leave) because we know better than they what is good for them.

    So, (continues Anna Umunna) we believe that although people voted for Brexit, what they really voted for Brexit in name only. What the People were really voting for in the referendum was to stay completely under the EU's control via the Single Market and Customs Union. People in June 2016 were demanding that Freedom of Movement continues, that the UK has no control over her borders or laws. And People were also demanding in 2016 that the EU controls who we trade with via the Customs Union.

    The People did not really vote for independence from the EU in 2016. Goodness me no. Its only fanatics like Mogg and Gove who want that. So we Chuka Soubrey, who know better than the People what is in the national interest will be doing our best to ensure that that what we want happens."

    Arrogance personified with two talking heads. Ms Soubrey, I will raise my glass to you losing your seat in 2022.

    Meanwhile, I had dinner with a chemical engineer this lunchtime. He pondered whether anyone would want to locate a chemical plant in the UK after Brexit. Even if we do a deal, there is no telling how long it would last. But no doubt your reasons for wanting to leave are more important.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601


    Even if we do a deal, there is no telling how long it would last.

    The biggest reason why that deal might not last is if people voted to Rejoin.

    Low likelihood outcome.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195
    stevef said:

    But people have different ideas what constitutes the national interest.

    I saw the sickening sight of Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubrey joined at the hip on Marr this morning. I really really hope Soubrey loses her seat next time. Their interview could be summarised thus:

    "Of course we accept the referendum result of 2016 (sincere and hurt look on Soubrey's face at the very idea that she does not). Of course Brexit will happen -(although it may not) because the People were wrong deceived and misguided to vote for it. We (Chuka and Anna) know better than the People what is in the national interest. All that we do we do for the country and for our constituents (although Anna's constituency and the country voted Leave) because we know better than they what is good for them.

    So, (continues Anna Umunna) we believe that although people voted for Brexit, what they really voted for Brexit in name only. What the People were really voting for in the referendum was to stay completely under the EU's control via the Single Market and Customs Union. People in June 2016 were demanding that Freedom of Movement continues, that the UK has no control over her borders or laws. And People were also demanding in 2016 that the EU controls who we trade with via the Customs Union.

    The People did not really vote for independence from the EU in 2016. Goodness me no. Its only fanatics like Mogg and Gove who want that. So we Chuka Soubrey, who know better than the People what is in the national interest will be doing our best to ensure that that what we want happens."

    Arrogance personified with two talking heads. Ms Soubrey, I will raise my glass to you losing your seat in 2022.

    Though if Soubry loselher seat, it would be to Corbynite Labour :)
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    stevef said:

    But people have different ideas what constitutes the national interest.

    I saw the sickening sight of Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubrey joined at the hip on Marr this morning. I really really hope Soubrey loses her seat next time. Their interview could be summarised thus:

    "Of course we accept the referendum result of 2016 (sincere and hurt look on Soubrey's face at the very idea that she does not). Of course Brexit will happen -(although it may not) because the People were wrong deceived and misguided to vote for it. We (Chuka and Anna) know better than the People what is in the national interest. All that we do we do for the country and for our constituents (although Anna's constituency and the country voted Leave) because we know better than they what is good for them.

    So, (continues Anna Umunna) we believe that although people voted for Brexit, what they really voted for Brexit in name only. What the People were really voting for in the referendum was to stay completely under the EU's control via the Single Market and Customs Union. People in June 2016 were demanding that Freedom of Movement continues, that the UK has no control over her borders or laws. And People were also demanding in 2016 that the EU controls who we trade with via the Customs Union.

    The People did not really vote for independence from the EU in 2016. Goodness me no. Its only fanatics like Mogg and Gove who want that. So we Chuka Soubrey, who know better than the People what is in the national interest will be doing our best to ensure that that what we want happens."

    Arrogance personified with two talking heads. Ms Soubrey, I will raise my glass to you losing your seat in 2022.

    Meanwhile, I had dinner with a chemical engineer this lunchtime. He pondered whether anyone would want to locate a chemical plant in the UK after Brexit. Even if we do a deal, there is no telling how long it would last. But no doubt your reasons for wanting to leave are more important.
    What meal do you eat at dinnertime?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,483


    Even if we do a deal, there is no telling how long it would last.

    The biggest reason why that deal might not last is if people voted to Rejoin.

    Low likelihood outcome.

    ...and as 12th most unsafe Con seat, then presumably all chance of forming an administration. There's a limited supply of DUP.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 14,483
    Nigelb said:

    The procrastination from Mrs May is all about keeping her as PM for as long as possible ...

    I don't think that's entirely accurate - procrastination seems to be Mrs May's default state of mind.

    Or, she is procrastinating long enough for Parliament to force her hand via legislation and amendments.
  • One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,735
    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    The letters may go in, but what if if she wins?

    I would think that's quite likely.

    Mrs May is, ultimately, more acceptable to the Soubry's, Clarke's, and Hammond's of this world than (say) JRM. And Mrs May is more acceptable to the JRMs, Fox's, etc of this world than Amber Rudd.

    If there were an alternative to Mrs May that had "star quality", and who was a proven vote winner (and who wasn't Boris), then it might be different. But Conservative MPs - above all - wish to be re-elected. It is not clear who would be a better vote winner than Mrs May.
    And current polls (and by-elections) indicate no pressing need to replace her.
    Very true , why replace a proven winner.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,329

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Sad. And we heard yesterday that @Beverley_C had closed her business due to Brexit.

    First Brexit came for the EMA, but I did not speak out because I have no dealings with the medicines agency...
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,493

    Labour hardly needs an away minute for "oppose everything", let alone a day.

    Well, Labour certainly need something, Mr Mark. So far they have supported the Tories all the way (with one or two notable exceptions, of course)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,431

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Sad. And we heard yesterday that @Beverley_C had closed her business due to Brexit.

    First Brexit came for the EMA, but I did not speak out because I have no dealings with the medicines agency...
    The EMA all do drugs don't they?

    I'll get my coat...
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,549


    David Cameron's former guru.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    edited February 11
    Mrs May's Brexit position has been perfectly clear for months ie leaving the single market and customs union but agreeing a FTA with the EU during a transition period that also ends free movement.

    Mrs May's Brexit position is almost indistinguishable from Mr Corbyn's apart from Mr Corbyn might keep the UK in the customs union or something close to it. There is far more in common between Mrs May and Mr Corbyn on Brexit than either has to Mr Umunna and his pro single market position and Mr Rees Mogg and his WTO terms position without any regulatory alignment
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
  • agingjbagingjb Posts: 70
    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,431
    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Offering one soon may actually be the best way to kick the can in the short term because she could simultaneously set out a framework for a very hard Brexit deal. By holding out the prospect of a second vote she can hope to put off any decisions from business.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Big business will not want a referendum. Supposing the deal is rejected by the electorate, as seems possible, and we go to WTO? That would be very damaging for us but the resulting economic shock could have severe international repercussions especially on the continent. The knock on effect for business has nightmarish implications.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,431
    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171

    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Offering one soon may actually be the best way to kick the can in the short term because she could simultaneously set out a framework for a very hard Brexit deal. By holding out the prospect of a second vote she can hope to put off any decisions from business.
    I agree William , but at the moment , she is not leading the party , but led by it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    edited February 11
    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Yes.

    But none did.

    Edit:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And if they had won I have no doubt they would have followed up on that policy perfectly legally.

    Just as if the Liberal Democrats win an election, they can take us back in. The flying pig would offer a convenient way of getting to Brussels to open talks as well!
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    ydoethur said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Big business will not want a referendum. Supposing the deal is rejected by the electorate, as seems possible, and we go to WTO? That would be very damaging for us but the resulting economic shock could have severe international repercussions especially on the continent. The knock on effect for business has nightmarish implications.
    True , but it will be May,s last throw of the dice.To keep her party and the show on the road.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Relations between big business and the Conservatives are much less close than they used to be. Wealthy individuals are much more significant donors.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 105
    As an English person sitting in Denmark with his Ukrainian /Russian family Polish friends and Danish cultural twists (candles and plentiful rye bread) I should feel like an Alistair Meeks fan - as I dip in and out of PB though I just feel more and more often that my Remain vote was an error and that the UK should walk away and make its own future - then my thinking head kicks in and I want the UK to pretend it all never happened and carry on as normal - This I think makes me the average centrust Englishman and I still don’t know what to do about it
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Ishmael_Z said:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
    Very true Labour did the same in 1975.In both cases it was never about the will of the people.It was a party management tool , to try to keep their parties together.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    Ishmael_Z said:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
    But if Labour had won the election of 1983, it would have had the problem that in leaving it would have been going against the will of the People in a democratic referendum of 1975 -and Remainers would have organised on that basis.
    Therefore likewise any future parliament that tries to rejoin the EU will stumble against the obstacle of the 2016 referendum. Parliament might be sovereign in theory, but it derives its power from the People. Governments with majorities in the Commons never have more than 50% of the vote, and therefore no future government in practice could override the 2016 referendum. If a future parliament wanted to rejoin it would have to hold another referendum.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 312
    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Spot on. They could've done - and Labour promised in 1983 to do precisely that. Not calling a referendum would arguably have made a successful Brexit far more likely, as any party putting it in its manifesto would have had to consider withdrawal far more deeply and put forward concrete proposals as to how it would fit with their other policy proposals and where they wanted to be at the end of the process and put them to the country. Of course, Labour's destruction in 1983 in part shows why a referendum has long been the preferred method of eurosceptics - because it's virtually impossible to gain a majority for a Brexit endpoint, as not enough people agree on the destination. Which again is why we're in such a mess now, because there's no one really to hold accountable for what type of Brexit we get, and whether it's a disaster, while the government's approach is decided by internal politics and an attempt to read the tea leaves of what satisfies the nebulous mandate given by the referendum.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    Sean_F said:

    Yorkcity said:

    Mrs May cannot make a decision, any decision, on Brexit without imperilling her position.
    Those wanting a hard Brexit will have to accept that the economy will be hard hit and that a hard border will re-appear in Northern Ireland. May should think about the country and her legacy rather than clinging desperately to 'power'.
    She has one chance, face down the Brexiteers and go for a soft Brexit. If they bring her down the Tories should choose Hammond without a vote and accept that they may lose a few MPs. If necessary get the SNP and Libdems to back them on crucial Brexit votes.

    Given that May is fond of dramatic set piece interventions, perhaps her speech in the next few weeks could contain a promise to hold a referendum on the deal.
    I think May will eventually offer a referendum on the deal, but at the last possible moment.Eventually the pressure of big business will outweigh her party considerations.
    Relations between big business and the Conservatives are much less close than they used to be. Wealthy individuals are much more significant donors.
    Maybe we will see.Donors have concerns to.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/10/theresa-may-faces-revolt-from-top-tory-donors-sir-john-hall
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    Roger said:
    I still think their best recent effort on the Tories was a photo of May giving a speech claiming to have united the party and the other four speech bubbles simply said 'resign'.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    stevef said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
    But if Labour had won the election of 1983, it would have had the problem that in leaving it would have been going against the will of the People in a democratic referendum of 1975 -and Remainers would have organised on that basis.
    Therefore likewise any future parliament that tries to rejoin the EU will stumble against the obstacle of the 2016 referendum. Parliament might be sovereign in theory, but it derives its power from the People. Governments with majorities in the Commons never have more than 50% of the vote, and therefore no future government in practice could override the 2016 referendum. If a future parliament wanted to rejoin it would have to hold another referendum.
    No it wouldn't.

    But anyway the most likely route back in is one small step at a time. It would also have been the best way to leave. It might be emotionally satisfying to flounce out like a melodramatic tart if that is the kind of thing you like to do. But as we are finding it isn't very practical.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,329



    David Cameron's former guru.

    Amazing how you can go from trendy techno-libertarianism to full on apologist for the corrupt degradation of democracy.

    Cameron was not only crap at referendums, he seemed to be a poor judge of character.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,685
    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Both Labour and Tory manifestos said they'd leave the EU
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 105
    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Not relevant to the thread header. Have flagged it up. :smile:
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 519
    Mortimer said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Both Labour and Tory manifestos said they'd leave the EU
    That is entirely disingenuous as many people voted Labour or Tory despite the Brexit situation. I for one voted on economic grounds in the general election with nothing to do with Brexit and I know many others who did similar. Stop trying to lump all Labour and Tory voters from 2017 as backing Brexit as this is clearly not the case.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601
    Well done the Scots. Cracking game of rugby.

    I think it was Mr Dancer who suggested the other day that the Scottish win looked tasty odds?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428
    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Only by mistake. Also God knows what you are meant to flag with the Flag button; pro pineapple pizza thoughtcrime, perhaps.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    Ishmael_Z said:

    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Only by mistake. Also God knows what you are meant to flag with the Flag button; pro pineapple pizza thoughtcrime, perhaps.
    Anyone who thought The Last Jedi was a good movie.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,421
    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Loads of times, always by accident.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 519
    stevef said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
    But if Labour had won the election of 1983, it would have had the problem that in leaving it would have been going against the will of the People in a democratic referendum of 1975 -and Remainers would have organised on that basis.
    Therefore likewise any future parliament that tries to rejoin the EU will stumble against the obstacle of the 2016 referendum. Parliament might be sovereign in theory, but it derives its power from the People. Governments with majorities in the Commons never have more than 50% of the vote, and therefore no future government in practice could override the 2016 referendum. If a future parliament wanted to rejoin it would have to hold another referendum.
    That is the biggest load of nonsense I have ever seen. Anything can be changed or overridden. In the future a bigger chunk of the electorate may well vote to be in the EU. The difference between 1975 and 2016 wining side is only 100,000 or so. How do you know what will happen in the future?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    King Bongo, I've had that used against me a few times. Mildly irksome.

    Mr. Eagles, reminds me of a (very) old joke. Antigonus Monopthalmus was seen as a harsh master, but after he had died and other men ruled, a farmer, digging in his field when a passer-by asked him what he was doing, answered: "I'm looking for Antigonus."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601
    edited February 11
    Roger said:
    To be fair, he is one of the few people on the planet who could wear that outfit and carry it off!

    EDIT Although looking again, he really needs to add a monocle....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    King Bongo, I've had that used against me a few times. Mildly irksome.

    Mr. Eagles, reminds me of a (very) old joke. Antigonus Monopthalmus was seen as a harsh master, but after he had died and other men ruled, a farmer, digging in his field when a passer-by asked him what he was doing, answered: "I'm looking for Antigonus."

    Great tip on Scotland. Shame I didn’t back it!
  • MJWMJW Posts: 312



    David Cameron's former guru.

    Amazing how you can go from trendy techno-libertarianism to full on apologist for the corrupt degradation of democracy.

    Cameron was not only crap at referendums, he seemed to be a poor judge of character.
    There's an interesting crossover between techno-libertarians and Trump - see Peter Thiel, the 'other' PayPal guy who doesn't fire cars into space, and wants to start his own state in the sea. Funded Trump.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Sandpit, ahem. I backed France to win :p
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 3,328
    Andrew Rawnsley's remarks about Liam are cruel but true.

    The main argument against [remaining in the Customs Union] is that it would preclude Britain from striking its own, separate trade deals with non-EU countries. The hard Brexiters will be angry. Liam Fox will be out of a job. Deprived of his government expense account, long-haul airlines will take a small hit to their profit margins. I think Britain can live with that.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/11/since-this-government-cant-govern-parliament-must-take-charge

    The idea of remaining in the Customs Union is certainly building up a head of steam. This will expose the 'Hannan Option' as the pipe dream it probably always was, and will reduce Brexit to the less noble status as a migrant-control measure, but hey ho. Let's go for it and save ourselves further grief.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,685

    Mortimer said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Both Labour and Tory manifestos said they'd leave the EU
    That is entirely disingenuous as many people voted Labour or Tory despite the Brexit situation. I for one voted on economic grounds in the general election with nothing to do with Brexit and I know many others who did similar. Stop trying to lump all Labour and Tory voters from 2017 as backing Brexit as this is clearly not the case.
    No, it isn't disingenuous, as manifestoes almost always include issues that not every voter agrees with.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Dawning, the idiot Fox is neither here nor there. Voting to leave the EU and then having the EU be responsible for our trade deals is daft.

    As for the Irish border, things might be further along if the cantankerous gnome Varadkar hadn't halted the electronic borders work that was being done when Kenny was Taoiseach[sp].
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Mr. Sandpit, ahem. I backed France to win :p

    Oh, I thought you’d tipped the Scots.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 9,723

    Mr. Sandpit, ahem. I backed France to win :p

    Hope you cashed out
  • agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    edited February 11

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    Not legally bound is surely the point? Realistically, politically and practically many of the factors which led the former parliament to make certain decisions will still apply and so prevent the new parliament from choosing to do something different, but they could always do something different, in the same way the referendum itself had no binding weight to it, but that didn't stop almost all MPs from triggering A50. So long as a new parliament is theoretically able to undo any actions of its predecessors, it is not bound and that is no myth.

    They are not bound. What they are not, is immune from any consequences that would arise from ignoring the previous parliament's actions.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Owls, alas, no.

    Mr. Sandpit, this seems to be a common thing for me. Last year, a few times. Mr Putney and others thanked me for tips I, er, hadn't made...

    Anyway, I've been betting with dinky sums and I'm glad others are winning.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    ydoethur said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Only by mistake. Also God knows what you are meant to flag with the Flag button; pro pineapple pizza thoughtcrime, perhaps.
    Anyone who thought The Last Jedi was a good movie.
    To identify the sensible people? Not a bad idea.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    edited February 11
    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    They could have. (edit - although presumably only after consulting parliament at the least)
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 3,328
    edited February 11

    Mr. Dawning, the idiot Fox is neither here nor there. Voting to leave the EU and then having the EU be responsible for our trade deals is daft.

    As for the Irish border, things might be further along if the cantankerous gnome Varadkar hadn't halted the electronic borders work that was being done when Kenny was Taoiseach[sp].

    Sadly it's becoming apparent that these trade deals can't be done any time soon and won't be particularly beneficial to us when they are. Staying within the EU customs umbrella can be marketed as a pragmatic outsourcing.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,215
    edited February 11

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Dawning, or as a half-in, half-out non-solution guaranteed to keep the sore running and put a foot in the door for those who dislike democracy when it doesn't go their way.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 6,466
    edited February 11
    stevef said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    stevef said:

    ydoethur said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    It doesn't.

    But Parliament would have to vote to reapply for EU membership in effect. Which is approximately as likely as Skawkbox or Breitbart making an an honest and useful contribution to political debate.
    Using that argument, any government after 1979 could have ignored the 1975 referendum and withdrawn the UK from the EU without a referendum
    Of course they could. That's what the Labour manifesto in 1983 promised to do.
    And that is how things ought to happen. Euref was a great big cop out by the Tory party, which couldn't bear to have the internal fight it ought to have had over Europe, because it couldn't stand the sight of its own blood, and so effectively made the country have the fight as a proxy for the party.
    But if Labour had won the election of 1983, it would have had the problem that in leaving it would have been going against the will of the People in a democratic referendum of 1975 -and Remainers would have organised on that basis.
    Therefore likewise any future parliament that tries to rejoin the EU will stumble against the obstacle of the 2016 referendum. Parliament might be sovereign in theory, but it derives its power from the People. Governments with majorities in the Commons never have more than 50% of the vote, and therefore no future government in practice could override the 2016 referendum. If a future parliament wanted to rejoin it would have to hold another referendum.
    Good afternoon all.

    I don't think another plebiscite would be at all desirable, and I voted Leave. It's not a good mechanism for deciding long-term national strategies.

    I doubt the UK will move far away from the EU in political or even regulatory terms. That's partly because (at least in my industry) standards are increasingly set globally.

    While we're certainly right to be navel-gazing about Brexit, the EU also has some interesting decisions to make about the Eurozone and the mechanisms needed to make it sustainable. Once we've left, there's only Denmark with a treaty opt-out from the Euro. There's likely to be a new treaty to deal with the accession of the western Balkan states. There's a general question to be answered on how to deal with countries on the periphery; Ukraine, Turkey, perhaps even Belarus (or even the UK).

  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 163
    edited February 11
    kingbongo said:

    As an English person sitting in Denmark with his Ukrainian /Russian family Polish friends and Danish cultural twists (candles and plentiful rye bread) I should feel like an Alistair Meeks fan - as I dip in and out of PB though I just feel more and more often that my Remain vote was an error and that the UK should walk away and make its own future - then my thinking head kicks in and I want the UK to pretend it all never happened and carry on as normal - This I think makes me the average centrust Englishman and I still don’t know what to do about it

    If we'd been thinking we'd have negotiated in 1940. The issue is that we are bl**dy minded, obstinate and don't like being told what to do by people who think they are superior to us. And by that I mean our political leaders.
    [And by We, I include some of my Polish friends who are about as British in outlook as I am - argumentative, like drinking beer and have a case of slight envy/distrust of our German friends]
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 901

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Turnover of 101m. 1150 employees.

    Have they considered paying their workers more? Just a thought.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894
    kyf_100 said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Turnover of 101m. 1150 employees.

    Have they considered paying their workers more? Just a thought.
    Imagine Chinese blueberries will go down well
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,004
    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
    IAAAFFBAEAIIPTG (*), but can we be sure that is true? China is such a vast country, with so many different climates, is it impossible to grow such seasonal fruit somewhere in the country at all times of the year, leaving aside dubious agrarian practices?

    I'd be more concerned about transport.

    (*) I am about as far from being an expert as it is possible to get
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    kyf_100 said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Turnover of 101m. 1150 employees.

    Have they considered paying their workers more? Just a thought.
    230 full-time employees, paid year-round.

    1,150 seasonal, paid during the relevant periods.

    Without knowing the length of the season, it's hard to make any such conclusions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817

    kyf_100 said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Turnover of 101m. 1150 employees.

    Have they considered paying their workers more? Just a thought.
    230 full-time employees, paid year-round.

    1,150 seasonal, paid during the relevant periods.

    Without knowing the length of the season, it's hard to make any such conclusions.
    Anywhere from one to three months, depending on what sort of fruit they grow and the weather.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428
    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
    I have heard it said, by residents of Perthshire, that the growing of so much soft fruit in those parts is largely an historical accident - the fruit farms were a 19th century ploy to give employment to 1000s of Irish navvies who had originally come over to build all the Scots Baronial castles. Certainly compared to apples and stuff, most soft fruit is pretty unchoosy as to where it grows. It is possible that Scottish raspberries would sweep the board at a blind tasting, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. Root vegetables, on the other hand...
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 18,894
    Ishmael_Z said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
    I have heard it said, by residents of Perthshire, that the growing of so much soft fruit in those parts is largely an historical accident - the fruit farms were a 19th century ploy to give employment to 1000s of Irish navvies who had originally come over to build all the Scots Baronial castles. Certainly compared to apples and stuff, most soft fruit is pretty unchoosy as to where it grows. It is possible that Scottish raspberries would sweep the board at a blind tasting, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. Root vegetables, on the other hand...
    Our Turnips are world class, our soft fruits a very close second.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,415

    stevef said:

    But people have different ideas what constitutes the national interest.

    I saw the sickening sight of Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubrey joined at the hip on Marr this morning. I really really hope Soubrey loses her seat next time. Their interview could be summarised thus:

    "Of course we accept the referendum result of 2016 (sincere and hurt look on Soubrey's face at the very idea that she does not). Of course Brexit will happen -(although it may not) because the People were wrong deceived and misguided to vote for it. We (Chuka and Anna) know better than the People what is in the national interest. All that we do we do for the country and for our constituents (although Anna's constituency and the country voted Leave) because we know better than they what is good for them.

    So, (continues Anna Umunna) we believe that although people voted for Brexit, what they really voted for Brexit in name only. What the People were really voting for in the referendum was to stay completely under the EU's control via the Single Market and Customs Union. People in June 2016 were demanding that Freedom of Movement continues, that the UK has no control over her borders or laws. And People were also demanding in 2016 that the EU controls who we trade with via the Customs Union.

    The People did not really vote for independence from the EU in 2016. Goodness me no. Its only fanatics like Mogg and Gove who want that. So we Chuka Soubrey, who know better than the People what is in the national interest will be doing our best to ensure that that what we want happens."

    Arrogance personified with two talking heads. Ms Soubrey, I will raise my glass to you losing your seat in 2022.

    Meanwhile, I had dinner with a chemical engineer this lunchtime. He pondered whether anyone would want to locate a chemical plant in the UK after Brexit. Even if we do a deal, there is no telling how long it would last. But no doubt your reasons for wanting to leave are more important.
    To be fair, with the government's ludicrous energy policies, there is little appeal for any energy intensive plant to be located in the UK. Despite Brexit.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Charles, mentioned it earlier but had another power cut today. The third in about a fortnight. Only a few minutes each time, but it's ridiculous.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    TBQH I wouldn't worry too much about the big firms like these guys. They have the clout to charge higher prices, buy from abroad and diversify.

    It's people like these (who are old friends of mine and whose fears for their business under Brexit were one thing that tipped me to remain) who will face problems. Small fruit farms operate on tight margins because they get ruthlessly squeezed on price and appearance (rather than quality) by supermarkets and juicers for their products, and they're only ever a couple of bad years away from real trouble as it is due to the capital intensive nature of the business.

    This will tighten their margins further, which is not helpful.

    An economist might say, go and do something else. However there are issues. Doing something else and importing our fruit negatively impacts our balance of payments, and will not help our drinks industry (cider and beer are big business). It is also going to make land management more difficult.

    So look further down the chain for the real bite.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,415
    Ishmael_Z said:

    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Only by mistake. Also God knows what you are meant to flag with the Flag button; pro pineapple pizza thoughtcrime, perhaps.
    @rcs1000 gets grumpy if you use the "flag" button as the system sends him an email to check it out.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    malcolmg said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
    I have heard it said, by residents of Perthshire, that the growing of so much soft fruit in those parts is largely an historical accident - the fruit farms were a 19th century ploy to give employment to 1000s of Irish navvies who had originally come over to build all the Scots Baronial castles. Certainly compared to apples and stuff, most soft fruit is pretty unchoosy as to where it grows. It is possible that Scottish raspberries would sweep the board at a blind tasting, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. Root vegetables, on the other hand...
    Our Turnips are world class, our soft fruits a very close second.
    A reference to root vegetables or the national political scene Malcolm?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,415
    Ishmael_Z said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
    Some bored lawyer looked at that case. Technically I think you would need to amend the law first to take out the anti-repeal provision...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    kingbongo said:

    I’ve also just realised after 15 years of loking at PB that there’s a button for reporting things as ‘off-topic’ - has anyone ever used this? For PB surely this mechanism should be reversed!

    Only by mistake. Also God knows what you are meant to flag with the Flag button; pro pineapple pizza thoughtcrime, perhaps.
    @rcs1000 gets grumpy if you use the "flag" button as the system sends him an email to check it out.
    He must hate me then. I keep hitting the bloody thing by mistake when trying to press 'quote'.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,415
    kyf_100 said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Turnover of 101m. 1150 employees.

    Have they considered paying their workers more? Just a thought.
    Also they are dropping seasonal workers - presumably temporary migrants.

    So not going to impact the long term employment levels in the UK
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428
    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
    Some bored lawyer looked at that case. Technically I think you would need to amend the law first to take out the anti-repeal provision...
    So the forewarned draftsman would amend his clause to "This Act can neither be amended nor repealed."
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,004
    malcolmg said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    One of the biggest growers of berries in the UK is moving part of its business to China because it cannot guarantee it will find enough fruit pickers available to work.

    Up to 200 seasonal jobs have gone at Haygrove’s farm in Ledbury, Herefordshire, and some of the company’s raspberry and blueberry-growing will be relocated to Yunnan province in China because of uncertainty over migrant labour due to Brexit.

    Angus Davison, the founder of Haygrove, said: “In the UK we employ 230 full-time and 1,150 seasonal workers, but we are now reducing that to 950 because of Brexit nervousness.” The company has a turnover of £101m.

    “We are already out of time,” he says, explaining that he can’t afford to wait for Theresa May to reveal her immigration policy as this year’s harvest was planned last year.

    Davison has written to Theresa May, pleading with her to take urgent action. “Unless a seasonal workers scheme is put in place, you must expect to see the steep decline of this significant rural employer and source of food,” he wrote.

    “It is appreciated that treating one industry differently to another is difficult; however agriculture, unlike construction and hospitality, can be exported. If enough people are not made available to do the work, the work can be taken to the people.”

    The prime minster has not replied.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/11/british-farmer-moves-fruit-growing-to-china-over-brexit-uncertainty

    Why would you want to buy non-Scottish raspberrys anyways?
    They taste better? For year-round availability? I buy at least two punnets a week and ... actually come to think of it, I've never seen Chinese raspberries. Do they disappear into jam?
    No chance of them tasting better , get real. Year round availability perhaps but it means accepting poorer quality.
    I have heard it said, by residents of Perthshire, that the growing of so much soft fruit in those parts is largely an historical accident - the fruit farms were a 19th century ploy to give employment to 1000s of Irish navvies who had originally come over to build all the Scots Baronial castles. Certainly compared to apples and stuff, most soft fruit is pretty unchoosy as to where it grows. It is possible that Scottish raspberries would sweep the board at a blind tasting, but I wouldn't bet the house on it. Root vegetables, on the other hand...
    Our Turnips are world class, our soft fruits a very close second.
    Scottish soft fruit is not first class, though it is possible you keep the best stuff and send the rest south.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 9,817
    edited February 11

    Scottish soft fruit is not first class, though it is possible you keep the best stuff and send the rest south.

    If they didn't they'd be in a jam.

    My coat is on the hook I think...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,415
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
    Some bored lawyer looked at that case. Technically I think you would need to amend the law first to take out the anti-repeal provision...
    So the forewarned draftsman would amend his clause to "This Act can neither be amended nor repealed."
    Wouldn't work - because an Act of Parliament can override existing law...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
    Some bored lawyer looked at that case. Technically I think you would need to amend the law first to take out the anti-repeal provision...
    So the forewarned draftsman would amend his clause to "This Act can neither be amended nor repealed."
    It doesn't matter if it says that, the principle of being able to amend exists. And a sound principle too, since why on earth would anyone want a law created that no one could ever repeal under any circumstances?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428
    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Charles said:

    Ishmael_Z said:

    agingjb said:

    Since a parliament cannot bind its successors, how can the result of a referendum called by one parliament continue to have absolute democratic force after a general election has created a new parliament?

    Of all the myths of British democracy the idea parliament cannot bind its successors is surely the most dishonest. Regardless of the maxim when you are elected to any public office you are ALWAYS bound by the actions of your predecessors.
    No you aren't. Or rather, parliament isn't. If the Pineapple on Pizza (Prohibition) Act contains a clause which says "This Act cannot be repealed", the Act can nonetheless be repealed.
    Some bored lawyer looked at that case. Technically I think you would need to amend the law first to take out the anti-repeal provision...
    So the forewarned draftsman would amend his clause to "This Act can neither be amended nor repealed."
    Wouldn't work - because an Act of Parliament can override existing law...
    In which case, why would you need the amendment prior to repeal? You wouldn't - you are right second time.
This discussion has been closed.