Lady Phyll Opoku-Gyimah is maybe best-placed to increase the Labour majority in Lewisham East.Some other impressive women coming forwards too.
In January, LGBT campaigner Phyll Opoku-Gyimah became briefly best-known for turning down the MBE she'd been offered on 2016's New Year's Honours list. She was flattered, she said to Diva magazine, but wasn't hugely keen on accepting an award linked to "colonialism and its toxic and enduring legacy in the Commonwealth, where – among many other injustices – LGBTQI people are still being persecuted, tortured and even killed because of sodomy laws."
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
I do see her point, time that MBE and similar gongs were renamed.
Perhaps the MBE could be relaunched as The Commonwealth Medal.
That won't satisfy her, as the appalling treatment of gay people in countries who have been independently run for 50 years is still all our fault (despite having some of the most progressive laws in the world).
Labour find a way to blame everything on Mrs Thatcher, so it's no real surprise.
As an Irishman once said, "we shouldn't be starting from here".
The Uk should have started negotiations from a WTO position and then sought concesions from the EU in return for offering lower tariffs for EU exports to the UK.
Maybe we will end up with WTO terms and start negotiations all over again but three years and a smooth transition will have been lost.
As many of us here suggested more than a year ago. The approach to the negotiations has been the wrong way around and is encouraging a crap deal.
Lady Phyll Opoku-Gyimah is maybe best-placed to increase the Labour majority in Lewisham East.Some other impressive women coming forwards too.
In January, LGBT campaigner Phyll Opoku-Gyimah became briefly best-known for turning down the MBE she'd been offered on 2016's New Year's Honours list. She was flattered, she said to Diva magazine, but wasn't hugely keen on accepting an award linked to "colonialism and its toxic and enduring legacy in the Commonwealth, where – among many other injustices – LGBTQI people are still being persecuted, tortured and even killed because of sodomy laws."
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
I do see her point, time that MBE and similar gongs were renamed.
Perhaps the MBE could be relaunched as The Commonwealth Medal.
That won't satisfy her, as the appalling treatment of gay people in countries who have been independently run for 50 years is still all our fault (despite having some of the most progressive laws in the world).
Sure, the pernicious influence of Empire era laws continues, but flag waving for the British Empire seems increasingly anachronistic when said Empire belongs only in history books and a few remote forgotten islands.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
The major problem with the British debate about a meaningful vote, however, is that it ignores the fact that the EU-27 also has a voice. All EU member-states would have to agree to any extension of the Article 50 talks to continue or re-open negotiations. But there would be little inclination to agree to last minute UK requests. The EU member-states might agree to give the UK extra month, but a longer extension looks unlikely. Both the member-states and the EU institutions want to get Brexit out of the way ahead of the European Parliament elections and the nomination of a new Commission in 2019. The European Council has supported the European Parliament’s proposal to redistribute 27 of the current 73 British seats to member-states which have been under-represented in proportion to their populations, and to keep the remaining 46 seats for future enlargements. France, Italy and Spain, which will together receive almost half of the available British seats, might be among the most vocal opponents of an Article 50 extension. Paris, Rome and Madrid would argue that it makes no sense to elect British MEPs and select a British commissioner only to see them go in a matter of months.
Lady Phyll Opoku-Gyimah is maybe best-placed to increase the Labour majority in Lewisham East.Some other impressive women coming forwards too.
In January, LGBT campaigner Phyll Opoku-Gyimah became briefly best-known for turning down the MBE she'd been offered on 2016's New Year's Honours list. She was flattered, she said to Diva magazine, but wasn't hugely keen on accepting an award linked to "colonialism and its toxic and enduring legacy in the Commonwealth, where – among many other injustices – LGBTQI people are still being persecuted, tortured and even killed because of sodomy laws."
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
So it's the UK's fault that 50 or more years post independence in 35 Commonwealth nations - mostly in Africa and the Caribbean - being gay is punishable by imprisonment. In two cases the death penalty is applied. Given Britain has liberalised its laws - how is it our fault they have not?
Perhaps she could go and campaign in her ancestral homeland of Ghana - a nation which viciously enforces its anti gay laws with jail terms between 5 and 25 years - on the issue and when the local police arrest her she presumably won't seek assistance from the imperialist British high commission as it would be Britain's fault of course she is in jail! Now that would be brave.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
I note that the Tiger was the nickname of Clemenceau, one of the principal architects of the Treaty of Versailles at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919.
The sketch presumably anticipates the Second World War resulting from Germany's later rejection of the Treaty Of Versailles as too harsh.
I have my usual criticisms of AMs position, namely that the Leave campaign has largely been incoherent on its proposals because by design it did not need to be i.e Cameron shaped it so that the Remain side would be coherent and people would not vote for it.
However this article is really good, and does not fall into the trap that many political commentators do where anything your political opponents state is ignored. In fact it is much more poewerful considering the strong support for Remain AM has shown on here.
I think that TMs best course of action is to move the Goervnment forward as the honest broker. I would be happy for her to make a further speech on the key areas AM highlights as contradictions, but to re-state her desire and intention to obtain a settlement which benefits both sides.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
He said Brexit meant border controls so I'm not sure he's the best person to ask for solutions for Brexiting without them.
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
A good header from a reasonable perspective, Mr Meeks.
The problem with the EU is that we will always have bureaucrats negotiating on their behalf.
To show how clever they are, they will take everything to the brink of breakdown before finally agreeing a deal they could have sorted out much earlier. That's to show you how skilful they are and how hard they are negotiating.
The whole problem of the EU is that they are 27 countries and not a single state, and that's why unification is the real objective - it would make everything so much easier. More efficient to their minds, and easier to impose on the ordinary thickos who don't have their superior intellect. Nationalism is such a nuisance.
Democracy is a bummer to those who know better. It slows the whole unification process up, and Cammo stepping out of line was a bad miscalculation. It also explains why we had no prepared negotiation position - this was not meant to happen.
There are some good things about the EU, but leaving it to the Proles to decide was always a hostage to fortune.
They can't allow the UK to get what is seen as a good deal. Stepping out of line mustn't be seen to be rewarded, but the individual countries (mainly Germany and France) don't want to suffer any bad effects if they go too far.
Any extra time given will be used for show-boating and not real negotiation. There are a lot of careers at stake.
As an Irishman once said, "we shouldn't be starting from here".
The Uk should have started negotiations from a WTO position and then sought concesions from the EU in return for offering lower tariffs for EU exports to the UK.
Maybe we will end up with WTO terms and start negotiations all over again but three years and a smooth transition will have been lost.
As many of us here suggested more than a year ago. The approach to the negotiations has been the wrong way around and is encouraging a crap deal.
The only reason it is being negotiated the wrong way around is that our lords and masters in politics and civil service are finding it hard to countenance the options that generally they did not vote for.
"a deal that its people are not prepared to live with"
Seems a lot of Remainers get cornered into this Brexiter way of thinking. Or shall we say BBC way of thinking.
Half of us don't want Brexit in the first place, so we want a deal that is as close to what we have now as possible. Add in a few Brexiters who don't care (or understand) what the deal is, as long as we're out, and you have an instant majority for something Norwayish. Of course many Brexiters won't be happy, but what exactly does it mean that they "aren't prepared to live with" such a deal? What choice have they got? It's a democracy: we have one deal, not thirty different ones tailored to the different politics of Brexiters (and Remainers).
Which is of course why Team Brexit shouldn't be run by Brexiters, but by a cross-party group which represents the British people rather than a particular flavour of Little Englandism.
"a deal that its people are not prepared to live with"
Seems a lot of Remainers get cornered into this Brexiter way of thinking. Or shall we say BBC way of thinking.
Half of us don't want Brexit in the first place, so we want a deal that is as close to what we have now as possible. Add in a few Brexiters who don't care (or understand) what the deal is, as long as we're out, and you have an instant majority for something Norwayish. Of course many Brexiters won't be happy, but what exactly does it mean that they "aren't prepared to live with" such a deal? What choice have they got? It's a democracy: we have one deal, not thirty different ones tailored to the different politics of Brexiters (and Remainers).
Which is of course why Team Brexit shouldn't be run by Brexiters, but by a cross-party group which represents the British people rather than a particular flavour of Little Englandism.
I wrote as much 3 days after the referendum back in 2016
The debate over Galileo has exposed a clash between bureaucrats and defence experts and between military and economic interests. If this conflict is not defused, it risks souring future security negotiations between the EU and the UK.
Cambridge University will end 300-year-old tradition of posting exam results in public so that students don't suffer 'distress and harm' if they have not done well
Good article, and I agree with Richard N's point too - the EU does not have a strong negotiating core, and tends to edge forward by fudging. In its absence, the main decision partner is actually Barnier (which was why the early attempts to undermine him by chatting up individual Member States was doomed to fail). The problem about Alastair's argument is that there is little real incentive for Barnier to compromise if he doesn't know what the British position is - he could easily find he'd made concessions to satisfy May, only to see the decision disavowed by the British Cabinet, or the Conservative Party, or Parliament.
Good Huffington column on diverse topics today. John McDonnell's focus cracking the anti-semitism issue is significant - if you want a general approach in today's Labour leadership, talk to Jeremy, but if you want a specific action taken with ruthless efficiency, talk to John.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
John McDonnell's focus cracking the anti-semitism issue is significant - if you want a general approach in today's Labour leadership, talk to Jeremy, but if you want a specific action taken with ruthless efficiency, talk to John.
I don't know what is more sad, students who think this kind of moronic and antisemitic "chat" is perfectly ok or the need to put a trigger warning at the top of the article.
In a strange mirror world this morning where I am going to accuse Alastair of being too hard on the EU and particularly on Barnier.
As the chief negotiator we would expect that Barnier would be well briefed on the main parties he is dealing with - most particularly on the current UK Government and on any potential replacement and main players in British Parliament. He would also need to be well briefed on the Northern Ireland border and the main players there. But I question whether he would be expected to have in depth knowledge of the morass of unintelligible politics that makes up Northern Ireland and particularly the Unionist movement which is, if anything, even more fragmented and inconsistent than the British Government. May calling and failing to win the election and thereby handing undue influence to Foster and her double handful of MPs creates a confusion that is probably beyond most people's ability to resolve. And Barnier did not walk into Northern Ireland and start throwing his weight around. He simply went and explained the various options and which ones he saw as the most practical.
I may not agree with his analysis or his solutions but I would not criticise him for trying to explain them from the perspective of the EU.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
Remind me how old you are? Not that I disagree, mind.
The debate over Galileo has exposed a clash between bureaucrats and defence experts and between military and economic interests. If this conflict is not defused, it risks souring future security negotiations between the EU and the UK.
A chap from my uni days was saying in our group that if the UK pulls out as Hammond has suggested and we take everything with us and don't allow our expertise or technology to be used then Galileo may never work whatever the expense.
Off-topic: the BBC's Jeremy Thorpe series, A Very English Scandal, starts on Sunday 20 May. Perhaps TSE will prepare a header on the LibDem's favoured voting system.
That won't satisfy her, as the appalling treatment of gay people in countries who have been independently run for 50 years is still all our fault (despite having some of the most progressive laws in the world).
No, it's not our fault by any means but we continue to associate with these countries via the Commonwealth and that's the problem.
On the one hand, we seem to want some kind of loose, inclusive fairly innocuous gathering of countries so the Queen can be at the centre of a nice big photo (compared to Victoria who could rule half the world with a much smaller family gathering).
That's fine and it's not for us to tell other countries what their laws should be and how they should treat their own people (apart from all the times when we do just that).
Yet I'm not wholly comfortable with the UK being part of a group where the right of some individuals right to live as they choose is respected in some countries and not in others.
That doesn't stop us working with or doing business with these countries and others whose laws aren't the same as ours but the Commonwealth will be an anachronism if all that links us is what we were - it should be about what we aspire to be.
The debate over Galileo has exposed a clash between bureaucrats and defence experts and between military and economic interests. If this conflict is not defused, it risks souring future security negotiations between the EU and the UK.
A chap from my uni days was saying in our group that if the UK pulls out as Hammond has suggested and we take everything with us and don't allow our expertise or technology to be used then Galileo may never work whatever the expense.
If we stop them using Ascension & the Falklands I'm not sure what alternatives they have....
Off-topic: the BBC's Jeremy Thorpe series, A Very English Scandal, starts on Sunday 20 May. Perhaps TSE will prepare a header on the LibDem's favoured voting system.
Cambridge University will end 300-year-old tradition of posting exam results in public so that students don't suffer 'distress and harm' if they have not done well
Thwere’s a chap at Essex County Cricket Club who keeps nagging for the figures to be posted when the Committee election results are published, and is told repeatedly that’s it’s unfair to losers. Why?
The £10,000 idea is daft. I’m amazed that the committee spent two years thinking that one up.
No-one disputes the problem. While real wages for millennials are pretty much on par with the cohort before them*, they are faced with much higher housing and education costs.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
And with education, accept that while 50% will go to university, only half of those are spending their time wisely. The tertiary education market is flawed and it’s expansion seems untethered to national productivity growth. Some courses can be cut to two years. Others should not be subsidised at all.
In the long term the objective should be to halve education costs to less than £5k per annum, perhaps by attracting greater numbers of overseas students to cross-subsidise. Oh, and there is no godly reason why students should have to pay greater interest rates on their loans than I do for my mortgage - less, since the whole boondoggle is government-backed.
*Of course, standing still is not great, since during the 20th century each successive generational cohort significantly outearned the previous one. But this is a different issue, relating to stagnant wage and productivity growing in the 21st century.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
It is a daft idea, but perhaps having lower Income tax or NI for under thirties would be a better way of rebalancing the intergenerational divide. It would help those getting started in life whether graduate or brickie.
It's the obvious solution, renewable at both sides' discretion of course. Remainers get their customs union and Leavers can prepare for their Max Fac powered by drones and unicorns in the fullness of time. Everyone's a winner.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
If the Gov't were to pay 26 year olds £10,000 on their birthday think how made this will make those who are 27,28,29,30, 31 .................
It is not affodable to pay these older age groups retrospectively so the policy would be a net vote loser by upsetting more than it pleases.
Off-topic: the BBC's Jeremy Thorpe series, A Very English Scandal, starts on Sunday 20 May. Perhaps TSE will prepare a header on the LibDem's favoured voting system.
Superficially, its political structures look coherent and purposefully designed, with grand-sounding institutional names such as the ** Parliament, but in reality the boundaries of power and decision making are ill-defined, and its modus operandi is fudge and muddling through.
Pungent tang of familiarity there.
Reference to Holyrood? Given that it's no more than a souped up council chamber because you're all a bunch of bottlers and cowards.
Cambridge University will end 300-year-old tradition of posting exam results in public so that students don't suffer 'distress and harm' if they have not done well
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
I hope it gets backdated. £10k and 22 years compound interest would be quite handy.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
It's the obvious solution, renewable at both sides' discretion of course. Remainers get their customs union and Leavers can prepare for their Max Fac powered by drones and unicorns in the fullness of time. Everyone's a winner.
As some of us have been pointing out for some time...
No arrangement is permanent, and change in either direction of closer alignment or fortress Britain is possible according to the whims of the British people.
The problem is that the Golums of Brexit feel "their precious" slipping away.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
The percentage varies considerably depending on what band your house is. It is quite a regressive structure, and devised that way by the Tories.
Off-topic: the BBC's Jeremy Thorpe series, A Very English Scandal, starts on Sunday 20 May. Perhaps TSE will prepare a header on the LibDem's favoured voting system.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Nope. But income taxes should be lower. The idea is to rebalance ever so slightly from income to wealth, and indeed housing wealth.
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
The EU's negotiating stance has been based on a deep understanding of the Brexit mindset, and a determination that it must not be appeased any longer.
John McDonnell's focus cracking the anti-semitism issue is significant - if you want a general approach in today's Labour leadership, talk to Jeremy, but if you want a specific action taken with ruthless efficiency, talk to John.
It's the obvious solution, renewable at both sides' discretion of course. Remainers get their customs union and Leavers can prepare for their Max Fac powered by drones and unicorns in the fullness of time. Everyone's a winner.
How about we agree an indefinite continuation of the status quo, subject to a two year notice period to terminate it that we can invoke unilaterally at any time?
So the bunch of a-holes in Brussels accurately described by Mr M are the ones that Remainers want us to stay Best Friends Forever with.
The EU's negotiating approach exemplifies why we are so right to be leaving. They just want to look like the tough guys in order to intimidate and other Sovereign Nation State (!) who might dare to consider following us out of the door. Having a win-win deal with the UK doesn't even feature in their thinking.
It seems like the EU is a no win position with you, Mr Rentool. If they rolled over and gave us everything, then you'd say "See, I told you it was right to leave, we've got a great deal with them without the problems of membership."
The other way round, Mr RCS ! Mr Rentool wins either way.
The EU rolls over - "See. We had nothing to lose except our chains. We were right to leave." The EU holds the line - "See how the EU treats us. We were right to leave."
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Nope. But income taxes should be lower. The idea is to rebalance ever so slightly from income to wealth, and indeed housing wealth.
For fairness and practicality the scheme would need to take account of mortgages and only tax the net equity in the house.
The those with large net equity would take out mortgages to reduce the net equity and invest the cash where the property tax did not apply.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Nope. But income taxes should be lower. The idea is to rebalance ever so slightly from income to wealth, and indeed housing wealth.
Tax and NI would need to be lowered by 25% in total for that to be revenue neutral w.r.t. my household.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Nope. But income taxes should be lower. The idea is to rebalance ever so slightly from income to wealth, and indeed housing wealth.
For fairness and practicality the scheme would need to take account of mortgages and only tax the net equity in the house.
The those with large net equity would take out mortgages to reduce the net equity and invest the cash where the property tax did not apply.
I don’t think it should. Keep it simple. It would be a pain for me if my proposal were taken up. I just bought a family house and I’ve a massive mortgage. But I see no point in beggaring the generation below me.
Edit: Ah, I understand your second para. Yes, that sounds like an interesting idea.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
I can see how the idea might arise. Equalising opportunity is the $64000 question. The potential of young people from poorer backgrounds is hardly being realised, to the detriment of economy & society, but means testing and positive discrimination are somewhat of an anathema to many on the Right.
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
The EU's negotiating stance has been based on a deep understanding of the Brexit mindset, and a determination that it must not be appeased any longer.
"Appeased". So are we allowed to vote ourselves out in any circumstance at all, in your view?
Off-topic: the BBC's Jeremy Thorpe series, A Very English Scandal, starts on Sunday 20 May. Perhaps TSE will prepare a header on the LibDem's favoured voting system.
PR not AV
That's rather shot his dog fox.
Maybe we should use the same system that elected Macron.
For research, Bunnies can (and will) go to France.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
Would that replace council tax ? Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
Nope. But income taxes should be lower. The idea is to rebalance ever so slightly from income to wealth, and indeed housing wealth.
For fairness and practicality the scheme would need to take account of mortgages and only tax the net equity in the house.
The those with large net equity would take out mortgages to reduce the net equity and invest the cash where the property tax did not apply.
Ok That is sounding better
It'd have an "interesting" effect on the UK mortgage market, could encourage investment in other areas as you say.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
I hope it gets backdated. £10k and 22 years compound interest would be quite handy.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
I hope it gets backdated. £10k and 22 years compound interest would be quite handy.
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
The EU's negotiating stance has been based on a deep understanding of the Brexit mindset, and a determination that it must not be appeased any longer.
"Appeased". So are we allowed to vote ourselves out in any circumstance at all, in your view?
William's oft stated position is that democracy is overrated and nation states should be dissolved. I suppose the one positive is that he is consistent.
I don't think introducing property taxes for primary residences is a good idea, even at 1% it represents an opportunity for a future Labour government to jack it up. I think we should introduce a value tax on second property and primary residences owned by non tax residents. Say 3% per year for the former and 25% per year for thale latter.
A chap from my uni days was saying in our group that if the UK pulls out as Hammond has suggested and we take everything with us and don't allow our expertise or technology to be used then Galileo may never work whatever the expense.
Do you really believe that? That the only people in Europe who can make a satellite positioning system work are the British?
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
The EU's negotiating stance has been based on a deep understanding of the Brexit mindset, and a determination that it must not be appeased any longer.
"Appeased". So are we allowed to vote ourselves out in any circumstance at all, in your view?
William's oft stated position is that democracy is overrated and nation states should be dissolved. I suppose the one positive is that he is consistent.
It's most frequently stated in your posts telling me what my position is...
I don't think introducing property taxes for primary residences is a good idea, even at 1% it represents an opportunity for a future Labour government to jack it up. I think we should introduce a value tax on second property and primary residences owned by non tax residents. Say 3% per year for the former and 25% per year for thale latter.
I’m a BTL property owner, by “fate” as much as anything else.
I don’t think there’s enough of us to achieve what I’m actually suggesting, which is long-term suppression of house prices and a subtle tilt away from taxing income toward wealth.
This 10k thing is one of WIllets mad ideas, not Gov't policy. Sounds like a terrible idea to me, the Tories need to focus on hard working 30 somethings.
I can see how the idea might arise. Equalising opportunity is the $64000 question. The potential of young people from poorer backgrounds is hardly being realised, to the detriment of economy & society, but means testing and positive discrimination are somewhat of an anathema to many on the Right.
I agree about equalising opportunity where we can. But 10K to 25 year olds?
1) Why not 26 year olds? 2) To Oxbridge graduates with loads of opportunity? 3) To Tarquin and Sophia, whose Daddy owns half of Chelsea and are going to use it to upgrade their gap year in Thailand? 4) Someone will shove it up there nose on coke, someone will put it straight on a three legged horse.
I'd much rather pay my tax to give blameless poor 87 year olds more warmth or meals on wheels or whatever, than dish out cash to all fit mid twenties.
Sadly, whilst accepting there is an "issue" here, I think two brains has misfired and probably put his cause back (judging from water cooler comment in the office today from the 30 and 40 somethings).
Could we just put interest rates up and make pensions and housing cheaper as a result?
I don't think introducing property taxes for primary residences is a good idea, even at 1% it represents an opportunity for a future Labour government to jack it up. I think we should introduce a value tax on second property and primary residences owned by non tax residents. Say 3% per year for the former and 25% per year for thale latter.
I’m a BTL property owner, by “fate” as much as anything else.
I don’t think there’s enough of us to achieve what I’m actually suggesting, which is long-term suppression of house prices and a subtle tilt away from taxing income toward wealth.
900,000 landlords who own 5.5m residential properties.
I blame Bercow to a large extent (even though I realise he wasn't on duty today) - he's had 9 years to improve PMQs and the only interventions he makes are in the style of a bad supply teacher.
Comments
And the peer – who has moved from having once voted in favour of UK membership of the EU’s predecessor, the European Common Market, to now being firmly in support of a British withdrawal from the EU – said that he believed that in the event of a UK vote for independence from the EU there would be a return to physical border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/brexit-peace-fears-are-rubbish-trimble-1-7297554
The major problem with the British debate about a meaningful vote, however, is that it ignores the fact that the EU-27 also has a voice. All EU member-states would have to agree to any extension of the Article 50 talks to continue or re-open negotiations. But there would be little inclination to agree to last minute UK requests. The EU member-states might agree to give the UK extra month, but a longer extension looks unlikely. Both the member-states and the EU institutions want to get Brexit out of the way ahead of the European Parliament elections and the nomination of a new Commission in 2019. The European Council has supported the European Parliament’s proposal to redistribute 27 of the current 73 British seats to member-states which have been under-represented in proportion to their populations, and to keep the remaining 46 seats for future enlargements. France, Italy and Spain, which will together receive almost half of the available British seats, might be among the most vocal opponents of an Article 50 extension. Paris, Rome and Madrid would argue that it makes no sense to elect British MEPs and select a British commissioner only to see them go in a matter of months.
http://www.cer.eu/insights/theresa-mays-meaningless-meaningful-vote
Perhaps she could go and campaign in her ancestral homeland of Ghana - a nation which viciously enforces its anti gay laws with jail terms between 5 and 25 years - on the issue and when the local police arrest her she presumably won't seek assistance from the imperialist British high commission as it would be Britain's fault of course she is in jail! Now that would be brave.
https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/994139475495342081
The sketch presumably anticipates the Second World War resulting from Germany's later rejection of the Treaty Of Versailles as too harsh.
However this article is really good, and does not fall into the trap that many political commentators do where anything your political opponents state is ignored. In fact it is much more poewerful considering the strong support for Remain AM has shown on here.
I think that TMs best course of action is to move the Goervnment forward as the honest broker. I would be happy for her to make a further speech on the key areas AM highlights as contradictions, but to re-state her desire and intention to obtain a settlement which benefits both sides.
https://order-order.com/2018/05/09/lewisham-east-runners-riders/
The problem with the EU is that we will always have bureaucrats negotiating on their behalf.
To show how clever they are, they will take everything to the brink of breakdown before finally agreeing a deal they could have sorted out much earlier. That's to show you how skilful they are and how hard they are negotiating.
The whole problem of the EU is that they are 27 countries and not a single state, and that's why unification is the real objective - it would make everything so much easier. More efficient to their minds, and easier to impose on the ordinary thickos who don't have their superior intellect. Nationalism is such a nuisance.
Democracy is a bummer to those who know better. It slows the whole unification process up, and Cammo stepping out of line was a bad miscalculation. It also explains why we had no prepared negotiation position - this was not meant to happen.
There are some good things about the EU, but leaving it to the Proles to decide was always a hostage to fortune.
They can't allow the UK to get what is seen as a good deal. Stepping out of line mustn't be seen to be rewarded, but the individual countries (mainly Germany and France) don't want to suffer any bad effects if they go too far.
Any extra time given will be used for show-boating and not real negotiation. There are a lot of careers at stake.
Seems a lot of Remainers get cornered into this Brexiter way of thinking. Or shall we say BBC way of thinking.
Half of us don't want Brexit in the first place, so we want a deal that is as close to what we have now as possible. Add in a few Brexiters who don't care (or understand) what the deal is, as long as we're out, and you have an instant majority for something Norwayish. Of course many Brexiters won't be happy, but what exactly does it mean that they "aren't prepared to live with" such a deal? What choice have they got? It's a democracy: we have one deal, not thirty different ones tailored to the different politics of Brexiters (and Remainers).
Which is of course why Team Brexit shouldn't be run by Brexiters, but by a cross-party group which represents the British people rather than a particular flavour of Little Englandism.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/26/richard-tyndall-on-the-exit-strategy/
Check the comments under this from yesterday:
https://twitter.com/KateAndrs/status/993814520249372672
http://www.cer.eu/insights/hitchhikers-guide-galileo-and-brexit
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5708727/Cambridge-University-end-300-year-old-tradition-posting-exam-results-public.html
Good Huffington column on diverse topics today. John McDonnell's focus cracking the anti-semitism issue is significant - if you want a general approach in today's Labour leadership, talk to Jeremy, but if you want a specific action taken with ruthless efficiency, talk to John.
https://unitedkingdom.cmail19.com/t/ViewEmail/t/DDC6E0E37EB363FD/BE8B6338EFBBD1A963B21DE8DA818551
https://theboar.org/2018/05/warwick-students-temporarily-suspended/
As the chief negotiator we would expect that Barnier would be well briefed on the main parties he is dealing with - most particularly on the current UK Government and on any potential replacement and main players in British Parliament. He would also need to be well briefed on the Northern Ireland border and the main players there. But I question whether he would be expected to have in depth knowledge of the morass of unintelligible politics that makes up Northern Ireland and particularly the Unionist movement which is, if anything, even more fragmented and inconsistent than the British Government. May calling and failing to win the election and thereby handing undue influence to Foster and her double handful of MPs creates a confusion that is probably beyond most people's ability to resolve. And Barnier did not walk into Northern Ireland and start throwing his weight around. He simply went and explained the various options and which ones he saw as the most practical.
I may not agree with his analysis or his solutions but I would not criticise him for trying to explain them from the perspective of the EU.
A chap from my uni days was saying in our group that if the UK pulls out as Hammond has suggested and we take everything with us and don't allow our expertise or technology to be used then Galileo may never work whatever the expense.
https://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/994166607575506944
On the one hand, we seem to want some kind of loose, inclusive fairly innocuous gathering of countries so the Queen can be at the centre of a nice big photo (compared to Victoria who could rule half the world with a much smaller family gathering).
That's fine and it's not for us to tell other countries what their laws should be and how they should treat their own people (apart from all the times when we do just that).
Yet I'm not wholly comfortable with the UK being part of a group where the right of some individuals right to live as they choose is respected in some countries and not in others.
That doesn't stop us working with or doing business with these countries and others whose laws aren't the same as ours but the Commonwealth will be an anachronism if all that links us is what we were - it should be about what we aspire to be.
Why?
No-one disputes the problem.
While real wages for millennials are pretty much on par with the cohort before them*, they are faced with much higher housing and education costs.
The solution is to make it an explicit aim of government to repress house prices over the long term, using whatever methods are necessary - chiefly via house building, planning reform, and a modest housing asset tax - say 1% p.a.
And with education, accept that while 50% will go to university, only half of those are spending their time wisely. The tertiary education market is flawed and it’s expansion seems untethered to national productivity growth. Some courses can be cut to two years. Others should not be subsidised at all.
In the long term the objective should be to halve education costs to less than £5k per annum, perhaps by attracting greater numbers of overseas students to cross-subsidise. Oh, and there is no godly reason why students should have to pay greater interest rates on their loans than I do for my mortgage - less, since the whole boondoggle is government-backed.
*Of course, standing still is not great, since during the 20th century each successive generational cohort significantly outearned the previous one. But this is a different issue, relating to stagnant wage and productivity growing in the 21st century.
If the Gov't were to pay 26 year olds £10,000 on their birthday think how made this will make those who are 27,28,29,30, 31 .................
It is not affodable to pay these older age groups retrospectively so the policy would be a net vote loser by upsetting more than it pleases.
Perhaps they would suffer distress by publicising they went to Cambridge not Oxford?
£10k and 22 years compound interest would be quite handy.
Mine is 0.75% of the value of my property per year right now.
No arrangement is permanent, and change in either direction of closer alignment or fortress Britain is possible according to the whims of the British people.
The problem is that the Golums of Brexit feel "their precious" slipping away.
As was pointed out to Dan Hodges by Dial-A-Moderate, lying about Israel is not anti-semitic.
The those with large net equity would take out mortgages to reduce the net equity and invest the cash where the property tax did not apply.
It would be a pain for me if my proposal were taken up. I just bought a family house and I’ve a massive mortgage. But I see no point in beggaring the generation below me.
Edit: Ah, I understand your second para. Yes, that sounds like an interesting idea.
For research, Bunnies can (and will) go to France.
It'd have an "interesting" effect on the UK mortgage market, could encourage investment in other areas as you say.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/994173659878129664
I don’t think there’s enough of us to achieve what I’m actually suggesting, which is long-term suppression of house prices and a subtle tilt away from taxing income toward wealth.
1) Why not 26 year olds?
2) To Oxbridge graduates with loads of opportunity?
3) To Tarquin and Sophia, whose Daddy owns half of Chelsea and are going to use it to upgrade their gap year in Thailand?
4) Someone will shove it up there nose on coke, someone will put it straight on a three legged horse.
I'd much rather pay my tax to give blameless poor 87 year olds more warmth or meals on wheels or whatever, than dish out cash to all fit mid twenties.
Sadly, whilst accepting there is an "issue" here, I think two brains has misfired and probably put his cause back (judging from water cooler comment in the office today from the 30 and 40 somethings).
Could we just put interest rates up and make pensions and housing cheaper as a result?