The UK Politics & Brexit Thread

[Dryce]

Maybe you should try a "cushy IT job" for a while. The market is flooded with highly-skilled workers from the Subcontinent whose presence here has nothing to do with the EU.

I would suspect that the establishment mindset that has enabled this situation is the same that would want to bind the UK closer to the EU.

I've worked on projects where there the technical staff have been mainly sourced from EU and India. The pattern has been for large OJEC (now OJEU) tenders to lock out local SMEs from all the but the crumbs - and the large companies that get the business claim they look for local labour but basically pull in free staff and contractors from whereever suits them.

Do this over time and the claim of 'lack of local staff' or more specifically 'lack of locals with expertise' becomes self-fulfilling.

 

[zipdip]

Well the irish border seems to have stopped the talks,we should just walk away with no deal then it will be up to us and Ireland to sort the border out,it will mean that there will have to be a hard border otherwise there will be free entry into our country.

 

[grober]

Whatever came beforehand, and the arguements for and against any brexit agreement, it wasn't the discussions of some London based press or media glitterati or some coniving Brussels bureaucrats that halted progression to the next important step in our negotiations yesterday it was the position of ten DUP politicians. Thus a small fringe NI political party with sectarian roots was able to scupper progress affecting the future of the entire United Kingdom for their own particular world view*
quote:-
"We have been very clear. Northern Ireland must leave the EU on the same terms as the rest of the United Kingdom. We will not accept any form of regulatory divergence which separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the United Kingdom**. The economic and constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom will not be compromised in any way."

* Northern Ireland voted 55.8% remain 44. 2% leave
NI votes Remain in EU referendum


**Which does tend to ignore the geographical aspect of the problem of course . Strikes me that bearing any major tectonic shift in the earth's plates the Irish Sea and island of Eire are going to remain fixed entities for the foreseable future, and that that the inhabitants of that island , north and south lead happier lives when their political structures find a way to acknowledge that physical reality rather than deny it.

 

[Dryce]

it will mean that there will have to be a hard border otherwise there will be free entry into our country.

If there's no wall it's not a tangible hard border. I don't think anybody in RoI or NI or rest of UK or EU is envisaging a wall.

UK has previously allowed people from the Republic to move fairly freely between UK and RoI well before the EU eased borders.

Arguably the special status here is not NI but RoI - ie. RoI citizens are treated differentltly by UK than the ogther EU citizens. The problem with that is it probably requires that RoI remain outside Schengen.

The problem for the EU is that if UK walks away then chances are RoI and UK do their own deal. EU doesn't want that in the same way that DUP have said they don't want NI to be under a different set of rules from the rest of the UK.

I don't get the impression that the EU really wants to make any concessions - but then it would argue that it's not the one choosing to leave so why should it have to be the one to flex. OTOH they do have a responsbility towards the RoI.

 

[Dryce]

Thus a small fringe NI political party with sectarian roots was able to scupper progress affecting the future of the entire United Kingdom for their own particular world view*

That's their job. If Ms Sturgeon hadn't been neutralised to some extent by the last general election then the Scottish tail would be wagging to UK dog a lot harder as well to bend things to their world view.

Regardless of what reservations we might have about the hardline politicians in NI - they have a better understanding of the long game and protecting strategic interests than most in the rest of the UK do these days. So the fact the we may not like or agree with them on a lot of stuff doesn't mean they aren't worth watching and listening.

 

[AMGeed]

"Remainers" predicted (guaranteed almost) all manner of disasters immediately after the vote, none of which came true and they've since stretched these predictions out from "immediate impact" to "long term impact" because they got them wholly wrong in the first place.

Not to my knowledge they didn't. Before the vote, immediately after the vote and right now - no one knows what post-Brexit Britain will look like and we won't know until the negotiations finally conclude and we can all see the terms on which we are leaving.

^You either have selective, or a very short memory ScottF. Just a couple of jogs to remind you the Governor of the BOE no less has changed his mind more than the weather pre and post Brexit.
The warnings
EU referendum: Carney doubles down on Brexit recession risk warning
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12187164/eu-referendum-mark-carney-priti-patel-suffragettes-brexit-live.html

Then he denied it
Subscribe to read

Then admits he was wrong
https://www.politico.eu/article/mark-carney-eats-humble-pie-on-brexit/

This, on top of financial institutions like JP Morgan predicting doom and gloom, but its yet to happen. The scaremongering came from the remainers who could only focus on negativity. The leavers pointed out the positives.

 

[Benzowner]

Well the irish border seems to have stopped the talks,we should just walk away with no deal then it will be up to us and Ireland to sort the border out,it will mean that there will have to be a hard border otherwise there will be free entry into our country.

This I cannot understand. If I want to go on holiday to a foreign country either in or outside the EU, either by train, boat or plane, I have to produce my passport, so we do not have open borders at present.

 

[Dryce]

This I cannot understand. If I want to go on holiday to a foreign country either in or outside the EU, either by train, boat or plane, I have to produce my passport, so we do not have open borders at present.

It's not just about passports so much as business and what can cross unimpeded.

As an extreme contrived example: At the moment you could have a farm that straddles the border and there won't be much consequence. It's all in the EU. So in principle common standards apply in terms of practice and regulation. So sell milk or other produce and nobody buying on eaither side of the border cares whether it came from the north or the south side of the farm. Post Brexit and the UK and EU regulations on say animal husbandry diverge - or the EU imposes a duty on Milk while the UK has a subsidy on animal feed - how do you administer the farm? What about a farm worker who lives in the north - can she work on the south side if the farm and vice versa. The sheep dogs in the south might need certain vaccinations by law - in the north those products could be banned.

Now in the past it would just be the UK and RoI to sort this out - concerned with looking after or screwing each other. But the EU is now part of the equation looking to maintain consistency across its whole jurisdiction.

I suspect this would all be easier if the UK had never been in the EU and was working with the RoI and EU to deal as an outsider - the EU would probably be a bit more flexible - and NI a bit less defensive.

 

[Yugguy]

I like Laura Kunsberg's summings-up:

Can May fix Brexit border problem?

The whole Brexit process was under threat after May's catastrophic decision to call an election and lose while winning. If she didn't have to appease the DUP she'd be a lot better off.

 

[Dryce]

The whole Brexit process was under threat after May's catastrophic decision to call an election and lose while winning. If she didn't have to appease the DUP she'd be a lot better off.

But she'd have a problem with an increasingly hysterical SNP contingent in Scotland looking to go the unilateral Indyref 2 route.

I suspect the call for the GE was actually a good one in principle - right up until the point where she called it and hadn't really figured how to go about it! That's another piece of the problem puzzle that is now lying on the table - we have a PM who with another week's campaigning would have lost it completely. If it were not for Brexit and the paucity of viable successors she would be gone by now - a political pillow put over her career.

I wonder if Ms May loses sleep figuring that even a slightly better managed election campaign might with a smidgin of a % better performance here or there would have left her in a much stronger position. Regrets - I'm sure she has a few.

However while the election result may have cursed her and left things in a more precarious state at the top of the political tree - but it also pretty much neutralised the SNP as well - sending them back to think again. The Catalonia mess has maybe also calmed some of the hotheads north of the border as well as focusing some minds in the EU as to how control can be almost lost within their jurisdiction.

 

[Scott_F]

^You either have selective, or a very short memory ScottF.

My memory is fine thanks. The piece that you quoted from my post was a response to:

How do you know what the future holds when the same “serious and sensible” commentators you refer to (the same ones that predicted the economy collapsing as soon as a Leave vote was returned) were completely wrong?

The same “serious and sensible” commentators who said house prices would plummet and the price of food would soar immediately (amongst other plague of locusts types forecasts) after the vote?

^Just a couple of jogs to remind you the Governor of the BOE no less has changed his mind more than the weather pre and post Brexit.
The warnings
EU referendum: Carney doubles down on Brexit recession risk warning
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12187164/eu-referendum-mark-carney-priti-patel-suffragettes-brexit-live.html

Then he denied it
Subscribe to read

Then admits he was wrong
https://www.politico.eu/article/mark-carney-eats-humble-pie-on-brexit/?

Virtually everything Mark Carney said related the what will happen after we leave the EU not if we vote to leave. The actual vote has seen sterling weaken and saw some volatility in the markets but since we haven't left yet we don't know what the long term effects will be. Carney was obviously laying it on with a trowel and soon had to backtrack on a lot of what he'd said. However, we all know that the whole referendum campaign was based on such talk from both sides (see #3900) and Carney didn't have to backtrack anywhere near as quickly as Farage with his nonsense claims regarding NHS funding.

^This, on top of financial institutions like JP Morgan predicting doom and gloom, but its yet to happen.

Once again, we haven't left yet.

The scaremongering came from the remainers who could only focus on negativity. The leavers pointed out the positives.

Bullsh1t.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Dryce]

Virtually everything Mark Carney said related the what will happen after we leave the EU not if we vote to leave. The actual vote has seen sterling weaken and saw some volatility in the markets but since we haven't left yet we don't know what the long term effects will be.

If the markets worked as well as is claimed by their protagonists then they should already have figured it all and priced in the anticipated long term effects.

.......... as if

 

[Druk]

sending them back to think again.

Saw what you did there. Boot on the other foot methinks?


.

 

[Deleted96908]

This is the major weak spot for me on the "Leave" side, a shame that those on the Left (which would normally oppose globalisation due to suppression of wages) are quiet about it, Corbyn and Mcdonnall have somehow managed to shuffle their way through without Labour really pouncing on them for being probably the biggest Brexiteers of all along with the great Dennis Skinner and Frank Field.

But they are almost all opportunists these days, immaterial of party - so say what they believe the moment demands, rather than what their conscience would have them say. If they weren't so self serving.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

But they are almost all opportunists these days, immaterial of party - so say what they believe the moment demands, rather than what their conscience would have them say. If they weren't so self serving.

I think this is what irks me with Corbyn; he has been such a principled man (whether or not you disagree with those principles) and yet he seems to have gone quiet on Brexit to keep the Blairite remainers happy.

I was speaking to my very political uncle last week about the whole climate at the minute and he can remember a time of such political turmoil - the referendum has obliterated the “left-wing - right-wing” order and I doubt it’ll ever settle back into what it once was.

 

[Deleted96908]

I think this is what irks me with Corbyn; he has been such a principled man (whether or not you disagree with those principles) - the referendum has obliterated the “left-wing - right-wing” order and I doubt it’ll ever settle back into what it once was.

Yes.

The organisation of political sentiment into left and right is an artificial hangover from the French Revolution and splits folks into factions when often none exist.

Consequently we have folks voting against perfectly good policy - simply in adherence to their party’s political line. Daft actually but it suits those that wish to align themselves with a corporeal body in the hope that they can be part of something larger - immaterial of whether the aims and beliefs of the larger body match those of their own.

Some of course are capable of modelling the party in their own light. Blair’s New Labour springs to mind and briefly, Thatcherism.

 

[Deleted96908]

Picking up from the Hospital/Health/NHS thread I was wondering what the modern state should provide. As background to this, the NHS is still nascent in historical terms and I am far from convinced that it will survive to be 100 years old unless we come to terms with the cost of providing blame free health care. I don't think it would be much of an exaggeration to assume that the cost of running the NHS could double in the short term if we provided decent health care for all, in a reasonable time frame and without a mention of postcode lotteries.

And from here. If we agree this would be desirable, then what about proper funding for education, immaterial of parent's background? And policing. And housing. Or well equipped and paid emergency services? Clearly when you start to add all this up, it would dwarf the Government's current spending and no doubt, if we are to avoid borrowing, taxes would rise to unprecedented levels.

Would this be a bad thing or good. Should we expect to somehow have great public services without increasing taxes? Or is government debt the only way, at least in the short term? (Let's not get caught up in claims that the last labour government overspent, when trillions were spent supporting banks, one of which saw their CEO state that they were doing god's work, shortly after pocketing a US tax payer funded bale out). Or perhaps some folks feel the answer lies in the private sector as practiced by our cousins on the other side.

So the questions I'd like to discuss, from both an idealogical and, or economic perspective, are:

What services should the state provide and why? When does the public sector take over from the private sector - or vice versa? Or if you think the answer lies mostly in the private sector, I'd like to understand how capitalist grab (Orwell) can be balanced with the needs of the less able - be it health, education etc. Or is a hybrid solution the best balance? If so, are there examples of national private and public programmes working together without it costing too much, or on the other hand, ignoring the needs of the less wealthy.

A big subject I know, but lots of big personalities here and it'd be good to listen to opinions - especially if we can avoid party politics.

 

[Harrythedog]

I definately think everyone should pay more except children. The NHS has come a long way from it's starting point of helping sick people to the point where just about every organ can be transplanted.
How about a weekly NHS surcharge of 0.5% on wages, pensions and benefits. That'll raise a few bob

 

[renault12ts]

I definately think everyone should pay more except children. The NHS has come a long way from it's starting point of helping sick people to the point where just about every organ can be transplanted.
How about a weekly NHS surcharge of 0.5% on wages, pensions and benefits. That'll raise a few bob

1% on taxes should be a start.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

No one source of sponsorship could handle the amounts needed in isolation so should (and already is) be funded from a number of different sources to spread the load.
Maybe it's time to ramp them all up a little? Smokers, drinkers, legal cannabis, fast food, NI, NI for the self employed, income taxes and encouraging private healthcare (maybe by offering tax breaks on premiums) could all pay more and shouldn't have an in-proportionate effect on all.

Personally I don't buy in to the concept that all nurses are angels and all NHS doctors are committed. My Dad was recovering in hospital from a hip replacement following a fall and died of a chest infection, the doc called us in and blamed dirty hospitals - his exact words- the nurses ignored his cough blaming his sitting position and we never saw a sign of his Rolex Submariner when I collected his belongings.

The Rolex was a fake that his mate had bought him for a laugh so good luck with pawning that one nursey