Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

All thwarted by remainer Parliament. No don’t the Torres will remind everyone that the reason we are still in the EU and having this election is down to Labour, Lib-Dems and the SNP, along with a few Tory rebels.

Clearly now Lib-Dems / Labour = Remain

Tory/ Brexit = Leave

The unknown quantity is the Brexit Party and how much they will impact the labour / Tory vote.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Isn't Labour's policy a second referendum, LibDems revoke Article 50, Conservatives a deal and Brexit Party no deal?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

i think Labour have many different positions on brexit not sure which one will make it to there worthless manifesto.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

No Labour policy is to renegotiate the deal so that we stay in the SM & CU (so BRINO) then have a referendum on that deal and remain, where they would campaign for remain.

So the referendum choice would be BRINO or Remain. Not really a choice is it? Plus they would campaign for remain making them a remain party

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Agreed, Labour need to decide their position and quickly.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Labour: We didn't like the referendum result, so we want another one.

Lib Dems: We didn't like the referendum result, so we're cancelling it.

Conservative: We weren't happy with the unexpected result, but we will give it a go.

Brexit: Why are we still here?

UK Voters: eeny, meeny, miny, moe . . that's where the cross will go :D

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

To which the EU would in no doubt be collectively saying WTF?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

while rolling about on the floor, like a remake of the old 'smash' adverts :D

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I sense a theme here: Can you trust the Tories?

Boris Johnson repeats his false claim that extending Brexit costs £1 billion a month

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Erm, those were a year before the 2017 Election - was she just very slow in responding to their "demands"?

Must be a new definition of "snap election" when it happens 12 months later... ;)

---------- Post added at 17:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:23 ----------

Bless...

Course you are (if doing it a year later counts... :D ).

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------

Conservatives We didn't like the House of Commons General Election vote result, so we want another one.

Conservatives: We didn't like the House of Commons WAB vote result, so we're cancelling it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Apart from anything else, it won't have been Boris who came up with that number, it will have been the Civil Service.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It's not the number, it's Boris and his incorrect use of it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Often you seem to seek a reason why the truth cannot be correct? Just face it, he lied and lied again. This will be his undoing ...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Boris doesn't lie. Even when he contradicts himself.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Was it Boris?
All that a Minister or Prime Minister will ask of the civil Service is "what is the figure for X?". What interpretation is placed on that and what, if any, clarification is sought by the civil service, is not down to the asker of the question.
Link
But the rebate is based upon getting 66% back of the difference between what we're expected to pay and what we get back. Therefore the more we get back the less rebate there is. 66% of anything we get back is effectively directly funded by the UK, because the rebate is reduced by that 66%. Even if our net contributions were zero, 66% of the money we get back has been funded by the UK, not the EU. Therefore much more than 66% of any money we get back, has come from the UK.



The mere fact that it takes a 66% rebate to reach contributions of anything near a fair amount, shows how much we are expected to contribute. If a business was handing out 66% discounts constantly, it would be ruled that that the original base prices were unfair and excessive. The EU is planning to ditch the rebates, so it will represent our actual potential future contribution, even if it's only related to a customs union.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

When “trying” to be condescending it’s always better if you actually have some kind of high ground to be condescending from. Which you don’t, so makes you look a bit, well...........

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

---------- Post added at 20:32 ---------- Previous post was at 20:29 ----------

If a number is a number, and the number has been agreed - how can any use of it be incorrect?

What would be the correct use of the number?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Well, that's what the Conservatives are saying. There is no credible evidence to the contrary, this is just a smear.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion [Banned: jfman]
 

wonder if anyone will ask Mark Francois what time the country supposed to explode today as he claimed it would if we didn't leave today

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

We are one of the largest of the world's economies. Hardly a position of weakness.

We will not sign any trade deals unless it is in our own interests to do so, and all this nonsense about negotiating away the NHS is peddled as Labour's latest wheeze to try to avert the public gaze from their own vision of the future, which is frankly horrifying.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion [Banned: jfman]
 

Bombardier NI operations sold to Spirit AeroSystems

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-50246299

Good thing, or bad thing for the company making Airbus parts?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion [Banned: jfman]
 

American owned companies aren't much fun to work for,i wish the employees luck especially after brexit.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion [Banned: jfman]
 

A lot has happened since then, we have the next good thing to look forward to, a tool which keeps Britain ticking over nicely and calmly, it's called democracy and we kick out the treacherous MPs who have defied their 2017 pledges. Already several MPs have stood down and are not contesting in their seats because they jolly well know they'd get a damn thrashing via the ballot box for ignoring their constituents wishes to the leave the EU.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

We are indeed one of the worlds largest economies, i don't think anyone would disagree with that at all BUT are we one of the worlds largest economies BECAUSE of our EU membership or DESPITE it. Thats the question that should be asked and answered.

If you don't think that the UK will bend over when it comes to trade deals, especially with economic super powers then I'm sorry but you're misguided.

US will want access to the NHS
Chine will want visas
India will want visas

I'll bookmark this post so we can come back to it if/when a brexit ever happens......

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion [Banned: jfman]
 

I must admit i had decided some time ago that i couldn't support the conservative party until the traitors where kicked out,this election will put the party back on track to where it should be.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Wanting and Getting are two different things.

If these countries have a surplus which they want to sell to us, they do it on our terms. If they don't like that, they can simply reduce their output :p:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

We will still be trading with the EU more or less as we do now, so why is that significant?

And what the US, China and India want and what they get will be two different things. It's strange that some people believe that we would sign up for something that disadvantaged us. Why would we do that?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You have no idea what our trade terms will be, so lets put that assumption to bed straight away.

---------- Post added at 15:42 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------

A very simplistic way of looking at it... you missed out the other part of the equation which is 'demand'


I'd be willing to wager that in trade talks with the major economies we will pretty much have terms dictated to us...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

aah yes, demand.

No problem, China & India will have trade relations with the EU.
We will buy their goods from the EU (Ireland) which cuts out huge transport costs and giving China & India something for nothing ;) :D :p:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Wasn't one of the reasons for leaving so that we are able to strike our own trade agreements with the major economies....?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

On our terms, not theirs.

And of course, Ireland, being on the doorstep and speaking the same language, must have advantages for a large corporation to develop a nice import/export business between the EU and UK . . if the EU has what we need, why go to China?

Good for the UK, good for Ireland and the EU . . done deal, no need to thank me :p:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

And with the border in the Irish sea they won't know what's hit them;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

UK = 2.25% of the world GDP, EU = 16.25% of the world GDP.

Bigger means better deals...

---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

That sort of logic explains why you think Brexit is a good thing... ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Just trying to fit in here Hugh, going with the flow . . ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Happy Brexit day everybody ! You know, you're right, nothings changed ;).

If Bozza ever does get Brino delivered, we'll just be paying the same with no benefits or influence or trade. So that's something to look forward to !

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Personally I am quite clear in my mind who is responsible for Brexit not being delivered last night, and it isn’t Boris Johnson.

I am hoping for a clear Tory majority next month, the WAB passed into law at double quick time, and the UK out of the EU as early as possible (though I accept the Christmas holidays might mean this is not until early to mid January, there’s no reason for it to take until the 31st).

The WAB is agreed with the EU, the Parliament that planned to obfuscate and amend it into oblivion is finally gone. Anyone who actually wants us out of the EU need only vote for their local Tory to make this happen.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The WAB isn't Brexit though is it ? Economically it will leave us poorer. I genuinely don't know how anyone can think its a good deal - and i don't think many Brexiters do either. Logic has gone out of the window in the bid to claim 'we won'. Just seems to be a vehicle leave Bozza as PM which is all important (to him anyway). The damage done to the country will be there long after he's gone.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The WAB is not a deal. Any deal with the EU for future trade etc can only start to be negotiated after the WAB has passed.

No WAB = No Deal. Get your logic around that.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

When are people finally going to get it.:mad:
Whatever version of the WA you're talking about, is NOT an ongoing deal. It is a "transitional, unambiguously limited in time" arrangement. Brexit still happens at the end of next year. It is NOT a deal in the way that Remainers use the term "deal". Never has been, never could be. Article 50 rules that out.


A typical example was a while ago(can't track down the links etc), where a Remainer stated that Leave supporters had incorrectly claimed that getting a deal would be easy. We're NOT at that stage of even beginning to negotiate one. Misleading as usual.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That's the worst part, the difficult bit is yet to come. The 'transitional arrangement', if you like to call that, is the easy bit.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Getting a deal is not easy as you need to get the WAB done first and that's not proving easy!

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You don't need to do anything first. Any WA is optional. According to Article 50, it is up to the EU to try and negotiate one.
Link

Article 50.2

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It’s good to be back. :)

I’m going to take a third spin of the dice to say I don’t think we will leave the EU on 31st January.

Interesting we’d rather import NHS staff than train them.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Even the likes of Germany have to import medical staff from around the world. Even high spending Sweden has its problems.
Link

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I’m sure the poor, the unemployed and hard working underpaid NHS staff will take comfort at their opportunities and wages being stifled by people from overseas.

The fact EU member states do this will surely put them at ease.

Interestingly England were 23rd in the Healthcare Access and Quality Index, so clearly there’s work to be done. Employment opportunities for people here, paying taxes here and not for people sending half their wages back from wherever they came from.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

This is one of the reasons along with other reasons on why Brits don't apply.

https://www.rcn.org.uk/news-and-even...een-a-disaster

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Pay them more then. That's the point - we don't want our workers terms and conditions undermined by excess supply coming from overseas.

Or is this selective market designed to benefit the few, not the many?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I don't need to know how much a nurse is paid to apply the principles of supply and demand. There's excess demand, it should force prices up.

Except we are now, despite making a song and dance about freedom of movement having to end to support our workforce, importing a workforce?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Getting a deal should be easy. We've had two Withdrawal Agreements with the EU. It was the hung Parliament that failed to ratify it, remember?

As long as we get a Conservative majority after the election, we should be able to achieve what we want in about 12 months.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Quite right facts and a good rant don't go together.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The facts are if we aren't paying enough we won't get the workforce from our own population. People will go and do something else.

Basic supply and demand.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Any shortages are not in all areas, and freedom of movement also means letting in the dross and various criminals. That adds further to any demand.


EG There was a documentary where a Slovakian couple came here with twenty-two of their children and grandchildren. Taking up multiple houses in Rotherham, where it was claimed that there were 6,000 Slovakians(or perhaps Slovakia Roma more specifically) just in Rotherham. Of course they all now had to be supported by benefits, NHS, interpreters, welfare advisors, etc. Their contribution to the UK was less than zilch. Of course Slovakia benefited from our losses.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That's a side issue.

Why are we, having decided to take your stance, undermining the terms and conditions of hard working nurses? Why aren't we training our unemployed?

Why can foreigners come for nurses jobs and drive down wages but not yours or mine?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

So what other high paying jobs are they going into? That for me is the unexplained mystery. They know the pay levels and conditions before they even start the degree course.

The central problem with employment pf medical staff, is that they know there is always locum work readily available because they have resigned from the NHS. Difficult to clamp down down on, but needs doing as the situation isn't going to improve any other way. GPs can be paid so much, that they can retire early or work part-time. Again a situation that cannot be sustained.

It was highlighted back in 1980 that the increase in the number of women training to be doctors was going to be a problem. Somebody from the medical school at Birmingham, pointed out that it took twice as many women to be trained to end up with a trained female doctor, than it took men to end up with a male doctor. That was because so many women dropped out or didn't continue. Probably nowadays that isn't so severe, but that impact will still be there.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Depends what job you have.

Foreign footballers don't seem to have driven wages down, on the other hand it seems the construction trade has been hit badly :p:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You don’t need to know - if you offer higher wages and better terms and conditions it stands to reason you’ll get more applicants.


Now we need to reduce the pay and working conditions of GPs?

Utterly astonishing.

Women back to the kitchens?

What a truly progressive future you’ve outlined here.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

How are they driving down the wages of nurses? The pay levels are set nationally and by a pay body.



Much of the shortages are contrived in the sense that minimum staffing levels were brought in, when they weren't apparently needed before. Overnight a massive increase in shortages appeared from nowhere.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

All wages are set by someone in order to fill vacancies. The fact it’s a national body is a red herring.

However rather than pay the going rate we want to undercut our own population. Taking back control indeed.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Yep, moving the goalposts is a common scenario where things have turned for the worse.

My cholesterol level was 'suddenly' higher than it has been for 30 years when they changed the tolerance levels :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Agreed. In fact, we penalised our own aspiring Nurses by taking away their bursary and forcing them to take out loans. We also ensured that they cannot afford to live in our Capital city:

Warning nurses need to earn extra £10,500 ‘to afford London rent’

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

People having to pay 'exorbitant' rent isn't the fault of the people paying their wages.

High rent is the 'supply & demand' of the rental housing market.

Do you not think that road sweepers, shop assistants, bus drivers etc etc are paying rents out of proportion to their wages?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Still doesn't answer the question of which other high paying jobs they are moving into.


It is widely acknowledged that Labour was too generous with the new GP contracts. How many other people can afford at such a relatively young age(eg in their 40s) to work part-time and maintain their standard of living.
Link from 2007.

I was just pointing out that actual experience and concerns of somebody involved in training doctors at the time, at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham.



What proportion of the part-time GPs are female?


How is that meant to help with GP shortages?


Becoming a nurse(or doctor) shouldn't be driven purely by money or status. That would attract the wrong people.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

And that is due to the housing crisis which has been the result of poor government housing policy over the past few decades don't you agree?..

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Nurses argued for degree level training, so why should they be subject to student loans in the same way as students in other subjects are? As Martin Lewis keeps trying to point out, most students pay little or nothing off their student loans. They are not loans in the general context.

Under the "supply and demand" principle, aren't those higher rents a result of having enough people that can pay them? If there weren't enough people who could afford it, the rents would have to drop.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I'd imagine the choice of paying what is asked or living on the street is an easy one to make

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Indeed, but carries through to decisions made based on the employment opportunities available. If a nurses salary isn’t competitive people will do something else.

However rather than pay the going rate, determined by supply and demand, the Government wants to plug the gap with foreigners!

---------- Post added at 13:50 ---------- Previous post was at 13:47 ----------

Our entire point is that other employment opportunities (e.g. those that can pay the rent or get a mortgage) are better. However rather than pay the rate to attract people we are going to import labour and exacerbate the housing crisis. I didn’t see that on the side of a bus.

“Drive down wages, drive up living costs.”

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Hasn't in any way shown how/why road sweepers, shop assistants and bus drivers can afford their rent

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That’s irrelevant to the point I’m making. They could have wealthy partners, huge inheritances, drug dealing, benefit fraud or prostitution for all I know.

We have an under-supply of nurses. Rather than pay more (as the employment market dictates) we are deciding to import cheap labour from overseas rather than upskill British workers into higher paying jobs.

It’s absolutely scandalous.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

So much for British jobs for British workers...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

:D

Can't have that and immigration at the same time ;)

---------- Post added at 14:47 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------

so could nurses and junior doctors ;)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

There's a real risk that, as the largest employer in the country, if the NHS went down this route it might make people question what the point of Brexit is at all if the little guy still gets his/her job undermined by imported labour.

It wasn't all so the rich could avoid an EU tax directive, was it?

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I think they're referring to the one where the UK has similar rules already in place.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

“Similar” is not a synonym of “identical”.

---------- Post added at 16:54 ---------- Previous post was at 16:53 ----------

It’s hardly a doubtful point - it’s a Government proposal!

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

If it has the same impact and just involves different forms and other admin matters, to all intents and purposes it is identical.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Nowhere, anywhere, will you find it in print that it exclusively deals with administrative matters.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Wow, Green Party leader, Caroline Lucas seen taking side swipe at Lib Dems... with "colourful" language...

https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/s...41966678757376 (Caution: Contains F word from Lucas)

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

So what are the major differences? You do the research this time. I've already done it.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You haven't - you are simply peddling a myth based on one sentence published by the Government.

They aren't likely to publicise the loopholes they are leaving open for investment funds. It's your contention that they are identical, yet nowhere can you find authoritative evidence.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

And of course you've got a huge amount of authoritative evidence, on this or anything else for that matter.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It's not my role to justify your floundering arguments.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Your contention/argument is that there are loopholes with an particular EU directive. Where have you justified that? And I don't mean mere wild unfounded speculation.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

That's not my contention at all. My contention is that the UK implementation varies and these are not solely administrative variation. Your own link, posted previously, described the variation as largely administrative.

As you know, largely does not mean wholly or exclusively.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Any chance of examples of those differences and loopholes?
Link

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

“Primarily”. Your own evidence points towards there being other changes involved. Thank you for proving my point.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The quote is about what the UK already had in place BEFORE the EU directive.
Still waiting for concrete examples of differences and loopholes that are there currently and will exist after the directive is implemented as of 1st Jan 2020.The bill as a whole is 7 pages long.


EgMassive detailed changes required.:rolleyes:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

You are the one who keeps linking to the article that says “primarily”. Earlier you claimed it was solely of an administrative nature which is clearly not true - otherwise it would have said that and left no doubt over the matter.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

It's still ALL TRUE about what the UK already has in place, BEFORE any directive comes into force. Your contention is that there are loopholes and still will be after the directive is implemented.

Still absolutely no examples of material differences and loopholes.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-n...hore-accounts/

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

BREAKING: EU to bring Legal case against UK over failure to name new EU Commissioner...

https://news.sky.com/story/eu-legal-...ioner-11861369

Oh you cretinous and corrupt fools, just chuck us out, we the 17.4 Million of us, won't care.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Surely that would be up to the next government to choose after the election.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I've said it before. We should nominate Nigel Farage, which should ensure that they don't grant us any more extensions.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The Johnson government had apparently said it was unable to, under UK law to nominate a new EU Commissioner because the UK was in the lead-up to general election but let's not forget, one of the main reasons for wanting to leave this rat invested corrupt EU entity, is that the European Commission has repeatedly pointed out that EU law trumps domestic law of their Member States.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

or we could appoint Jeremy Clarkson, seeing as he never did get the PM job :D

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Not in every aspect of UK law, and certainly not (yet) anything to do with national or local elections.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

They would give us unlimited extensions just to see the look on his face!