Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

Nody wrote: »

I'd argue UK has not changed their position (which is we the English British get all the benefits and EU get to suck a lollypop and like it) as much as their wording of their position when EU said, "Eeh, no, that's not happening because facts & reality". The Brexiteers still think they can get what they though they could get 3.5 years ago; they have only been moving the chairs on the Titanic around to make it look more aesthetically pleasing to the EU.

I would argue the UK has changed its position. The UK made it clear (and again, this slide is not an offer, it is an explanation to the EU itself of the different forms an agreement could take) that they wanted far more than the Canada deal. Remember Canada +++?

Now they are faced with No Deal they are demanding that the EU offer them what they already rejected (and again it was never actually offered) so this direct tweeting to the EU from No 10 asking why they won't give them what they never offered is bizarre.

sondagefaux

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Thanks, I know about the WA and about the PD and I know that the WA is the international agreement bit and the PD is the words bit that is non-binding so not sure why you felt the need to restate it. The slide Barnier presented showed an eventual deal scenario if the UK does not rescind red lines. The what is going on bit was answered in post 6904

Firstly, your question, with accompanying last paragraph talking about the Barnier slide is very similar to the question tweeted out by the No. 10 Downing Street press office, minus the actual slide.

Secondly, I didn't think that post answered your/Downing Street's question fully. Feel free to disagree.

Regarding Canada, the EU said in March 2018 that the UK won't get a deal similar to Canada's unless it accepts a great deal more on Level Playing Field provisions, because of its geographical proximity to the EU and because of the existing high levels of trade between the EU and the UK.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

I would argue the UK has changed its position. The UK made it clear (and again, this slide is not an offer, it is an explanation to the EU itself of the different forms an agreement could take) that they wanted far more than the Canada deal. Remember Canada +++?

Now they are faced with No Deal they are demanding that the EU offer them what they already rejected (and again it was never actually offered) so this direct tweeting to the EU from No 10 asking why they won't give them what they never offered is bizarre.

It is totally clear that the UK changed its position. The 'offer' was made to May over two years ago (as a suggestion by Barnier). Brexit UK under Johnson has gone for a much harder Brexit, thus nullifying the original suggestion.

CelticRambler

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The policy goal appears to be to kill off the low wage/skill portion of the economy, particularly that that relies on immigrant labour.

Well, I suppose all those unemployed car-plant workers in the Northern Counties can re-skill as fruit-pickers and move to the South East ... though that'd technically make them economic migrants, wouldn't it?

CelticRambler

I see, too, from that Guardian link that the UK is going to refuse entry to French and Italians who travel using their national ID alone. That's going to make for an interesting spectacle at the border posts unless the UK mounts a large-scale information campaign to remind the French that their national ID - accepted all across Europe - isn't good enough for the Brits.

sondagefaux

Peregrinus wrote: »

There are better solutions, involving slightly less humiliating, slightly more mutual, climbdowns. The UK is steamed up about, e.g., subjecting itself to ECJ jurisdiction, but I think they can understand why the EU is steamed up about the possiblity of dumping, undermining of standards, etc that the EU faces. So they need to find agreement on some mechanism for ensuring that can't happen which isn't direct submission to ECJ jurisdiction. Which we know is possible, because it has been done in other cases, e.g. for EFTA countries.

This would still require quite a lot of climbing down by the UK, albeit with a bit of face-saving as well, and a certain amount of blustering denial - all of which is fine, from an EU point of view. We know the UK is capable of that because, if they weren't, there would never have been a Withdrawal Agreement.

The EU is not proposing that the UK be under the direct jurisdiction of the ECJ, nor is it proposing that it be under indirect jurisdiction of the ECJ.

It wants the ECJ to continue to have jurisdiction over matters of relevant EU law.

Let's say there's a mutually agreed measure on baby clothes in a trade agreement, which both parties implement through their own laws.

The EU passes a Directive to implement the measure.

The UK passes an Act of Parliament to implement the measure.

The UK says the EU Directive is flawed and does not implement the measure correctly in EU law. The Commission says that it does.

Which court decides whether this EU law, the Directive, does or does not implement the measure correctly? The ECJ.

Disputes over whether the UK Act implements the measure correctly will be decided by the UK courts.

Neither court system will have any jurisdiction over the other party's laws.

Sam Russell

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51548976

Coronavirus: Jaguar Land Rover 'shipping parts in suitcases'

If Land Rover are shipping parts in suitcases because of the virus, I wonder how it will work when there are customs checks?

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you will find that any benefits will be tied to work. With unskilled immigration gone, there will be plenty of low level, low paid jobs looking for people and my guess is that the Tories will say that you must work or lose your benefits. So companies get their workforce, unemployment falls.

Everyone wins. Except of course wages won't rise since the employer effectively has a tied in workforce.

I knew I was right, didn't think it would be so quick for them to state it.

Immigration: firms will need to train more UK workers, says Priti Patel

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/19/immigration-firms-will-need-to-train-more-uk-workers-says-priti-patel?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Translate

johnnyskeleton

Xertz wrote: »

The other problem is if they have more or less stated that they can’t and won’t be bound by any agreement as is impinges upon their sovereignty.
How do you even negotiate anything with someone who says that?
It’s like the “Freemen of the Land” type logic and they’re blatantly negotiating in bad faith.

Their basic premise is that the UK state should not have the authority to sign treaties, as no future government should be bound by them. That’s basically saying that international agreements are impossible.

But strangely have no problem with the World Trade Organisation (which is a body of unelected bureaucrats who impose their most favoured nations rules in the most anti democratic way possible, backed up by a Court which the UK electorate cannot directly elect), which Trump seems to have a problem with.

Or the UN, which the UK has an ill deserved veto over and which is the body that created the Global Compact on Migration which many Brexiteers seem to think is a plan by the EU to force the UK to take more migrants and whose general assembly has recently voted in favour of the UK giving up Sovereignty over the Chagos Islands.

Or NATO, which could oblige, in the event of an invasion, UK troops to fight in a foreign war.

Igotadose

Leroy42 wrote: »

I knew I was right, didn't think it would be so quick for them to state it.

Immigration: firms will need to train more UK workers, says Priti Patel

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/19/immigration-firms-will-need-to-train-more-uk-workers-says-priti-patel?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Translate

So, if there were a real labour movement in the UK, it'd be time to unionize like crazy as employers can't bring in as many low-paid, foreign workers to take jobs.
And even without that, prices should start going up as workers could hold out for better pay.
Why do I think neither of these will be allowed to happen?

MrMusician18

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you will find that any benefits will be tied to work. With unskilled immigration gone, there will be plenty of low level, low paid jobs looking for people and my guess is that the Tories will say that you must work or lose your benefits. So companies get their workforce, unemployment falls.

Everyone wins. Except of course wages won't rise since the employer effectively has a tied in workforce.

There are a lot of moving parts in the labour market but if this policy causes a labour shortage, you'd expect wages to rise. Although not announced today, you see chatter in the right wing press about a more relaxed temporary worker visa too to also become available. This could ease pressure on fruit picking and the like - but then does it matter if said industry survives when it's worth almost nothing to the overall economy?

ancapailldorcha

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

But strangely have no problem with the World Trade Organisation (which is a body of unelected bureaucrats who impose their most favoured nations rules in the most anti democratic way possible, backed up by a Court which the UK electorate cannot directly elect), which Trump seems to have a problem with.

Or the UN, which the UK has an ill deserved veto over and which is the body that created the Global Compact on Migration which many Brexiteers seem to think is a plan by the EU to force the UK to take more migrants and whose general assembly has recently voted in favour of the UK giving up Sovereignty over the Chagos Islands.

Or NATO, which could oblige, in the event of an invasion, UK troops to fight in a foreign war.

Right but what people, very much including myself have been doing wrong for so many years is that we have been using facts to counter a narrative based on emotion.

People feel oppressed by the EU. They feel oppressed by EU regulations. They feel that they have lost their national sovereignty and autonomy. Feelings are not facts and therefore they cannot be refuted by citing scientific studies and/or expert opinion though the latter has been nuked by the "loony liberal elite" poison that's effectively toxified that well.

Everything you've said above is correct but these are facts. If someone is convinced that there is a secret conspiracy amongst EU politicians to flood their country with migrants then the implication is that the elite media which only happens to be that which doesn't feature it as top priority each day is either corrupt and in on it or incompetent and useless.

I think the only way forward is for the UK to drink from the poisoned chalice. Facts haven't cut it for a while and until the luxury of being free from the consequences of believing insipid nonsense is stripped away either in the form of close alignment with Brussels or shortages and queues at Dover then the English and the Welsh can't progress as societies.

Leroy42

MrMusician18 wrote: »

There are a lot of moving parts in the labour market but if this policy causes a labour shortage, you'd expect wages to rise. Although not announced today, you see chatter in the right wing press about a more relaxed temporary worker visa too to also become available. This could ease pressure on fruit picking and the like - but then does it matter if said industry survives when it's worth almost nothing to the overall economy?

It's not designed to create a shortage, it is designed, as Patel has alluded to, or getting all those currently economically inactive to do the jobs.

And you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works.

A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit. And you can bet these will be zero hours contracts and the likes.

But this is the natural progression of the no immigration policy that so many seemed excited by.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

It's not designed to create a shortage, it is designed, as Patel has alluded to, or getting all those currently economically inactive to do the jobs.

And you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works.

A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit. And you can bet these will be zero hours contracts and the likes.

But this is the natural progression of the no immigration policy that so many seemed excited by.

Exactly. As Alex Andreou once said, you either breed a workforce or you import it.

What's quite perverse here is that a lot of younger people feel like their future has been stolen by the older generations. It's more pronounced here than elsewhere I think because of how much the country's economy is concentrated in the southeast while the rest has been left to rot.

The implication is that along with the wealth that younger people feel, justifiably or not has been denied to them by their elders, said elders may now be demanding their last resource, time. We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.

Lemming

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The UK had published it's new immigration regime this morning, effectively closing the door to low skill migration. This points based system is to take effect from January and there doesn't appear to be any transition period envisaged.

The policy goal appears to be to kill off the low wage/skill portion of the economy, particularly that that relies on immigrant labour. It's a rather radical shake up that will see many UK companies become uncompetitive, particularly those difficult to automate. As these jobs aren't currently filled by Brits, the UK government doesn't seem to think they're important. Looks like they're forgetting that these roles largely serve the British economy.

This looks to be less about immigration - although the government are clearly making hay with the dog-whistle - and more about attacking the domestic benefits system (whilst dressing it all up as a focus on immigration). The numbers cited seem suspect, especially the "reduce EU migration by up to 90,000" when the current number is around that figure if I recall, or the 8 million Britons cited includes students, pensioners, and carers alongside the long-term unemployed. I dare say it probably also includes disabled folk too. Coming from Patel, this smells like the worst excesses of Victorian work-house cruelty being prepared to serve up all whilst falling short of the numbers that businesses will be able to realistically hire and retain as productive employees.

ArthurDayne

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Exactly. As Alex Andreou once said, you either breed a workforce or you import it.

What's quite perverse here is that a lot of younger people feel like their future has been stolen by the older generations. It's more pronounced here than elsewhere I think because of how much the country's economy is concentrated in the southeast while the rest has been left to rot.

The implication is that along with the wealth that younger people feel, justifiably or not has been denied to them by their elders, said elders may now be demanding their last resource, time. We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.

Particularly true when you consider that the post-war generation of the UK (and indeed Western Europe generally) were likely the most privileged generation in history — at a time where peace, an improving sense of equality and social welfare, economic transformation, improving standards of healthcare, more liberal thinking, as well the freedom to not be boxed in by borders allowed them unprecedented opportunity that no generation had known before. I appreciate that the Cold War was ongoing, but that ultimately culminated in the ‘glory days’ of the 90s, where many of that generation were able to benefit from the economic profligacy of that heady time when it seemed that Western civilisation had achieved the final victory.

Yet that generation talks now as if they had lived through some great hardship foisted upon them by ghouls and gargoyles in Brussels. They talk as if they themselves had stormed the beaches of Normandy, and huddled from the German bombers in Tube stations. They speak as if they were the last bastion of an older tougher world, when really they were the first of a newer and more widely prosperous one.

serfboard

Leroy42 wrote: »

You have to consider the views of the likes of Raab and Patel, who wrote in a book that the UK worker was unproductive and lazy. On top of that, it is taken that many in the UK don't want the type of jobs that unskilled immigrant were prepared to do.

Taken together, I don't think it is a stretch that they will demand that UK workers fill any void left behind. "you wanted to get rid of immigrants, well we did and now we need you to pick the fruit, man the pubs etc". And if you don't you will lose your benefits.

Leroy42 wrote: »

It's not designed to create a shortage, it is designed, as Patel has alluded to, or getting all those currently economically inactive to do the jobs.

And you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works.

A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.

There is the right-wing narrative, from the likes of Patel, that people on welfare are lazy - they could work but don't want to.

So now, they're going to take these lazy people and make them work? What employer is going to welcome these lazy people being forced on them?

And the sanction is what? Withdraw benefits? And what do they expect people to do then? Beg? Steal? Say you steal for food. You get locked up. How much does that cost? I've seen a figure that says it costs 100 grand a year, or 2,000 a week. So you're spending 2,000 to save 200?

It's such complete horseh1t, but it's also a depressing reminder of how much the Tories despise poor people.

ambro25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

(...)

I think the only way forward is for the UK to drink from the poisoned chalice. Facts haven't cut it for a while and until the luxury of being free from the consequences of believing insipid nonsense is stripped away either in the form of close alignment with Brussels or shortages and queues at Dover then the English and the Welsh can't progress as societies.

'took you a while, glad you got there (IIRC)

For all of today's furore, one has to remember that this policy is a draft, so it may well get diluted yet, if not terminally shelved. Methinks today's is part and parcel of the same politico-moral boundaries-testing, as all the other kites flown by Johnson's government since the General Election.

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

... you do that by forcing them to take the jobs, regardless of suitability or ability. People focus on fruit pickers but it will include cleaners, delivery people, home help, public works.

A captive work force. Take this job at the rate we decide or lose your child benefit. And you can bet these will be zero hours contracts and the likes.

It's all suspiciously reminiscent of the US, where benefits don't exist in any meaningful way, where unemployment is supposedly at an all-time low, yet the lowest income earners have to work two or three jobs simultaneously to make ends meet.

I suppose if nothing else good comes from Brexit, at least there's an outside chance that the Leavers might realise just how much those pesky European immigrants contributed to the benefits safety net enjoyed by the natives.

54and56

Excellent post from the excellent Peter Foster on #10's assertion that the EU is moving the goalposts on the offer of a Canada + type deal.

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1230096832497405957

Capt'n Midnight

Leroy42 wrote: »

I knew I was right, didn't think it would be so quick for them to state it.

Immigration: firms will need to train more UK workers, says Priti Patel

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/19/immigration-firms-will-need-to-train-more-uk-workers-says-priti-patel?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Translate

There's a £2.5bn Apprenticeship Levy. Even though it's free money 1/3rd of firms are not claiming it. There's a huge disconnect somewhere and it won't be solved by Priti lip service.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-51505625?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c0rep9l3mj7t/apprenticeships&link_location=live-reporting-correspondent

This suggests that some large companies seem happier to treat the levy simply like an extra tax and say goodbye to the money involved, rather than take advantage of it to improve the skills of younger workers.

ancapailldorcha

ambro25 wrote: »

'took you a while, glad you got there (IIRC)

For all of today's furore, one has to remember that this policy is a draft, so it may well get diluted yet, if not terminally shelved. Methinks today's is part and parcel of the same politico-moral boundaries-testing, as all the other kites flown by Johnson's government since the General Election.

In fairness, I'm trying to avoid falling into the cognitive trap of tarring millions of people with a very broad brush. A task made much more difficult by the result of last year's election.

Lemming

Listening to BBC4 radio on the way home from work and it would appear that a lot of business interests - who lamentably stayed silent through Wrexsh1t - are now, finding their voices in alarm however much too late it may be being not just a cent short but the full euro to boot. Patel's numbers of 8 million Britons are also being absolutely derided as absolutely delusional thinking by said same business groups, not least of all the CBI.

There were some interviews [in the context of perceived immigration concerns] with folk in a town - I think it was somewhere in Derbyshire - and if folk are still trying to give millions of people the benefit of the doubt, I'll tell you that listening to some of those interviews would dissuade you from any sense of compassion or generosity. Staggering in the ignorance and absolute lack of self awareness on display. Everything from the woman complaining that local services were all just "too busy" to the man talking about seeing his son & his friends unable to get minimum wage jobs and yet foreigners were "cheap labour" without so much as a pause for thought of what he was saying, or trying to lay it on about his son "having to go to university and taking on that debt" instead of staying local in a dead-end job on minimum wage. Hmmmmm, let me think about that one for a se ... nope.

rogue-entity

Christy42 wrote: »

Are the traitors people with different political opinions than themselves? That seems pretty terrifying that they want to lock people up for having a different political opinion

I'd argue that the real 'traitors' are those in the Tories who acquired an EU passport ostensibly to keep the very rights they've voted away for everyone else. If nothing else, they're magnanimous hypocrites.

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think you will find that any benefits will be tied to work. With unskilled immigration gone, there will be plenty of low level, low paid jobs looking for people and my guess is that the Tories will say that you must work or lose your benefits. So companies get their workforce, unemployment falls.

Everyone wins. Except of course wages won't rise since the employer effectively has a tied in workforce.

And those will be the very same group who won't have the benefit of being able to seek work elsewhere as the immigration systems of most countries preference; the highly skilled, the famous, the wealthy and intermarriage.

This only applies to some of the traditional jobs that the British feel are beneath them, demeaning, don't pay what they feel entitled to etc; jobs that command skills will either see visas being issued or the relevant work being outsourced. There are parallels to be drawn with the US labour market and the exploitation of the H1B Visa system in particular.

Leroy42 wrote: »

You have to consider the views of the likes of Raab and Patel, who wrote in a book that the UK worker was unproductive and lazy. On top of that, it is taken that many in the UK don't want the type of jobs that unskilled immigrant were prepared to do.

Taken together, I don't think it is a stretch that they will demand that UK workers fill any void left behind. "you wanted to get rid of immigrants, well we did and now we need you to pick the fruit, man the pubs etc". And if you don't you will lose your benefits.

What it won't do is increase costs to business as they will effectively have access to a captive work force. The person can up and quit as they would leave with nothing, and get no support.

As Ireland is the only other place they could move to (the CTA means freedom of movement between Ireland and the UK remains intact), I wonder how many would consider moving here

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Exactly. As Alex Andreou once said, you either breed a workforce or you import it.

What's quite perverse here is that a lot of younger people feel like their future has been stolen by the older generations. It's more pronounced here than elsewhere I think because of how much the country's economy is concentrated in the southeast while the rest has been left to rot.

The implication is that along with the wealth that younger people feel, justifiably or not has been denied to them by their elders, said elders may now be demanding their last resource, time. We have an ageing population and a social care system which is bursting at the seams so if this goes ahead then working as a care worker for benefits seems probable.

A lot of those younger folk, are ones I would expect to look at moving here but I also know folk in the UK who have bought their own home and/or have strong family ties and are ostensibly trapped.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1230116164434583553

Priti Patel think thats the economically inactive will fill the jobs. She will probably be one of them on her current form.

What really stood out from this was this stat:

The Home Office estimates 70% of EU workers currently in the UK would not meet the requirements if applying under the new system.

That is terrifying!

An Ciarraioch

The departing Lib Dem MEPs leave a food hamper for FF's incoming Barry Andrews:

https://twitter.com/Andrews4Europe/status/1230104830930300930

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/CorbynistaTeen/status/1230202817442439168

The people of the U.K are in for a lot of fun with this government.

Strazdas

Lemming wrote: »

Listening to BBC4 radio on the way home from work and it would appear that a lot of business interests - who lamentably stayed silent through Wrexsh1t - are now, finding their voices in alarm however much too late it may be being not just a cent short but the full euro to boot. Patel's numbers of 8 million Britons are also being absolutely derided as absolutely delusional thinking by said same business groups, not least of all the CBI.

There were some interviews [in the context of perceived immigration concerns] with folk in a town - I think it was somewhere in Derbyshire - and if folk are still trying to give millions of people the benefit of the doubt, I'll tell you that listening to some of those interviews would dissuade you from any sense of compassion or generosity. Staggering in the ignorance and absolute lack of self awareness on display. Everything from the woman complaining that local services were all just "too busy" to the man talking about seeing his son & his friends unable to get minimum wage jobs and yet foreigners were "cheap labour" without so much as a pause for thought of what he was saying, or trying to lay it on about his son "having to go to university and taking on that debt" instead of staying local in a dead-end job on minimum wage. Hmmmmm, let me think about that one for a se ... nope.

Let's call a spade a spade here. Most Leave voters voted Leave to stop immigrants moving to the UK (they will deny this furiously of course.....at the same time as claiming how immigrants are a huge burden to Britain).

MrMusician18

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/CorbynistaTeen/status/1230202817442439168

The people of the U.K are in for a lot of fun with this government.

There will be new fast-track NHS Visa for certain medical professionals with NHS job offers, reducing their visa fees and providing support to come to the UK with their families. Applicants will need to have a job offer from the NHS, be trained to a recognised standard and have good working English language skills.

The NHS will still have access to foreign labour, directly employed labour at least. It's other low skill areas like contract cleaners that they might have trouble filling the positions.

listermint

MrMusician18 wrote: »

There will be new fast-track NHS Visa for certain medical professionals with NHS job offers, reducing their visa fees and providing support to come to the UK with their families. Applicants will need to have a job offer from the NHS, be trained to a recognised standard and have good working English language skills.

The NHS will still have access to foreign labour, directly employed labour at least. It's other low skill areas like contract cleaners that they might have trouble filling the positions.

No one will want to move to the UK it's less attractive now than anywhere in the EU.

This is all shenanigans and it's driven by self delusion. The notion they can turn back the clock and make themselves more successful is laughable. There is doctors and nurses leaving the service as I type this ...