What's in the news?

[bovril]

I can't help but feel the economic predictions are all missing the point somewhat. The factors that led to Brexit are well documented and are not necessarily to do with balances of trade. They exist in Europe too, so it's clearly not just a British phenomenon. 

[ealingfox]

The ensuing hysterics from Momentum types was predictable but I'm sorry, that was seriously poor from Fiona Bruce on Thursday. Not being in possession of the facts was bad enough, but then, as an independent moderator, to incite derision and laughter from an impressionable audience against a panellist was embarrassing and bang out of order.

 

Given her greenness I'd hope it could be chalked up to inexperience, but when stuff like that happens you can understand why some say what they do about the Beeb these days.

Edited 20 January 2019 by ealingfox

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

This may may not be true or even relevant, I don't know anymore because you can't trust anyone or any organisation so just putting it out there.

 

 

 

 

 

The numbers: Haven't checked but the constituency & voting area figures look pretty accurate. I presume the "by party" numbers relate to who held the constituencies in 2016 - they would be inaccurate since the 2017 election.

But while those numbers are interesting, they are irrelevant to the decision-making process (though not to the party political manoeuvring). The referendum was a national vote, so the only figure that matters is the national figure: 52%-48%. There were clearly a lot of marginally pro-Leave constituencies in 2016 and a smaller number of massively pro-Remain constituencies.

 

The conclusion is "rancid", to quote the writer. MPs are elected to serve based on a wide political platform. They weren't elected as Brexit delegates in 2015.

 

Also, the referendum was only a mandate to "Leave". How we were to leave was left up to negotiations. I'm not aware of any MPs who want to ignore the referendum result (something that would be possible as it had advisory status and the courts have confirmed that the govt could revoke its notice to leave). Of course, most of those calling for a second referendum hope that the result will be reversed by public vote - but even they will have to accept defeat (for many years, at least) if Leave wins again. Some feel that a second vote is justified on the specifics of a deal - or because parliament has rejected the deal proposed.....but an awful lot of MPs are working to find a better deal.....why is their definition of Brexit any less valid than the ERG's?

 

But many, many MPs (both Labour and Tory) opposed May's deal and are working for a Softer Brexit (others trying to achieve a Harder Brexit). That is their right. We just need a democratic resolution.

 

The mirror image of the stance Mr. Maher adopts is if the vote has been 52% Remain and hard-line Remainers insisted that this was a mandate for a federal European state, acceptance of Schengen, membership of the Euro etc.....and then condemned not just anyone who wanted a second vote but anyone working to achieve a more moderate form of Remain (the status quo, "remain and reform" or whatever) labeling them as "self-serving", "rancid", "traitors" and all the rest.

 

Btw. If one accepts the idea that MPs are just "Brexit delegates" of their constituencies (I don't, but Mr. Maher seems to), then Dominic Raab, Liam Fox, Kate Hoey, Gisela Stuart, Nigel Dodds, Chris Grayling, John Redwood, Theresa Villiers and Peter Lilley are among the MPs supposedly betraying their Remain-voting constituents. The same might also apply to May herself and to Rees-Mogg (their voting areas voted Remain but each covered 2 constituencies).

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pro-brexit-mps-represent-remain-constituencies/

 

 

[Toddybad]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

The numbers: Haven't checked but the constituency & voting area figures look pretty accurate. I presume the "by party" numbers relate to who held the constituencies in 2016 - they would be inaccurate since the 2017 election.

But while those numbers are interesting, they are irrelevant to the decision-making process (though not to the party political manoeuvring). The referendum was a national vote, so the only figure that matters is the national figure: 52%-48%. There were clearly a lot of marginally pro-Leave constituencies in 2016 and a smaller number of massively pro-Remain constituencies.

 

The conclusion is "rancid", to quote the writer. MPs are elected to serve based on a wide political platform. They weren't elected as Brexit delegates in 2015.

 

Also, the referendum was only a mandate to "Leave". How we were to leave was left up to negotiations. I'm not aware of any MPs who want to ignore the referendum result (something that would be possible as it had advisory status and the courts have confirmed that the govt could revoke its notice to leave). Of course, most of those calling for a second referendum hope that the result will be reversed by public vote - but even they will have to accept defeat (for many years, at least) if Leave wins again. Some feel that a second vote is justified on the specifics of a deal - or because parliament has rejected the deal proposed.....but an awful lot of MPs are working to find a better deal.....why is their definition of Brexit any less valid than the ERG's?

 

But many, many MPs (both Labour and Tory) opposed May's deal and are working for a Softer Brexit (others trying to achieve a Harder Brexit). That is their right. We just need a democratic resolution.

 

The mirror image of the stance Mr. Maher adopts is if the vote has been 52% Remain and hard-line Remainers insisted that this was a mandate for a federal European state, acceptance of Schengen, membership of the Euro etc.....and then condemned not just anyone who wanted a second vote but anyone working to achieve a more moderate form of Remain (the status quo, "remain and reform" or whatever) labeling them as "self-serving", "rancid", "traitors" and all the rest.

 

Btw. If one accepts the idea that MPs are just "Brexit delegates" of their constituencies (I don't, but Mr. Maher seems to), then Dominic Raab, Liam Fox, Kate Hoey, Gisela Stuart, Nigel Dodds, Chris Grayling, John Redwood, Theresa Villiers and Peter Lilley are among the MPs supposedly betraying their Remain-voting constituents. The same might also apply to May herself and to Rees-Mogg (their voting areas voted Remain but each covered 2 constituencies).

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pro-brexit-mps-represent-remain-constituencies/

 

 

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

5 hours ago, Lionator said:

I've just caught up on Question Time the other night. You have a professor of European politics being shouted down for speaking the truth and a bunch of idiots cheering for Isabelle Oakeshott who hid evidence of Russian interference in the referendum. We are living in truly insane, terrifying times.

But the important question is:

 

Is Fiona Bruce a racist?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, bovril said:

I can't help but feel the economic predictions are all missing the point somewhat. The factors that led to Brexit are well documented and are not necessarily to do with balances of trade. They exist in Europe too, so it's clearly not just a British phenomenon. 

 

I think you're making an important point.

 

A lot of the British were very unhappy with "Brussels" unwillingness to listen or change from some rather strange positions. That hasn't changed, if anything Juncker seems more obtuse now than ever before. The Brits wanted some power back not to give more away to faceless bureaucrats. 

 

And then of course there was the "immigrant" issue and the EU bringing more and more poor countries in on a level footing with rich economies.

[Lionator]

5 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

But the important question is:

 

Is Fiona Bruce a racist?

No, but she's clearly a Tory (not that that should stand against her). 

[Parafox]

4 hours ago, FIF said:

 

I think you're making an important point.

 

A lot of the British were very unhappy with "Brussels" unwillingness to listen or change from some rather strange positions. That hasn't changed, if anything Juncker seems more obtuse now than ever before. The Brits wanted some power back not to give more away to faceless bureaucrats. 

 

And then of course there was the "immigrant" issue and the EU bringing more and more poor countries in on a level footing with rich economies.

The current and previous Governments have been blindly arrogant with regard to the concerns of the British voters. Under Cameron, they refused to accept the very real and loudly voiced, concerns about immigration and the pressures it was putting this country and our societal structure under. Labour were never going to be anything other than all welcoming and "right-on" fairness for all, regardless of the impact open immigration policies would have. So as bad as Cameron's mob.

Until now, all Government ministers have believed that they know better than the "plebs."

Now they've been cornered and isolated by Joe Public and they don't have a clue how to manage it because they've lost power to us, the people.

Theresa May said she would deliver on the country's majority vote of Leave The EU. She's failed miserably because she herself is a Remoaner and has no commitment to leaving. She is unable to overcome Juncker et al because she has no authority or leverage within the EU.

She sold her soul to the devil by bringing in the Irish politicians to support her. The the SNP will just be stubborn with the Krankie gloating and trying to exert some non-existant power over Westminster.

It's all a mess we never could have seen coming. 

I voted Leave and I would do again, but the time has to be right. Unfortunately the timing was wrong because we have one of the weakest PM's in history. That and Cameron's poor judgement in calling a referendum because he didn't know what else to do and had failed in his own negotiations with the EU, along with Farage and Boris and the rest bailing out has left us adrift without any serious, convincing and powerful leader. We are negotiating from a seriously weak position. 

 

[Salisbury Fox]

16 minutes ago, Lionator said:

No, but she's clearly a Tory (not that that should stand against her). 

I thought Bruce was a breath of fresh air for a programme that has been stale for sometime. I am assuming that she is getting a hard time for not letting Diane Abbott get away with talking rubbish? Let's face it, someone has to. Can't blame Bruce for Labour letting her have so much airtime.

[fuchsntf]

10 hours ago, davieG said:

Brexit: High-profile Germans plead with UK to stay in EU
18 January 2019

Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and Jens Lehmann are among the letter's signatories
Leading German figures have written to the UK asking it to stay in the EU.

The letter, published in the Times, is signed by 31 people, including the leader of the Christian Democratic Union - and likely successor to Angela Merkel - Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and former Arsenal goalkeeper Jens Lehmann.

They cited post-work pints and pantomime as beloved British habits.

But the UK's role in post-war Europe is the focus of the signatories calling for Britain to stay.

"Without your great nation, this Continent would not be what it is today," they wrote.

The letter - also signed by the chief executive of Airbus, Thomas Enders, and punk singer Campino - said the UK had helped define the European Union as a community of "freedom and prosperity".

"After the horrors of the Second World War, Britain did not give up on us," it continued.

"It has welcomed Germany back as a sovereign nation and a European power.

"This we, as Germans, have not forgotten and we are grateful."

The signatories said that they "respect the choice" of British people who want to leave the EU and, if the country wants to leave for good, "it will always have friends in Germany and Europe".

But they said the choice was not irreversible and "our door will always remain open".

'Friends across the Channel'
The letter concluded: "Britain has become part of who we are as Europeans and therefore we would miss Britain.

"We would miss the legendary British black humour and going to the pub after work hours to drink an ale. We would miss tea with milk and driving on the left-hand side of the road. And we would miss seeing the panto at Christmas.

"But more than anything else, we would miss the British people - our friends across the Channel.

"Therefore Britons should know, from the bottom of our hearts, we want them to stay."

Related

but they wouldn't miss the Brits!!   I am here with my black humour, tea and Gingers-nuts to dunk...and my whole life is a fking pantomine.

And I love noth'n more than driving on the left-hand side,while struggling with the seat-belt...We expat organise English-Theater,have Sky-uk,

organise last night of the Proms around Germany....and make the Germans laugh..!!!

 

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, Salisbury Fox said:

I thought Bruce was a breath of fresh air for a programme that has been stale for sometime. I am assuming that she is getting a hard time for not letting Diane Abbott get away with talking rubbish? Let's face it, someone has to. Can't blame Bruce for Labour letting her have so much airtime.

On this occasion Diane Abbott wasn't talking rubbish and the negativity she gets is appalling in comparison to say, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox who are serial liars and who seem to get away pretty much unscathed. Now, Diane Abbott is not front bench material, she's simply not cut out for it, she doesn't have the leadership qualities or speaking ability and really this decision should've been taken by Labour a while ago however she's still an excellent MP, an extremely intelligent Cambridge graduate who offers inspiration to groups of people who don't get as much of a voice as they deserve. 

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, Parafox said:

The current and previous Governments have been blindly arrogant with regard to the concerns of the British voters. Under Cameron, they refused to accept the very real and loudly voiced, concerns about immigration and the pressures it was putting this country and our societal structure under. Labour were never going to be anything other than all welcoming and "right-on" fairness for all, regardless of the impact open immigration policies would have. So as bad as Cameron's mob.

Until now, all Government ministers have believed that they know better than the "plebs."

Now they've been cornered and isolated by Joe Public and they don't have a clue how to manage it because they've lost power to us, the people.

Theresa May said she would deliver on the country's majority vote of Leave The EU. She's failed miserably because she herself is a Remoaner and has no commitment to leaving. She is unable to overcome Juncker et al because she has no authority or leverage within the EU.

She sold her soul to the devil by bringing in the Irish politicians to support her. The the SNP will just be stubborn with the Krankie gloating and trying to exert some non-existant power over Westminster.

It's all a mess we never could have seen coming. 

I voted Leave and I would do again, but the time has to be right. Unfortunately the timing was wrong because we have one of the weakest PM's in history. That and Cameron's poor judgement in calling a referendum because he didn't know what else to do and had failed in his own negotiations with the EU, along with Farage and Boris and the rest bailing out has left us adrift without any serious, convincing and powerful leader. We are negotiating from a seriously weak position. 

 

 

Who is "us, the people" who have supposedly taken power? Does that include us "Remoaners" or only you Brexshitters? It would be nice to know if, along with 48% of the country, I've been designated as subhuman or an alien interloper.

 

Glorying in our democratic representatives supposedly being "cornered and isolated by Joe Public" seems sinister and anti-democratic at the very least.... as does your desire for a "powerful leader".

 

Not sure who you mean by the "Irish politicians" brought in to support May? If you mean the DUP, they're elected members of the British parliament and entitled to promote the interests of their communities as they see fit. I'm not keen on them myself, but they're only supporting the Tory Govt insofar as it suits their interests - and the Tories only needed them because they performed disastrously in an election against a widely mistrusted opposition leader. If you're referring to politicians from the Irish Republic, they've just pursued their national interests through negotiations, seeking a friendly relationship with the UK but not at the cost of jeopardising their security or interests as a nation and a committed member of the EU.

 

I'm not sure why "the Krankie" would be gloating if her power is non-existent? In truth, her power over Brexit is indeed limited (30-odd MPs voting at Westminster) as May has largely ignored her - ignoring, also, the large majority of Scots who opposed Brexit. In making these scornful comments about the Scots and Irish and their valid attempts to exercise democratic influence, you come across to me as an anti-democratic English nationalist extremist.

 

You say it's "a mess we never could have seen coming", yet a lot of us DID see a mess coming. Admittedly, the mess is even greater than we could have imagined. But the UK was "negotiating from a seriously weak position" from the outset - as some of us pointed out. With the clock ticking, we were engaged in negotiations with an opposite number about 4-5 times bigger and more powerful than us - difficult enough, but we also did so despite having unrealistic expectations and no agreed govt stance, and being led by a PM whose main priority was to keep her divided party together through fudges, delays and dishonest rhetoric. Plus, the EU has its own obvious vulnerabilities so had no option to roll over and offer the super-generous deal that Brexiteers boasted we would get: "they need us more than we need them", "they can whistle for any divorce payment", they'll capitulate because of German car makers & French wine makers, "EU-UK: the easiest trade deal ever", "loads of global trade deals ready to go in March 2019", "no issue over the Irish border" etc. etc.

 

I know there have been loudly-voiced concerns about immigration - and successive govts have been complacent about this. But who are these immigrants "putting the country and societal structure under pressure"? Most EU immigrants work - often in jobs where we are short of skilled natives or in jobs unattractive to locals - and unemployment is low, isn't it? Data shows that EU immigrants pay more in tax than they use in services. So, if the extra numbers caused a shortage of schools, hospitals, housing or roads, we had the extra revenue flows to fund that. It wasn't immigrants who instituted real-terms pay cuts, or who introduced Universal Credit or the bedroom tax, or who slashed public spending and starved councils of funds, or who handed out insecure employment contracts, or who cut funding for nurse training, or who presided over mushrooming inequality while offering tax giveaways to the higher-paid and to large corporations.

 

Ain't it great? We now live in a country where being "welcoming" and espousing "fairness for all" are values to be despised as "right on".

 

 

[RobHawk]

10 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Who is "us, the people" who have supposedly taken power? Does that include us "Remoaners" or only you Brexshitters? It would be nice to know if, along with 48% of the country, I've been designated as subhuman or an alien interloper.

 

Glorying in our democratic representatives supposedly being "cornered and isolated by Joe Public" seems sinister and anti-democratic at the very least.... as does your desire for a "powerful leader".

 

Not sure who you mean by the "Irish politicians" brought in to support May? If you mean the DUP, they're elected members of the British parliament and entitled to promote the interests of their communities as they see fit. I'm not keen on them myself, but they're only supporting the Tory Govt insofar as it suits their interests - and the Tories only needed them because they performed disastrously in an election against a widely mistrusted opposition leader. If you're referring to politicians from the Irish Republic, they've just pursued their national interests through negotiations, seeking a friendly relationship with the UK but not at the cost of jeopardising their security or interests as a nation and a committed member of the EU.

 

I'm not sure why "the Krankie" would be gloating if her power is non-existent? In truth, her power over Brexit is indeed limited (30-odd MPs voting at Westminster) as May has largely ignored her - ignoring, also, the large majority of Scots who opposed Brexit. In making these scornful comments about the Scots and Irish and their valid attempts to exercise democratic influence, you come across to me as an anti-democratic English nationalist extremist.

 

You say it's "a mess we never could have seen coming", yet a lot of us DID see a mess coming. Admittedly, the mess is even greater than we could have imagined. But the UK was "negotiating from a seriously weak position" from the outset - as some of us pointed out. With the clock ticking, we were engaged in negotiations with an opposite number about 4-5 times bigger and more powerful than us - difficult enough, but we also did so despite having unrealistic expectations and no agreed govt stance, and being led by a PM whose main priority was to keep her divided party together through fudges, delays and dishonest rhetoric. Plus, the EU has its own obvious vulnerabilities so had no option to roll over and offer the super-generous deal that Brexiteers boasted we would get: "they need us more than we need them", "they can whistle for any divorce payment", they'll capitulate because of German car makers & French wine makers, "EU-UK: the easiest trade deal ever", "loads of global trade deals ready to go in March 2019", "no issue over the Irish border" etc. etc.

 

I know there have been loudly-voiced concerns about immigration - and successive govts have been complacent about this. But who are these immigrants "putting the country and societal structure under pressure"? Most EU immigrants work - often in jobs where we are short of skilled natives or in jobs unattractive to locals - and unemployment is low, isn't it? Data shows that EU immigrants pay more in tax than they use in services. So, if the extra numbers caused a shortage of schools, hospitals, housing or roads, we had the extra revenue flows to fund that. It wasn't immigrants who instituted real-terms pay cuts, or who introduced Universal Credit or the bedroom tax, or who slashed public spending and starved councils of funds, or who handed out insecure employment contracts, or who cut funding for nurse training, or who presided over mushrooming inequality while offering tax giveaways to the higher-paid and to large corporations.

 

Ain't it great? We now live in a country where being "welcoming" and espousing "fairness for all" are values to be despised as "right on".

 

I love it when Alf really gets going on something. Superb post

[Milo]

19 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I love it when Alf really gets going on something. Superb post

Gerrimin - Alf for PM 

 

I’d vote for him

[WigstonWanderer]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8248790/theresa-may-violence-streets-brexit-reversed/

 

Has anyone else seen this article in the Sun? It depicts a chart supposedly showing the results of a poll about the popularity of various Brexit alternatives. It has been widely quoted on Sky News as showing 28% of people support a No Deal Brexit, the most popular option of any of the ones offered.

 

I must be missing something because the sum of all the options adds to well over 100%, even if you eliminate the “don’t knows”.

 

I wonder if the Sun understands what a percentage is?

[Innovindil]

11 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8248790/theresa-may-violence-streets-brexit-reversed/

 

Has anyone else seen this article in the Sun? It depicts a chart supposedly showing the results of a poll about the popularity of various Brexit alternatives. It has been widely quoted on Sky News as showing 28% of people support a No Deal Brexit, the most popular option of any of the ones offered.

 

I must be missing something because the sum of all the options adds to well over 100%, even if you eliminate the “don’t knows”.

 

I wonder if the Sun understands what a percentage is?

You can find the poll here:

 

https://www.icmunlimited.com/tag/brexit/

 

The poll results were also quoted in a guardian article, here:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/20/theresa-may-cross-party-consensus-brexit-backstop-tory-split?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

So, it's not just the sun. 

[WigstonWanderer]

6 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

You can find the poll here:

 

https://www.icmunlimited.com/tag/brexit/

 

The poll results were also quoted in a guardian article, here:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/20/theresa-may-cross-party-consensus-brexit-backstop-tory-split?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

So, it's not just the sun. 

I can only suppose that voters were allowed to pick more than one option. Very misleading.

[davieG]

The number of people in work in the UK has reached a record high of 32.54 million, latest figures from the Office of National Statistics show.

Unemployment was flat, with a small increase of 8,000 between September and November for a total of 1.37 million.

"The share of the population in work is the highest on record," said David Freeman, ONS head of labour market.

"The share of the workforce looking for work and unable to find it remains at its lowest for over 40 years."

Average earnings excluding bonuses increased by 3.3% in the year to November, as wage rises continued to outpace inflation.

 

The unemployment total is 68,000 lower than a year ago with the jobless rate 0.2% down on this time in 2018 and the number of job vacancies at their joint highest level since 2001.

The increase in both unemployment and employment is explained by the UK's rising population, and fewer people classed as economically inactive, which includes those on long-term sick leave, students, and people who have given up looking for a job.

The number of economically inactive people fell by 100,000 to 8.6 million, a rate of 21%, which is the lowest on record.

[urban.spaceman]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-guernsey-46954922

[gw_leics772]

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I can only suppose that voters were allowed to pick more than one option. Very misleading.

I think i may have participated in that to get to view a leicester mercury page.

 

Im sue i chose them in order, so hopefully its weighted.

 

Actually im not sure.of anything, mifht just have ticked the ones i was ok with, but i do remember loads of statements that i had to chose strongly agree, tend to agree, couldn't give a shit, and **** dat shit, which leads me back to.hope its weighted, but more likely just tick a load and thats why it doesnt add up to 100%.

Clear as mud. I need a lie down

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, gw_leics772 said:

I think i may have participated in that to get to view a leicester mercury page.

 

Im sue i chose them in order, so hopefully its weighted.

 

Actually im not sure.of anything, mifht just have ticked the ones i was ok with, but i do remember loads of statements that i had to chose strongly agree, tend to agree, couldn't give a shit, and **** dat shit, which leads me back to.hope its weighted, but more likely just tick a load and thats why it doesnt add up to 100%.

Clear as mud. I need a lie down

Sounds like a pretty worthless poll to me. In fact polls seem to be so much bullshit these days.

[Countryfox]

 

Dianne Abbott has now put in a formal complaint to the BBC that Fiona ‘smirky’ Bruce interrupted her 32,542 times on Question Time ...   which was 42,753 times more than she interrupted anyone else.    She also stated that she wouldn’t go back on that programme again unless David Dimbleberry presented it.

[The Doctor]

Scottish parliament has received a motion to congratulate a YouTuber for a charity stream done with Osacio-Cortez with the intent of pissing off father Ted writer Graham Linehan: http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx?SearchType=Advance&ReferenceNumbers=S5M-15504

 

 

Politics in 2019 is the strangest timeline

[Toddybad]

12 hours ago, Innovindil said:

You can find the poll here:

 

https://www.icmunlimited.com/tag/brexit/

 

The poll results were also quoted in a guardian article, here:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/20/theresa-may-cross-party-consensus-brexit-backstop-tory-split?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

So, it's not just the sun. 

Tbh it should be irrelevant if people want a no deal or not, it can't be allowed to happen by any responsible government. 

 

People were given the option of leaving, or staying in, the EU, not whether or not to destroy our economy. 

 

Most politicians don't understand the impact of no deal, let alone normal people. 

 

For example, a fact that won't be publicised is that the working assumption of the NHS is that drug costs will rise by 35-40% in the event of no deal. That's a huge number.

 

This isn't some pro-EU politician that's come up with that, it's the genuine internal expectation. That wasn't ever put on the side of a bus was it? 

 

Just today Sony have confirmed they are moving their European HQ from London to Amsterdam, Bentley have described no deal Brexit as a killer for their business, and Dyson is moving its HQ to Singapore - though the say that isn't Brexit related but just bairns to coincide with the thing their owner argued for. 

[Innovindil]

10 hours ago, davieG said:

The number of people in work in the UK has reached a record high of 32.54 million, latest figures from the Office of National Statistics show.

Unemployment was flat, with a small increase of 8,000 between September and November for a total of 1.37 million.

"The share of the population in work is the highest on record," said David Freeman, ONS head of labour market.

"The share of the workforce looking for work and unable to find it remains at its lowest for over 40 years."

Average earnings excluding bonuses increased by 3.3% in the year to November, as wage rises continued to outpace inflation.

 

The unemployment total is 68,000 lower than a year ago with the jobless rate 0.2% down on this time in 2018 and the number of job vacancies at their joint highest level since 2001.

The increase in both unemployment and employment is explained by the UK's rising population, and fewer people classed as economically inactive, which includes those on long-term sick leave, students, and people who have given up looking for a job.

The number of economically inactive people fell by 100,000 to 8.6 million, a rate of 21%, which is the lowest on record.

 

2 minutes ago, Toddybad said:

Tbh it should be irrelevant if people want a no deal or not, it can't be allowed to happen by any responsible government. 

 

People were given the option of leaving, or staying in, the EU, not whether or not to destroy our economy. 

 

Most politicians don't understand the impact of no deal, let alone normal people. 

 

For example, a fact that won't be publicised is that the working assumption of the NHS is that drug costs will rise by 35-40% in the event of no deal. That's a huge number.

 

This isn't some pro-EU politician that's come up with that, it's the genuine internal expectation. That wasn't ever put on the side of a bus was it? 

 

Just today Sony have confirmed they are moving their European HQ from London to Amsterdam, Bentley have described no deal Brexit as a killer for their business, and Dyson is moving its HQ to Singapore - though the say that isn't Brexit related but just bairns to coincide with the thing their owner argued for. 

Just in case you missed it toddy.