Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
yorkie1999

Also in the news

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

In 2016, the Italian embassy in London estimated that 600,000 Italians were resident in the UK. According to Ethnologue, Italian is the first language of some 200,000 people in the UK, although the 2011 Census recorded only 92,241 people with Italian as their main language in England and Wales.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italians_in_the_United_Kingdom 

 

I know it’s wiki but it quoted the Italian embassy so I doubt it’s inaccurate.

 

It is estimated that as many as six million people living in the UK have an Irish-born grandparent (around 10% of the UK population). The 2001 UK Census states that 869,093 people born in Ireland are living in Great Britain.

 

Again Wikipedia 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_diaspora

 

 

Maybe we can find better sources but I was in a bit of rush to be fair.

 

Here are some more figures (various credible recent sources, though dates, figures & means of calculation vary slightly):

- 3.7m EU27 citizens in UK v. 1.3m UK citizens in EU27 

https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

- Brits in EU: Spain 310k, Ireland 280k, France 190k, Germany 100k....less in the rest

https://fullfact.org/europe/how-many-uk-citizens-live-other-eu-countries/

- EU27 citizens in UK: Poland 853k, Ireland 331k, Romania 175k, Portugal 175k, Italy 170k, France 160k, Lithuania 155k

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/fact-figures/how-many-eu-citizens-live-in-the-uk/

- Migrants in UK by birth country: Poland 922k, India 829k, Pakistan 522k, Ireland 390k, Romania 390k, Germany 318k, Bangladesh 263k, Italy 232k, S. Africa 228k, China 216k

- Migrants in UK by nationality: Poland 1021k, Romania 411k, Ireland 350k, India 346k, Italy 297k, Portugal 235k, Lithuania 199k, Pakistan 188k, Spain 182k, France 181k

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/

 

Re. Italy: The figures you've quoted for native Italian speakers (200k or 92k) are not too distant from the 3 figures I've quoted....but the 600k figure quoted by the Embassy is way out of line with your figures on Italian speakers and my figures on migrants by citizenship, birth country and nationality. My guess is that the Embassy may be counting people with dual nationality or Italian descent, the British-born kids of Italians who came here decades ago? :dunno:

 

Re. Ireland: 6m people with an Irish-born grandparent would be unsurprising (I have 3 Irish-born grandparents myself). Your census figure of 869k from 2001 is a lot higher than the more recent figures that I've quoted (331k-390k).

But that could be a genuine fall. There was mass immigration from Ireland for the post-WW2 reconstruction & many of that generation would have died off since 2001 (including my Dad). There was also a lot of Irish immigration in the 1980s/1990s due to the Irish economy being in a bad state compared to the UK....but after the 1990s, there were the Celtic Tiger years, so fewer Irish will have come since 2001. :dunno:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Strokes said:

 

Interesting stuff.

 

I'd have expected there to be a fair number still heading for Australia, USA etc.

But some of those figures are surprisingly high: 1.27m in Aus, 674k in Canada, 305k in S. Africa....though I suppose some have been there for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Interesting stuff.

 

I'd have expected there to be a fair number still heading for Australia, USA etc.

But some of those figures are surprisingly high: 1.27m in Aus, 674k in Canada, 305k in S. Africa....though I suppose some have been there for decades.

Just like my original figures, I do wonder if there are some inflated estimates. It’s probably quite a difficult thing to keep track of, as you’re relying on many organisations to provide accurate figures. I think it’s quite obvious that brits tend to go to English speaking nations, as we do tend to be very lazy when it comes to learning new languages. We should have a bit more variety rather than primarily french in scuola.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strokes said:

Just like my original figures, I do wonder if there are some inflated estimates. It’s probably quite a difficult thing to keep track of, as you’re relying on many organisations to provide accurate figures. I think it’s quite obvious that brits tend to go to English speaking nations, as we do tend to be very lazy when it comes to learning new languages. We should have a bit more variety rather than primarily french in scuola.

 

You obviously learned Italian yourself (bold!) :D

 

All very true what you say there. Even thinking about the 1.3m Brit ex-pats in the EU, a lot are retirees concentrated in often English-speaking enclaves on the Costas, in the Dordogne or wherever.

 

On Brits learning other languages, it actually seems to be getting worse. I did a languages degree at a uni that was highly-rated nationally for its vocational languages courses.....the languages dept has since closed down, supposedly due to a big decline in student applications (though I've heard that there were also some financial scandals elsewhere in the uni).

 

A lot fewer kids are taking most languages at GCSE and A-level, too. That's doubtless partly due to the prevalence of English on the Internet, more working-age foreigners speaking English etc. Apparently, it's also partly due to kids thinking that some subjects (science, languages) will be harder work than other subjects - and harder to get decent grades, making it harder to progress.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/04/2019 at 02:05, Alf Bentley said:

 

You obviously learned Italian yourself (bold!) :D

 

All very true what you say there. Even thinking about the 1.3m Brit ex-pats in the EU, a lot are retirees concentrated in often English-speaking enclaves on the Costas, in the Dordogne or wherever.

 

On Brits learning other languages, it actually seems to be getting worse. I did a languages degree at a uni that was highly-rated nationally for its vocational languages courses.....the languages dept has since closed down, supposedly due to a big decline in student applications (though I've heard that there were also some financial scandals elsewhere in the uni).

 

A lot fewer kids are taking most languages at GCSE and A-level, too. That's doubtless partly due to the prevalence of English on the Internet, more working-age foreigners speaking English etc. Apparently, it's also partly due to kids thinking that some subjects (science, languages) will be harder work than other subjects - and harder to get decent grades, making it harder to progress.

After spending many years travelling,then settling in Germany.....I find the British younger generation,have taken on foreign language a lot more and a lot easier.

plus over the years,I met more Working class expats or contract workers,wanting to pick up a language,and succeeding,more than ,more so called better educated. I found some esespecially "English" managers or better placed men,not women were just too lackadaisical and arrogant to learn..

Over the years the attitude has changed,because to compete for a job,when other Europeans can often speak at least 1-2 other languages,

outside their mother-tongue.

Many like myself learnt well after school,and through the "want & need" to be part of  the new culture,Americans and English (not other Brits) were and are still

Lagging,but I have now over the last year's met more Americans who have lost that arrogance that foreigners should speak English.

Scots,Irish and Welsh have always seemed to be more willing,and again many like myself,took up the language of their new country,first from the street,then

Later going to either free night classes,or paid for budget language schools themselves or through their employer...

I have met more of this younger generation of English ( I myself being also English),after working travelling,living through Europe/world over 45 years,

these last 8-10 years who are more willing and wanting to learn,1-2 more languages...

It's not about what happens back home,but what the people do,once they decide to get their feet and mind a moving onto new horizons...

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New plan to abolish the House of Lords after Brexit
Brexit 'offers an opportunity for modernisation' of our political system


08:35, 23 APR 2019
NEWS

The House of Lords should be abolished after the UK leaves the EU, a conservative think tank has argued.

Bright Blue Scotland has called for the unelected chamber to be replaced by a new Senate, representing the different parts of the UK.

Its report - Our still United Kingdom - puts forward a new constitutional arrangement for the country following its EU departure.

The paper, authored by MSP (member of the Scottish Parliament) Murdo Fraser, argues current arrangements are inadequate and support for independence in different parts of the UK will increase if further reforms are not introduced.

Currently there are about 800 members eligible to take part in the work of the House of Lords
Currently there are about 800 members eligible to take part in the work of the House of Lords (Image: PA)
Mr Fraser said: "With nationalists in different parts of the United Kingdom seeking to use Brexit uncertainty for their own political ends, it is important that unionists have a coherent response.

"Introducing a UK-wide Senate delivers the long-awaited and overdue reform of the House of Lords, giving a better balance to the UK constitution and protecting the interests of the nations and regions furthest from London.

"A new quasi-federal settlement can mitigate concerns that exist in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and also are growing in many parts of England, about an over-centralised state where, despite asymmetric devolution over a period of two decades, there is still pressure for more power to be passed down from the centre."

 

The report argues the House of Lords should be abolished and replaced with a new Senate, or Upper House, representing different parts of the UK.

This should be predominantly - if not entirely - elected, fulfilling the role both of a revising chamber and as a counterweight to the Commons.

It calls for a new Statute or Charter of Union, which would declare the creation of a quasi-federal state and provide legislation for the UK's intergovernmental work.


A new UK Council of Ministers should replace the existing Joint Ministerial Committee system, it says, with a need for England to have representatives elected by an English Grand Committee.

Ryan Shorthouse, director of Bright Blue, said: "Our departure from the EU provides the impetus to introduce important governmental and constitutional reforms to create a 'quasi-federal' future for the four nations of the union.

"Notwithstanding the difficulties and divisions Brexit has created, it does offer an opportunity for overdue democratisation and modernisation of key institutions of the union."


SNP MSP Tom Arthur said: "Even the Scottish Tories now admit that support for independence is on the rise because of the way Scotland has been utterly ignored throughout the Brexit process.

"Murdo Fraser's comments show that the Scottish Tories are rattled - they are running scared of independence because they know that recent experience of a broken Westminster system will only lead more people to support Scotland taking its own decisions."

Should the Lords be replaced with a new elected Senate?
Yes, it's time for a major political change
No, the system works fine as it is
It should be scrapped- but there's no need to replace it with anything
A UK Government spokeswoman said: "The Government is committed to ensuring that the House of Lords continues to fulfil its constitutional role as a revising and scrutinising chamber which respects the primacy of the House of Commons.

"However, as set out in the manifesto, the Government is clear that comprehensive reform of the House of Lords is not a priority for this Parliament."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ozleicester said:

That's in Australian Dollars, and it's in parts a bonus based on his share participation following the acquisition of 21st Century Fox.

Not so sure you can call it "earning" on the whole. He didn't earn it, he merely received it as a consequence of a business merger.

 

Still obscene, mind.

 

However, nothing compared to Discovery CEO David Zaslev and his US$ 129 in 2018:

https://www.businessinsider.com/highest-paid-ceos-of-2018-discovery-david-zaslav-disney-bob-iger-2019-3?r=US&IR=T

 

Maybe, just maybe we should then look at the rules for allowing this to happen in the first place and approach more common sense with regards to CEO salaries and bonuses. Then again, that's down to the shareholders and board to decide.

It's slightly odd to complain about the outcome, when you ought to further examine the causes, and then criticize that.

Edited by MC Prussian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Claire Fox standing for the Brexit party, big surprise.

 

Good pick up for them that - can't have this party turning into one where it's all right leaning leavers. Need a big push to pull the 5 million Labour voters backed Brexit as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MattP said:

Claire Fox standing for the Brexit party, big surprise.

 

Good pick up for them that - can't have this party turning into one where it's all right leaning leavers. Need a big push to pull the 5 million Labour voters backed Brexit as well.

 

I suppose the main value of the likes of Fox to Farage is for media presentation, making it credible to present his party as not just a right-wing party.

I've come across her debating Brexit on Newsnight, but I don't suppose most voters have - still less that she'll swing many votes personally.

 

I'm sure Farage will pick up a fair few votes from Labour Brexit supporters, anyway. How many will be partly down to turnout - some will doubtless stay at home.

I'm guessing that he gets more votes from the Tories, though, plus a fair chunk from UKIP, possibly enough overall to top the poll though with a lot less than 50% of the vote.

 

I presume Labour is maintaining ambiguity over Soft Brexit v. Referendum for now at least, thereby keeping its softer Brexiteer vote but losing fervent People's Vote types to parties with a clear Referendum/Remain message.

Will be interesting to see what Brexit stance Labour adopts if the May-Corbyn talks fall flat before the Euro elections (as they surely will) and if nothing is getting through the Commons. Might Labour then switch to a stance of reluctant support for a referendum, in time to stop its support haemorrhaging to the Remainer parties?

 

Mind you, a lot could happen in a few weeks. For a start, it sounds like we could have PM Boris some time soon.... :blink: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I suppose the main value of the likes of Fox to Farage is for media presentation, making it credible to present his party as not just a right-wing party.

I've come across her debating Brexit on Newsnight, but I don't suppose most voters have - still less that she'll swing many votes personally.

 

I'm sure Farage will pick up a fair few votes from Labour Brexit supporters, anyway. How many will be partly down to turnout - some will doubtless stay at home.

I'm guessing that he gets more votes from the Tories, though, plus a fair chunk from UKIP, possibly enough overall to top the poll though with a lot less than 50% of the vote.

 

I presume Labour is maintaining ambiguity over Soft Brexit v. Referendum for now at least, thereby keeping its softer Brexiteer vote but losing fervent People's Vote types to parties with a clear Referendum/Remain message.

Will be interesting to see what Brexit stance Labour adopts if the May-Corbyn talks fall flat before the Euro elections (as they surely will) and if nothing is getting through the Commons. Might Labour then switch to a stance of reluctant support for a referendum, in time to stop its support haemorrhaging to the Remainer parties?

 

Mind you, a lot could happen in a few weeks. For a start, it sounds like we could have PM Boris some time soon.... :blink: 

3

 

Source?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

I suppose the main value of the likes of Fox to Farage is for media presentation, making it credible to present his party as not just a right-wing party.

I've come across her debating Brexit on Newsnight, but I don't suppose most voters have - still less that she'll swing many votes personally.

 

I'm sure Farage will pick up a fair few votes from Labour Brexit supporters, anyway. How many will be partly down to turnout - some will doubtless stay at home.

I'm guessing that he gets more votes from the Tories, though, plus a fair chunk from UKIP, possibly enough overall to top the poll though with a lot less than 50% of the vote.

 

I presume Labour is maintaining ambiguity over Soft Brexit v. Referendum for now at least, thereby keeping its softer Brexiteer vote but losing fervent People's Vote types to parties with a clear Referendum/Remain message.

Will be interesting to see what Brexit stance Labour adopts if the May-Corbyn talks fall flat before the Euro elections (as they surely will) and if nothing is getting through the Commons. Might Labour then switch to a stance of reluctant support for a referendum, in time to stop its support haemorrhaging to the Remainer parties?

 

Mind you, a lot could happen in a few weeks. For a start, it sounds like we could have PM Boris some time soon.... :blink: 

She's a decent polemicist and that can only be a good thing for the party itself.

 

I don't know much about Labour candidacy but the selection of Lord Adonis surely hints at pro-remain - he bizzarly appears to have called for leavers not to not to vote for the Labour party. The words of someone there who has never been elected. 

 

I expect the Brexit party to win and the Labour party to finish second but as long as the Conservative party gets hammered in these I don't care that much, it that speeds up May's departure then great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

Source?

 

Speculation based on general media coverage that:

- 1922 Committee is looking at ways of getting rid of May much sooner than December

- About 70 Tory constituency parties are actively petitioning to get rid of her

- Polls of Tory Party members show him well ahead of all potential rivals

 

Plenty that could still prevent it happening, of course. Notably, anti-May Tories might not find a way of forcing her out, and if they do, Boris isn't guaranteed to get enough votes from MPs to be 1 of the 2 names put to the membership....

But it's looking a distinct possibility.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change UK announce Stephen Dorrell and Rachel Johnson as candidates. 

 

Still waiting to see what this "change" is they want to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

I expect the Brexit party to win and the Labour party to finish second .

 

Sounds likely.

 

Vote percentages will matter, though. If the Brexit Party were to get anywhere close to 40%, that would seriously damage the Second Referendum campaign, I'd have thought.

Whereas, even if they top the poll, if their vote share is 28% or something then it'll be good publicity for them, but won't show us anything we don't already know - namely that a sizeable chunk of the population support Brexit at any cost....but not necessarily anywhere close to a majority....

 

Would be interesting to see what happened to Labour's vote share if they "reluctantly supported the need for a second referendum", though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of interest a question for those who know more than I, what other policies do the Brexit party have?  Is it just a case of the bounder getting on his horse and trying to lap up the protest votes, or is there more substance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...