Not The Politics Thread.

[Gordon the Great]

On 20/06/2021 at 12:17, Spiritwalker said:

 

 

Each to their own, he’s one of my favourite politicians, very witty and was on great form this morning.

I can assure you that he won't be missed, not if he crosses the road in front of me anyway!🤣

Edited 23 June 2021 by Gordon the Great
Missed word

[Magictv]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-referendum-fishing-betrayal-newlyn-b1867151.html

 

[Voll Blau]

20 minutes ago, Magictv said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-referendum-fishing-betrayal-newlyn-b1867151.html

 

I do feel sorry for these people (saw a similar thing interviewing farmers who voted Leave the other day) but at the end of the day, we were all warned this was a possible consequence of it. People who voted in favour of it need to take ownership of that.

 

The problem is enough people don't actually give a fvck about the cost to these industries and are just happy with the act of Brexit itself. That is the victory for them, and anything else just doesn't matter.

[Alf Bentley]

On 21/06/2021 at 23:10, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Labour have only had 13 of the last 42 years in power, and that was what many consider a right wing version of a left wing party.

 

It would be good if voters dissatisfied with the state of the nation remembered this fact when they went to the polls.

 

Once Covid hopefully fades into the background, the great mission of the Tory Govt is "levelling up". Fair play, very necessary. Regional inequality has increased massively, the economy is slanted towards the SE and unhealthily reliant on The City and consumerism - and deindustralized regions have been badly neglected. But who was in power for 29 of the past 42 years? Not entirely the Tories' fault as global economic trends have been crucial....but an awful lot more could've been done to "level up" over the past 42 years.

 

The issue of the moment is an education report finding that disadvantaged white kids are under-performing similar kids of other ethnicities. They've been neglected for decades, the report suggests......which begs the question as to which irresponsible party has dominated power over those decades. However, some now claim that this is nothing to do with under-funding of education or failure to target resources properly over those decades - and nothing to do with slashing the funding of Sure Start early years programmes that sought to counteract the disadvantages of disadvantaged kids of every ethnicity. It's all due to people focusing on "white privilege", apparently. Strange, as I have a 17-year-old and never recall either her or her schools talking about white privilege.

 

To deploy my habitual football analogy, if LCFC fall on hard times and are looking for a new manager, wouldn't we want to focus on candidates' records and evidence of their abilities?

Or would we want to ignore all that and appoint someone with a cheerful manner, a bit of a character who was "one of us" and was entertaining on TV? Holloway as Boris for football, anyone? 

[Innovindil]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56846637

 

With a week to go until the deadline for EU nationals living in the UK to apply for settled status, it is clear that far more EU citizens have been living in the country than previous estimates suggested.

 

As of 31 May, the government had received 5.6 million applications for the post-Brexit scheme that allows EU (and EEA) nationals to continue living and working in the UK after the end of this month.

 

That is far higher than the official estimate when the scheme was fully opened in March 2019 that there were 3.7 million (non-Irish) EU nationals in the country.

 

Surprising. 

 

[Jon the Hat]

23 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56846637

 

With a week to go until the deadline for EU nationals living in the UK to apply for settled status, it is clear that far more EU citizens have been living in the country than previous estimates suggested.

 

As of 31 May, the government had received 5.6 million applications for the post-Brexit scheme that allows EU (and EEA) nationals to continue living and working in the UK after the end of this month.

 

That is far higher than the official estimate when the scheme was fully opened in March 2019 that there were 3.7 million (non-Irish) EU nationals in the country.

 

Surprising. 

 

So **** loads of people left, and we still have 2 million more European migrants than we thought?  Or lots of people brought their families in while they have the chance?

[Innovindil]

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

So **** loads of people left, and we still have 2 million more European migrants than we thought?  Or lots of people brought their families in while they have the chance?

Well, the last I heard on migration figures showed somewhere near a million foreign nationals (both eu and non-eu) leaving the UK in the last year. So I'd suggest the former. 

[bovril]

14 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

So **** loads of people left, and we still have 2 million more European migrants than we thought?  Or lots of people brought their families in while they have the chance?

How did you work that out?

 

The figure refers to how many people have applied for the settled status scheme since it started, not how many EU citizens are currently in the UK. I know a lot of people who have received settled status but left in the last 12 months. 

[Alf Bentley]

45 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/56846637

 

With a week to go until the deadline for EU nationals living in the UK to apply for settled status, it is clear that far more EU citizens have been living in the country than previous estimates suggested.

 

As of 31 May, the government had received 5.6 million applications for the post-Brexit scheme that allows EU (and EEA) nationals to continue living and working in the UK after the end of this month.

 

That is far higher than the official estimate when the scheme was fully opened in March 2019 that there were 3.7 million (non-Irish) EU nationals in the country.

 

Surprising. 

 

 

Interesting stuff.

 

From the official map, it seems to be a diverse range of places where there were extra EU citizens:

- Big cities like London, Birmingham & Manchester & prosperous towns like Oxford & Cambridge: service sector jobs or finance/high-tech?

- Tourist areas like Lake District. E. Yorks coast

- Horticultural areas like Vale of Evesham, Kent, Lincs & Norfolk

- Retirement areas like Sussex coast, N. Kent coast, E. Yorks coast: care homes?

 

The nationality breakdown is interesting, too: surprising that there were almost as many Romanians as Poles (nearly 1m), yet the French & Germans don't even feature - so presumably fewer than 350k?

 

Both the map and the nationality breakdown maybe suggest that most were doing fairly low-paid work (hospitality, farms, care homes), not so many in high-skilled, high-paid jobs......though might not apply in London & 1-2 other places?

 

 

[Innovindil]

28 minutes ago, bovril said:

How did you work that out?

 

The figure refers to how many people have applied for the settled status scheme since it started, not how many EU citizens are currently in the UK. I know a lot of people who have received settled status but left in the last 12 months. 

Well the EU themselves are predicting "tens of thousands" haven't yet signed up for settled status, so it's probably fair to expect at least a couple hundred thousand more staying here without signing up. 

 

6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Interesting stuff.

 

From the official map, it seems to be a diverse range of places where there were extra EU citizens:

- Big cities like London, Birmingham & Manchester & prosperous towns like Oxford & Cambridge: service sector jobs or finance/high-tech?

- Tourist areas like Lake District. E. Yorks coast

- Horticultural areas like Vale of Evesham, Kent, Lincs & Norfolk

- Retirement areas like Sussex coast, N. Kent coast, E. Yorks coast: care homes?

 

The nationality breakdown is interesting, too: surprising that there were almost as many Romanians as Poles (nearly 1m), yet the French & Germans don't even feature - so presumably fewer than 350k?

 

Both the map and the nationality breakdown maybe suggest that most were doing fairly low-paid work (hospitality, farms, care homes), not so many in high-skilled, high-paid jobs......though might not apply in London & 1-2 other places?

 

 

Not sure why that bit would surprise you Alf. Germany and France are what I'd expect 2 of (if not THE 2) biggest gatherers of foreign nationals, makes sense that their people wouldn't be coming here. 

 

And I think it's fairly common knowledge that they do the lowest paid jobs here. The polish engineer we had with us said for the same work he did here he'd get around £200 a month for in Poland, while here he made close to 10 times that. 

 

Plus we've already seen a few sectors crying about the lack of cheap labour. Going to be interesting to see the shift in wages across sectors and what will survive the culling. Plenty of cheap labour abusers in for rough times, might have to get their own hands dirty for a change. 

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Innovindil said:

 

Not sure why that bit would surprise you Alf. Germany and France are what I'd expect 2 of (if not THE 2) biggest gatherers of foreign nationals, makes sense that their people wouldn't be coming here. 

 

And I think it's fairly common knowledge that they do the lowest paid jobs here. The polish engineer we had with us said for the same work he did here he'd get around £200 a month for in Poland, while here he made close to 10 times that. 

 

Plus we've already seen a few sectors crying about the lack of cheap labour. Going to be interesting to see the shift in wages across sectors and what will survive the culling. Plenty of cheap labour abusers in for rough times, might have to get their own hands dirty for a change. 

 

I'm sure France & Germany are 2 of the biggest gatherers of foreign nationals. That doesn't mean that they don't also export a fair few of their own nationals - especially as 2 of the most populous Euro-nations & both nearby.

There are plenty of French and Germans in the UK: e.g. many in London working in finance/business plus younger ones in lower-wage work.

 

Unsurprisingly, 2011 census data showed Poles as the most numerous foreign nationality, but French came 6th and Germans 8th, whereas Romania wasn't in the Top 10:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/detailedcountryofbirthandnationalityanalysisfromthe2011censusofenglandandwales/2013-05-13

Presumably the number of French & Germans in the UK has stabilised or fallen but hundreds of thousands of Romanians have arrived in the last 10 years......though I had forgotten that, although Romania joined the EU in 2007, their citizens only gained the automatic right to work in the UK from 2014. That suggests a big shift to low-paid jobs in the last decade.

 

Yes, there could be a crisis in several sectors due to the lack of cheap labour - and I doubt that a few cheap labour bosses getting their hands dirty will solve the problem.

Maybe a case of (1) Higher pay to attract locals & higher-priced goods & services and/or (2) More British workers getting their hands dirty and/or (3) Further immigration so as to maintain cheap labour/low prices (would be controversial) and/or (4) More of hotel/catering closing down and farmers switching from labour-intensive to non-labour-intensive agriculture etc.

 

Sectors like the care sector HAVE to survive. Unless greater numbers of migrants are encouraged to come again (unlikely after Brexit), presumably pay & conditions will have to improve sufficiently for Brits to want to do the work. That would be good news, but I wonder if it will work unless unemployment is high - it's demanding work and often unsociable hours, which might not appeal to many even with higher pay.

Sectors like fruit/veg farming are an odd one as I picked fruit/spuds in my teens/early 20s and the workforce was almost 100% British back then (students, housewives, unemployed & gypsies).

[brucey]

6 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Sectors like the care sector HAVE to survive. Unless greater numbers of migrants are encouraged to come again (unlikely after Brexit), presumably pay & conditions will have to improve sufficiently for Brits to want to do the work. That would be good news, but I wonder if it will work unless unemployment is high - it's demanding work and often unsociable hours, which might not appeal to many even with higher pay.

Post Brexit, several areas in the care sector have been added to the 'Shortage Occupation List'. Meaning non-EU migrants trained in those areas now have a much easier route into working in the UK than before (and also now on an equal playing field to EU migrants - and Brits). For instance, all doctors jobs are now considered a shortage occupation, whereas previously it was only specific types of doctors (paediatrics, psych). So perhaps the EU migrants will be replaced by non-EU migrants instead.

[Alf Bentley]

28 minutes ago, brucey said:

Post Brexit, several areas in the care sector have been added to the 'Shortage Occupation List'. Meaning non-EU migrants trained in those areas now have a much easier route into working in the UK than before (and also now on an equal playing field to EU migrants - and Brits). For instance, all doctors jobs are now considered a shortage occupation, whereas previously it was only specific types of doctors (paediatrics, psych). So perhaps the EU migrants will be replaced by non-EU migrants instead.

 

I hadn't seen about that - but, from what I can see, in care work (as opposed to health) it only applies to senior care workers and managers. By definition, that is presumably a minority?

Given our aging population, there could still be a growing shortage of care workers in care homes and visiting the elderly in their homes....unless less senior care workers are also added to the list or the profession is made more attractive to locals? 

[brucey]

12 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I hadn't seen about that - but, from what I can see, in care work (as opposed to health) it only applies to senior care workers and managers. By definition, that is presumably a minority?

Given our aging population, there could still be a growing shortage of care workers in care homes and visiting the elderly in their homes....unless less senior care workers are also added to the list or the profession is made more attractive to locals? 

This is the new visa category they introduced, where the previous visa caps no longer apply.

This page lists the job categories eligible, there's quite a large number of them.

https://www.gov.uk/health-care-worker-visa/your-job

 

You might be right about the care home workers - I'm not familiar with that area. I had assumed you meant healthcare in general.

 

Edited 23 June 2021 by brucey

[What the Fuchs?]

On 22/06/2021 at 08:21, StanSP said:

Sick. Fancy yacht is clearly their top priority. 

 

 

 

How can they justify using £200 million of taxpayers' money to build a luxury yacht for use by a handful of elites, when these are the same people who slashed the foreign aid budget, said they didn't have enough money to give a pay rise to frontline NHS staff, and had to be embarrassed by Marcus Rashford into providing food for poor kids? The government's priorities seem clear: we have enough money for things we can milk as much nationalistic symbolism out of like yachts, planes, situation rooms and the military, but not so much for things that make tangible improvements to people's lives. And i'm not even gonna go into the billions in dodgy contracts, cronyism and the billions being spent on vanity projects like HS2.

 

Also, besides it being completely immoral, how does building this yacht make any sense from an economic perspective? Are we looking for trade deals exclusively with countries that have coastlines? Does it make sense that a trade envoy gets sent at massive expense on essentially a luxury cruise at our expense when they could perform their roles in much quicker and cheaper ways (or not at all, if we consider embassies and consulates)? Do we seriously think that people are so gullible that we can trick them into trade deals by saying, "look how nice our boat is"? All the other countries in the world that don't rely on luxury yachts to enable their trade deals seem to do just fine. Furthermore the government themselves admitted in 2016 that the use of yachts is not economically viable. https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2016-10-10/47643 The previous yacht was scrapped because it cost taxpayers around £11 million a year if I remember correctly - obviously more than any hypothetical benefits it brought (which the government themselves admitted were negligible).

 

Not only is this whole venture incredibly insulting at a time when many people are struggling, it reeks of Johnson's previous vanity projects that cost us millions when he was London mayor - the man isn't exactly known for his careful use of public money, or a healthy relationship with the truth for that matter as the Jennifer Arcuri case and many other instances throughout his career have shown. Johnson likes getting away with such vanity projects by cloaking them in a nationalistic light that can be spun in the right win tabloids: it's not a yacht for those at the top, it's a 'national yacht'. No wonder he was desperate to name it after prince Philip; he's desperate for everything to be justified by mere symbolism, as if anyone looked at it objectively in receipt of the facts they would see it as it is, an insult to the taxpayer.

 

If Labour had won in 2017 or 2019, imagine the headlines if Corbyn had announced he was wasting £200m on a luxury yacht? For many months now it seems as if the Tories are pushing the boundary more and more to see what abuses of power they can get away with. Seems like a lot so far.

[Facecloth]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15388014/matt-hancock-secret-affair-with-aide/

 

Surely has to go now. Not only would this have put him in a compromised position where people could have threatened to expose him if didn't do certain things, like PPE contracts etc it also makes a mockery of the fact most of is haven't seen family for most the year, not done things we enjoy, single people haven't dated etc, all because of social distancing and only see those on your bubble, and he's been shagging his aide.

[Bellend Sebastian]

12 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15388014/matt-hancock-secret-affair-with-aide/

 

Surely has to go now. Not only would this have put him in a compromised position where people could have threatened to expose him if didn't do certain things, like PPE contracts etc it also makes a mockery of the fact most of is haven't seen family for most the year, not done things we enjoy, single people haven't dated etc, all because of social distancing and only see those on your bubble, and he's been shagging his aide.

His colleague was hired "WITH PUBLIC MONEY".

 

Why do they write these articles as if their audience have suffered a serious brain injury?

 

 

[Facecloth]

1 minute ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

His colleague was hired "WITH PUBLIC MONEY".

 

Why do they write these articles as if their audience have suffered a serious brain injury?

 

 

It's in The Sun, most the readers probably have.

[Bellend Sebastian]

4 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

It's in The Sun, most the readers probably have.

The Mail does it as well, and I would put it to their readership that if someone was speaking to them like that in real life they'd soon make their excuses and leave

[CosbehFox]

The main man at the top has gotten away with multiple affairs whilst in a cabinet role. Why should the punishment for Hancock be different? 
 

Both partners to Johnson and Hancock received public money it appears as well 
 

Looks like Johnson told Murdoch to go get Hancock 

Edited 25 June 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[StanSP]

@Babylon. Tut tut.

 

 

 

 

[Bellend Sebastian]

5 minutes ago, StanSP said:

@Babylon. Tut tut.

 

 

 

 

Conservatives: +6

[Guest ttfn]

The most amazing thing about this Hancock story is that at least 2 women have shown themselves to not be completely repulsed by him.

[Buce]

3 minutes ago, ttfn said:

The most amazing thing about this Hancock story is that at least 2 women have shown themselves to not be completely repulsed by him.

 

'What was it that first attracted you to the multi-millionaire Matt Hancock..?'

[moore_94]