2 minutes ago, Chindie said:

They'll listen out for good British accents on the boats, double check for the glorious sight of a Union Jack flying proudly from the trawler, and they'll jump into the boat singing in the Queen's English 'Eat me! With chips! And lashings of vinegar and salt! Sabe me from horrible Spanish muck to make my grave!'.

They could do this now, but EU law forces us to to throw them back, deceased. 

Fixed it for you  

4 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Fishing problems are of our own making due to the trade of quotas we allow.

You'll have to help me along with that one as I always thought we set them as part of the EU which fed into international quotas.

As I understood it, and I could be wrong, leaving would allow us the remove our shared quotas and start new ones which we would negotiate on our own. As we would also retain our a large potion of our waters our quotas could be higher and conservation efforts/discard policy less damaging.

Would like to know if I'm wrong though so I don't keep talking carp!

44 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Where did I say Labour are above reproach? I don't particularly support them either. They largely support Brexit. They're foolish to do so.

If you think Brexit isn't going to harm this country your lobbying might require rather more than the common sense cynicism and pinch of salt

No, I just get bored of reading spurious comments and thought I'd have a go myself! Hence saying that Labour voters think they want to remain.

I used red and Labour because you used blue and Tory. Nothing to do with your voting patterns but we live in a two party system, owing to the fact that the Lib Dems have moved away from policy, Greens never really had any and UKIP can only manage one at a time.

As a lobbyist, looking backwards at the world moving helps nobody, as we have seen in the last decade with the EU!
I am not quite ready to make a decision on whether Brexit is bad or not, especially when we haven't left! But I will fight tooth and nail to make sure we can solve our energy crisis without relying on big companies like the EU does, to try and retain our fishing waters for food and conservation, to build homes more reflective of British climate etc. etc. etc.
 

Quote

Libya’s coast guard abuses migrants despite E.U. funding and training

ZAWIYAH, Libya — The video showed a small rubber dinghy crowded with terrified migrants. Next to it, a uniformed man in a Libyan coast guard boat was yelling and wielding a bullwhip.

The whip slithered through the air and struck a shirtless migrant. The Libyan cracked the whip again, forcing some of the panicked migrants to fall into the sea and struggle to clutch the side of the boat.

“We have to punish them to make them calm down,” said Ramzi Ali, a member of the coast guard unit, shrugging after playing the video on his cellphone. “We need to keep control. They can take our life.”

The European Union has poured tens of millions of dollars into supporting Libya’s coast guard in search-and-rescue operations off the coast. But the violent tactics of some units and allegations of human trafficking have generated concerns about the alliance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/libyas-coast-guard-abuses-desperate-migrants-despite-eu-funding-and-training/2017/07/10/f9bfe952-7362-4e57-8b42-40ae5ede1e26_story.html?utm_term=.e34d677e6a99

The EU, such a joke. All that money spent last year and what do we get? Libyan soldiers helping migrants across the sea while beating them and Italian coastguards burning toxic plastics in the Med.
Now we want to give them more money!!!!!

Such a massive waste of funding when we could be tackling fundamental problems instead. Will be good to not take responsibility for throwing cash as a problem to solve it....maybe we can actually help the world! 

Meanwhile the EU has pledged to further help Africa....they could start by removing some of the harshest trade barriers which make EU countries rich and African ones poor! 

48 minutes ago, Chindie said:

They will survive. They might have to take an election or 2 in the wilderness, but they know (the less lunatic ones) this is going to hit hard and they know that will cop flack for it, so the seeds will be sown to direct the story as they want, and they will ensure they take others with them. Labour might follow willingly given their Brexit position.

And the Tories always have support. There will be millions of voters who will not allow the car crash of Brexit to deflect their love of the Blue Team. Already you can see the start of problems festering (yes Brexiteers, it took a while longer than many thought, but it's coming) and still you've millions of Leave voters refusing to accept this is a problem they've made. Tory support will be similar.

Very similar to Labour too, we are an entrenched country. There will be millions of voters who will say Brexit is a car crash even if things remain the same or improve and they will vote for the only party wanting us to stay in the EU, the red team. That's right isn't it?  Already you can see how appalling those politicians that were voted in are and still you have millions of Remain voters refusing the accept this is a problem they've made and been making for decades.
Labour support will be similar.

When I tried to save the Aston Arena (Aston Villa Leisure Centre), one of the proposals I put forward was to use the site for an Olympic sized swimming pool. There are probably still pictures of my ideas on Aston Arena's facebook.

This made sense because some British Olympic open water swimmers already swam in the area and others were using Newtown for their training. Yes, Newtown!!!!

I can give you very many other reasons why is was a good idea, from both an economic, social and regeneration point of view but sadly some in the city had other ideas as to what the site was good for and where the money from it was going to go. 

I'm not saying it's the absolute best place for pool but I am saying our idea was costed in terms of build (without Council money) but we needed to consider both maintenance and further funding to support open water swimming in the lakes and canoeing in the river. Political will is weak.

2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Did you just call his Mrs a bluenose?

Oi, cast your aspersions elsewhere....I already struggle to to make friends in here  

1 minute ago, omariqy said:

I would get my ideal family home if the Mrs didn't get a nosebleed every time we venture north of London. 

Fresh air does strange things to polluted noses.

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

 

I accept there is a slow down in activity and growth what I don't get is the keep to that somehow being indicative of a 40% crash.

 

Not in our sector (SMEs), we are doing fine. In part it's because we don't land bank so pay existing land prices but also because our projects are finished more quickly so less time for financial worry and because we build for the local market so prices are not as speculative.

Typically though the media only reports info about the biggest housebuilders. A bit like the terrible Shelter report, 'phantom homes'.

4 hours ago, bobzy said:

The initial pay scale is very similar compared to "graduate" jobs, but it very, very swiftly falls absolutely miles behind.  Even compared to other non-degree-necessary jobs, teaching pays well initially but with no added benefit.

I have no idea where you're getting 3 months without childcare from?

Also, lol at wanting to "kill" for a 60/70 hour week at £27k/year  

Ha, I know....I am perhaps a little too passionate about my job but it's my own fault and I accept that. Also, way too strong a word...oops lol

If you're a teacher with children you have 3 months off a year, that's 3 months where you have a legitimate choice to not pay for childcare. 

You are also much easier to sack in the private sector, typically due to to contractual arrangements and targets. I also covered some of the other benefits and I'll throw in an ability to be wage hungry within education; for example, manager points, working abroad, being a man in primary education, moving from secondary to primary, failing as a teacher and so working in teaching related roles ha. Some public sector jobs provide key worker housing, as do some of the super wealthy companies taking on cherry picked graduates.

Many self employed people and those on temporary (2/3 year) contracts also find it much tougher to get a mortgage. That means they are even further from buying a home.

I accept that other public sector roles involve fewer promotion opportunities but that is a similar problem faced by say, the manager of a shop. Who is probably a graduate

This might not feel important but to the very many people who are on the median salary, it is, especially when the cost of living in some places continues spiralling out of control. 

I am not arguing that we shouldn't pay our public sector staff more fairly but I don't think it's fair to forget about the many who struggle because they're in the private sector churn.

57 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Can't do the private / public comparison, it's a con to play everyone off against each other.

There are too many weirdo's that need to measure against others for their self worth and are happy earning a pound if they think others are only earning 99p. When we should all be aspiring to help each other to a pound and a penny.

Perhaps not a direct comparison but at a granular level I think we should.  Imo avoiding the conversation has helped speed up the race to the bottom for a few reasons.

We don't talk roles or security. Why does the private sector pay so more than the public sector doing the same job, for example in the JobCentre. But in schools, with academies, that's often reversed, unless you're in high level management?
Why does the public sector pay conversation focus on nurses but ignore conversations about mid-level management, and agency staff salaries? And even the benefits they don't get, for example ir35.
Why does affordability not enter into this at all? For example, I mentioned childcare. But you can go even deeper and look at how planning changes have stifled the amount of key worker housing.

This whole debate reminds me of the rise of UKIP. The last thing we want is to ignore a really important conversation for decades until we hit breaking point and the public sector starts dying on its behind......oh wait....

7 minutes ago, TrentVilla said:

Well... funny you should say that, I've got some magic beans I'm looking to sell and would you believe it I'm willing to let them go for £19'999!.......

..................... But don't forget you will have two lots stamp duty to pay, one on this property and then again on a bigger property in x years.

 

I don't think there's stamp duty under £125,000 and there used to be some discount mechanism for right to buy.
SLDT on the second property though, that's an extra likely 3% unless you sell the rental.

Maybe I'm wrong, I better check. something I should really know!

10 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Never seen that kind of money before. Hopefully it can set us up. Just want to do the right thing and not **** it up hence why I'm hoping for some solid advice from people.

Awesome  

It's all personal but in my opinion if I could cement a roof over my head any salary I had would serve to top up the value of my house when/if I wanted to move. Or in your case, maybe rent it out. 

Obviously I don't know where you live but if it's in the Midlands then £50k is a good price for a house, I guess you'll know your local market. The price isn't going to drop unless you're in Scunthorpe and if anything, it will go up in value, particularly at £50k.

There's lots that influences the value of a home but at 35 in this jobs and housing climate, I'd love the security of homeownership.

4 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Ive just came into 20k. Live in council house and can buy for 50k. House is a tad small but we can sell or rent it out after 5 years of buying it. Also wife's brother wants us to go in shares with him on his mums bungalow which can be bought for 25k. Good idea or not, or are we best putting the 20k down on a bigger house. Want to invest it instead of leaving it in bank.

If I had the chance of security for that sort of money I would go for it. Good luck to you whatever you decide.

Ahhh housing policy. For the few, not the many.

Quote

Contaminated blood scandal: Theresa May orders inquiry

Inquiry to look into deaths of 2,400 people after thousands were infected with hepatitis C and HIV mostly in 1970s and 80s

Ministers have announced a full inquiry into how thousands of people were infected with hepatitis C and HIV by contaminated blood transfusions, following a long campaign by backbench MPs and pressure groups.

The decision by Downing Street came hours before the government faced possible defeat in a vote on an emergency motion about the need for an inquiry into the scandal that is believed to have contributed to 2,400 deaths.

Theresa May’s spokesman said she and the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, had told the cabinet on Tuesday that an inquiry into the contaminated blood scandal was required.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/11/contaminated-blood-scandal-theresa-may-orders-inquiry

3 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

I think there is also an element of social media outrage here from people that didn't bother listening to the whole speech and the context in which he gave his answer  (partly because the version that did the rounds and stirred the outrage was deliberately edited to suit an agenda)

he was answering a question about a Marshall plan type scenario  and saying that merely chucking money at Africa isn't the solution  and that if France was to help Africa, a plan must be developed by and with African leaders and according to African interest. 

this must be my personal  equivalent of Hitler v Stalin  , which is the worse of the 2 evils , defending the French or Defending Twitter users

Thanks for posting. It would have taken me a few days to listen to the whole speech but I'm more inclined to get it out of the way. Goddam twitter twonks.

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

You start on 22,000; far less than most professions you go to uni for (nevermind for 4 years)

Your workload and expectation levels from day one simply aren't worth it.

Ha.

Taking on more responsibilities when you're already working, often, a 60/70 hour week simply isn't worth the few hundred quid a month.

The issue is two-fold but the big issue is getting people into the profession and keeping them there. Experienced teachers are just people who got better at giving up their lives.

That's more than many university students first jobs and regularly, with higher final salaries. In the long run that counts for a lot.
You also don't need to go to University to become a teacher but it's the most recognised route.

I would like to throw a few things in the mix. Teachers not only get more holiday but potentially cheaper childcare and 3 months without it, around £50 a day. Public sector employees are typically on a points system which means they can get pay upgrades as standard and earn more with extra responsibilities. Teachers also have a skill that is internationally recognised (where salaries can be quite high) and many keep their experience points when they move jobs. Their jobs are also fairly secure.

60/70 hour week? I'd kill for one of those plus a teachers salary. But many of us choose the jobs we go into and regularly that is not representative of workload, inflation or living costs.
The workload really is the killer though, it not only needs to be reduced but made more representative of the actual job. Imo that's the biggest problem for teachers and is very unfair. At least my 90+ hour weeks are deliverable projects and not just admin...well....lol

There's also a difference between primary and secondary school teaching, including workload. We need to start teasing out that conversation because it doesn't just impact teachers but teaching itself. A quick look at the academisation of the two (and salary/security potential in each different role) shows you the problem is more complicated than pay and workload.

25 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Yep. Shite working conditions and abuse from the majority of the population.

Don't forget very good pay too! 

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

Once again, politics is not only what happens behind closed doors in meetings with lobbyists, it's also what happens (in fact, it's primarily what happens) in the public sphere. 

And in the public sphere, May spent the previous 11 months calling anyone who disagreed with her 'unpatriotic' and encouraging friendly media outlets to call people with different beliefs 'saboteurs' and 'enemies of the people'. I have no sympathy for her now she's fallen on hard times. 

Exactly! And May was rejected wasn't she?!!!! The media saw through it and the electorate gave her a kicking! 

I am not asking for sympathy for her, I am asking people to look past their ideologies and solve our problems! That's us guys, voters, MP's, parties, the media...everybody!

If government needs ideas why not help them? Just because they asked before the election and it wasn't reported the the public sphere doesn't mean it didn't happen! Just like the pathetic stores run by pro-Labour papers this morning, it's rhetoric or the worst kind of politics.

I fully expect someone like Corbyn to co-operate because while he hates the Conservatives, he's not entrenched enough to be for the few and not the many.....well, time will tell!

11 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Why go to the press with it if it was an honest hand of cooperation? It's coercion, a threat. Work with us (read 'do what we say') or be killed by the line we'll spin first.

This doesn't happen if she had more seats. It's blatant petty politics that has the brass neck to make out those that oppose it are the ones playing games.

Maybe the press wasn't interested in stories of co-operation, or they might have published info about the many cross party Brexit meetings that have already happened?

The Conservatives have 100% invited all parties to get involved well before the election. I know because I attended some of the meetings! Is it enough? Nowhere near, neither is the conversation! But it's many many times better than what Labour are, or aren't doing.

26 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Might I suggest that the Tories are less interested in doing what's good for the country and more thinking 'you **** are getting tarred with us'.

Maybe! But do you think it's better to stand on a platform of opposition or stand up to be counted in the conversation? I know what sort of party and MP i'd want to be and which should get my vote.

17 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

And of course "cooperating" will mean nothing short of going along with every single thing that the tories try to push through that's tangentially related to Europe. 

How much compromise do you think will be coming from the tory camp?

Who cares! Set an agenda of solutions because you understand policies and the campaigning will take care of itself, especially if you're Labour! That's basically how Corbyn finally achieved his platform, because others didn't co-operate! Even his party!

Plus, compromise lifted so many people out of income tax, stimulated apprenticeships and delivered pupil premiums, but heck, what's cooperation worth when you can be anti-Conservative instead.

8 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The issue will be Labour will be damned whatever they do.

Help and they get tarred with the disaster too.

Don't and Brexit failed because Labour undermined it, etc.

There's a strong element of truth to that but so what? Their job is fix the country, not cement their careers! For the many not the few indeed!

Whatever side of the house, spectrum or debate you are, if you can't co-operate during Brexit (and don't want to), then you really should get punished by the electorate.

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

That is pretty funny.

During the election campaign she talked about how Corbyn would be 'naked and alone' during Brexit negotiations. turns out that May is naked, alone, and begging the opposition to keep her company.

I don't see the relevance unless you care less about policy than politics? Why argue who is the bigger prat when we should be solving problems?

You can say 'begging' if you like but it would be very helpful if Brexit conversations got cross-party support. Other parties have tried to get those meetings together (and we've had some successful ones) but Labour seem particularly disengaged and their ministers don't appear to know a thing.
Maybe they do, but it would be nice if they showed that instead of saying stupid things like 'the conservatives are begging for policies"

Good job we have this new type of politics eh! 

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

*wakes up, sees Tories in disarray*

What's happened? I hope you're not talking about May asking for Brexit contribution from other parties?

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm sorry, but I've read this post several times and I don't understand what it means, or what it suggests doing that we are not currently doing today. 

Could you give some concrete examples, or at least explain it a little more clearly?

In part, it requires predicting future/identifying existing market opportunities and supporting them accordingly.  It could be through direct access to investment finance, regulatory change, procurement or other.

When we wanted to lower VAT for green deal products the European Court of Justice ruled against us. That impacted our high tech design industry who in the advent of technical changes to manufacturing, both in the supply and manufacturing process, we not able to invest in British made/designed products. Consumers were also impacted as no good standard was established. This not only stifled an innovative sector we have been leaders in (Aston Uni for example) but impacted the employment opportunities within that field. We also saw good wind companies being bought by foreign investors as they couldn't find enough capital or investment here....in part due to a nervousness from Government about competition law.

Being outside the EU we could encourage growth in very many industries, particularly with how the supply chain of components works internationally and the advent of something like 3D printing. 

But it's not just industry. New fisheries policy could simultaneously lower domestic prices and increase exports. Conservation projects (which we would need to have to manage fish stocks) would improve academic and tourist opportunities. Imo we have a very warped way of looking at rural and coastal communities contribution to the wider economy..

I understand it's a bit of a 'utopia' and it's a bloody difficult challenge but I feel we do have some great resources that in the modern world, could benefit both our domestic market/society and embrace many of the changes going on in the burgeoning economies.
For whatever reason, and I don't always think it's the EU, I don't feel we've done a good enough job at supporting our natural resources....or even identifying what they are!