itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

44 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Multiple prominent 'Leave' campaigners stated that we wouldn't be leaving the single market, with one saying it would be madness.

We hear a lot about 'Remain' scare stories; yet none, if any, have been debunked as we haven't left yet.

I agree with that in essence and leaving will tell us if terrorist attacks increase, budget airlines stop flying here and we're all £4,700 worse off every year....

However, it does happen and in prominent places. From a Guardian article.

Quote

The construction sector suffered its worst quarter for four years following the vote to leave the EU and, in a blow to government hopes for better housing supply, homebuilding stalled.

They should have spoken to industry instead of using stats that suited their agenda; but then that's not how scare works. 
Our members and other trade associations noted an immediate pick up in sales and inquiries as some certainty was finally delivered with the ref....I did tell the Guardian; strangely they weren't interested.

27 minutes ago, blandy said:

Um, The question was should we leave or remain part of the EU, wasn't it?. The EU is a co-operative and trading union. The EU existed before the single market. The EU is more than the single market, much more. The EU gives citizens rights and protection, it makes law about the environment, and health and standards and funds science and infrastucture and education and has policies on movement of people and on policing and on policy to the likes of Israel and Russia..and I could go on.

So fundamentally I belive you are wrong to claim the EU is the single market and just a trading block.

Now, this ignorance thing...

You're talking about something created post war that has changed beyond recognition. It's much more, than many expected and wanted it to be. Plus, no EU, no single market....chicken, egg.

And it leads nicely onto that ignorance; are you saying we can leave the EU and remain part of the single market without negotiation? Or do you believe subsequent treaties block that option? If I'm wrong then fair enough but nothing about the language, actions or campaigns make me see it any different.

Of course I am not seriously suggesting that's it's just a trading block, it's so much more; but it concentrated on being a trading block which is why a message about English being less important was delivered in English, Africa is treated as a cashcow by EU policy, our desire to talk people protection was kicked into the long grass and historic borders such as the Irish one will remain under the microscope instead of under the radar. 
All these decisions are about trade, because the EU is more concerned with trade that co-operation. Even it's terms of co-operation and entry are based on trade.  
That's why the question to leave was about the single market and why everyone, leave or remain, used that fact to either promote or condemn arguments.

I get your original point but we're here now and we are having exactly the same debates. Being pedantic about the question is not helpful when everyone who did any research knew the potential reality of their vote.

47 minutes ago, blandy said:

Ahem

There are cases supporting either side, so to 'ahem' with such confidence misses the point made in the long quote!
ECJ decisions are unpredictable as we saw with the greendeal. 

I'll also include the section of the article which you missed out. He starts with 'will not' and ends with 'should fervently hope'.

Quote

Sorry Nigel but EU law will not prohibit a properly handled nationalisation of energy utilities.

Nigel Farage thinks EU law prevents nationalisation. Ironically he seems to have got this from a recent post on Left Futures by Westminster University’s Danny Nicol. Professor Nicol argues that the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) and EU liberalisation directives prohibit renationalisation of energy utilities, as proposed by Jeremy Corbyn.

Btw this isn't an attack but you're a smart cookie so I was surprised you posted in the manner you did.

3 hours ago, blandy said:

That's rubbish twice Dem. Firstly "the people" didn't ask to leave the single market. That wasn't the exam question. Secondly Cameron ran away the day after the result. He delivered nothing. May has started the process, and God knows where it's heading, but no-one's delivered on anything.

I don't get this point of view. Leaving the EU is leaving the single market because the EU is the single market; it's a trading union not a co-operative one. (exampled many times by Junker and the EU post Brexit)
It was mentioned by 'Remain' scare stories (facts) throughout the campaign and reiterated by many 'Leavers'.

It's like the battlebus; only the very entrenched still use it to criticise 'Leave' because they weren't interested in what was being said or even how they said it. 

The same ignorance has already permeated our papers this morning with the 'Labour taking us back to the 1970's' story. The radio is full of callers regurgitating headlines and not reality and it bloody stinks.

On 4/25/2017 at 06:09, blandy said:

We build more cars here than we've ever done and the factories are efficient. We have unfettered access, for the moment, to the single market. We are good at making and selling cars. As we know, Nissan and the rest very much regard the single market as key to business and so to the jobs of all the workers at their factories and those of their suppliers etc.

Definitely correct. My dad works in parts manufacturing for a now American company and it's vital. However; for the last decade he's been told the plant is moving so historically there is a little bit of 'all talk'. So far so good and they won some new orders, though brexit is clearly making companies think tax advantages abroad.

Efficiency is definitely one important factor in why they are staying however I am going to question where you got your stats from. To me it seems 2000 was the glory year with car ownership in the 25m mark. We have a lot more cars on our and foreign roads, so perhaps the stats aren't actually all that great?

As with San Fran and the EV car fiasco, Japanese companies are already moving in to try and realise a marketplace post-Brexit. 

1 hour ago, mockingbird_franklin said:

Tony is correct, yes they may have been influenced to see property as a way to make a fast buck, but the majority of the problem comes from deregulation of the banking sector and both the red and blue tory party are to blame for that. wasn't it mervin king who said we have the worst possible banking system, and that banking system had many of the checks and balances removed.

 

Apart from the obvious issues caused by the financial crash, feel free to elaborate as banking is not my specialty! 

58 minutes ago, bobzy said:

The majority of voters will not read into what the parties are offering and they won't compare and reflect on the likely impact stated policies may have on their lives.  I cannot see any reason why anyone who does this and is under, say, 35 would currently vote for a Conservative government.

What a whole host of voters like is a really simple message that they can back and then forget about politics for any <x> number of years.  The exact thing happened with Brexit, which no-one really knows the long-term implications of.  However, it's real easy to get behind "control our borders".

At the moment, the media (be it social or otherwise) is telling us that Corbyn would be a terrible leader (why?) and that the Tories are best placed to "guide us through Brexit" (why?) - therefore, it will be a Tory landslide.

Okay, I'll give you a few reasons that aren't wrapped in convenient stats. (eg- levels of employment which are skewed by temp work and zero hours contracts)

T-Levels - About bloody time. Apprenticeships are vital and thank god they have been a focus so we could progress to T-Levels. Concentrating exclusively on pre-16 is wrong.
Fairer Funding in Schools - Suddenly Labour are vehemently against it on the grounds they would spend more....not deliver more! Many teachers also support the policy.
Housing - Whatever people say IT IS local authorities that are stopping supply coming through, May is changing Cameron's 'demand' direction and thank god, because Labour don't get it and created this mess in the first place! Especially in London. HA's are even impacted by local politics.
Brexit - Do you want a party who understands the seriousness of the decision or one which says they understand but don't speak to industry? Tories listen, Labour often look for soundbites.
Increase in personal tax allowance - We can thank the Lib Dems for this, but again, the Tories do listen to good advice and May is much better than Cameron for it.

Of course there are many reasons against but I agree, 'the majority of voters will not read into what the parties are offering and they won't compare and reflect on the likely impact stated policies may have on their lives.' You may have illustrated that perfectly...

Your brexit reasoning can also be applied to joining the EU too. Nobody told the people we'd swap manufacturing for arts, state aid (no matter how necessary/relevant) for a European court, local for big business and an increase from 9 to 28 voting members. Yet that's what happened and was always going to happen......just like the likely change we'd leave the single market etc....people have to think about the consequences too, you can't just blame politicians for campaigns or we'd be savaging remain every day!

Finally, the Corbyn criticism is a disgrace and I agree wholeheartedly. I'm really angry that he never got a proper chance. Though, he's not really progressed his message while in debates and his replies are often soundbites or confused ramblings (though generally great content).
The party is to blame and the media loves an ongoing scoop but he doesn't help himself, for example, he still sticks to Diane Abbot like 'ahem' and it must be great to know all those incredibly bright under 28 years olds to take up senior positions......

33 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

My word, no wonder May doesn't want to do debates.

She has been shambolic in PMQ's today.

She is pretty sharp tongued when prepared but when questioned directly I'm not sure she's either stern enough to be like Thatcher or evasive enough to be like Cameron.

Having said that I have probably seen 2 questions from Corbyn which made me think hmmmm, how would I answer that. He's a horrible questioner despite having great material. 

6 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

you included "messed it all up " though as part of your comment  ... I'm not convinced that your parents (for example ) have ruined any 18 years old future by their actions ,anymore than mine have (for example)

Depends, did they vote Labour in 2001 and 2005?

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

You missed "the biggest block who pulled young people out of the EU"

Young people didn't vote in great enough numbers so perhaps the EU wasn't that important to them?

Also houses prices are unaffordable,welfare has been cut, free education is no more but the EU continues do ignore their stakeholders as trade is so important....leaving the EU might be the best thing to have happened to young people. Especially if it kicks the EU and the UK up the behind.  

13 hours ago, PompeyVillan said:

To be honest, and I'm not being insulting but it think many people believe that the anti Tories, like myself, are exaggerating. 

They hear some of the things I perceive and point out as immoral but they don't see them. 

They don't experience them themselves.

I'm not being critical, I work with liberal but politically ambivalent people who have said things in a general sense like "Well things have been okay for me under the Conservatives". 

Or "When I last went to the doctors it was good". 

Call them "Shy Tories" if you want, they're not evil or selfish monsters that hate the poor. Just people who are probably not that bothered, and thought New Labour was quite"trendy" too. They might be slightly bothered by immigration too.

Then there are of course those that are ideologically driven by Conservative politics like @tony29 who eat babies, kick puppies, drive with full beams on at all times and steal from collection  boxes.

 

Ignorance is bliss.
I sometimes attend some high level political events where v wealthy donors appear (usually Labour events). Imo there is little difference between the two parties at that level; the level which runs the party....

You do make a good point though;
A Lib Dem potentially winning in Richmond.
Labour in Birmingham keeping seats.
Caroline Lucas voters forgetting the Green record in the city.
Labour voters forgetting that the guys who made all the mistakes are still running the party.

I make my voting decision on how engaged my local candidate is, not on the rhetoric put out by twitter/parties/uninformed voters/media. When I lived in Moseley it was Jerry Evans, near Lichfield Chris Pincher and now in Brighton, well, the opposition to the Tories do not deserve speaking about. Maybe I'll go independent.

2 hours ago, sexbelowsound said:

https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#/

Useful website if anyone is interested in the current deficit within schools. My school is currently going through the same thing with 19 members of staff in danger of redundancy.

You can check the schools in your area by searching. Don't do it via the map as some schools don't appear. The estimates are rough but knowing what I know they are very close to the truth.

Useful but sadly not that accurate.

One school I know has a budget cut of 5 teachers/15% (according to that site).
Speaking to the Head who runs it they are actually in surplus next year and need extra staff; which they can afford.

I'll try and find out the impact on the other two schools they manage/have managed.

1 hour ago, dAVe80 said:

My home town makes it on another top 10. 10 areas worst-hit by the Tories' housing benefit cut for youngsters (Figures show a 'very rough estimate' by the House of Commons Library of the number of 18-21 year olds on Housing Benefit, with no children and not on incapacity benefits or Income Support as of November 2016):

Birmingham, Ladywood (230)

Hackney North and Stoke Newington (180)

Croydon North (150)

Nottingham East (140)

Birmingham, Erdington (130)

South Swindon (130)

Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (120)

Middlesbrough (110)

Bristol West (100)

Leeds Central (100)

If only we could get across to the younger electorate, what an opportunity they have for change, if they used their hard fought right to vote. 

I hope they don't vote Labour either. The architects of many Tory policies.

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

There was talk recently if the student loan book being flogged. Dunno what happened on that front...

Worrying but apparently they're still talking about it.....

1 hour ago, Xann said:

Don't worry, The new Tory cuts in education should mean not too many children of the poor will trouble the higher echelons of learning.

I know a few primary schools who aren't worrying. Secondary schools are in quite a pickle.
Also higher echelons of learning? Seriously? As in what? Learning that gets you a job? Or education that lets you laud it over those deemed 'less intelligent?'

Do me a favour and actually look at some of the educational announcements. At the moment I am consulting on T-Levels and jesus christ do we have an opportunity to shift education away from the mess it currently stands. The mess Labour seem to think is the answer. Good god the Tory's don't get it but at least they're trying!

On 3/27/2017 at 20:06, chrisp65 said:

If my memory serves me right, the last time there was a significant deregulation of housing standards was....thatcher's tory government. Minimum sizes were reduced, including the height of ceilings which was scrapped. Ceilings just had to be high enough to open a door.

This country won't be happy until it's turned itself in to a full on Dickensian fayre.

Quite some time ago eh! If working out whether regulation has been strengthened (before harking on about something fairly irrelevant) I'd have refereed to the Housing Standards Review.....Tories were in charge; sorry!

What we can say is that Cameron was awful and built too few homes with too much emphasis on demand; but Labour, they are the real villains of the piece. Not only do their councils stifle planning hugely but the party are guilty of even now, misunderstanding the issue completely. Plus remember, the modern day planning process has Labour all over it. (we will soon see if May is as bad/lazy).

Tbf John Healey is a nice guy who knows the issues and is willing to listen to solutions.....however, Labour appear a party of opposition rather than scrutiny and so we rarely have a reasoned debate on the subject.....well, unless lots of Tory's turn up. 

If you were forced to portion total blame at any party (and I don't think that's fair), then Labour made a real mess of housing in London.

23 minutes ago, blandy said:

I probably didn't word that very well . All courts have problems - cost, time, out of touch magistrates and judges. What I should have said perhaps is that for donkeys years, it's been accepted without complaint about legitimacy to be the correct final arbiter of....etc. I know the Tory right wing and UKIPs don't like it based on (IMO specious) soveieignty arguments, but by and large it's accepted across the EU as legitimate.

Don't worry about the wording. I get you completely. I just wanted to clarify before I throw my toys out of the pram  (not this time thank god)

I'm not going to pretend I know enough about ECJ rulings, I simply don't and you're right that it is accepted as legitimate. (v good choice of word ;))
Annoyingly I don't even have the time to look it up this weekend but I do know a few cases that didn't really make a lot of sense because of sovereignty. Not small things either.

It's easy to bang on about but the greendeal is one such example. At times the one rule for all (ECJ interpreted) is so far askew from the reality for others. The EU and ECJ has done a spectacularly poor job at realigning that. Though DC probably emboldened them with his pathetic renegotiation.

I see parallels with yesterdays school holiday decision. If schools and govt are going to be so heavy handed (rightly or wrongly) perhaps they should be more responsible for the consequences? Also I'd guess in many court scenarios the decision makers sometimes get the rulings they need and not the ones that are right. Though of course that comes down to opinion.

It's another discussion that should have been had fully pre-referendum. I wanted to know what influence the ECJ has and why that was good/bad. Nobody could give me the answer so I made decisions based on the little info I had.

16 minutes ago, blandy said:

Au contraire. It makes enormous sense for the body set up to adjudicate on trade disputes etc. within the EU marketplace to be the arbiter for matters within that marketplace (or specifically the marketplace that included UK, then didn't include it, then included it again but as a non-EU member). It's basically the same marketplace covering the same nations, but with the status of one of the 28 nations haveing changed, at that nation's instigation.

What kind of profligate fool would think setting up another body just to cover UK disputes would be a good idea, when one already exists and has been used without problems for donkey's years? That would be the type of pointless beaurocracy that the UKIPers etc. have been raging against.

Just to clarify, are you saying the ECJ has been used without problems for donkey's years?

1 hour ago, hippo said:

Surely though any savings will have a limited lifespan. Yesterdays appeal must have cost loads in manpower - and the success rate at appeal is close on 70% and rising. More people are going to go to tribunal - increasing cost overheads - and making the cost of running the first 2 assessments a total waste. 

I thought the tories were supposed to thrive on ruthless efficiency !. 

Exactly right. And no, the problem is the Tories don't know what they are impacting; they just assume life is like X,Y and Z without really exploring the reality. Hence the panel debacle. 
I used to think it was arrogance but on too many occasions I have experienced it as ignorance. So many just don't know any better!

Just for the record I started my benefits advice journey under the Labour party and the mess you see before you is their structure. They devalued our public services to the point of almost impossible return, especially in benefits.

I hold Labour very much accountable for this mess, I didn't expect the Tories to do anything less than rub their hands with glee at how privatised Labour made the benefits and job searching system. The Tories are doing what they always do, think this as about work and not a route into work.

I used to work with people who claimed these benefits, or more accurately I worked for a private company who tried to get claimants off them through work, or reassessment (when they were judged fit for work).

It was a real issue and I made a special effort to help people when they truly needed it....much to the displeasure of my company. They say it doesn't but it does work like that.
At least the panels have started to work for and not against claimants, though it took many years for that to happen.

The whole system stinks, right from the jobcentre to the assessments. Sadly @Stevo985 has it right, they rely on people either not making the effort or struggling to understand the language and process.

Having said that the most successful claimants were always the ones who said nothing....in many cases honesty is not something that favours a claimant.
Glad you saw justice, eventually.

4 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

One of the most persistent and mystifying conservative delusions (and I chose a small 'c' for a reason, this applies not only to British conservatives but most of them around the world as far as I can tell) is their failure to understand that there are other people just like them, other nationalists, hawks and hard-liners, in other countries, putting the exact opposite pressure onto their governments. 

A bit of reality would be great eh!

The same can be said for those who complained EU citizens should not be used as a bargaining chip. It's incredible how ignorant people can be, as @MakemineVanilla also pointed out.
Too many people only see one point of view without at least accepting the reality of another position.

3 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

Call me stupid, but I like the thought of globalization.  I've always found partnerships and a common goal better than singularity.  Mankind can do incredible things when they need to.  I'd like to see every penny aimed at defending ourselves put to science research, education and healthcare    

Great post @lapal_fan. How we needed more of this sort of perspective pre-referendum.

I will however throw a cat among the pigeons and perhaps someone else can put a perspective or even facts forward; that is defending spending on defence.

Despite all too often bringing pain and sorrow, defence gives a lot to society. Some nations use 40% of defence spending on RnD, with tech regularly reaching the open market. This forum exists because of defence spending. 
When we look at private RnD we could easily argue that it's in their interest to advance relative to competition. And in the public sphere there are many experiments for the sake of experiments. (not always a bad thing)
Defence navigates that political and competitive minefield with fewer burdens and although it could be argued it's for very specific applications, those applications often become part of a complete product.
For example, defence RnD in batteries has amped heavily since drones developed a real purpose, supported by extensive defence spending on GPS.

With the little knowledge I have I feel it might be a better solution to share more military RnD and patents with universities/researchers rather than considerably drop military funding. That way two public entities (one favouring society) could be part of the process.

5 hours ago, PieFacE said:

This tonight; looks good from the trailer.

 

It's really quite entertaining. Enjoyed it thoroughly.

Not strictly a movie but movie length; however, Simon Amstells Carnage is both brilliant and hilarious.

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

I'm a Remainer obviously, I studied the EU a fair bit, so I have to be honest that the EU does have a democratic deficit. Whilst we vote for the European Parliament, it's powers aren't that much beyond a watchdog. It has to overview the EU in it's entirety and it has to effectively consider laws put in front of it. The Commission is the main problem. It's made of figures nominated by their respective countries (who then swear to act to the benefit of the EU as a whole - in essence they have to act as Europeans not 'British' or 'French' or whatever) so aren't strictly voted for. The Council is just representatives of each government, so voted for nationally.

It's not as bad as people suggest, but it's not good either.

I felt our need to take EU regulation and implement its structure everywhere a real issue. It definitely blurred the lines of where the EU influences. eg - procurement.

The watchdog comment is also pretty interesting, I guess there are directives and regulations too. 
Though language is important too. If you look at the green deal and VAT, I believe our interpretation of the language was a little different from the ECJ's.

The worst thing about all of this is the four years wasted by people butting heads on issues that became too big for many to climb down from.
Good god I wish we'd have talked a little more about the EU.

10 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

I even found that whole "longest applause" for the wife of the dead Seal absolutely nauseating. Commentators who claimed he appeared 'Presidential' that night really went down in my opinion. 

I found the whole stunt event, cheap, tawdry and completely undignified. 

But that's US politics. Their system has been cheap, tawdry and completely undignified for decades. In the context of US politics HE did look Presidential.

I think that's something many anti-Trump people forget. Both those of us looking in and the Americans who have suddenly found their policy voice now there's a President with 'vilify me' stuck to his back, front and everywhere else.

2 hours ago, ml1dch said:

If there's one thing we've learned from this sorry episode it's that asking the public is a surefire way to get a stupid answer to the question you've asked.

Do you feel the same about the one to get us into the EEC?