PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   BREXIT (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/619673-brexit.html)

ORAC 20th Aug 2019 10:47

We are not talking about the current recess, that ends on 3rd September, we are discussing the following recess for the party conferences, which will be voted upon once once the return.

Based in past precedent they should vote for a recess from 12th Sept to 8th Oct. With an election probably imminent Labour CLPs will be desperate to hold theirs in order to set their policy on Brexit etc and Conservatives vote for it regardless, so I would expect the vote to pass.

https://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs.../recess-dates/

Cancelling the recess won’t change the arithmetic on days until an election, that deadline will have already passed, and there will also be ample time left for any attempt to pass legislation to either succeed or fail.


ShotOne 20th Aug 2019 10:54

For once Iím kind of in agreement with you racedo. If farms -or any other business rely on poverty wages they are unviable. Just like costa, recently in news for outrageous deductions. If they canít or wonít pay reasonably to attract staff they shut down and good riddance. Does the remain argument really hinge on supply of sub-min wage labourers?

ATNotts 20th Aug 2019 11:01


Originally Posted by ShotOne (Post 10549771)
For once Iím kind of in agreement with you racedo. If farms -or any other business rely on poverty wages they are unviable. Just like costa, recently in news for outrageous deductions. If they canít or wonít pay reasonably to attract staff they shut down and good riddance.

At present, through the mechanisms of Income Support and Tax Credits, in many areas now all rolled into Universal Credit, businesses of all types can get away, quite legally, with paying the minimum wage confident in the knowledge that the government (that's the taxpayer to you and I) will top up their meagre wages. Can that be right? No not really. A business should stand on it's own two feet, and if the business can't be sustained by paying proper wages then they should go out of business.

The hospitality industry generally, as well as many other such as horticulture are guilty of this.

NoelEvans 20th Aug 2019 11:02


Originally Posted by ShotOne (Post 10549771)
For once I’m kind of in agreement with you racedo. If farms -or any other business rely on poverty wages they are unviable. Just like costa, recently in news for outrageous deductions. If they can’t or won’t pay reasonably to attract staff they shut down and good riddance.

I suspect that you are wealthy enough that you won't complain about the consequent increase in food prices that your suggestions would bring about? Ultimately any wages are driven by the consumers' desires to get 'owt for nowt' and it will be an attitude that will be most prevalent in the big cities. I once saw an excellent sticker on a Dutch car "Farmers feed cities". A few of those posting here need to think about that one.

101917 20th Aug 2019 11:08

I cannot claim responsibility for this, but thought it worthwhile to post.

https://mail.aol.com/webmail/getPart...scope=STANDARD

NoelEvans 20th Aug 2019 11:27


Donald Tusk accuses Boris Johnson of trying to impose hard border in Northern Ireland
What is he on about?

Due to the Common Travel Area, there will be no 'hard border' for people. Britain has said that it will not impose a 'hard border' for goods. So who is going to 'impose' a 'hard border'? Out of all of those combinations it only leaves the EU wanting to impose a hard border for goods. How, in their distorted thinking, can they claim that Boris Johnson is 'trying to impose' this??!!

I get back to my question that I have asked several times:
The 'backstop' is there to keep that border 'open' in some 'maybe one day' situation that future negotiations have not yet come up with a solution. The 'backstop' is not acceptable to the UK Parliament, so that that is dead and gone. Insistence on retaining the 'backstop' makes any deal unlikely therefore that border will run into that 'no solution' situation not 'maybe one day' but on 1 November. So how on earth can insisting on the backstop be "protecting the border" from a 'hard border'???!! The EU's stance on this just defies all common sense. The Monster Raving Loon Party's policy on this is far more same than the EU's and I just have to repeat it again:
"There will be no need for a backstop to the Brexit negotiations; weíll use Alec Stewart as wicket-keeper."

Economics101 20th Aug 2019 11:30

Maybe this is in the wrong thread, but I think I have the solution to the Brexit mess. Boris should go to his friend Trump and tell him to forget Greenland, why not buy Northern Ireland instead. The Donald could be persuaded to build an enormous wall along the North-South border (his conversation with Varadkar a few months ago showed that he thought we had a border problem like the US-Mexico one). No need for a Backstop. :ok:
The DUP would surely feel at home with the wilder red-state Evangelicals, and they would not have to interact with those pesky backward Southern Fenians. We in the South would not have to deal with those pesky Nordies. Brexit, the gift that keeps on giving!

ShotOne 20th Aug 2019 11:32

We already pay dearly for this supposedly cheap food; aside from tax credits, the minuscule tax take from the ultra-low waged doesnít even begin to cover the cost of services they consume.

wiggy 20th Aug 2019 11:40

From the Guardian's Berlin correspondent:


If you wanted to remind EU leaders of the need for an instrument as binding as the backstop, reneging on your predecessor’s assurances on citizens’ rights seems a pretty good way to go about it.

Fly Aiprt 20th Aug 2019 11:48


Originally Posted by ShotOne (Post 10549790)
We already pay dearly for this supposedly cheap food; aside from tax credits, the minuscule tax take from the ultra-low waged doesnít even begin to cover the cost of services they consume.

Some posts here seem to indicate that the loss of EU subsidies and freedom of goods and labour movements will not hurt agriculture and consumers in the UK (as well as car industry, fisheries, etc.).
What remains to establish is by what mechanism this will happen.

Krystal n chips 20th Aug 2019 12:17


Originally Posted by ShotOne (Post 10549790)
We already pay dearly for this supposedly cheap food; aside from tax credits, the minuscule tax take from the ultra-low waged doesn’t even begin to cover the cost of services they consume.

Gosh ! fancy these people having the temerity to expect to be allowed to live ! ......but don't worry. As Javid and Boris are embarking on a no ( tax payer funded ) expense spared infrastructure and public sector spending spree, it can only be a matter of time before new workhouses are announced so they can all be confined in one location......which will reduce the costs considerably....

WB627 20th Aug 2019 12:21

Good Friday Agreement
 
The prospect of a hard border seems to be a hot topic at the moment in the media. What I can't understand is why the Good Friday Agreement will not prevent the imposition of a hard border. It looks to me like it would mean that the British Government have to ignore the agreement in the event of a no deal exit. As this is a legally binding international agreement, there must be consequences for ignoring it and imposing a hard border?

I am surprised that neither the Irish Government or the EU, have taken this matter to court to prevent it from happening.

Nor have I seen any explanation in the media as to how the Government will get round a hard border or contravening the Good Friday Agreement.

akindofmagic 20th Aug 2019 12:52


it can only be a matter of time before new workhouses are announced
I fail to see why a modern workhouse would be a bad idea. Why shouldn't people have to work for their (tax payer funded) benefits?

419 20th Aug 2019 13:13

Three important words (IMO) added.

Originally Posted by akindofmagic (Post 10549836)
I fail to see why a modern workhouse would be a bad idea. Why shouldn't fit and able people have to work for their (tax payer funded) benefits?


Fitter2 20th Aug 2019 13:30

The Withdrawal Agreement that the HofC has rejected 3 times would have imposed on Northern Ireland changes in their status which are incompatible with the Good Friday Agreement. It is the EU insistence on the backstop, and their refusal since triggering Article 50 to discuss trade (in clear contravention of Paragraph 2 of the Article) which has prevented discussion on avoidance of a 'hard border'. It is the EU which is endangering the GFA.

SWBKCB 20th Aug 2019 13:45


As for the EU citizen thing. Already the farmers who rely on seasonal workers are finding it difficult to recruit EU workers not least because of the perceived hostility to be found in England now but also because of the improvement in living conditions and educational opportunities and indeed jobs in their own country.

Agri workers coming to the UK excluding increased costs get 13% less than 3 years ago where as because Euro-Zloty rate has not changed any increase in minimum wage across EU countries they get the benefit of. Seasonal workers are voting with their pockets and going elsewhere and that is even before the abusive media rhetoric.
As always, life isn't black and white. It isn't either/or but a combination of both. Certainly in the horticultural sector, you won't get away with paying minimum wage for good quality, skilled labour (who do jobs I certainly couldn't/wouldn't want to do!)

WB627 20th Aug 2019 14:08


Originally Posted by Fitter2 (Post 10549856)
The Withdrawal Agreement that the HofC has rejected 3 times would have imposed on Northern Ireland changes in their status which are incompatible with the Good Friday Agreement. It is the EU insistence on the backstop, and their refusal since triggering Article 50 to discuss trade (in clear contravention of Paragraph 2 of the Article) which has prevented discussion on avoidance of a 'hard border'. It is the EU which is endangering the GFA.

It did cross my mind that the British Government would say we will not put controls on the border but, EU/Ireland, you go ahead and do so if you wish.

However, somehow, the border will need to be controlled to ensure the EU gets the import taxes due to it, unless they choose to forego any taxes on goods crossing from North to South and I doubt they would do that, because everything exported from the UK to the EU would go that way.

Catch 22 springs to mind. One thing is certain, it's going to get interesting and regardless of whoever actually puts controls on the border, the UK will get the blame.

wiggy 20th Aug 2019 14:30


Originally Posted by WB627 (Post 10549872)
It did cross my mind that the British Government would say we will not put controls on the border but, EU/Ireland, you go ahead and do so if you wish.

However, somehow, the border will need to be controlled to ensure the EU gets the import taxes due to it, unless they choose to forego any taxes on goods crossing from North to South..
.

If the UK leaves it's side of the NI Border unchecked doesn't that mean the UK are choosing to forego any checks on people crossing from South to North?

And since I'm here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...britain-brexit

SWBKCB 20th Aug 2019 14:31


However, somehow, the border will need to be controlled to ensure the EU gets the import taxes due to it, unless they choose to forego any taxes on goods crossing from North to South and I doubt they would do that, because everything exported from the UK to the EU would go that way.
Spot on - even without bringing the Irish border in to it, nobody has ever really squared the circle of how we have free trade agreements with the rest of the world and "frictionless" trade with the EU.

andrewn 20th Aug 2019 14:38


Originally Posted by SWBKCB (Post 10549885)
Spot on - even without bringing the Irish border in to it, nobody has ever really squared the circle of how we have free trade agreements with the rest of the world and "frictionless" trade with the EU.

Let's let the EU figure a solution out then. In the meantime we just crack on as normal. I'd say the UK side risks of this whole border malarkey are pretty minimal.

Come to think of it I suspect this is exactly what BJ and team are thinking as well...


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.