|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Wed 5 Aug 15:01
It wasn't going to be allowed to happen - 21 Tory MPs voted against it - but it's now inching ever closer, I believe. I'm sure there will be many voters who voted for Brexit but didn't want us to leave without a deal and I'd like to say "Hell mend them" but the trouble is it will affect the many more millions who didn't vote for Brexit, not to mention their children and grandchildren.
Now, where did I put my happy pills?
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 5 Aug 16:28
G.G. are you taking over from my Victor Meldrew Job ??
We are heading for a no deal because thats what Dominic wants
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 5 Aug 19:56
Scotland already lost £4bn due to Brexit. FFS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 5 Aug 20:20
Dougie Ross will have a word with BJ and get it sorted for us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 5 Aug 20:57
LOL ^^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 6 Aug 09:27
Those who run our country are totally set on no-deal, presumably because key financial backers will do well out of it. The Scottish Govt are dreading a winter-wave of the virus coinciding with a no-deal Brexit. There will be food and medicinal shortages with no-deal. Throw in a second wave, a second lockdown and a border in the Irish Sea and you have total chaos. If the only people to suffer were the people who voted for it, I’d celebrate their hardship, but it’s always the poor and the vulnerable who suffer so I won’t be cheering.
Opposition leaders made a poor decision last year to give the Government the General Election it wanted when the parliament actually still had the Government where it wanted it. It could have made sure no-deal was not an option, and arguably, it was still capable of stopping Brexit altogether. Corbyn and the other leaders were so negligent, and presumably deluded about their own chances, that it was almost criminal. The media have moved on because by having an election, the Opposition parties and the Parliament gave up the power it still held on the matter. Taking into account the feelings in the less enlightened parts of Englandshire, there is no great public outrage over Brexit or even no-deal. And of course all of the media is owned and managed by the privileged, and most of them are as far right as Wee Jinky used to be.
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Thu 06 Aug 09:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 6 Aug 10:07
That is a good post G.G.
I honestly thought that the people who voted to leave would have a re-think and vote the Tory's out at the last G.E.
How wrong was I :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 6 Aug 10:17
I still say that 'Leave' was the correct decision.
The EU is a busted flush, is destined to implode, and would have drained the UK of any/all remaining finance and resources in the process.
However, the current charge towards 'no deal' is rather suspicious, given the previous proclamations about how easy the 'oven-ready', 'Canada+ style' deal was gonna be.
Like others, I suspect that there are many Tory backers that will do very well out of a 'no deal', and to hell with everyone else...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 6 Aug 11:35
Quote:
Luxembourg Par, Thu 6 Aug 10:17
I still say that 'Leave' was the correct decision.
The EU is a busted flush, is destined to implode, and would have drained the UK of any/all remaining finance and resources in the process.
However, the current charge towards 'no deal' is rather suspicious, given the previous proclamations about how easy the 'oven-ready', 'Canada+ style' deal was gonna be.
Like others, I suspect that there are many Tory backers that will do very well out of a 'no deal', and to hell with everyone else...
That's fair enough, Lux. The EU is far from perfect, riddled as it is with corruption and bureaucracy, but I'd have preferred the UK to try and improve it from within, rather than walking away. Had we left with a good deal in place, I could have lived with that, even if only 37.5% of the electorate actually voted Leave.
Leaving without a deal fills me with dread. When you factor in the huge national debt accruing as a result of the pandemic, we could be looking at many decades of austerity.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 Aug 12:09
The EU isn't remotely close to being a busted flush. If you remember Brexit was going to be the domino that got the rest going..
If you have a quick look at any independent polling you'll find most of the attitudes toward the EU come out at a net positive as well. The main groups of people against the EU tend to be groups of nationalists.
In terms of money:
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2020/01/21/brexit-costs-close-to-matching-britains-total-eu-contributions-infographic/#7c45fefb1c55>
And that's before we've left the transition period. We've already lost jobs to the continent and assets under management in the UK have been diminished too.
We've also failed to protect in law:
Worker's rights
Environmental standards
Food standards
The NHS
Loss of Geographic Protection Indicators across the EU although there will be a UK equivalent for domestic use
We're also putting a border in Ireland after the lies saying we wouldn't.
Our future trade deals are potentially going to lose us money:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12342116
Although that's NZ press that's our own Government analysis being quoted. They didnt stick that on the side of a bus.
There's actually plenty more I could throw up but I can't be @rsed or I'd be here all day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 6 Aug 12:50
Once the queue of lorries are backed up to York some may realise what they voted for!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Thu 6 Aug 13:01
One good thing about the European Union is that, unlike another union I can think of, you can leave it without requiring the permission of other members!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 Aug 13:29
And you actually get to veto some of the most important decisions if they don't suit your country.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Thu 6 Aug 14:01
Quote:
GG Riva, Thu 6 Aug 11:35
Quote:
Luxembourg Par, Thu 6 Aug 10:17
I still say that 'Leave' was the correct decision.
The EU is a busted flush, is destined to implode, and would have drained the UK of any/all remaining finance and resources in the process.
However, the current charge towards 'no deal' is rather suspicious, given the previous proclamations about how easy the 'oven-ready', 'Canada+ style' deal was gonna be.
Like others, I suspect that there are many Tory backers that will do very well out of a 'no deal', and to hell with everyone else...
That's fair enough, Lux. The EU is far from perfect, riddled as it is with corruption and bureaucracy, but I'd have preferred the UK to try and improve it from within, rather than walking away. Had we left with a good deal in place, I could have lived with that, even if only 37.5% of the electorate actually voted Leave.
Leaving without a deal fills me with dread. When you factor in the huge national debt accruing as a result of the pandemic, we could be looking at many decades of austerity.
The national debt has not even increased by even 1% due to the pandemic.
It is so huge as it is what has been spent on the pandemic response is a drop in the ocean.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 6 Aug 15:08
Corby had little choice but to vote for a General Election once the other opposition parties supported one. Without a single Labour vote, the government still an adequate majority for an election, so had Labour voted against then the media would have claimed they were running scared.
The SNP acted in their own interests, anticipating that a General Election would strengthen their hand so it is understandable how they voted.
The Lib Dems were the useful idiots, a role they had all but mastered when propping up the Cameron regime. They claimed to believe that they could become the largest party in a new parliament by hoovering up the Remainer vote and that Jo Swinson could be the next PM. Instead she managed to lose her own seat. This is a party which believes in proportional representation and remaining in the EU yet has signally failed to advance the cause of either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 6 Aug 19:05
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 Aug 12:09
The EU isn't remotely close to being a busted flush. If you remember Brexit was going to be the domino that got the rest going..
Oh - I never once said that Brexit will bust the EU.
Italy, Spain and Greece will do that quite easily, without any help from UK.
I have friends and ex-colleagues working in the EU & EIB
- "extremely worrying" - is how they candidly describe the situation in Italy in particular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 6 Aug 21:23
3 countries are having financial difficulties and have a lot to do to get themselves back on track but its not the end if the EU.
More countries are flourishing than struggling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 6 Aug 23:52
<<3 countries are having financial difficulties and have a lot to do to get themselves back on track>>
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
And the award for understatement of the year goes to...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 Aug 08:42
Its not the end of the EU though is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Fri 7 Aug 09:52
I think that if the Scottish Government have any gumption, then they'll be discussing an "advisory" independence referendum on election day next May. The UK Government are legally bound to accept and implement the result of the election, so I reckon it would be extremely difficult legally for them to ignore the referendum result. Also forces the Unionists out to vote, otherwise they'd be faced with a massive SNP/Pro-Independence majority in Holyrood which the most certainly do not want - hold it on any other day and they could simply boycott and undermine the legitimacy of the vote.
As for the EU, I'm more inclined for Scotland to do a Norway, mainly to retain control of fisheries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 Aug 11:23
"As for the EU, I'm more inclined for Scotland to do a Norway, mainly to retain control of fisheries"
I don't entirely disagree with that but what you gain in influence over your fishing you lose in other larger areas of economic importance to Scorland so I would rather we were in with meaningful input to those decisions rather than the Norway option as fishing would still be a smaller part of our economy.
Both options are preferable to what we're looking at now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 7 Aug 11:28
Maybe the SNP should stand on a one policy manifesto, let's face it the tories got elected with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 7 Aug 15:35
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 Aug 08:42
Its not the end of the EU though is it?
No - at least not immediately - but would almost certainly be the end of the Euro, and without the Euro, the whole EU project fails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 Aug 16:05
It's not a natural follow on that any one of those leaving the Eurozone would cause it to collapse and even if it did it's a stretch to say that would end then end the EU. It existed for plenty of time before a single currency and there would be appetite in most countries for a Union afterwards too.
Independently their economies would be at the mercy of larger economies such as those of the US and China and the smaller economies would be dominated by even more countries. Acting as a block gives artificial power to all of the nations in that block even those that have larger economies.
If you look around the world the trend is to more and more unions and greater alignment of regulations to facilitate trade.
Prior to Covid kicking in the Eurozone was actually having some of it's best progress since the banking crisis and that was carrying the problems in Greece, Spain and Italy.
If the UK had remained in the EU it wouldn't have been responsible for bailing out the Eurozone. There's a good article here about previous debt issues and future debt issue for the Eurozone:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36456277
As I said before it's also extremely unlikely the EU will collapse and we've already lost more in a few years transitioning out of the EU than we paid as bet contributors for the entire time we were in it and we still face the prospect of a no deal Brexit which will exacerbate that problem.
The only people that seriously think the EU is going to collapse are folk that write for the Daily Express.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 7 Aug 17:26
The EU is the largest economy in the world. Be an idiot to split it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 7 Aug 17:42
Does that mean it would be idiotic to break up the world's sixth biggest economy?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 7 Aug 18:26
Not if you're looking to move into the biggest one 😉
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 7 Aug 19:16
Meanwhile a further 98 people die from Coronavirus!
Ignored by BBC who announce 2 people die when plane overshoots runway in India!😡😡😡
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 7 Aug 22:35
The national debt has not even increased by even 1% due to the pandemic.
Have you got figures for that, Sadindiefreak?
This is a party which believes in proportional representation and remaining in the EU yet has signally failed to advance the cause of either.
Although Elections to Holyrood, Scottish Local Authority Councils (and formerly to the European Parliament) all have (or had) more proportionality than FPTP
I think that if the Scottish Government have any gumption, then they'll be discussing an "advisory" independence referendum on election day next May.
An interesting idea HJ, but I think there are problems. One is an advisory vote has no legal status and Westminster is likely to ignore it (and will say so in advance). Two, it may increase the turnout in the Holyrood election and this may not favour the SNP. Three, I’m not convinced Nicola Sturgeon actually wants a referendum (for two reasons – one she’s afraid she’ll lose, and two, she’s afraid she might win).
Ignored by BBC who announce 2 people die when plane overshoots runway in India!
To be brutal, Covid deaths in the UK aren’t news, plane crashes are. TBF both stories are covered on the website.
To go back to the OP, in negotiations nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and there will be a great deal of posturing by both sides, both to influence the other side and to persuade their own side you really had their interests at heart, shortly before selling out. I wonder if all the CEOs of the German car manufactures have been on the phone to Frau Merkel yet, and whether the UK team really think they are negotiating from a position of strength. Whatever happens, it will be spun as being in the best interests of the British People (and a lot of people will feel let down). But right now, people aren’t particularly interested – nothing much has changed (yet) compared to the consequences of the pandemic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 7 Aug 23:01
I wonder if the CEOs of UK financial services industry have been on the phone to Johnson to tell him that the 26 billions pounds of services that they sell to the EU is under threat. Actually probably haven't bothered to phone him as they are all starting to speed up the rate if their relocation.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sat 8 Aug 02:53
Quote:
McCaig`s Tower, Fri 7 Aug 22:35
The national debt has not even increased by even 1% due to the pandemic.
Have you got figures for that, Sadindiefreak?
This is a party which believes in proportional representation and remaining in the EU yet has signally failed to advance the cause of either.
Although Elections to Holyrood, Scottish Local Authority Councils (and formerly to the European Parliament) all have (or had) more proportionality than FPTP
I think that if the Scottish Government have any gumption, then they'll be discussing an "advisory" independence referendum on election day next May.
An interesting idea HJ, but I think there are problems. One is an advisory vote has no legal status and Westminster is likely to ignore it (and will say so in advance). Two, it may increase the turnout in the Holyrood election and this may not favour the SNP. Three, I’m not convinced Nicola Sturgeon actually wants a referendum (for two reasons – one she’s afraid she’ll lose, and two, she’s afraid she might win).
Ignored by BBC who announce 2 people die when plane overshoots runway in India!
To be brutal, Covid deaths in the UK aren’t news, plane crashes are. TBF both stories are covered on the website.
To go back to the OP, in negotiations nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and there will be a great deal of posturing by both sides, both to influence the other side and to persuade their own side you really had their interests at heart, shortly before selling out. I wonder if all the CEOs of the German car manufactures have been on the phone to Frau Merkel yet, and whether the UK team really think they are negotiating from a position of strength. Whatever happens, it will be spun as being in the best interests of the British People (and a lot of people will feel let down). But right now, people aren’t particularly interested – nothing much has changed (yet) compared to the consequences of the pandemic.
It's less than 10% in meant to type. Finger trouble from me.
Just so you know how the 10% figure is arrived at.
National debt currently just short of 2 trillion.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/bulletins/publicsectorfinances/may2020
Amount spent including estimates of future spending this year on Covid comes to 190 billion.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52663523
That comes out at 9.5% of national debt.
Its certainly not an excuse for years of austerity since the National debt has increased by 94% since the Tories came to power in 2010. Up from 1.03 trillion to 2 trillion.
So an average of 9.4% a year.
So Covid is just like a years worth of the debt the Tories usually accrue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 8 Aug 07:35
So during the years of austerity we were still spending far more than we were making?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 8 Aug 08:23
The Tories didn't improve national debt in the slightest. Austerity saved sweet FA. All it did was make the people who vote that way think the benefit scroungers and immigrants who they wrongly assume are bleeding the country dry are being punished. The reality is that all the Tories have done is increase the risk of a public health crisis due to lack of support services.
I'll never understand why people are so blinkered to the Tories. They are scum of the highest order. It doesn't make you posh or better to vote for them - it makes you and idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sat 8 Aug 08:58
The Tories' reputation for financial competence is a complete myth but you won't read that in the Express/Mail/Telegraph. I'm always surprised Labour don't make more of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 8 Aug 09:32
Quote:
jake89, Sat 8 Aug 08:23
The Tories didn't improve national debt in the slightest. Austerity saved sweet FA. All it did was make the people who vote that way think the benefit scroungers and immigrants who they wrongly assume are bleeding the country dry are being punished. The reality is that all the Tories have done is increase the risk of a public health crisis due to lack of support services.
I'll never understand why people are so blinkered to the Tories. They are scum of the highest order. It doesn't make you posh or better to vote for them - it makes you and idiot.
Don't beat about the bush with mealy mouthed words, Jake. Just say what you really think, straight out.....😃
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 8 Aug 10:06
Was the national debt as high as 1.03 trillion when the Tories took over from Labour?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 8 Aug 10:48
Yes it was mate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 8 Aug 12:57
Fullfact really is a cracking website.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Sat 8 Aug 13:04
Yeah its quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sat 8 Aug 14:01
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Sat 8 Aug 07:35
So during the years of austerity we were still spending far more than we were making?
Yes but only because they cut taxes for the rich. Otherwise austerity might have worked. That was never the intention though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 8 Aug 15:20
Quote:
londonparsfan, Sat 8 Aug 10:48
Yes it was mate.
👍
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 6 Sep 09:37
No deal looking a cert just now G.G.
This from Aunty :-
The UK's chief Brexit negotiator has said the government is not "scared" of walking away from talks without a trade deal ready to come into force in 2021.
In practice, this would mean taxes on exports and customs checks.
It's a scenario which road hauliers say would cause "severe" disruption to supply chains, with border management systems not yet up and running to make sure consignments are cleared to proceed to the EU.
Last week, the Road Haulage Association said the UK was "sleepwalking into a disaster".
Speaking to Sky's Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme, Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey accused the government of being "very reckless" and said a no-deal Brexit would be "a disaster for people's jobs, business and livelihoods up and down the country".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Mon 7 Sep 08:24
Compliments of Aunty :-
Ministers are planning new legislation that would override a key part of last year's EU withdrawal agreement.
The move would eliminate a requirement for new Northern Ireland customs arrangements which were intended to prevent the return of checks at the border with the Irish Republic.
Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Michelle O'Neill tweeted that any threat of backtracking on the protocol would be a "treacherous betrayal which would inflict irreversible harm on the all-Ireland economy and the Good Friday Agreement".
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said the move would "significantly increase" the likelihood of a no-deal Brexit, and the "resulting damage to the economy will be entirely Tory inflicted. What charlatans".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 7 Sep 11:08
Another U turn, should we be surprised?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Mon 7 Sep 16:23
The UK government need to convince the EU that they are mad enough to rip up the agreement and head for a no-deal Brexit, and they are doing a pretty good job of it.
They have always believed (and stated) that the EU will back down at the 11th hour, but I think they might have misjudged this one.
The government might be happy to throw NI under a bus, but the EU won't do the same with the Republic. I suppose reunification will be the next step.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Mon 7 Sep 18:20
Reunification aaaaaaaaargh and an indépendant Alba and Cymru
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 8 Sep 08:08
<The UK government need to convince the EU that they are mad enough to rip up the agreement and head for a no-deal Brexit, and they are doing a pretty good job of it.>
I think they ARE mad enough, not just trying to bluff the EU...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Tue 8 Sep 09:23
Johnson and his government get more and more like Trump and his administration every day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 8 Sep 11:16
Its more than a simple u-turn LA it is a threat to ignore and rewrite a signed legal document agreed by both the EU and the UK
This from 15 minutes ago :-
Head of UK government’s legal department quits over Brexit threats, report says
The head of the UK government’s legal department has quit over suggestions that Boris Johnson is threatening to override the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement with the EU, the Financial Times has reported.
Jonathan Jones is understood to be leaving the job due to a dispute with Mr Johnson’s office over its reported plans to undermine the treaty signed in January in relation to the Northern Ireland protocol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Tue 8 Sep 12:26
And another civil servant bites the dust!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 8 Sep 19:51
Theresa May - who stood down as prime minister last year after her own Brexit deal failed to get the support of Parliament - said: "The United Kingdom government signed the withdrawal agreement with the Northern Ireland Protocol.
"This Parliament voted that withdrawal agreement into UK legislation. The government is now changing the operation of that agreement."
"How can the government reassure future international partners that the UK can be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?"
The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Ed Davey, also called it a "sad and shocking state of affairs for our country".
Sums it all up really
No deal was the default from day one, making some rich people Very rich
Boris the compulsive liar and Dominic the compulsive controller
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Tue 8 Sep 21:38
I think you meant very rich people even richer.Never understand the need to get even more as I am pretty sure they haven't found a way to take it with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 8 Sep 21:40
donj
I think you meant with them :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 10 Sep 18:45
From Aunty :-
The EU is demanding the UK ditches plans to change Boris Johnson's Brexit deal "by the end of the month" or risk jeopardising trade talks.
The UK has published a bill to rewrite parts of the withdrawal agreement it signed in January.
The EU said this had "seriously damaged trust" and the EU would not be "shy" of using legal action against the UK.
But cabinet minister Michael Gove said the UK had made it "perfectly clear" it would not withdraw the bill.
The government says Parliament is sovereign and it can pass laws which breach the UK's international treaty obligations.
He's right it is sovereign They lied to the Queen as well :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 10 Sep 19:03
To be fair I don't have any problem with lying to the Queen. At least no more than I have a problem with lying to any other old dear.
I do have a problem with the government risking what little international trust and leverage we have left that isn't based on sheer force.
Johnson is probably right that Parliament can pass laws which breach the UK's international treaties but that's not the point.
It's about trust and mutual understanding, so whilst some aspects of the treaties the UK signed might no be convenient for individual governments on individual days, they still have to abide by them because If they don't then the agreements, all of them, essentially become meaningless when the cosignatories no longer trust that the UK will abide by them.
A world where nobody trusts you doesn't seem like a safe or comfortable world to me.
The enemy travels by private jet, not by dinghy.
Post Edited (Thu 10 Sep 19:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 13 Sep 18:43
What a Fanny :-
Justice Secretary Robert Buckland has defended plans to potentially override the EU Withdrawal Agreement as an emergency Brexit "insurance policy".
He told the BBC he hoped powers being sought by ministers in the Internal Markets Bill would never be needed, as a solution could be found with the EU.
He said he would resign if the UK ended up breaking international law "in a way I find unacceptable".
But he made clear he did "not believe we will get to that stage".
In a way HE finds unacceptable .....So he won't be resigning then :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 17 Oct 16:57
Anyone have any doubts about where we're heading now.
I blame the Labour party for agreeing to a GE last December. Parliament had the Tories where it wanted them until that deluded old fool, Corbyn, handed the Tories their huge majority.
The last thing we needed - as if this pandemic wasn't bad enough. ☹
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 17 Oct 17:35
I.ll be fair here and say this. I used to put that argument forward as well that Corbyn should never have agreed to a General Election however I realise now it wasn.t quite as clear cut as that. His options were somewhat limited. He undoubtedly believed though that he could repeat his showing at the previous election when he still did poorly but just not disastrously. Ultimately he was out maneuvered by Cummings and Co.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 17 Oct 19:30
No deal was always the ultimate goal and would appear to be the outcome if what we read and hear is true
There are many very rich people who will become very richer as a consequence which is the Tory Party.s ultimate endgame and fek the rest of us
Agreeing to a General election did not put the Tory.s in power the English public did that even in the hardest austerity hit regions they voted for Boris the Brave
I wonder what they are thinking now
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 17 Oct 21:21
Quote:
Buspasspar, Sat 17 Oct 19:30
No deal was always the ultimate goal and would appear to be the outcome if what we read and hear is true
There are many very rich people who will become very richer as a consequence which is the Tory Party.s ultimate endgame and fek the rest of us
Agreeing to a General election did not put the Tory.s in power the English public did that even in the hardest austerity hit regions they voted for Boris the Brave
I wonder what they are thinking now
Of course it was the electorate that voted the Tories in for another 5 years, but Corbyn and Labour should have been smart enough to realise they couldn't win a GE at that point and should have just left Bozo to sweat with his minority government, although as TOWK alludes, it wasn't as simplistic as that. Still......
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Sat 17 Oct 21:39
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 7 Aug 22:35
The national debt has not even increased by even 1. due to the pandemic.
Have you got figures for that, Sadindiefreak?
This is a party which believes in proportional representation and remaining in the EU yet has signally failed to advance the cause of either.
Although Elections to Holyrood, Scottish Local Authority Councils (and formerly to the European Parliament) all have (or had) more proportionality than FPTP
I think that if the Scottish Government have any gumption, then they.ll be discussing an "advisory" independence referendum on election day next May.
An interesting idea HJ, but I think there are problems. One is an advisory vote has no legal status and Westminster is likely to ignore it (and will say so in advance). Two, it may increase the turnout in the Holyrood election and this may not favour the SNP. Three, I’m not convinced Nicola Sturgeon actually wants a referendum (for two reasons – one she’s afraid she’ll lose, and two, she’s afraid she might win).
MT No legal status? Says who?
Not sure I follow you logic in assuming a larger turnout than normal at a Holyrood election might not favour the SNP? Tory voters tend to get out and vote, it is the disaffected that tend not to bother but if they do get out and vote it certainly won’t be for the Tories, so IMO a larger turnout would be more likely to suit the SNP.
Also if you don’t mind can you elaborate on your assertion that NS might be afraid to win a referendum. Why ever would that be ?
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Sun 18 Oct 00:13
Blaming Corbyn is missing the target by a mile. He did not want a Brexit election for obvious reasons but the Lib Dems were slavering at the idea, nonsensical though it was then and now, of attaining a parliamentary majority. I know this sonuds ludicrous but read back on the newspapers of the day.
Given that an election could be called without Labour votes, Corbyn had little option other than to say he was prepared for a fight. Let.s get the history right before we start throwing stones. Corbyn did not instigate the December election.
And why do that LIbdem lot always seem to have their windows remain unbroken? Is there a state apparatus at work of which we should know more?
sammer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sun 18 Oct 07:39
I've stood up for the lib dems regarding their supposed u-turn over tuition fees (because they came a sorry third as we rejected that policy so they had no mandate to honour or force that issue)...
...But absolutely agree the lib dems (forget her name) genuinely believed they would hoover up all the remain votes and be installed as the new government and therefore wanted the new election
Post Edited (Sun 18 Oct 09:06)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sun 18 Oct 10:04
Quote:
sammer, Sun 18 Oct 00:13
Blaming Corbyn is missing the target by a mile. He did not want a Brexit election for obvious reasons but the Lib Dems were slavering at the idea, nonsensical though it was then and now, of attaining a parliamentary majority. I know this sonuds ludicrous but read back on the newspapers of the day.
Given that an election could be called without Labour votes, Corbyn had little option other than to say he was prepared for a fight. Let.s get the history right before we start throwing stones. Corbyn did not instigate the December election.
And why do that LIbdem lot always seem to have their windows remain unbroken? Is there a state apparatus at work of which we should know more?
Ah, apologies to you and to Jeremy Corbyn, Sammer. I did not recall that a GE could be called without Labour's backing. That's obviously what TOWK was alluding to when he replied to my earlier post. In that case, I'll transfer my rage towards the Lib Dems and their deluded leader, Jo Swinson.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 18 Oct 11:05
It looks like Johnson.s oven-ready deal is turning out to be a turkey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 18 Oct 11:07
G.G. I.m sure its Sir Ed Davey who is the leader of the Lib Dems
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Thaipar
Date: Sun 18 Oct 11:15
Quote:
Buspasspar, Sun 18 Oct 11:07
G.G. I.m sure its Sir Ed Davey who is the leader of the Lib Dems
Jo was back in December when GE was BPP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 18 Oct 12:13
Ah got it .... thanks Thaipar
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 19 Oct 14:08
The government are now adopting the terminology .Australian deal. because it sounds more positive than .no deal..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Mon 19 Oct 15:54
Quote:
wee eck, Mon 19 Oct 14:08
The government are now adopting the terminology .Australian deal. because it sounds more positive than .no deal..
Yea, I heard that. What's the background to that? Maybe one of our Aussie correspondents can fill us in?
I hope it's nothing to do with their British ancestors.... 🙂
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Mon 19 Oct 16:01
Australia trades with the EU on WTO terms which basically means normal tariffs with no concessions I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 19 Oct 16:03
The Australians are negotiating a trade deal with the EU 🙈
Good summary here:
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/explainers/what-is-an-australian-style-deal/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Mon 19 Oct 19:20
Spot on again wee eck Australia is a bigger kinder word than NO
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Mon 19 Oct 23:47
Australia don't have a deal but they have a few stand alone arrangements so it not completely no deal but very close to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sun 25 Oct 10:05
This from the Guardian :-
Senior figures in European governments believe Boris Johnson is waiting for the result of the US presidential election before finally deciding whether to risk plunging the UK into a no-deal Brexit, according to a former British ambassador to the EU.
Ivan Rogers, who was the UK’s permanent representative in Brussels from 2013 to 2017, told the Observer that a view shared by ministers and officials he has talked to in recent weeks in several European capitals, is that Johnson is biding his time – and is much more likely to opt for no deal if his friend and Brexit supporter Donald Trump prevails over the Democratic challenger, Joe Biden.
Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Sun 25 Oct 12:54
Johnson the political opportunist - who would have thought it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 25 Oct 14:15
He's only the puppet!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Sun 8 Nov 14:41
Ref: wee eck
Sun 18 Oct 11:05
"It looks like Johnson.s oven-ready deal is turning out to be a turkey."
No doubt whoever gets stuffed he`ll have plenty o` gravy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 10 Nov 09:28
So the Lords remove the illegal parts of the Internal Market Bill
But Boris will reinstate them next month ???
From Aunty :-
The government has suffered a heavy defeat in the House of Lords over its controversial Brexit legislation.
The Internal Market Bill contains measures that overrule parts of the UK`s Brexit agreement with the EU.
Peers voted overwhelmingly to remove a section of the bill that would allow ministers to break international law - by 433 votes to 165.
The government said it would reinstate the clauses when the bill returns to the House of Commons next month.
It comes as trade talks continue between EU and UK officials in London as they try to reach an agreement over a future economic partnership.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Sun 22 Nov 01:04
MT No legal status? Says who?
Not sure I follow you logic in assuming a larger turnout than normal at a Holyrood election might not favour the SNP? Tory voters tend to get out and vote, it is the disaffected that tend not to bother but if they do get out and vote it certainly won’t be for the Tories, so IMO a larger turnout would be more likely to suit the SNP.
Also if you don’t mind can you elaborate on your assertion that NS might be afraid to win a referendum. Why ever would that be ?
Forgive me desparado - I meant to respond ages ago but real life got in the way...
No legal status? Says I. I think constitutional matters are reserved to Westminster.
Re turn-out, turn-out used to be lower at Holyrood elections than at Westminster elections, but higher than at European elections and Council elections.
Who are the people that don`t vote and why not? I suspect that there are perhaps several motivations: the degree of importance you attach to the council/parliament; the extent to which the election receives publicity; whether you care about the result; whether you are happy with your candidate/leader.
I remember one local council by-election that was held on the same day as a general election when the Tory share of the vote shot up – I concluded that this was because Tories who couldn’t be bothered to vote at council elections turned out because the GE was seen as “important”. Anecdotal evidence if you like, but I think there is the possibility that normal non-voters could turn out on a special occasion.
Regarding NS not really wanting to win a referendum - she doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to have one if you ask me. And I wonder if she knows that she won’t be able to deliver on her promises. Quite happy to continue to travel hopefully and hoover up the rewards in the meantime.
If you give me another couple of months I’ll respond to your comments on the other thread, if you like.
Edit - does the "preview" option no longer work?
Post Edited (Sun 22 Nov 01:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Tue 24 Nov 18:25
`Buried in a 19,800 word Spectator essay written by former online editor and Vote Leave director Dominic Cummings is an admission:-
The Brexit referendum was won by lying to the public.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Wed 25 Nov 09:27
Just like the Scottish referendum?
Just like pretty much every General Election?
How come it`s only THIS one that is allowed to be questioned?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Wed 25 Nov 15:04
Depends who you read...
Remainer papers - "Delays caused by Brexit"
Leaver papers - "French only open half of the lanes"
A number of papers (on both sides) reported "There is an unusually high amount of holiday traffic" ??????
We`re in the middle of lockdowns, travel restrictions, etc etc - and there is HIGHER HOLIDAY TRAFFIC?
WTF? Some people really don`t give a flying feck.
Post Edited (Thu 26 Nov 08:50)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 26 Nov 21:45
Lux... I live in North Berwick and there have been more tourists this year even under the earlier strict lock down rules than any year I can remember since 1987
Every accent you could imagine ...camper vans in every car park and spare ground available, long queues outside the chippy take away and the ice cream shop
They have been coming here for months on the train from Edinburgh with the kids.. buckets and spades ...rucksacks and packed lunches
Trying to use the toilets in the few shops that were open and when refused pissed and shat in residents gardens and back yards but mainly on the beach
Where were the Polis ? I have never seen a policeman or car here since May
So Aye, higher Holiday traffic here, and double Aye they don`t give a flying feck
Post Edited (Thu 26 Nov 21:46)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 30 Nov 12:41
These stories always frustrate me. It's basically like saying "I know you've made these rules and I voted for this, but I'm BRITISH so just let me and my family in, please."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Mon 30 Nov 14:07
I don`t see anyone in the article saying they voted for it. I would imagine that all of them (except maybe the guy in Switzerland) voted against it.
Post Edited (Mon 30 Nov 14:13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 30 Nov 15:12
Most of those quoted will not have had a vote, (I didn`t have a vote either) unless they retained property and residence in UK, in which case, these rules would not affect them.
No - it`s whingeing for whingeing`s sake.
Once Brexit deal/no-deal is actually decided, and any rules/treaties/agreements/ad infinitum are worked on, most of these inconsistencies will be worked out.
This is just the usual numpties picking individual bits of rules that don`t suit them and squealing that is isn`t fair...
For example (in my case) the EXISTING rules on University fees discriminate against children of Scottish people resident in EU against children of English people.
Kids of English people resident in EU are entitled to `home` status to study in UK - meaning fees of £9,250
Kids of Scottish people resident in EU are NOT entitled to `home` status - meaning fees of £26,740
I fully expect that this will be equalised once Brexit is finalised, in whatever form it takes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Mon 30 Nov 15:24
How can they discriminate against kids of Scottish people when Scottish doesn`t exist as a nationality at the moment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Mon 30 Nov 15:39
Quote:
aaaaaaaaaargh, Mon 30 Nov 15:24
How can they discriminate against kids of Scottish people when Scottish doesn`t exist as a nationality at the moment?
Under EU laws they can't.
The law is that people from other EU countries must get same fees as charged locally.
This is why EU students coming to Scotland get free tuition but English students can be charged. (because its same country not a different one)
Wherever this is happening the Universities are breaking EU law.
Post Edited (Mon 30 Nov 15:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 30 Nov 16:13
And that equalisation will involve Scottish students losing the ability to study abroad for free and EU students having to pay to study in Scotland for new applicants from 21/22 onwards.
As always folk that are loaded or have loaded parents won't lose access but everyone else will.
No change for the English as we charged each other the maximum anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 1 Dec 08:56
The `discrimination` is due to education being a devolved responsibility.
The UK Government stated a few months ago that UK citizens and their children resident in EU would qualify for `home` status for Uni fees.
The Scottish Government have not made any equivalent declaration.
The existing Scottish rules only state that UK citizens returning from EU to study would qualify - but NOT their children, even if they are UK citizens.
My daughter currently studying in Edinburgh avails of free tuition under EU rules which have been extended to cover the completion of existing courses.
My second daughter, planning/hoping to go to Edinburgh/Glasgow in 2021 will be hit with (at the moment) £26k fees - well, I will be hit with...
I fully expect that this will be addressed once the terms of Brit deal/no-deal are finalised, so no point squealing to the newspapers about how unfair Brexit is
Scottish students are not " losing the ability to study abroad for free"
They are losing the right to study for the same cost as local students (which in some countries are free, but certainly not all).
Scotland got an exemption from allowing rUK students to study for free, as the Scottish Universities would be drowned.
Pay 9k to study at Leicester/Warwick/Manchester, or zero for Edinburgh/Glasgow/Aberdeen?
The upside is that there should be more spaces available for Scottish students at Scottish Uni`s - I know that the number of students from the EU European schools (and the EU in general) applying to Scottish Uni`s has dropped dramatically this year because of the above situation.
Also, the number of (full fee paying) Chinese students is apparently dropping this year due to the UK gov`s Huawei 5G decisions...
- possible funding problems?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Dec 12:51
"They are losing the right to study for the same cost as local students (which in some countries are free, but certainly not all)."
Thats obviously what I meant and it does mean that Scottish students are losing the right to study abroad for free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 1 Dec 13:17
"Thats obviously what I meant and it does mean that Scottish students are losing the right to study abroad for free"
As we will no longer be in the EU, that`s kinda the point...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Dec 16:11
Which isn't exactly a positive outcome for students IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 1 Dec 16:31
What`s your point caller?
I don`t recall anyone claiming that this was a "positive outcome for students"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Dec 16:51
My point is that its not a positive outcome for students in Scotland and I never said that anyone did say it was a positive outcome for Scotland.
I was expressung my view on what the biggest changes were going to be post Brexit and that is that Scottish students are going to be disadvantaged by losing access to free education on offer throughout the EU and EU students will lose the reciprocal right in Scotland so its not great for EU students either.
At least EU students still have the option of other EU countries for opportunities for free secondary education whereas Scottish students have had their options almost completely removed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Tue 1 Dec 16:55
Quote:
Luxembourg Par, Tue 1 Dec 16:31
What`s your point caller?
I don`t recall anyone claiming that this was a "positive outcome for students"
I'm sure lpf can speak for himself, Lux, but the point is that when any group or individual is negatively affected by a change it is regrettable- your own younger daughter is a case in point.
I wish I shared your optimism that "it'll all be alright on the night"....
Eta. I see lpf has already spoken for himself. 😃
Not your average Sunday League player.
Post Edited (Tue 01 Dec 16:56)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Dec 17:03
But you were right GG 😀
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Tue 1 Dec 18:23
Agreed - anyone losing out is `regrettable`, but not what was being discussed.
My point above was not so much optimism, but pragmatism.
I`m not going to go squealing to the newspapers about how unfair the EXISTING rules will impact me after an increasingly likely no-deal Brexit - when it`s clear that the vast majority of any treaties/deals/no-deals and associated rules are still undecided.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Tue 1 Dec 18:51
I haven't looked into that exact scenario but would it not be the case that your kids could move back to Scotland for a few months before applying as a resident of Scotland?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 4 Dec 19:55
Brinkmanship at its worst :-
From Aunty
The conditions for a post-Brexit trade deal have not been met, negotiators for the UK and EU have said, as talks to reach a deal are paused.
Michel Barnier and David Frost have said "significant divergences" remained between the two sides.
European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen and PM Boris Johnson will discuss the situation on Saturday.
State aid subsidies, fishing and enforcement of new rules remain the key sticking points in negotiations.
If a deal is not agreed by 31 December, the two sides will trade on World Trade Organization rules, meaning the introduction of taxes on imports.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sun 6 Dec 22:36
"I haven`t looked into that exact scenario but would it not be the case that your kids could move back to Scotland for a few months before applying as a resident of Scotland?"
UCAS applications are already in for 2021 entry - she`s still at school here.
Taking her out of final year of a European Baccalaureat to go to Scotland to sit Highers? not a great plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 7 Dec 01:27
Lux - Is your daughter a Luxembourgish citizen? What subject is she looking to study?
Just spit-balling here, but you know that Germany and Norway have no tuition fees and no nationality requirements?
I`d be guessing that she would be pretty fluent in German, so that could be an option? Many good Universities in Germany such as Heidelberg, Freiburg, Köln, Rostock, Leipzig to name but a few - I researched at Heidelberg for a while and would highly recommend it.
Norway, you`ll have a very good choice of English-taught Bachelor programs. Oslo and Bergen are the best Universities up there by all accounts.
Karlovy in Prague offers a number of English programs for fairly low tuition fees as well and that`s a great university and awesome student city.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 7 Dec 11:28
Dual national - British & Lux
Wants to study Law.
Nah, she speaks German, but not well enough to study Law.
- Fluent in French but definitely doesn`t want to study in France...
Has her heart set on going to Scotland - if I have to pay fees, so be it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Mon 7 Dec 12:11
I was meaning could she not move back to Scotland after the school year is up so she's resident and then qualify for the free tuition?
Essentially using the period between finishing school and starting uni to regain resident status in Scotland?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Mon 7 Dec 13:35
Lux - fair enough, I'd be exactly the same for my wee one if he wanted to study in Japan. I have a friend born to a Scottish mother in the US who ended up in the same situation as your daughter. Tell your daughter to take a look at Aberdeen though as it was the best Law school in Scotland for a very long time :)
I'm pretty sure though that, as it stands, the tuition free rule in Scotland applies after 3 years of residency. In my mind the Scottish Government needs to set up some sort of "Scottish resident status" to avoid situations like this. Essentially this would be a register of those who would be entitled to become Scottish citizens by birth/parentage or after 5 years residency in Scotland, which is the requirement for UK citizenship. Could have a clause like in Sweden whereby you're entitled to the benefits of the system (free education, elderly care etc after 2 years of schooling or 3 years of taxpaying work). Nae doubt though the Unionists parties would scream Anglophobia though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Mon 7 Dec 18:53
Boris the Brave Johnson has backed down and offered to remove the international law-breaking clauses in an effort to break the stalemate with the EU in Brexit deal talks.
The prime minister conceded the clauses after the EU signalled the final deadline for a deal is Wednesday.
The Government has said it is prepared to deactivate three controversial clauses 44, 45 and 47 from the UK Internal Market Bill following discussions in the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee.
The move remains a major climbdown, after ministers insisted they were necessary as "a safety net" – regardless of whether a deal was agreed or not.
ETA ....these were the same clauses the House of Lords removed
Post Edited (Mon 07 Dec 19:15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 7 Dec 21:17
Boris Johnson going for his Neville Chamberlain moment on the steps of Air Farce One, waving a sheet of A4 declaring "The Deal " 🤡🤡🤡
God help us!🙏
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Tue 8 Dec 06:41
Quote:
Buspasspar, Mon 7 Dec 18:53
Boris the Brave Johnson has backed down and offered to remove the international law-breaking clauses in an effort to break the stalemate with the EU in Brexit deal talks.
The prime minister conceded the clauses after the EU signalled the final deadline for a deal is Wednesday.
The Government has said it is prepared to deactivate three controversial clauses 44, 45 and 47 from the UK Internal Market Bill following discussions in the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee.
The move remains a major climbdown, after ministers insisted they were necessary as "a safety net" – regardless of whether a deal was agreed or not.
ETA ....these were the same clauses the House of Lords removed
Looking like Blojo is going to be abandon the fisheries, as indicated by the EU late Sunday night.
Post Edited (Tue 08 Dec 06:43)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 9 Dec 09:19
So does this mean that citizens from Northern Ireland still retain free movement?
Just going by Gove's announcement!🤔
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 9 Dec 11:12
Well Gove just been on the radio saying EHIC card will still work after 1st January!🤔💩💩💩
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Wed 9 Dec 11:21
I`m sure it will otherwise European citizens in this country will struggle to access heathcare
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 10 Dec 08:04
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Wed 9 Dec 09:19
So does this mean that citizens from Northern Ireland still retain free movement?
Just going by Gove's announcement!🤔
I think it's freedom of movement between N.I and ROI.
In which case we could see a sudden influx of businesses locating in N.I.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 10 Dec 11:09
Well...
I picked up a `variance` last month in our off-balance sheet reporting
(the shares we hold on behalf of funds)
ONE of the smaller funds moved £107m from sub-custodian in London to another sub-custodian in Frankfurt.
Capital/AuM/Custody are definitely buggering off now, and I expect more as long as `no-deal` uncertainty hangs.
We really need to get off the fence.
If a deal can be done, do it.
If not, then stop fannying around, declare it - and let`s deal with the fallout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 10 Dec 12:08
Sunday the new deadline now apparently 🤦♂️
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 10 Dec 12:29
I don't pretend to understand finance of business, but does it matter if funds go through London rather than, for example, Berlin?
Similar with businesses. Does it matter if they're in the EU? If a business wanted to ensure free trade could they just put an office in Northern Ireland?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 10 Dec 12:40
Quote :-
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 10 Dec 12:08
Sunday the new deadline now apparently 🤦♂️
Aye Boris the bumbling brave blunders in and buggered it :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Thu 10 Dec 13:13
"I don`t pretend to understand finance of business, but does it matter if funds go through London rather than, for example, Berlin?
Nothing to with where the funds `go through`.
Where the custodian (or sub-custodian) is located determines
1. Where the assets are registered/held
2. Where the fees are paid
3. Ultimately where any jobs are supported
To the fund, doesn`t matter a great deal, assets will be safe in either location and fees will be paid regardless.
But if too much capital moves out of London, it`s position in the global markets will diminish, jobs will go etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 10 Dec 13:49
Just to add to Lux's post if or when that happens it leads to a drop in tax take and potentially a loss of jobs and future jobs in the UK.
The company I work for is a service provider to the FS industry and we created new jobs in offices in Dublin and Amsterdam as a direct response to Brexit. Those jobs would either not have been needed in the past or would have located in London. Going forward the new jobs that will be created as we continue to grow are far more likely to be located in Europe than London.
Its not 1000s of people so its not a cataclysmic cliff edge that everything will stop in the UK when Brexit happens but there is a risk of a slow gradual erosion of the FS sector which is out largest sector in terms of GDP and tax revenues. We aren't the only company in this situation and others are likely to be impacted much more by it.
Whilst we all hate bankers its actually in our common interest to have as many assets as possible managed from the UK and we need to protect our position as much as possible as we now compete with the EU and their members want the business as they now do in many sectors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 10 Dec 16:45
Quote:
londonparsfan, Thu 10 Dec 13:49
Just to add to Lux's post if or when that happens it leads to a drop in tax take and potentially a loss of jobs and future jobs in the UK.
The company I work for is a service provider to the FS industry and we created new jobs in offices in Dublin and Amsterdam as a direct response to Brexit. Those jobs would either not have been needed in the past or would have located in London. Going forward the new jobs that will be created as we continue to grow are far more likely to be located in Europe than London.
Its not 1000s of people so its not a cataclysmic cliff edge that everything will stop in the UK when Brexit happens but there is a risk of a slow gradual erosion of the FS sector which is out largest sector in terms of GDP and tax revenues. We aren't the only company in this situation and others are likely to be impacted much more by it.
Whilst we all hate bankers its actually in our common interest to have as many assets as possible managed from the UK and we need to protect our position as much as possible as we now compete with the EU and their members want the business as they now do in many sectors.
Just to add a bit of weight to that... the company I work for supports the financial services sector and we have had numerous consultants supporting the movement of IT, operational processes, funds, etc to Dublin, Paris and Frankfurt. This is now for the most part in place and will not be going back even with a deal on Sunday - it’s just far far too late now.
As said, the impact of this won’t be felt immediately, but over the coming months and years, their future investments, which ultimately leads to revenue and jobs for the country will be centered around those centres and not the UK
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 10 Dec 19:27
That's looking good, nuclear winter without the bombs!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 11 Dec 09:17
" They`re estimating 800k job losses across Europe but I read we`ve already lost £500k in the UK. Unbelievable. "
What?
You`re comparing 800k job losses in EU with £500k in UK?
£500k of what? Assets? AuM? AuC? salary? Fees? Gummy bears?
JPM is apparently planning to move 90bn of assets to Frankfurt.
UK have over £ 9 trillion in AuM
That`s £9,000,000,000,000
£90bn is £90,000,000,000
or 1%
Whilst it is obviously a huge amount of capital when taken in isolation, 1% is worrying if it becomes a trend, but does not really signify the death of the industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parsfan
Date: Fri 11 Dec 09:48
I don't think he meant for the "£" there, makes much more sense without.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The universe is ruled by chance and indifference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 11 Dec 17:22
Why is Johnson talking up `No Deal` now? Is he just preparing us for the worst or is he planning to sign a deal, no matter how bad, so he can claim he plucked victory from the jaws of defeat? He`s such a devious, unprincipled character it`s difficult to know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Fri 11 Dec 17:48
I think only time will tell.
Maybe he is still planning on backing down on some things so that he can claim victory, but I think that would end his political career.
The other possibility is that he really believes that no deal can work in the long term. I think that is probably true in financial terms, but he will probably need to pimp the country out to the US or China to make that work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 11 Dec 17:49
He is actually reveling in it wee eck
All the years all the negotiations all the lies truths and untruths
He is so adamant to protect the fishing waters ... for the benefit of the Scots ..Er no for the benefit of 5 of the richest families on the list :(
Having said that it would be good to see fishing flourish again in all the wee harbour towns but unfortunately its the day of the super trawler owned by the super rich
SO ... get ready all you UK businesses you have until Sunday to readjust relocate re plan, Boris the Brave would like to say sorry for giving you such short notice :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 11 Dec 17:56
" SO ... get ready all you UK businesses you have until Sunday to readjust relocate re plan, Boris the Brave would like to say sorry for giving you such short notice :) "
Ohhh don`t be so melodramatic - they will have an additional 18 days after Sunday to prepare :-D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 11 Dec 18:02
Ooops sorry Lux :-)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 11 Dec 21:27
Sorry, that was supposed to be 800k job losses across the EU and 500k in the UK. Significantly worse for the UK was my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Fri 11 Dec 22:10
Quote :-
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 11 Dec 17:22
Why is Johnson talking up `No Deal` now?
It was what He wanted all along wee eck from years of planning.. lying.. misinformation about the EU ...He has lied all through his newspaper days where most of the misinformation printed about the EU rules came from the Brave One himself
His pathetic last ditch intervention to sort it and get Brexit done has had as much impact as his many costume changes to suit the mood for the photo shoot
He is the worst PM in living memory
There are Millionaires about to become multimillionaires very soon as a consequence of no deal
Britannia Unchained indeed :(
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 11 Dec 22:49
It was telling I think that`s his attempts at talking directly to Macron and Merkel were rebuffed. The EU is a union where each country has an equal say and their negotiator speaks for, and acts on behalf of, all the member nations - unlike the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Rastapari
Date: Fri 11 Dec 23:52
He's s cynical lady bit..
All be design, watch his chums make a killing.
Carole Baskin fed Rasta to a tiger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Sat 12 Dec 06:41
I think the consequences of a No deal is now a reality, he would now prefer some sort of deal, preferably the Canada one, but will now probably go for the Australian one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Sat 12 Dec 07:13
Quote:
Tenruh, Sat 12 Dec 06:41
I think the consequences of a No deal is now a reality, he would now prefer some sort of deal, preferably the Canada one, but will now probably go for the Australian one.
The Australian one is No Deal.
Australia has no overarching deal with the EU it is nothing more than a statement of goodwill whilst the EU and Australia are negotiating an actual deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 12 Dec 08:19
OH Jings the navy is on standby :-
Trade talks between the UK and European Union are continuing in Brussels with one day to go until a deadline imposed by the two sides.
The leaders of both parties have warned they are unlikely to reach a post-Brexit trade deal by Sunday.
On Friday, Boris Johnson chaired a "stock-take" on the UK`s preparedness for a no-deal scenario.
Meanwhile, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) said four Royal Navy patrol boats are ready to protect UK fishing waters.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 12 Dec 11:36
Is Priti standing on the bow?🚣♀️🚣♀️🚣♀️
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Sat 12 Dec 12:01
Aye LA the Titanic i hope :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Mon 21 Dec 08:58
So Schapps on this morning saying people won't starve because they have been stockpiling, even though they were told not to panic buy!!🤔
So what's the problem, Covid or Brexit?
You can't trust a word that comes out of their mouths, is Schapps the only one not away on holiday?🤔🤬🤬🤬
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Wed 23 Dec 17:19
Being leaked that a deal has been done!🤔🙄🙄🙄
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 23 Dec 19:15
Boris has sh*t his pants when he saw the reality of a no deal brexit at Dover
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Wed 23 Dec 19:44
It looks like there is going to be a deal in the next 24 hours.
If the quotes on fishing are right, it appears that "Take back control" actually meant "Take back approximately 30% of control"
I wonder how Johnson is going to sell it to the swivel-eyed loon members of his party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Wed 23 Dec 19:58
Correct aaaaaaaaaagh
The Eu wanted a 25% reduction Ireland wanted a 35% reduction So Boris the Brave has gone mid table .... He is a superb negotiator is he not
Meanwhile the one and only toilet for 3,000 truck drivers is still blocked even after Priti`s long term contingionsy plan went into action She forgot to phone the cleaner :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: JTH123
Date: Wed 23 Dec 21:21
"It’s a shame France didn’t put as much effort into blocking their borders in 1940."
From the spoof Twitter account for the Queen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: red-star-par
Date: Wed 23 Dec 21:57
Quote:
JTH123, Wed 23 Dec 21:21
"It’s a shame France didn’t put as much effort into blocking their borders in 1940."
From the spoof Twitter account for the Queen.
I'd imagine that would appeal to the sort of people who find the term "cheese eating surrender monkeys" amusing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: dander par
Date: Wed 23 Dec 22:42
Quote:
Buspasspar, Wed 23 Dec 19:58
Correct aaaaaaaaaagh
The Eu wanted a 25% reduction Ireland wanted a 35% reduction So Boris the Brave has gone mid table .... He is a superb negotiator is he not
Meanwhile the one and only toilet for 3,000 truck drivers is still blocked even after Priti`s long term contingionsy plan went into action She forgot to phone the cleaner :)
Superb at selling the country to gates etc 😡
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Wed 23 Dec 23:08
I wonder if Marc Francois will call Johnson a surrender monkey.
If he really has folded then it will be gammon for Christmas. The TV will be full of their angry little faces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Thu 24 Dec 07:10
Mark's still AWL .Don't know where he's been the last few months .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sadindiefreak
Date: Thu 24 Dec 07:56
Quote:
aaaaaaaaaargh, Wed 23 Dec 23:08
I wonder if Marc Francois will call Johnson a surrender monkey.
If he really has folded then it will be gammon for Christmas. The TV will be full of their angry little faces.
Isn't the alleged rapist Francois still in hiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Dec 08:36
Well, it looks like the fishermen in Aberdeen have got exactly what they voted for - a complete shambles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Thu 24 Dec 09:02
I had read somewhere that the investigation into Francois had been dropped and he was making a return. Maybe I jumped the gun a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 24 Dec 09:34
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Dec 08:36
Well, it looks like the fishermen in Aberdeen have got exactly what they voted for - a complete shambles.
I don`t think its as good as that jake89 :)
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Thu 24 Dec 10:16
Quote:
jake89, Thu 24 Dec 08:36
Well, it looks like the fishermen in Aberdeen have got exactly what they voted for - a complete shambles.
Not many fishermen in Aberdeen these days. Most if not all are in Peterhead and Fraserburgh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Dec 10:44
I'd said Aberdeenshire but effing autocorrect!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Buspasspar
Date: Thu 24 Dec 11:36
A leading German liberal MP, Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, is upbeat on the type of deal emerging, saying the key thing is to avoid numerous tariffs and quotas.
He told Deutschlandfunk radio that “it would be a good thing” if the negotiators really had agreed to keep EU-UK trade free of tariffs and quotas.
He also said “it appears European fishing crews have succeeded in retaining at least 75% of their current catch over the next five years, and of course that’s far more than the French, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch and Belgians could have expected”.
We are forever shaped by the Children we once were
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 24 Dec 12:13
This doesn't sound like a good deal to me. Probably fine for the London service jobs but terrible for fishing and farming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Thu 24 Dec 12:44
Imagine the seeth when a good deal is announced......
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 24 Dec 12:51
The ERG won't be amused!🙄
Now to find Boris for a press conference, wonder if he'll gatecrash Lizzies speech tomorrow!🤔🤡🤡🤡
Post Edited (Thu 24 Dec 12:53)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Thaipar
Date: Thu 24 Dec 12:54
Quote:
da_no_1, Thu 24 Dec 12:44
Imagine the seeth when a good deal is announced......
You tell us what a 'seeth' is and we will tell you if it is a good deal or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: da_no_1
Date: Thu 24 Dec 13:15
Quote:
Thaipar, Thu 24 Dec 12:54
Quote:
da_no_1, Thu 24 Dec 12:44
Imagine the seeth when a good deal is announced......
You tell us what a 'seeth' is and we will tell you if it is a good deal or not.
Apologies to all. As Thaipar correctly pointed out I spelt "seethe" wrong. Instead of "seethe" I typed "seeth". For this and other things I am immensely sorry.
"Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 24 Dec 22:31
The loss of Erasmus is getting largely panned on Twitter as BJ stated it would not be lost, in a direct answer to D Chapman SNP.
Though still available in Northern Ireland!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Thaipar
Date: Thu 24 Dec 23:54
Quote:
da_no_1, Thu 24 Dec 13:15
Quote:
Thaipar, Thu 24 Dec 12:54
Quote:
da_no_1, Thu 24 Dec 12:44
Imagine the seeth when a good deal is announced......
You tell us what a 'seeth' is and we will tell you if it is a good deal or not.
Apologies to all. As Thaipar correctly pointed out I spelt "seethe" wrong. Instead of "seethe" I typed "seeth". For this and other things I am immensely sorry.
And so you should be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Mon 4 Jan 13:54
Steps in the right direction...
Offer received for Glasgow Uni (only Glasgow & Edinburgh are part of the Russell Group) with fees payable of £19k
Obviously no word yet from the Scottish Government regarding the disparity between treatment of Scottish & English UK nationals living in the EU...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Wed 10 Feb 17:53
Another update - slowly but surely...
Now, any UK citizen born in EU will be treated by the Scottish Govt as if they were born in rUK - so fees of £9k
Fees have dropped from £26k to £19k, and now to £9k, I can cope with that, but still don`t think it`s right or fair...
They still have not addressed the disparity of the treatment of Scottish v English/Welsh/NI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 11 Feb 16:25
So is it now only Scottish residents who get free tuition whilst anyone applying from the rest of the UK, or a person born in the UK but residing in Europe, pays £9k?
Do EU countries typically charge tuition fees?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Thu 11 Feb 16:42
No ROI students get access to free tuition but not living costs. It's a mix in Europe, some countries do offer free tuition and some charge so Scottish students have lost the ability to study abroad for free.
If the UK national lived in Scotland before living abroad then they would still potentially qualify for free tuition. If you were Scottish and lived in England before living in the EU you would still have to pay full tuition fees.
That's if I've read it all correctly. It's pretty complex. If someone moves from RUK permanently and can prove they are ordinarily resident in Scotland and didn't move to benefit from free tuition then I think you're eligible too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 12 Feb 12:09
No, my kids were born in Lux, both have always had UK passports/citizenship/nationality etc
- when they turn 18, they automatically qualify for a Lux passport and dual nationality having been born and educated here, should they want it.
Both my wife and I were born in Fife, All 4 grandparents were born in Fife.
(I can confirm 7 out of 8 great grandparents born in Scotland too, I suspect the last one was born in ROI)
Grandparents include, Fireman, MOD Policewoman, NHS Nurse, Water Board Driver - we are Scottish, Fife-ish born and bred..
(I won`t mention fighting for Scotland umpteen times and being national champion...)
The UK Government has stated for England - that people returning from EU to study would get `home fee status` AND
"Your children are also eligible for support on the same terms" - even if they are not themselves UK nationals!
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-nationals-in-the-eea-and-switzerland-access-to-higher-education-and-19-further-education
The Scottish Government has stated that UK Nationals who lived in Scotland and are returning to Scotland to study are eligible for `home fee status` but NOT their children.
They will only be eligible to get the rUK tuition fee rate.
- And yes, I have the above in writing.
Post Edited (Fri 12 Feb 12:16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 12 Feb 12:38
I can see where the Scottish Government are coming from. If we're now out the EU and therefore no longer paying fees for EU nationals, why would they cover fees for someone who wasn't born here and doesn't live here?
The issue would be easily resolved if the other UK nations would follow suit and make university free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 12 Feb 13:48
"If we`re now out the EU and therefore no longer paying fees for EU nationals, why would they cover fees for someone who wasn`t born here and doesn`t live here?"
1. Because she is a UK National with Scottish heritage.
2. To avoid discrimination.
The UK Government give `English home fee status` to my English colleague`s kids.
The Scottish Government give `rUK fee status` to Scottish peoples kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 12 Feb 15:07
Get what you mean. It should be consistent but the problem is that Scotland handles university education differently to the rest of the UK. If we were still in the EU your kids would be able to attend for free. That free education was because they were EU citizens rather than where their parents were originally from.
It sounds like Scotland are saying all EU citizens are to be treated the same whereas England is making exceptions for ones born to UK citizens.
Sounds positive if SG are suggesting it's £9k (home fees) but isn't it always £9k in Scotland anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: londonparsfan
Date: Fri 12 Feb 15:41
I think the issue is Lux's daughter is a UK citizen (as well as EU if she wants) that has never lived permanently in the UK but is from a Scottish family and likely sounds that she considers herself more Scottish then English. Under the current system she is classed as rUK rather than Scottish in Scotland so they miss out on the free tuition rather than any consideration being given to the families background.
If Lux moved back to Scotland and wanted funding for Higher Education he would still get it but his kids can't get the same support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 12 Feb 16:12
Yep. Issue is that there's no way of holding "Scottish citizenship" or "English citizenship".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 12 Feb 18:33
[Yep. Issue is that there`s no way of holding "Scottish citizenship" or "English citizenship".]
Except that the UK Government use `last UK residence` as a qualifier -Scotland don`t
Meaning that should my daughter want to study in England, because I did not live in England, she would be deemed a 3rd country applicant paying £26k
Should she want to study in Scotland, she is deemed to be a `rUK` applicant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 12 Feb 18:45
Who pays for the fees of Scottish students going to a Scottish university?
If it’s from the contributions of the Scottish taxpayers (or out Scotland share of tax revenue) then while it sticks for you lux, I can understand the view that money paid in from the local population should go to children who were educated, live and potentially stay in that same population after uni
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Fri 12 Feb 18:56
So the fact that I paid tax in Scotland for 14 years before moving, as did my wife - both my parents, both her parents (all 4 working, all 4 born in Fife) paid taxes in Scotland - is all immaterial right?
You suggest that one can only benefit if one is local `now`?
Sounds like a slippery slope towards isolationism, racism and discrimination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 12 Feb 19:19
What you're suggesting would be incredibly complex.
To give an example - my sister-in-law and her boyfriend currently live in England (both Scottish though one of his parents were Irish). If they remain there and raise a child there, should that child be eligible for free education in a country they have never resided in whilst the child next door to them has to pay as their parents are English? What about if one parent is Scottish and the other English, Welsh, Spanish or whatever? Do they then only pay half a fee?
The original rules from my understanding were that you had to have resided in Scotland for a certain period of time or came from an EU country. We're not in the EU anymore so now it's only Scottish residents who are eligible.
Essentially the original purpose of free education in Scotland was to only benefit Scottish residents. The only reason they ever included EU residents was because of the regulations at that time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 12 Feb 19:23
I hardly think it`s a slope towards racism to suggest that people who do not live in Scotland cannot send their children to be educated in Scotland without paying fees.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 12 Feb 19:32
It's not racism in the slightest, especially as "European" isn't a race! The original agreement to pay for EU students only existed due to EU regs that said that EU students must be treated the same as local. So.in England and EU student would pay whatever an English resident would pay and the same in Scotland. It just happened that in England it's £9k and in Scotland it's £0k. We're now not in the EU so those regs should no longer apply. I believe anyone who has started a degree already will be allowed to finish it under the original agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 02:16
Jeez - where to start?
Jake - your sister-in-law living in England - there are set, non-conflicting, consistent rules based on residency in England.
[It`s not racism in the slightest, especially as "European" isn`t a race! ]
Just like anti-Muslim, anti-Jewish, anti-English etc etc comments are not racism?
OK then. Jog on.
Nothing like missing the easy (for semi-intelligent people) point to grasp.
One child is being treated differently, by different parts of the UK based on where her parents lived 20 years ago.
Because I lived in Scotland...
England treats her as British and Scottish. = ineligible for English `home fees`
Scotland treats her as British and NOT Scottish. = ineligible for Scottish `home fees`
IF i had lived in England
England would treat her as British and English = eligible for English `home fees`
Scotland would also treat her as British and English = eligible for English `home fees`
Where rules treat people differently based on where they used to live -
Unless there is a mistake by omission from the Scottish Government, it can ONLY be discrimination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 13 Feb 07:46
Yeah it’s all a bit confusing where you have one nationality that spans four different countries with different constituent laws and legal systems etc
In this scenario if I’m reading it correctly, Scotland chooses to spend its money on a different policy of funding for further education - so where an English kid going to uni has to pay, the Scottish gov will pay the fees of Scottish kids studying in Scotland (which is discrimination yes, but I believe is in a good way and a good way to spend the money we all collectively raise)
Quick question, I believe the actual person liable for paying the fees will be your daughter and not you lux? sounds like you’d pay them anyway - buti think you pay them on behalf of your daughter ( I’m sure that’s the case and is why the student loans cover tuition fees as well)?
At £36k a throw, I can fully understand why you’d like the Scottish gov. to fund your daughters education - but equally I’m sure you understand they have a finite pot of money and therefore have to draw lines somewhere.
So I suppose the question is, how do you define a kid as being Scottish and therefore benefit from having their fees funded?
Is it someone who was born in Scotland irrespective of where the live/grew up?
Or is it someone who currently lives in Scotland?
Or is it someone who was educated in Scotland and this is purely a continuation of that education?
Or is it someone with Scottish heritage, ie who’s parent(s) are Scottish but they themselves were born/grew up in another country?
End of the day, this is a big and expensive benefit the Scottish gov provide to Scottish kids and I’m guessing they have to draw the line somewhere.
My own personal view is that I think residency is the fairest test. that way you’re reaching the Scottish population/people who have made Scotland their home, who themselves are currently contributing to Scottish society and hopefully are likely to stay afterwards and start to contribute financially.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 13 Feb 08:19
I think DBP has just summed up the situation perfectly and I agree with his conclusion on how we can best fairly decide on who receives free university education.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 13 Feb 08:59
Lux, care to explain what Jews and Muslims have to do with your argument?
I realise this may be difficult to grasp, but anyone resident in Scotland receives free education. It doesn't matter their religion, race or gender. Free.
Your daughter wasn't born here. She doesn't live here. She essentially has no links to Scotland beyond the fact her parents used to live here quite some time ago. There is no Scottish citizenship and having UK citizenship is irrelevant to the argument. She also wouldn't get free prescriptions or any other Scottish specific policies unless she lived here.
Your daughter would previously have gotten free education due to being an EU resident, not because of her citizenship. This is null and void due to Brexit.
The issue you have is that education is a devolved issue so therefore the policies will be different for each nation. Essentially, you've been scuppered by a Brexit here. The Scottish Government could change their approach, but they don't have to and it's probably perceived as a saving to charge EU residents as they would with students from anywhere else in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Sat 13 Feb 09:33
I don`t think UK universities should be funding any non-resident students except for the occasional grant to allow a few people from poorer counties to attend. If someone lives outside the UK then they are paying taxes in another country and should take advantage of the higher education system there. It would be daft not to, since you are paying for it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 10:20
DBP - Yes, obviously I would be paying whichever fees are applicable.
- and I will be paying them at whatever level it ends up.
UK is now out of the EU, but have drafted some rules for the interim period (I believe it is to include courses starting before 01/01/2028) specifically for UK Nationals who worked in the EU under the UK`s membership.
And yes - residency should be - and indeed is the deciding factor.
In the case of UK Nationals working in the EU, the last residence before moving is considered.
What I am asking for is consistency in how it is applied.
Children of an English resident are treated equally in all UK countries.
Children of a Scottish resident are NOT treated equally.
Discrimination - the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 13 Feb 10:23
Only one fully fledged state funded university in Luxembourg and they do charge fees even for residents. Anywhere from five thousand to twenty odd thousand euros depending on the course. Of course the legal minimum wage in Luxembourg is over 2200 euros a month.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 13 Feb 13:16
sorry lux, i was talking about residency of the child - it`s the child who would be liable for the tuition fees and in turn the child who would receiving the benefit from the scottish government`s funds.
i don`t believe that is in anyway being discriminatory - i don`t really care what country a persons parents were born in, if you live in scotland and scotland is your home, then by default you`re contributing to scotland`s society (in many different ways) and as far as i`m concerned, your invested in scotland and by the same token we are all invested in you.
i`m proud of the fact that population here are happy for their money to be spent on the education of our kids and can see the long term financial and community benefits of educating that population
as for differences in the way people are treated across the UK... it happens all the time as like it or not, we are a union of 4 different countries, with different govs, legal, education systems, etc. you try to get a termination in Northern Ireland or a free prescription in england.
so i don`t think you can call it discrimination if everyone in the jurisdiction and subject to a gov rule or law is treated exactly the same, regardless of colour, gender, race, sexual preference, religion, culture or heritage (and as said above, every child resident in scotland has the same rights to education as every other child resident in scotland)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 13:49
I am only talking about the specific case of UK Nationals working in the EU.
It is the UK & Scottish Governments who put the parent`s UK Nationality as first pre-requisite.
Also both Governments who use the parent`s last UK country of domicile as the qualifying factor.
[so i don`t think you can call it discrimination if everyone in the jurisdiction and subject to a gov rule or law is treated exactly the same,]
Isn`t that what I just said?
I`ll rearrange the example above just for you...
If I had:
Lived in Scotland - Scotland treats her as British but NOT Scottish = ineligible for Scottish `home fees`
Lived in England - Scotland would treat her as British and English = eligible for English `home fees`
Lived in Scotland - England treats her as British and Scottish = ineligible for English `home fees`
Lived in England - England would treat her as British and English = eligible for English `home fees`
Spot the inconsistency yet?
I`m prepared to believe that this is an oversight by the Scottish Government, and have requested that they take a look, and correct the term.
Failing that, the only other possibility is discrimination by the Scottish Government, who claim to be much more `EU centric` than the UK Govt.
- A constitutional lawyer I have approached agrees.
Post Edited (Sat 13 Feb 13:53)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 13:59
More simply
If I had lived in England, both Governments treat her the same - as English
Bcs I lived in Scotland, England treats her as Scottish, but Scotland treats her as English
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 13 Feb 14:02
That's because the assumption is that UK = England. Go on Gov.uk and see how long it takes you to find something stating "Does not apply for Scotland".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Sat 13 Feb 14:11
"Bcs I lived in Scotland, England treats her as Scottish, but Scotland treats her as English"
Or you could rewrite that as "England treats her as non-English, and Scotland treats her as non-Scottish", both of which are true since English and Scottish don`t really exist as nationalities.
Both countries have their rules for eligibility, and there is no reason for them to be aligned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 14:29
"Or you could rewrite that as "England treats her as non-English, and Scotland treats her as non-Scottish", both of which are true since English and Scottish don`t really exist as nationalities."
If you stop trying to be pedantic for half a second, clearly I am using `English` & `Scottish` in this case to refer to `deemed an England resident` & `deemed a Scotland resident` - Nationality is UK - already a given.
Thank you for agreeing with me - Your summary again highlights the difference in treatment - i.e. discrimination.
If I had lived in England (using your phrasing)
"England treats her as English, and Scotland treats her as English"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 13 Feb 15:39
It sounds like we’re at that agree to disagree point :)
From my perspective it sounds like (in terms of provision of education), the Scottish government treats all people who were born in another country, who grew up in another country, who currently live in another country and I’m guessing we’re schooled outside the Scottish education system but have British citizenship through their parents as British, and doesn’t class them as a Scottish resident regardless... that in itself doesn’t scream discrimination in my opinion.
What I can see from your perspective (putting the fees to one side) is a discrepancy that appears to come from the fact that your daughter has citizenship of a Union of countries where many aspects of those countries lives, eg education, gov spending, etc are devolved and applied to those who currently reside in those constituent countries. I’d add, i believe each one fairly applies their own laws and rules, but recognise that those rules are different across the individual nations.
I think you can guess that for me, the end result feels right, and while I’m sure you will disagree with that (and in your position I would as well), I don’t think it’s fair to accuse the Scottish gov (or any constituent countries gov) of being discriminatory in the application of their rules - your daughter is remotely a British citizen (and that’s fair enough) ...but there isn’t such as thing as a British education system which takes us back to how do you define a Scottish child?
when you take a step back, the whole concept and set up of the uk and British citizenship is a bit bizarre really
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par
Date: Sat 13 Feb 16:45
We`re not really discussing the same thing.
I agree with most of what you say, but you seem to be coming from what you think the category and classification should be, not what it is.
[ which takes us back to how do you define a Scottish child? ]
The Government already has defined this, as being the last UK country of residence of the parent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 24 Jun 16:25
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Wed 23 Jun 20:15
Ah well one of the great benefits!🤬
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-o2-data-roaming-charges-b1871484.html
That’s actually a nightmare for folk living near the border in NI. I used to complain constantly to Vodafone for being charged extra to use Vodafone in the uk (co. Fermanagh) but the nearest pylon was in Ireland (Donegal)… especially galling as it was a Vodafone.ie service provider
Most of my family over there end up having to use two phones
Post Edited (Thu 24 Jun 16:25)
|
|
|
|
|
|
