How long....

WARNING: This section may contain jokes or topics of an offensive nature.
Recommended for over 18's only. Send Admin a PM to request exclusion.

Moderators: Admin, Ralph, asl, Robin

RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Red Duke wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Just reading some of the text on that Petition:

“Leaving the EU in March 2019 will allow the UK good time to negotiate more efficiently.”

“The EU border in Ireland to be managed simply by having a dual Euro / pound currency as legal tender in both the North and South. Exports to the South would be dealt with in Euro and vice versa when importing to the North. Rates fixed at time of the deal.”

Who came up with this nonsense??
The level of ignorance on the subject is on par with the Minister for Northern Ireland's knowledge of Irish politics.
Not just the ignorance but the sheer economic illiteracy of fixing a GBP/EUR exchange rate between NI and RoI...does this mean that GBP/EUR rates are fixed between U.K. and Italy or Germany or any other country which trades using the overland freight through U.K. via Holyhead to RoI? The petition is essentially calling to tie the pound to the euro meaning we lose monetary policy sovereignty to the ECB!
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
MPs meaningful vote set for 14th January then.

Bit of a stalemate until then perhaps with plenty of noises off from No Dealers and People’s Voters between now and then.
asl
Posts: 6668
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:37
Here was me hoping for a Christmas respite.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
asl wrote:Here was me hoping for a Christmas respite.
You mean you haven’t scheduled in RNF Brexit chat for Christmas Day?
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
asl wrote:Don't be a dick... Quite clearly I haven't asked 7.2m people and quite clearly I wasn't implying that my personal experience could be extrapolated out. I also know one person who has gone the other way and now thinks we should leave because the EU negotiators are clearly trying to get the best deal for *them*. (No sh1t, Sherlock...) The point is, people can and do change their minds and my impression is that there could be a 5% swing to Remain.

Stupid? No, I don't think people were stupid to vote to Leave: I think they were wrong simply because they were ill-informed. I'm not saying I was any better informed - and *that* is my point. The vote should never have been given to Joe Public because they did not have the information from which to make an informed decision. I'm a reasonably well educated professional person with an interest in politics and economics. I didn't have enough information. Big Dave Smith who drives a white van, reads the Daily Mail and thinks I'm a Celebrity is the pinnacle of TV - you ain't telling me he knew better than me if he voted to Leave. No, no leavers knew the outcome of leaving - you'd have to be Hari Seldon to have known that. I voted to remain because I knew what the outcome of that was likely to be.
I shall put ALL that down to your obvious lack of breeding and inability to have a coherent argument without resorting to personal abuse. You argue my case very well - thank you
asl
Posts: 6668
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:37
...which is an amusing standpoint given your post that I was replying to! Hey ho.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Corbyn tables vote of no confidence in May!

If it goes to a vote and she loses she really is a stupid idiot for a) cancelling vote last week and b) not announcing it would happen this week.

But as it is a motion on PM no obligation for Government to allow vote. More of a warning shot ahead of a no confidence motion on Government.
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
asl wrote:...which is an amusing standpoint given your post that I was replying to! Hey ho.
I would love you to point out where I was abusive to you. I was calling out your clear link between your view that there would be a sizable swing to Remain. With your personal encounter with a few people you know. Which I am still quite happy to say, proves nothing. You then went on to say, they didn't realise they were voting to leave the customs union. If that is the case, they must not have listened to nay of the debate in 2016, because that was what it was all about. If you find that somehow personal or abusive. A you say …… hey ho

BTW no people who voted Remain ( I am presuming Jason Mithers, who drives a Merc and reads the Guardian, who thinks that Question Time is the pinnacle of TV), know what the outcome of staying in the EU will be. Things that were discounted just a couple of years ago, are now clear targets. If you think you know what the EU will look like in 10 - 15 years. You are clearly very well informed
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Ihearye wrote:
asl wrote:...which is an amusing standpoint given your post that I was replying to! Hey ho.
I would love you to point out where I was abusive to you. I was calling out your clear link between your view that there would be a sizable swing to Remain. With your personal encounter with a few people you know. Which I am still quite happy to say, proves nothing. You then went on to say, they didn't realise they were voting to leave the customs union. If that is the case, they must not have listened to nay of the debate in 2016, because that was what it was all about. If you find that somehow personal or abusive. A you say …… hey ho

BTW no people who voted Remain ( I am presuming Jason Mithers, who drives a Merc and reads the Guardian, who thinks that Question Time is the pinnacle of TV), know what the outcome of staying in the EU will be. Things that were discounted just a couple of years ago, are now clear targets. If you think you know what the EU will look like in 10 - 15 years. You are clearly very well informed
Plenty of quotes form Farage, Boris, et al talking about keeping the benefits of the customs union and just stopping immigration.

And I would be fairly confident that a lot of people who never follow any news at all have never even heard of the customs union. They may have voted to control borders based on all the Facebook targeted ads etc but that is only one side of the customs union argument.

Some people voted to have cake. Some voted to eat it. Most of the arguments said both.

As for future of EU, that depends on your point of view. I see the future as more exiting integration of technology (satellites and 5G), energy networks, protocols for smart cities and autonomous transport, even more efficient and productive supply chains, better links between research centres etc and view this as outweighing the costs of a large Parliament (though the U.K. has more unelected people in House of Lords) and failings of the CAP and protectionism. Whereas others, in my opinion, get overly het up about ‘Brussels bureaucrats’ and ‘EU laws’ so see nothing but negatives in the future.
Red Duke
Posts: 1991
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:15
Location: North West
My view is that if the EU continues in its current form over the next 15 years, the disconnection between the political elite and the people will grow ever greater and it will lead to rise all sorts of civil unrest.

The politicians of today have not learnt any lessons from history.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Red Duke wrote:My view is that if the EU continues in its current form over the next 15 years, the disconnection between the political elite and the people will grow ever greater and it will lead to rise all sorts of civil unrest.

The politicians of today have not learnt any lessons from history.
I didn’t know that leaving the EU would lead to us scrapping our privilege based politics with our elected chamber dominated by schools like Eton and our other chamber of unelected members awarded positions by the said elected government.

Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson are being held up as being connected to the real-world of normal British people?

I would be interested to know what specifically the EU Parliament has done which is disconnected from society to a worse extent than the Bullingdon Club and MPs using taxpayers money to rennovate moats and duck houses.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
I see how this is going to play out now. May loses vote. Says she will plough on with no deal. Corbyn tables no confidence motion in Government. Conservatives like Soubry, Allen, Grieve, Clarke, Boles and many more vote with Labour to bring down government and call a general election and delay Article 50. May, Hammond, Rudd and the Remainers in Cabinet relieved to have a) delayed leaving and b) handed over the chaos to someone else. If Labour win the election then Corbyn pleased to deliver Brexit and try and negotiate a Labour Deal whilst Brexiters in Tory party can blame Labour for either delaying leaving or getting a bad deal.
Red Duke
Posts: 1991
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:15
Location: North West
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Red Duke wrote:My view is that if the EU continues in its current form over the next 15 years, the disconnection between the political elite and the people will grow ever greater and it will lead to rise all sorts of civil unrest.

The politicians of today have not learnt any lessons from history.
I didn’t know that leaving the EU would lead to us scrapping our privilege based politics with our elected chamber dominated by schools like Eton and our other chamber of unelected members awarded positions by the said elected government.

Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson are being held up as being connected to the real-world of normal British people?

I would be interested to know what specifically the EU Parliament has done which is disconnected from society to a worse extent than the Bullingdon Club and MPs using taxpayers money to rennovate moats and duck houses.
My comment was in response to the future of the EU. The EU is yet to have its accounts approved confirming how corrupt it is. The expenses that Euro MPs can claim without receipts are just as bad or not worse the UK MPs.

Hopefully, the Brexit fiasco will lead to the split of the Tories and Rees-Mogg and his ilk can choke on their silver spoons and never get anywhere near power and disappear into a footnote of history.
kora
Posts: 573
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 12:55
We live in hope RD but the elite have run the country for so long they probably know how to hang in there for a bit longer. They had a hiatus from 45 to 52 but they've been back ever since so I don't hold out too much hope. Trouble is that even if you get rid from the front benches, they still run the civil service so still have enormous power. Sir Humphrey Appleby is still running the country I'm afraid.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
kora wrote:We live in hope RD but the elite have run the country for so long they probably know how to hang in there for a bit longer. They had a hiatus from 45 to 52 but they've been back ever since so I don't hold out too much hope. Trouble is that even if you get rid from the front benches, they still run the civil service so still have enormous power. Sir Humphrey Appleby is still running the country I'm afraid.
Indeed. Downside of having one of the oldest Parliamentary systems in the world is that 300 plus years of an elite ruling class system is hard to rebalance.
SHANDY VOR
Posts: 581
Joined: 12 Aug 2012, 16:13
Have a day off
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
SHANDY VOR wrote:Have a day off
From what exactly?
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
kora wrote:We live in hope RD but the elite have run the country for so long they probably know how to hang in there for a bit longer. They had a hiatus from 45 to 52 but they've been back ever since so I don't hold out too much hope. Trouble is that even if you get rid from the front benches, they still run the civil service so still have enormous power. Sir Humphrey Appleby is still running the country I'm afraid.
Indeed. Downside of having one of the oldest Parliamentary systems in the world is that 300 plus years of an elite ruling class system is hard to rebalance.
Here is the (pro-free market anti-Corbyn) Economist’s take from today’s issue:

“The elite that failed
Britain’s political crisis exposes the inadequacy of its leaders

In the past year the British body politic has endured an astonishing list of maladies. The cabinet has lost a foreign secretary and two Brexit secretaries, not to mention lots of lesser fry. Parliament has voted to hold the government in contempt. The Conservative Party has held a vote of no confidence in the prime minister and left her badly wounded. And it is going to get worse. There is no parliamentary majority for any Brexit deal, and no way out of the impasse that won’t break promises—and possibly heads.

There are two popular explanations for this mayhem. One is that Europe was always destined to tear Britain apart, since too many Britons loathe the evolution of the common market into a European Union. A second is that Brexit has provided a catalyst for a long-simmering civil war between successful Britain (which is metropolitan and liberal) and left-behind Britain (which is provincial and conservative). Both explanations have merit. But there is also a third: that the country’s model of leadership is disintegrating. Britain is governed by a self-involved clique that rewards group membership above competence and self-confidence above expertise. This chumocracy has finally met its Waterloo.

Consider the decision that unleashed the current disaster. David Cameron gambled the future of the country on a simple referendum—51% and you’re out—whereas other countries, confronted with less momentous decisions, opt for two-stage votes and super-majorities. He made the gamble only in order to see off a challenge from the Europhobic wing of his Tory party and the defection of voters to the uk Independence Party. He set great store by his ability to sell the eu at home and to win reforms in Brussels, despite the fact that he had spent much of his career grumbling about Europe and antagonising the eu bureaucracy (including removing Tory meps from their broad right-wing coalition). His resignation ignited a civil war between his former Oxford chums Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, whose mutual destruction paved the way for Theresa May. Mr Cameron then rewarded other pals for losing an unlosable referendum, with peerages, knighthoods and, in the case of Ed Llewellyn, his Eton mucker and chief of staff, a seat in the Lords and the ambassadorship to France.

Or consider the current race for the Tory leadership that Mrs May launched last week when she was forced to promise her party that she would not lead it into the next election. The Tories are in turmoil not just because they are divided, but because the various candidates are inadequate. Jeremy Hunt, the foreign secretary, lacks principle; Sajid Javid, the home secretary, lacks charisma; and Mr Johnson, the right’s champion, is an embarrassment who this week declared that Britain shouldn’t balk at leaving the eu without a deal, on the grounds that it might produce only a temporary shortage of Mars bars.

Britain’s leadership crisis is rooted in the evolution of the old establishment into a new political class. This evolution has been widely hailed as a triumph of meritocracy over privilege, and professionalism over amateurism. In fact, the new political class has preserved many of the failures of the old establishment. It is introverted and self-regarding, sending its members straight from university to jobs in the Westminster village, where they marry others of their kind. It relies on bluff rather than expertise, selecting those trained in blaggers’ subjects like ppe and slippery professions like public relations and journalism (Mr Cameron worked in pr before going into politics, whereas Mr Gove and Mr Johnson, along with his brother, another Tory mp, were hacks).

At the same time, the political class has abandoned one of the virtues of the old establishment. The old ruling class preserved a degree of gentlemanly self-restraint. Senior politicians left office to cultivate their gardens and open village fetes. The new political class, by contrast, is devoid of self-restraint, precisely because it thinks it owes its position to personal merit rather than the luck of birth. Thus meritocracy morphs into crony capitalism. Tony Blair has amassed a fortune since leaving office and George Osborne, Mr Cameron’s former chancellor of the exchequer, is following eagerly in his footsteps.

The triumph of the new elite coincided with the erosion of other paths into the leadership class. The Labour Party traditionally recruited working-class talent through the trade unions and local government. Its 1945-51 government was successful in part because it boasted big figures like Ernest Bevin, who honed his leadership skills in the unions, and Herbert Morrison, who ran the London County Council. The Conservatives recruited from a broad range of constituencies, from the squirearchy to the armed forces and the business world (both Joe Chamberlain and Stanley Baldwin came from highly successful Midlands-based companies).

There are some welcome signs that the political system is beginning to develop antibodies to the rule of the chumocracy. The Labour Party has broken with the Blairite habit of dropping metropolitan mps into regional constituencies and has begun promoting first-rate local talent such as Angela Rayner (who left school at 16 with no qualifications and a child on the way). The Tory party has succeeded in recruiting impressive former soldiers such as Tom Tugendhat, as well as members of ethnic minorities such as Mr Javid, the son of an immigrant bus driver. The creation of powerful local mayors is devolving decision-making from London and creating new avenues into the national political elite.

Unfortunately, this self-correction comes too late. The failure of Britain’s political class not only opened the way to the Brexit vote. It also opened the way to the capture of the Labour Party by Jeremy Corbyn and his far-left clique. Many Britons despair that they face a choice between Brexit and chaos under the Tories and socialism and chaos under Labour. If next year goes as badly as this one, they may end up with both.“
Johnsons Red Army
Posts: 1598
Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 14:19
Location: Stroud
Corbyn OUT!
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Bloomberg’s turn to criticise the failings of the U.K’s system of a ruling elite / club: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... -u-k-elite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Red Duke
Posts: 1991
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:15
Location: North West
An excellent summary of how we have got into this mess. I do like the word chumocracy.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Red Duke wrote:An excellent summary of how we have got into this mess. I do like the word chumocracy.
Of course, when reading about how Oxford grads have taken over governing our creaking island and its embarrassing school boy politics I just have to remember 38 current Heads of State around the world are grads of my own alma mata and that those countries want intellect and analytical not Oxbridge Tim Nice But Dims.
Johnsons Red Army
Posts: 1598
Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 14:19
Location: Stroud
So the day of the 'meaningful vote' is finally here.

Perhaps today will finally be the day that May decides the game is up and resigns, following her expected heavy defeat in the Commons?

I can't say I'll be holding my breath, though.
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Johnsons Red Army wrote:So the day of the 'meaningful vote' is finally here.

Perhaps today will finally be the day that May decides the game is up and resigns, following her expected heavy defeat in the Commons?

I can't say I'll be holding my breath, though.
She won’t resign. Conservatives obviously won’t back Corbyn’s No Confidence motion (when it comes later tonight or tomorrow).

As Parliament passed the amendment that she has to come back with a proposition to vote on within three days, she will come back with a choice between No Deal, People’s Vote, or Norway. MPs won’t vote for the first of those, so they will either opt for Norway, or be more democratic and ask the people to vote.

And she’ll stand down in a few years ahead of the next Gen.

(Or maybe her deal will pass today after all!)
Johnsons Red Army
Posts: 1598
Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 14:19
Location: Stroud
The thing that confuses me about why anyone would want a Norway-style option, is that it's just a worse version of what we have already. Unless, of course, they were hoping it would just serve as a 'stop-gap' before they tried to get their harder version of Brexit.
Johnsons Red Army
Posts: 1598
Joined: 27 Dec 2015, 14:19
Location: Stroud
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote: (Or maybe her deal will pass today after all!)
Bookies are saying 11/1 for that to happen, so I think we can rule that one out, lol!

https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/br ... ngful-vote" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Johnsons Red Army wrote:The thing that confuses me about why anyone would want a Norway-style option, is that it's just a worse version of what we have already. Unless, of course, they were hoping it would just serve as a 'stop-gap' before they tried to get their harder version of Brexit.
Apart from Farrage of course who said “who wouldn’t want to be like Norway” and several similar statements before the Ref.

As for the vote: I still think a slim chance Rees-Moggers/No Dealers might back the deal to annoy People’s Voters/Remainers and that PVs/Remainers might back it to annoy Moggers/NDs. Like a prisoner’s dilemma.
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Ihearye wrote:
asl wrote:...which is an amusing standpoint given your post that I was replying to! Hey ho.
I would love you to point out where I was abusive to you. I was calling out your clear link between your view that there would be a sizable swing to Remain. With your personal encounter with a few people you know. Which I am still quite happy to say, proves nothing. You then went on to say, they didn't realise they were voting to leave the customs union. If that is the case, they must not have listened to nay of the debate in 2016, because that was what it was all about. If you find that somehow personal or abusive. A you say …… hey ho

BTW no people who voted Remain ( I am presuming Jason Mithers, who drives a Merc and reads the Guardian, who thinks that Question Time is the pinnacle of TV), know what the outcome of staying in the EU will be. Things that were discounted just a couple of years ago, are now clear targets. If you think you know what the EU will look like in 10 - 15 years. You are clearly very well informed
Plenty of quotes form Farage, Boris, et al talking about keeping the benefits of the customs union and just stopping immigration.

And I would be fairly confident that a lot of people who never follow any news at all have never even heard of the customs union. They may have voted to control borders based on all the Facebook targeted ads etc but that is only one side of the customs union argument.

Some people voted to have cake. Some voted to eat it. Most of the arguments said both.

As for future of EU, that depends on your point of view. I see the future as more exiting integration of technology (satellites and 5G), energy networks, protocols for smart cities and autonomous transport, even more efficient and productive supply chains, better links between research centres etc and view this as outweighing the costs of a large Parliament (though the U.K. has more unelected people in House of Lords) and failings of the CAP and protectionism. Whereas others, in my opinion, get overly het up about ‘Brussels bureaucrats’ and ‘EU laws’ so see nothing but negatives in the future.
Energy networks - the majority are already EU owned
satellites and 5G - you seem certain that this will end ? Will it?

As Germany shows signs of drifting towards recession. Couple that with the banking madness of vast swathes of EU countries and I think your ideals may be kicked somewhat further down the road. However, federalism and closer integration (e.g defence , taxation). Has nothing to do with EU laws and bureaucrats and 'EU laws'. The future of the EU does not matter on your viewpoint. You express the way you would like it to develop. hate to break this news to you, but what you wish, will not be considered. I have no idea what the EU will look like in 10 - 20 years and don't think I am being presumptive is saying you don't either. That was merely the point I was debating, in so far as people who voted leave, where taking a leap of faith, but no more a leap that those who voted remain (?)
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:
Red Duke wrote:My view is that if the EU continues in its current form over the next 15 years, the disconnection between the political elite and the people will grow ever greater and it will lead to rise all sorts of civil unrest.

The politicians of today have not learnt any lessons from history.
I didn’t know that leaving the EU would lead to us scrapping our privilege based politics with our elected chamber dominated by schools like Eton and our other chamber of unelected members awarded positions by the said elected government.

Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson are being held up as being connected to the real-world of normal British people?

I would be interested to know what specifically the EU Parliament has done which is disconnected from society to a worse extent than the Bullingdon Club and MPs using taxpayers money to rennovate moats and duck houses.
Nothing like picking the extremes and using that as a basis of an argument that applies to all.
In my opinion the fact is that to the 'liberal' upwardly mobile middle classes in the likes of London. The immigration issue does not exist because it is that nice girl that serves them a latte with a dash of vanilla. If you move further north, it is viewed as impacting jobs, housing, access to NHS, lower wages etc etc.
To the 'liberal' upwardly mobile middle classes in the likes of London, introduction of borders, impacts their dash across the Channel for their weekend breaks and stocking up on fine wine and cheeses.
If you move further North, this is not a concern to any extent.


I do actually have a bit more respect for those that would be on the Leave side of the debate, irrespective of the, due to their advantged status, that fact it will benefit them in any way. As opposed to the 'liberal' middle classes, that care little for why vast swathes of people voted to leave, as long as it doesn't impact them in any way and that their Latte is being served pronto. Ciao
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Taking jobs is incorrect and using that argument covers up local policy failings.

As you know I live in the North East. The only region who makes enough stuff to have net exports.

I must have interviewed over 50 manufacturing, tech, digital and pharma companies over last few years.

The overwhelming challenge they face? High skilled recruitment. USA, India and EU are the biggest sources of skilled employees such as engineers or lab scientists. Only in coding is a U.K. born pipeline coming through.

This is a region with high unemployment and three universities. It is an utter failure of national policy that the U.K. is creating great high value added jobs through great science and innovation, but very few in the U.K. have the skills to take these roles. If companies like GSK or JLR could not hire immigrants, the roles wouldn’t be filled by locals, the roles would be created in other counties - until we are producing skilled workers in our education system. (But that requires long term planning, listening to business, not chopping and changing education system based on ideology etc etc and requires young people to have inspiration and aspiration to work hard, not to doss about and want something for nothing).
Red Duke
Posts: 1991
Joined: 20 Nov 2009, 09:15
Location: North West
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Taking jobs is incorrect and using that argument covers up local policy failings.

As you know I live in the North East. The only region who makes enough stuff to have net exports.

I must have interviewed over 50 manufacturing, tech, digital and pharma companies over last few years.

The overwhelming challenge they face? High skilled recruitment. USA, India and EU are the biggest sources of skilled employees such as engineers or lab scientists. Only in coding is a U.K. born pipeline coming through.

This is a region with high unemployment and three universities. It is an utter failure of national policy that the U.K. is creating great high value added jobs through great science and innovation, but very few in the U.K. have the skills to take these roles. If companies like GSK or JLR could not hire immigrants, the roles wouldn’t be filled by locals, the roles would be created in other counties - until we are producing skilled workers in our education system. (But that requires long term planning, listening to business, not chopping and changing education system based on ideology etc etc and requires young people to have inspiration and aspiration to work hard, not to doss about and want something for nothing).
I agree that our Education System does not produce enough people with the right skills. To me, the teaching profession should hang its head in shame. It is fundamentally ludicrous that kids can leave school who can't read, can't write and can't add up.

What is the percentage of illiterate people in jail? It is bound to be a lot higher than the national average. How many people are in debt because they have no idea how to manage money? It has lead to real problems with Universal Credit and non-payment of rent for people who do not have the skills to control their spending.

The education system is solely designed for benefit of what Universities want and not for the education of pupils. For example, no University place should be given based on predicted results. They should wait until the results are known before offering places.

Most Teachers have been in Education since they were 5. They have no other life experience other than education. I would have it that no teacher should be employed unless they have at least two years of working within other walks of life.
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
Red Duke wrote:
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Taking jobs is incorrect and using that argument covers up local policy failings.

As you know I live in the North East. The only region who makes enough stuff to have net exports.

I must have interviewed over 50 manufacturing, tech, digital and pharma companies over last few years.

The overwhelming challenge they face? High skilled recruitment. USA, India and EU are the biggest sources of skilled employees such as engineers or lab scientists. Only in coding is a U.K. born pipeline coming through.

This is a region with high unemployment and three universities. It is an utter failure of national policy that the U.K. is creating great high value added jobs through great science and innovation, but very few in the U.K. have the skills to take these roles. If companies like GSK or JLR could not hire immigrants, the roles wouldn’t be filled by locals, the roles would be created in other counties - until we are producing skilled workers in our education system. (But that requires long term planning, listening to business, not chopping and changing education system based on ideology etc etc and requires young people to have inspiration and aspiration to work hard, not to doss about and want something for nothing).
I agree that our Education System does not produce enough people with the right skills. To me, the teaching profession should hang its head in shame. It is fundamentally ludicrous that kids can leave school who can't read, can't write and can't add up.

What is the percentage of illiterate people in jail? It is bound to be a lot higher than the national average. How many people are in debt because they have no idea how to manage money? It has lead to real problems with Universal Credit and non-payment of rent for people who do not have the skills to control their spending.

The education system is solely designed for benefit of what Universities want and not for the education of pupils. For example, no University place should be given based on predicted results. They should wait until the results are known before offering places.

Most Teachers have been in Education since they were 5. They have no other life experience other than education. I would have it that no teacher should be employed unless they have at least two years of working within other walks of life.
And you don't think parents and role models have an awful lot to do with that ?
parents, who don't care if their kids go to school or not?
parents , who never spend a minute with their kids in the evening, going through their school day?
parents who set the example to their kids that anti social behaviour and lack of respect is OK?
parents who absolve themseleves of any responsibility in their childrens education, yet dont assist those who they are handing over that responsibility to?
parents, who never turn up at a parents night to see how their children are doing, or hear what help they may need.
parents who seem oblivious to the socially and educationally inept children they are bringing up.
parents, who never turn up to see their children actually doing something positive in school. Be it in the choir, playing for a team, in a play etc etc
THESE are the kids leaving school with poor attainment. You seriously think any self respecting teacher, could not help a responsive, socially engaged kid, not to read or write? In this days of constant monitoring, they would soon be called out and be out. Parts of our society is broken and they have broken it themsleves
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
RegencyCheltenhamSpa wrote:Taking jobs is incorrect and using that argument covers up local policy failings.

As you know I live in the North East. The only region who makes enough stuff to have net exports.

I must have interviewed over 50 manufacturing, tech, digital and pharma companies over last few years.

The overwhelming challenge they face? High skilled recruitment. USA, India and EU are the biggest sources of skilled employees such as engineers or lab scientists. Only in coding is a U.K. born pipeline coming through.

This is a region with high unemployment and three universities. It is an utter failure of national policy that the U.K. is creating great high value added jobs through great science and innovation, but very few in the U.K. have the skills to take these roles. If companies like GSK or JLR could not hire immigrants, the roles wouldn’t be filled by locals, the roles would be created in other counties - until we are producing skilled workers in our education system. (But that requires long term planning, listening to business, not chopping and changing education system based on ideology etc etc and requires young people to have inspiration and aspiration to work hard, not to doss about and want something for nothing).
Having worked in JLR of an on for many years, I can't find it in myself to agree with you. Most of the foreign nationals taking up IT jobs are from India. Not surprising given its ownership. However, To suggest that these jobs are advertised, or that local candidates are sought. Is just incorrect. Likewise, a large % of foreign apprentice’s are from India and the same story applies. EU nationals, have , in my experience, usually been brought in on a contract basis. What their rates of pay are, I didn’t know, but do know I had interviewed people in the past, with similar are better skills for a position. Any one of whom would have been a welcome addition to the work force. I can’t comment on any other industries, but on JLR, I can
User avatar
Ihearye
Posts: 3428
Joined: 05 Jan 2018, 08:08
btw , this is the JLR that got EU money to move the building of the new Defender off shore. Long before Brexit was even on the horizon. There has been a plan in place, to move production out of UK for some time. Not because of markets, but because of build cost. Be it in EU countries, Brasil, China etc
RegencyCheltenhamSpa
Posts: 29756
Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 03:27
Ihearye wrote:btw , this is the JLR that got EU money to move the building of the new Defender off shore. Long before Brexit was even on the horizon. There has been a plan in place, to move production out of UK for some time. Not because of markets, but because of build cost. Be it in EU countries, Brasil, China etc
And what drives build costs and investment decisions? Skills and productivity.

Moving on to Nissan for example, Sunderland is the most productive and competitive plant in Nissan’s global network outside of Japan, which is why HQ keeps commissioning builds at Nissan. Currently France are offering incentives for the next round of R&D investment and battery manufacturing. And the Czech plant is getting more competitive by the year. To win the next round of investment, Nissan U.K. need to prove to HQ they are the best value to invest in ahead of France or Czech rep. This means proving a lower unit cost, better productivity and better OEE (currently over 95% in NMUK). This means better technology and digital manufacturing tools and the skills to use them. Biggest skills shortage in Nissan UK is computer coders and robot operators as much as it is engineers and welders (also in short supply). Currently these skills shortages are filled by international recruitment.

Any hiccup to recruitment and innovation and Nissan HQ may well decide to invest in France or Czechia for the next models and batteries if they become more efficient.

This isn’t anything to do with the EU: if our government replaces the skills lost from freedom of movement by investing in producing the skills ourselves or by allowing immigration from the rest of the world then leaving tomorrow with No Deal would be no problem.
Post Reply