Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
The steel industry will be preserved in one form or another. It's too crucial to national defence to let slip.

I think you over estimate the competency of British politicians.

I'm of the opinion that they desperately don't want to do it, as nationalisation is something the Conservatives are ideologically opposed to. By the same measure though, national defence tends to be reasonably high up on their list of priorities as well, and every person involved in military logistics will be screaming that if Tata go under, so does our ability to build warships and tanks independently. The government will squirm and fight it, but if there's absolutely no option, they'll take a 60% stake, lay off half the workers, and do their best to subsidise what's left until it's competitive again.

I know some of you will probably dismiss this due to the source, and I don't like the Guardian much either - but this explains the background a little. The political background anyhow.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/31/port--talbot-tata-british-steel-brexit-leave-campaign

From what I understand, the Tories could have saved the steel industry by now if they wanted, but they do not want to for ideological and diplomatic reasons.

 Ketara wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
The steel industry will be preserved in one form or another. It's too crucial to national defence to let slip.

I think you over estimate the competency of British politicians.

I'm of the opinion that they desperately don't want to do it, as nationalisation is something the Conservatives are ideologically opposed to. By the same measure though, national defence tends to be reasonably high up on their list of priorities as well, and every person involved in military logistics will be screaming that if Tata go under, so does our ability to build warships and tanks independently. The government will squirm and fight it, but if there's absolutely no option, they'll take a 60% stake, lay off half the workers, and do their best to subsidise what's left until it's competitive again.

With all due respect, Ketara, the idea that the Conservatives are ideologically opposed to nationalisation is complete nonsense. They were more than happy to nationalise the banks.

Years ago, you could argue the Tories were against nationalisation, but Cameron's mob are not, and never have been, Conservatives. They occupy the same middle ground as everybody else these days.

However, your point about national defense is a good one.

Here's what I think will happen. The Tories MUST nationalise steel. Already reeling from IDS's resignation, and presiding over a bitterly divided party torn apart by the EU referendum, Cameron can ill afforded another crisis, or be seen to be 'betraying' British workers.

As someone who lives not too far from Port Talbot, the loss of the Steelworks will probably destroy the whole town.

Even then, only one of the four rollers is actually in operation, and it is still losing £1,000,000 a day.... I don't know if nationalising it would even help.

Nationalise the steelworks and railways, use the steelworks to produce new tracks and trains and connect up the country properly. Every city to have a nationalised tram/local rail/tube system too.

Save a whole bunch of industries in one go and improve the whole country

 Da Boss wrote:
I know some of you will probably dismiss this due to the source, and I don't like the Guardian much either -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/30/britain-sacrifices-steel-industry-to-curry-favour-with-china/

Seems a general feth up all around.

Again.

never rains but pours eh ?

We seem to be run by people determined to cut the throat of our industry and workers. We don't have any heavy industries left, successive governments have shut it down, demolished the sites and sold the rest to foreign companies who wind them up over a number of years and asset strip then. Coal and steel both dead, Nuclear power sold off, transport and rail all sold off, which is why we have such high rail prices, it's obvious that companies like Deutsche Bahn would pass more costs onto us than Germans.

The out campaign keep saying we can manage on our own. We don't have anything left, successive Tory governments have destroyed our ability to be independent, and Labour haven't helped much either, most of the remaining Steel industry near my parents wound up under Blair's government.

Today the minimum wage increases, and employers are crying that it'll cost jobs. It's not even a huge increase, and it's barely enough of a wage for people to get by due to the soaring cost of living and housing prices. The UK is a low wage economy with effectively high unemployment. Don't let the improving employment figures fool you, they're all part time jobs and zero hour contracts, they aren't living jobs. Not like those thousands and thousands of full time jobs offered by the steel industry.

I broadly agree with you, Treesong, which is why I find it depressing that when a politician like Jeremy Corbyn comes along who is proposing an alternative, doing things differently to the Red and Blue Tories, he gets villified for not being sufficiently patriotic or wearing the right kind of suit.

Ah well.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/01/steel-crisis-uk-accused-blocking-eu-attempts-regulate-chinese-dumping

Another bit of info on UK attempts to stifle chinese steel dumping in Europe.
Edit: I should point out for fairness sake: Ireland backed the UK on this as usual. The FG government at the time is pretty close to the Tories. Scumbags. Glad they got a kick in the nads in the last election.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh man, I just saw that apparently China has just released new punative tarrifs on European steel, including from Wales! To prevent US from dumping in THEIR market.

Stay classy, China!

Well feth...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:

Oh man, I just saw that apparently China has just released new punative tarrifs on European steel, including from Wales! To prevent US from dumping in THEIR market.

Stay classy, China!

An eye for an eye, I say. We should respond in kind. And yes, the Tories are donkey-caves for blocking EU attempts to restrict dumping of Chinese Steel. I'm still not changing my mind re Brexit.

Check the date...

SCE: I really, really don't care (in the nicest and most respectful way possible!) what way you vote in the Ref. Good for you! I'm glad you guys are having the Ref and I'm ambivalent about the outcome.

I guess the main drum I'm beating on here is intended to counteract the anti-EU propaganda that I see spewed all over the place and point the finger where it needs to be pointed.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Check the date...

Check my Orkmoticon.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Check the date...

Check my Orkmoticon.

Ah, missed that (hiding there at the bottom ).

EU is engaged in some pretty heavy negotiation with the IMF
https://www.rt.com/news/338201-wikileaks-imf-greece-event/

Apparently it endangers the 'troika' group which is the IMF, the European Comission and the European Central Bank.
The IMF want Angela Merkel to take thier recommendations on greek debt relief but nobody wants to give an answer until we have had the referendum.


I think this says that britain's contribution to the EU is big enough to be a factor in whether or not the EU can cover greeces economic problems.
Obviously i see this troika group as a sign of the EU trying to enhance their economic control by securing permanent ties to the IMF in furtherance of a 'united states of europeland', but then i am pro-exit.

Intrestingly enough, a 'troika' is also a russian vehicle pulled by three horses as well as an obscure administrative term for 3 people working together in an administrative capacity.

Well dave camron and the ins are at it there using tax payers money to print and post a pro europe mailshot to all uk households costing 6.3million pounds plus another 3 mill on online. The leaflet is a continuation of "project fear" you know we will lose all trade/jobs thing will cost more etc.

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-04-06/government-spends-9m-on-sending-27-million-pro-eu-leaflets/

Didn't get that leaflet, got another one today though, from "www.eureferendumfacts.org"

Unsurprisingly, it seems to be lacking, in well, actual facts and, naturally, doesn't share any sources.

EU Referendum 'facts' wrote:"EU law overrules UK law
This stops the British public from being able to vote out the politicians who make our laws. EU judges have already overruled British laws on issues like counter-terrorism powers, immigration, VAT, and prisoner voting."

Wouldn't pretty much half of them listed there all under the ECJ, or ECHR, like mentioned earlier?

 Compel wrote:
Didn't get that leaflet, got another one today though, from "www.eureferendumfacts.org"

Unsurprisingly, it seems to be lacking, in well, actual facts and, naturally, doesn't share any sources.

EU Referendum 'facts' wrote:"EU law overrules UK law
This stops the British public from being able to vote out the politicians who make our laws. EU judges have already overruled British laws on issues like counter-terrorism powers, immigration, VAT, and prisoner voting."

Wouldn't pretty much half of them listed there all under the ECJ, or ECHR, like mentioned earlier?

Both Yes and No campaigns fly fast and loose with actual details.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/07/prepare-love-bombed-britain-hugabrit-jarvis-cocker?CMP=fb_gu

this is actually kind of funny

A collection of pro-remain Europeans has just formed a group called #PleaseDon’tGoUK, and this month they’re launching a campaign called #hugabrit. Their intention, according to founding member Tessa Szyszkowitz, a UK correspondent for an Austrian news magazine, is to “send a love bomb to the British people, because we think the EU is a project worth fighting for”.


....... The big unknown, of course, is the extent to which British suspicion of the EU has a symptomatic correlation with the traditional British horror of being touched by strangers. It’s hard to imagine Nigel Farage, for example, responding positively to an unsolicited hug from anyone. You might get better results from promising to leave him alone, or hugging him and then offering to stop.

“We have encountered some difficulties in our attempts to overcome the traditional British reluctance towards physical contact,” says Szyszkowitz, “but we are happy to take up this challenge for a higher cause. In truth, I think the Brits like to get hugged as long as you ask politely.”

Skullhammer wrote:
Well dave camron and the ins are at it there using tax payers money to print and post a pro europe mailshot to all uk households costing 6.3million pounds plus another 3 mill on online. The leaflet is a continuation of "project fear" you know we will lose all trade/jobs thing will cost more etc.

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-04-06/government-spends-9m-on-sending-27-million-pro-eu-leaflets/

If this isn’t against the election rules it should be.

Doesn’t matter if you are in/out or undecided – this is not a good use of public money, if they want to promote staying in they should pay for it via donations just like everyone else.

This has really annoyed me no end, I cannot believe that the tax payer is being forced to fund something like this. This could well be the straw that makes me vote OUT of the EU

Edited to say:

In fact I would argue that this sets a dangerous precedent. If the government can use taxpayers money to campaign for what it thinks is the ‘right’ vote then what is to stop it doing the same at a general election? If the conservatives think they are the right people to get voted in at the next GE (and I assume they will do) can we expect another £10M bill to the taxpayer for them to send us all a letter explaining why they think that.

This cannot be allowed to proceed – and if it does I definitely will be voting out, this cannot be allowed to work.

Curious now as to whether the Tories used any tax funds in their anti-AV campaign.

The Defence secretary Michael Fallow stated...

"The leave campaign will also be entitled to a similar amount of taxpayers' money to put out their leaflet once the campaign gets going so there will be information from both sides," he told Good Morning Britain.
The government is not neutral, let me be very clear about that.

This government, the democratically elected government and cabinet, has taken a decision that on balance we would be better off, safer and stronger, inside a reformed European Union.

And therefore we are entitled to put our case out.

– MICHAEL FALLON

So the point doesn't seem to be the money which Brexit will get too, more the timing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stranger83 wrote:

Skullhammer wrote:
Well dave camron and the ins are at it there using tax payers money to print and post a pro europe mailshot to all uk households costing 6.3million pounds plus another 3 mill on online. The leaflet is a continuation of "project fear" you know we will lose all trade/jobs thing will cost more etc.

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2016-04-06/government-spends-9m-on-sending-27-million-pro-eu-leaflets/

If this isn’t against the election rules it should be.

Doesn’t matter if you are in/out or undecided – this is not a good use of public money, if they want to promote staying in they should pay for it via donations just like everyone else.

This has really annoyed me no end, I cannot believe that the tax payer is being forced to fund something like this. This could well be the straw that makes me vote OUT of the EU

Edited to say:

In fact I would argue that this sets a dangerous precedent. If the government can use taxpayers money to campaign for what it thinks is the ‘right’ vote then what is to stop it doing the same at a general election? If the conservatives think they are the right people to get voted in at the next GE (and I assume they will do) can we expect another £10M bill to the taxpayer for them to send us all a letter explaining why they think that.

This cannot be allowed to proceed – and if it does I definitely will be voting out, this cannot be allowed to work.

How do you feel about Brexit having the same amount of money available for their campaign out of the taxpayers pocket?

Apparently both campaigns get £7m to spend, but this £9m leafleting, to tell us 'the facts' and the government's position, is in addition to that.

Also campaigning isn't due to start yet but this doesn't count. It's certainly a fiddle and the facts of these leaflet need to be examined, I suspect it was not put together by an independent body.

Leave campaigners complained that the promotional campaign was costing more than the £7m each side will be allowed to spend by law, once the official campaign period starts next week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35984991

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
Apparently both campaigns get £7m to spend, but this £9m leafleting, to tell us 'the facts' and the government's position, is in addition to that.

Also campaigning isn't due to start yet but this doesn't count. It's certainly a fiddle and the facts of these leaflet need to be examined, I suspect it was not put together by an independent body.

Leave campaigners complained that the promotional campaign was costing more than the £7m each side will be allowed to spend by law, once the official campaign period starts next week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35984991

Cameron's on the ropes with the Panama papers, and this leaflet comes out. Very cynical move.

 r_squared wrote:
The Defence secretary Michael Fallow stated...

"The leave campaign will also be entitled to a similar amount of taxpayers' money to put out their leaflet once the campaign gets going so there will be information from both sides," he told Good Morning Britain.
The government is not neutral, let me be very clear about that.

This government, the democratically elected government and cabinet, has taken a decision that on balance we would be better off, safer and stronger, inside a reformed European Union.

And therefore we are entitled to put our case out.

– MICHAEL FALLON

So the point doesn't seem to be the money which Brexit will get too, more the timing.



How do you feel about Brexit having the same amount of money available for their campaign out of the taxpayers pocket?

IF Michael Fallon has said that (and I haven't seen the interiew - you may have mis heard what he said) then he should be fired right now for blatant misrepresentation of that FACTS.

A lot of the brexit referendum is being held on opinion given as fact, thats understandable so we don't really know what will happen either way - but here are some facts about the referendum that we know 100% are true.

Each side - in and out - will be allowed to spend a maximum of £7 Million on their campaign - so this mail shot is £2M MORE than the out campaign can spend in the entire referendum, and they get to spend the same £7M during the campaign!

The £7Million will largely come from private donors, with only a small portion (I believe it is in the high tens of thousands or low hundred thousands but don't have this info to hand) coming from the public purse. To claim that OUT will be able to spend £9M on the tax payers money is a blatant lie, and if I was an IN voter and one of the chief guys campaigning for my vote told a lie like this I'd have to have a serious review of the 'Facts' they are telling me.


Now again, I've not seen the interview so cannot say that he did say what you think he said, but if he did how can anyone ever trust anything he'll ever say again.

I'm afraid you're mistaken. Both sides have been allocated 7m out of the public purse to spend on their campaigns.
The in campaign have over spent by 2m, I'm not going to lose any sleep over that.

The Michael Fallon quote came from further down on the page that was linked to earlier.

 r_squared wrote:
I'm afraid you're mistaken. Both sides have been allocated 7m out of the public purse to spend on their campaigns.
The in campaign have over spent by 2m, I'm not going to lose any sleep over that.

The Michael Fallon quote came from further down on the page that was linked to earlier.

They have overspent by £9 Million - as they will be spending the £7million in the campaign also.

Have you got anything that backs up that they will get £7 Million from the public purse - this seems to go against every other election ever where only a small fraction comes from the tax payer. It also seems to fly in the face of everything that I have read about the campaigns where the opinion is that the Out Campaign will only be able to spend around £5 million as that is all they have currently pledged in donations.

Michael Fallons claim of this is the first I've read of it anywhere - and I've done quite a lot of reading about the referendum.

from here:

https://fullfact.org/europe/whos-getting-taxpayers-money-eu-referendum/

It’s correct that the two official campaigns will get some public money in direct grants and publicly funded benefits such as a free mailout across the country. This is likely to amount to millions, but it’s not clear exactly how much. It shouldn’t be confused with the £7 million spending limit each will have which is money they have to raise themselves

What assistance the campaigns can get
•A grant of up to £600,000. The Electoral Commission says this can be used for certain spending including administrative costs, putting together campaign broadcasts and producing a leaflet to send out to voters.
•A free mailing of that leaflet to voters. This is only for the delivery by Royal Mail, rather than dissemination online. It excludes any spending on production.
•Free referendum campaign broadcasts.
•A free dedicated page in an information booklet sent to every household by the Electoral Commission.
•Use of certain public buildings for meetings.

These don’t count towards the £7 million limit for campaign spending as they’re not charged to the campaigns.



So my assumption that the Taxpayer money was in the low hundred thousands is wrong, but it's still a very long way short of the £7million claimed by Fallon, and this goes to both sides - so in is spending an EXTRA £9Million of taxpayer money, which again is just not right and is a dangerous precedent to set.

I was going to quote the same source actually.
The mail out and other benefits and assistance will amount to millions from public funds being spent.

The free mailout each lead organisation is entitled to, for instance, is likely to cost a significant amount. Back in 2011, during the referendum on the AV voting system, over £8 million of public money was spent funding the delivery of the two lead campaigns’ free mailout to addresses across the country.

It's safe to say that millions is going to be spent by both sides trying to sway the electorate.
Brexit will get their slice of wedge, much to my personal annoyance too. ;-)

But they both still have to work with the £7m limit, whatever benefits they get on postage and subsidies. However you cut it, the £9m spent on these other leaflets is entirely independent and additional to this.

These leaflets produced to 'inform' the public should have been produced by an independent body. That way £9m could have been spent on them in a way that was open, fair and likely of genuine informative value, but it wasn't, it's a biased publication for the benefit of one side over the other. And the government has used its position to get that significant spend on top of the rules that are supposed to govern equal spending for both campaigns.

 r_squared wrote:
I was going to quote the same source actually.
The mail out and other benefits and assistance will amount to millions from public funds being spent.

The free mailout each lead organisation is entitled to, for instance, is likely to cost a significant amount. Back in 2011, during the referendum on the AV voting system, over £8 million of public money was spent funding the delivery of the two lead campaigns’ free mailout to addresses across the country.

It's safe to say that millions is going to be spent by both sides trying to sway the electorate.
Brexit will get their slice of wedge, much to my personal annoyance too. ;-)

You are obviously not understanding why this is outrageeous and damn right dangerous for our democracy so let me try to explain it to you again.

We have rules about how an election, which includes referendums are to be run. As part of these rules spending limits are set and a set amount of the public purse is provided to each side to ensure that one side cannot buy all the vote of the election. This is perfectly fair, and whilst I hadn't realised how much came from the public purse the fact that both sides get the same makes the position resonable.

What the Governement has done is taken an extra £9Million - FROM THE PUBLIC PURSE - and claimed that this is OK because it sets out the governments point of view. Everyone is aware that the governement is pro EU so why couldn't they do this with their free leaflet? Why should they be given a second leaflet, paid for by tax payers money that has been collected to pay for diablilities/police/fire and the NHS, all of which are needing to undergo cuts.

Even more worrying is the claim that they have a right to use this £9Million, which again is in addition to the rest of the money which they intend to spend, because it 'Sets out the governments position'. Does this mean that in future general and council elections we can expect to see the government spending a similar amount of public money to promote the party that is in power? Afterall I think it probably would be their opinion that voting for their party is the correct vote - and we now have a precedent that the government can spend public money over and above what they are allowed to spend as long as it promotes their message.

I still don't see anything that supports Fallons claim that the out side will be given £9million of tax payers money on top of what they are already to be given, so I stick by my claim that his comments are an attempt to provide us with misinformatiom, which sadly seems to have worked in your case. His attempt was to make it look like both sides are being allowed to spend the same and get the same from the public purse, but anyone with any common sense can see through this for the lie that it is - and since he told such a blatant lie he should be made to resign, because nobody can ever trust anything he might say again.

If the governement was to come out today and say that IN wll not get a second free mail shot then I can understand your argument that they are not getting anything from the public purse that OUT are not getting - but this is not the case, this £9Million pound mail shot is in addition to the free one that they intend to use also.

After reading this thread I know that you are very pro EU, and have a bit of a bblinkered view on anyone who might disagree with what you are saying, but hopefully this has made it clear to you why so many people are rightly angry about this,

Added to which the leaflet is being produced outside of the agreed upon timeframe for campaigning.

I am pro-EU reform (rather than just pro-remain), but this has been a TFG move by the remain group in government. I agree it also sets a dangerous precedent, along with denying people with different opinions from accessing government data and services.