Herzlos wrote:


And you people keep voting in the fething Tories. Cutting back the NHS is about the only thing they consistently try and do.

 Heisperus wrote:

Herzlos wrote:


And you people keep voting in the fething Tories. Cutting back the NHS is about the only thing they consistently try and do.

Along with privatising pretty much everything and selling it off to their buddies

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Skullhammer wrote:
But she is non biased.....riiight

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners

So a Supreme Court Judge, who has a much firmer grasp of the legal questions involved than pretty much anyone else, pointed out that there might be legal issues. Since you disagree, that clearly means that she's biased, not that you're just wrong.

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Nah, I call bullgak on this memo. In fact, it's concentrated bullgak

It's construction, the use of language, the way it's couched....

Not for me

I'm a student of history and politics, and as a result, I've came across tons of official documents.

This feels out of place, as though it were designed to be planted in The Guardian newspaper or something...

Sorry Deloitte's have admitted that it was an internal memo. Definitely real. Clever couching of wording though. Read what it doesn't say.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/leaked-brexit-memo-deloitte-touting-for-business-downing-street_uk_582b21ede4b0ec3145f9fef1?ir=UK+Politics&utm_hp_ref=uk-politics

“This was a note intended primarily for internal audiences.

“It was not commissioned by the Cabinet Office, nor any other government department, and represents a view of the task facing Whitehall. This work was conducted without access to No.10 or input from any other government departments.”

Skullhammer wrote:
Come on whrilwind


“This was a note intended primarily for internal audiences.

“It was not commissioned by the Cabinet Office, nor any other government department, and represents a view of the task facing Whitehall. This work was conducted without access to No.10 or input from any other government departments.”

It was made and released to gak stir. Im not saying there wrong but the more of these type of memos are leaked the less they will be belived which in turn increases distrust in the politicos and could possibly lead to a "unfortunate" outcome.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Should the public expect that the NHS is funded no matter what? Is the NHS a right or a privilege?

Herzlos wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Should the public expect that the NHS is funded no matter what? Is the NHS a right or a privilege?

It's one of the best things we've ever done and basic healthcare should be a fundamental human right. Have a look at places without an equivalent, like the US; do we really want that?

Plus, things are actually cheaper in the long run if funded properly - lots of the serious and expensive hospital care is because of stuff missed previously due to shortages, patients getting kicked out of rooms early, no early detection services, that sort of thing.

If we can afford to replace Trident at whatever cost, or lob £millions of missiles at Syria, then we should be able to get basic health care running.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
What a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Article 3
Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson Tuesday ruffled European feathers by telling a Czech newspaper that the U.K. could probably leave the region’s customs union and still enjoy free trade. He also described as a “myth” the idea that freedom of labor movement is a fundamental right in Europe.

The customs union allows members to trade with each other tariff-free, while setting common duties on other nations, yet staying in it prevents the U.K. from striking its own trade deals. The question of participating in it has divided British Prime Minister Theresa May’s government, with Johnson, Brexit Secretary David Davis and Trade Secretary Liam Fox agitating to leave and Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond counseling caution.
Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s representative on Brexit matters, posted on Twitter on Tuesday that he “can’t wait to negotiate” with Johnson so he could read him Article 3 of the Treaty of Rome, one of the central compacts of the EU signed in 1957 that established common duties and commercial policies toward third countries.
Follow @Brexit for the latest news, and sign up to our Brexit Bulletin for a daily roundup.
Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem said on BBC Television’s “Newsnight” program that it would be “impossible” for the U.K. to be outside the customs union but still inside the single market, which focuses on reducing non-tariff barriers.
Johnson “is saying things that are intellectually impossible, politically unavailable,” Dijsselbloem said, predicting Brexit would be a “lose-lose situation” for both the U.K. and EU.
‘Great Inspiration’
Calenda told Bloomberg Television that he had “loved” the biography of Winston Churchill written by Johnson, “but on Brexit we are on opposite sides.” Johnson told him during a recent meeting that Italy would grant Britain access to the EU’s single market “because you don’t want to lose prosecco exports.”
“He basically said, ‘I don’t want free movement of people but I want the single market,’” said Calenda. “I said, ‘no way.’ He said, ‘you’ll sell less prosecco.’ I said, ‘OK, you’ll sell less fish and chips, but I’ll sell less prosecco to one country and you’ll sell less to 27 countries.’ Putting things on this level is a bit insulting.”
Calenda said that a balance needs to be struck because the U.K. is a very important partner.
“I respect the British vote, England is to me a source of great inspiration -- as you can see from Winston standing there,” Calenda said, pointing to a life-size cardboard cutout of Churchill in his office. The figure holds a sign reading in capital letters: "Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip."
“Once you make a decision, you need to be clear in execution,” Calenda said.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
I'm assuming that May wants a local elite, for local people.

It's only filthy *foreign* elites that she wants to condemn.

Skullhammer wrote:
Come on whrilwind


“This was a note intended primarily for internal audiences.

“It was not commissioned by the Cabinet Office, nor any other government department, and represents a view of the task facing Whitehall. This work was conducted without access to No.10 or input from any other government departments.”

It was made and released to gak stir. Im not saying there wrong but the more of these type of memos are leaked the less they will be belived which in turn increases distrust in the politicos and could possibly lead to a "unfortunate" outcome.

 reds8n wrote:



.. watching Bojo do a most impressive reverse ferret with regards to Turkey -- death penalty etc etc -- has been quite eyebrow twitching as well.

TBF one suspects there's a degree of gamesmanship there but they've come across as so genuinely clueless one does worry.

 Yodhrin wrote:
So, who else has spent a while today researching VPNs?

I know it's perhaps an overused comparison, but the IPBill truly is Orwellian, although thankfully it's your typical Blackadder "cunning plan" version of Orwellian where the government brings forth the most intrusive, sweeping surveillance system ever implemented in a democracy, responds to privacy concerns by adding the word "privacy" to the title of one section and then actually making it more intrusive...all while seemingly being completely unaware or uncaring of the fact that using a no-log VPN for a few quid a year makes the big, headline functions of the new laws(storing your browsing history for 12 months at the ISP level and making that data available to just about everyone short of Jimbob the Tramp down at the local train station) completely redundant.

Once again, tech-blind fud politicians create laws that will likely only actually harm the innocent and the uninformed, while anyone with even a modicum of tech knowledge(including the supposed-hordes of Islamo-commie-Nazi-paedo-pirate-hackers lurking behind every mouseclick) carry on as if nothing has changed.

The saddest thing of course is that nobody was really that worried about it a year or so ago, since it was obvious the law would be torn to shreds once the appeals reached the European Court, and now it's beginning to dawn on my techy pals that this steaming river of bum-gravy and incompetence is probably going to stand in its entirely thanks to Brexit.

 Yodhrin wrote:
So, who else has spent a while today researching VPNs?

Jobs of the future may not have stable hours, holiday pay, sick pay, or pensions, the Work and Pensions Secretary has said.

Damian Green described the trend in employment practices towards the so-called “gig economy” as “exciting” and said the changes had “huge potential”.

The Cabinet minister’s endorsement of the approach comes a month after an employment tribunal found that drivers for the Uber car service should in fact get the minimum wage and paid holiday. The tribunal dismissed the taxi company’s claim that its drivers were in fact self–employed and not entitled to these rights.

Mr Green said in a speech at the Reform think-tank on Wednesday morning: “Just a few years ago the idea of a proper job meant a job that brings in a fixed monthly salary, with fixed hours, paid holidays, sick pay, a pension scheme and other contractual benefits.

“But the gig economy has changed all that. We’ve seen the rise of the everyday entrepreneur. People now own their time and control who receives their services and when.

“They can pick and mix their employers, their hours, their offices, their holiday patterns. This is one of the most significant developments in the labour market. The potential is huge and the change is exciting.”

He said the Government had launched the Taylor Review into employment practices to make sure that “employment rights keep up with employment practices”.

He also used the speech to argue that the private sector and voluntary sector should be more involved in the provision of welfare services.

“The Government is a necessary, but not sufficient provider of welfare,” he said.

The minister made a small concession to critics of the Government’s benefit sanctions system, announcing that he would extend hardship payments available to sanctioned people to a wider group.

The “gig economy” is the idea that technological change will make stable jobs less prevalent and that more people will instead work a number of casual “gigs” as a self-employed person.

A significant growth in the numbers of people self-employed in recent years has however been accompanied by falling incomes for self-employed people.

Labour has called for the judgment that Uber drivers are in fact employees to be enshrined in law so that other workers with similar working arrangements cannot be denied paid holidays or the minimum wage. Uber is appealing the judgment.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
People in the UK were fighting for workers' rights long before the EU rolled into town

Philip Hammond will admit to the largest deterioration in British public finances since 2011 in next week’s Autumn Statement when the official forecast will show the UK faces a £100bn bill for Brexit within five years.

Slower growth and lower-than-expected investment will hit tax revenues hard, the official forecasts will show, supporting the Treasury’s pre-referendum warnings that the long-term economic costs of Brexit are high.

Instead of a surplus in 2019-20, as his predecessor George Osborne had promised, Mr Hammond will show a sizeable deficit in that year with the gap between the borrowing forecast for each year in the Budget last March and the Autumn Statement getting bigger every year.

The deterioration in the outlook — which is still a forecast and highly uncertain — will not prevent Mr Hammond from finding room for some tax cuts to help what officials in Whitehall call “Jams”, meaning families who are “just about managing”. But these giveaways will be small compared with the additional borrowing the government will plan. There will not be much room in the public finances to reset fiscal policy with a big stimulus package.

The Office for Budget Responsibility has drawn up the forecasts the government will present and officials acknowledge they have been grappling for weeks with weak tax revenues and an outlook for lower growth.

The consensus of independent economic forecasts, which are generally close to the OBR’s, show mediocre economic growth until 2020 with higher inflation and weaker business investment combining to slow revenues to the exchequer. Once converted by the OBR into likely tax revenues, the deterioration in the public finances will cumulate to around £100bn.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that a weaker economic outlook would lead to roughly £30bn in additional borrowing by 2019-20 before any gains from lower contributions to the EU budget are taken into account.

An official forecast along these lines would vindicate the Treasury’s pre-referendum central estimate of a £36bn annual cost of Brexit to the public purse but it would come only five years after the vote, indicating the cost might rise further in future.

By far the largest reason for the Brexit hole in the public finances will be lower growth. With bad income tax revenues so far this financial year, the OBR has already said it was “very unlikely” to hit the 2016-17 Budget forecast. With delays to the sales of Lloyds and RBS shares, Mr Hammond is likely to have to finance upwards of £15bn additional borrowing this year.

The red ink in the forecasts gets worse over time, mostly as a result of slower growth, but government decisions and some classification changes have also conspired to make Mr Hammond’s life difficult.

Since the Budget, the government has announced less stringent work capability tests for the disabled and a slower introduction of universal credit, which jointly add almost £5bn to borrowing over five years.

The Office for National Statistics has changed the way it measures corporation tax receipts, leaving a hole of almost £5bn in borrowing in 2019-20 and the fiscal watchdog is set to assume Britain does not save any money in net EU contributions by the end of the decade because government policy on this aspect of Brexit is not yet finalised.

Public sector debt will jump, Mr Hammond will be forced to admit, by £100bn this year, raising it from 83 per cent of national income to almost 90 per cent from higher borrowing and because the ONS has announced it will treat the Bank of England’s new term-funding scheme as additional debt.

The burden of debt is set to decline more slowly than thought in March, leaving the UK economy more vulnerable to risks of another downturn.

 reds8n wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
People in the UK were fighting for workers' rights long before the EU rolled into town

I'm quite keen to keep them.

I'd rather they weren't given away by people who think leaving the EU is like resigning from a golf club.

But that's the public for you




https://www.ft.com/content/acb33786-ac16-11e6-9cb3-bb8207902122?ftcamp=published_links%2Frss%2Fworld_uk_politics%2Ffeed%2F%2Fproduct

Philip Hammond will admit to the largest deterioration in British public finances since 2011 in next week’s Autumn Statement when the official forecast will show the UK faces a £100bn bill for Brexit within five years.

Slower growth and lower-than-expected investment will hit tax revenues hard, the official forecasts will show, supporting the Treasury’s pre-referendum warnings that the long-term economic costs of Brexit are high.

Instead of a surplus in 2019-20, as his predecessor George Osborne had promised, Mr Hammond will show a sizeable deficit in that year with the gap between the borrowing forecast for each year in the Budget last March and the Autumn Statement getting bigger every year.

The deterioration in the outlook — which is still a forecast and highly uncertain — will not prevent Mr Hammond from finding room for some tax cuts to help what officials in Whitehall call “Jams”, meaning families who are “just about managing”. But these giveaways will be small compared with the additional borrowing the government will plan. There will not be much room in the public finances to reset fiscal policy with a big stimulus package.

The Office for Budget Responsibility has drawn up the forecasts the government will present and officials acknowledge they have been grappling for weeks with weak tax revenues and an outlook for lower growth.

The consensus of independent economic forecasts, which are generally close to the OBR’s, show mediocre economic growth until 2020 with higher inflation and weaker business investment combining to slow revenues to the exchequer. Once converted by the OBR into likely tax revenues, the deterioration in the public finances will cumulate to around £100bn.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that a weaker economic outlook would lead to roughly £30bn in additional borrowing by 2019-20 before any gains from lower contributions to the EU budget are taken into account.

An official forecast along these lines would vindicate the Treasury’s pre-referendum central estimate of a £36bn annual cost of Brexit to the public purse but it would come only five years after the vote, indicating the cost might rise further in future.

By far the largest reason for the Brexit hole in the public finances will be lower growth. With bad income tax revenues so far this financial year, the OBR has already said it was “very unlikely” to hit the 2016-17 Budget forecast. With delays to the sales of Lloyds and RBS shares, Mr Hammond is likely to have to finance upwards of £15bn additional borrowing this year.

The red ink in the forecasts gets worse over time, mostly as a result of slower growth, but government decisions and some classification changes have also conspired to make Mr Hammond’s life difficult.

Since the Budget, the government has announced less stringent work capability tests for the disabled and a slower introduction of universal credit, which jointly add almost £5bn to borrowing over five years.

The Office for National Statistics has changed the way it measures corporation tax receipts, leaving a hole of almost £5bn in borrowing in 2019-20 and the fiscal watchdog is set to assume Britain does not save any money in net EU contributions by the end of the decade because government policy on this aspect of Brexit is not yet finalised.

Public sector debt will jump, Mr Hammond will be forced to admit, by £100bn this year, raising it from 83 per cent of national income to almost 90 per cent from higher borrowing and because the ONS has announced it will treat the Bank of England’s new term-funding scheme as additional debt.

The burden of debt is set to decline more slowly than thought in March, leaving the UK economy more vulnerable to risks of another downturn.

 Goliath wrote:
In other news, a recent survey has shown that 80% of the UK is pro cake-having, as well as pro cake-eating.

 Graphite wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38008315

Well fancy that. Just as it looks likely that Brexit is going to have to go through Parliament, including the Lords, the plans to remove some of the Lords powers to slow down legislation have been dropped.

You'd almost think the government believed it would be useful to have someone who could stop something and then take the blame instead of taking the blame themselves....

 Yodhrin wrote:
So, who else has spent a while today researching VPNs?

I know it's perhaps an overused comparison, but the IPBill truly is Orwellian, although thankfully it's your typical Blackadder "cunning plan" version of Orwellian where the government brings forth the most intrusive, sweeping surveillance system ever implemented in a democracy, responds to privacy concerns by adding the word "privacy" to the title of one section and then actually making it more intrusive...all while seemingly being completely unaware or uncaring of the fact that using a no-log VPN for a few quid a year makes the big, headline functions of the new laws(storing your browsing history for 12 months at the ISP level and making that data available to just about everyone short of Jimbob the Tramp down at the local train station) completely redundant.

Once again, tech-blind fud politicians create laws that will likely only actually harm the innocent and the uninformed, while anyone with even a modicum of tech knowledge(including the supposed-hordes of Islamo-commie-Nazi-paedo-pirate-hackers lurking behind every mouseclick) carry on as if nothing has changed.

The saddest thing of course is that nobody was really that worried about it a year or so ago, since it was obvious the law would be torn to shreds once the appeals reached the European Court, and now it's beginning to dawn on my techy pals that this steaming river of bum-gravy and incompetence is probably going to stand in its entirely thanks to Brexit.