Johnson with his typical breezy lack of care on Marr. Asked about the cull of pigs due to the shortage of abbatoir workers he flippantly reminds Marr that they will die anyway. Never mind the waste or the expense to struggling farmers. Eventually Johnson blusters that there will be no return to mass immigration. Wasting pigs is preferable to more foreigners. Marr fails to follow up that ok, so maybe an element of planning was required two years ago, some sort of Brexit Plan or whatever happened to the magic tap that would allow us to supplement the workforce in key areas? Another bit of make believe. So the rich can have artisan slaughtered meat from small organic farms and the rest can do without unless British people are prepared to learn to slaughter or rely on imports. I don’t eat red meat, so I guess this is not my worry.
I think the government have put themselves in a difficult political position of their own making. The extra £20 was always supposed to be temporary. But now, instead of getting credit for helping families in the short term during the pandemic, they look like they are just taking money off the poorest. I'm not in a position to say if UC is at a sufficient level to live on with or without the extra £20. But, from a political point of view, I bet the Tories wish they'd never given it in the first place now!
I watched it live. It was a poor performance by the PM imho. I can see why he doesn't like giving live interviews!
The simple question to ask is whether the financial pressures of the pandemic have eased. The answer is clearly ‘no’ and getting worse as we head into winter.
Yes, but that is a different matter. I'm just talking about the politics, not whether UC is at the correct rate or if the £20 is now become essential to many people or not. It is just not a good look for the government even though they have, on paper, done nothing wrong. They didn't "have to" give the temporary help. I'm sure that when they thought up the idea they thought they would get political plaudits for doing so. It appears that it's completely backfired and blown up in their faces. So, as I said, I imagine they wished they'd never done it in the first place now!
The issue is that before the pandemic we were spending more than we were collecting. We then spent a record amount (quite rightfully) keeping people afloat. Now that the apndemic is over we need to go after the vast number of companies & people that took the pee witht he furlough and other schemes when they didn;t need to. Money isn't free we need to pay it back at some point. The Tories need to cut spending or raise taxes. They are criticised for either/both but the reality is they have to do something. UK tax take (barring an understandable dip during the pandemic period) is at an all time high for recent years. It's arguable whether any more can be grabbed at a time when everyone says the economy is in the ****. There's no easy answer but spending has to be addressed. And spending that will not immediately lead to investment and increase in revenues has to be looked at first. Wages are rising as the unempolyment figures are low and job vacancies are high. Hopefully helping people out of the understandable hole removal of the temporary top up puts them in.
Hey, I’m for some fiscal prudence as much as the next fella, but the pandemic has shown how arbitrary the rules are applied. Years of telling us we can’t afford services like social care, etc etc and yet Tory chums have made an absolute fortune out of the money thrown around recently. So efficiency yes, but not ensuring the poorest have enough, that schools, hospitals and other services don’t? Unacceptable now. Tax avoidance needs to be eliminated as a concept with extreme prejudice and the rich must pay to reconstruct the World that gives them everything. Otherwise, let’s admit that ‘levelling up’ was never something the Tories really meant.
And that's as issue which needs investigation and those found to be taking the pee need to be prosecuted where rules have been breached and aggressively taxed where they have legally profiteered, possibly named and shamed also. We need to get to a situation where people don't need to be bailed out or supported by the state. Subsidising low wages with state help is neither sensible nor efficient. I'm all for helping out and supporting those that by no fault of their own need it to the tune of a viable living wage (plus extra for those that need it through disability etc), but topping up low salaries when unemployment is so low is bonkers. Taking away the temporary universal credit uplift is right, uplifting the minimum wage to counter that so that those in work are not penalised should be considered. Those that are unable to work or need assistance should receive enough without top ups.
Yes, wages need to rise to eliminate benefits, but the wage hike needed to make up for the UC 6m receive is pretty high. Given rents you are looking towards the minimum wage of £15ph Labour delegates wanted, but Starmer rejected. And you have to deliver it without landlords across the Country simply lifting rents, pocketing the difference and sending tenants running back to the state or the foodbank for assistance
Rent prices are a function of supply and demand. Short of building more and higher taxation of empty residential properties, the government are trying to encourage business to move out of the South East where rental availability and pricing is not such an issue. Giving more assistance to pay rent will just push up the rent until the supply issue is sorted. The average return on a rental property is hovering around the 4% pa margin (Hamptons report). Which to be honest is not looking favourable these days compared to other investments. As a financial analyst it's something I wouldn't consider. As long as the government tightens up controls and taxation on offshore ownership and continues it's policy of moving admin out of London I would hope the issue will ease in the long term.
Brexit, for one. Took us out of the horrendous mess that is the EU. Yep, it will take time to realise the full benefits, but that for sure. Apart from that, my usual measure is whether or not youngsters are able to earn money and buy property seems to be going OK. People who want to work hard to earn money generally can earn money. No it's not perfect, but I shudder to think where we would be right now with Labour in power, probably shackled with everything that is wrong with the EU, six months behind our current vaccine status. The media, even the media that support them, are currently having a crack at the Conservatives. The right wing right now want to see what has been literally blue socialism, from the most left wing tory party ever, turned on its head (after being reluctantly accepted due to COVID), and that may be where the tories really come into their own. But the right wing media are hoping that Tice can offer a right wing alternative that will pull the Conservatives back to their more traditional position. I don't think for a moment that Tice and Co will turn out to be a new BNP, but I don't suppose I'm going to allay the fears of anyone on the left at the moment. I have always wanted, since I grew up anyway, to see Capitalism with a social concience. That is what most people on here, including the left most leaning posters, also seem to want, given their concerns for businesses being able to hire people on the cheap, their concerns about the effects of Brexit on business, and their reaction to the terrible taxing tories. Perhaps needs (like levelling up, building back better, and green new deals) mean we will get that. Would be a pity if people's reaction to the name would stop them from seeing a party that is attempting to do thinkgs that otherwise they would approve of.
No money too dodgy for the Tories. £1.8m received from Boris’s tennis playing pal Lubov Chernukhin among others emerging from the ‘Pandora Papers’ leaks. It’s clearly her husband’s money, a fortune he made as a member of Putin’s Government, ripping off the state bank. He now owns many acres of UK countryside that plebs like you can’t walk through. Why so much money? Why so many meetings with the PM and ministers? Why after the Salisbury murder get so close to Russian influence? https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-58711151
The pig cull has begun with ‘grown men in tears’. That may seem sentimental. As Boris says, they will all die anyway, but the only justification for killing such lovely, intelligent creatures is to eat them and if that’s not going to happen it’s a shocking waste. 'Grown men in tears': Hundreds of pigs culled with farms overcrowded amid butcher shortage http://news.sky.com/story/grown-men...lled-due-to-abattoir-worker-shortage-12426747
I find it difficult to consider their crying to be sentimental. If the are crying, surely it is because of the money they will be losing, and not sympathy for the pigs, who are destined for slaughter anyway.
I find it amazing anyone can support Brexit with hindsight. I get it when the vote happened. But now? It's a complete and utter reduction of our freedom of movement and our quality of life. And for what??
Separation from a failing proto-superstate, determined to take its place at the top table of world power, and willing to allow its citizens to make whatever sacrifice is needed to facilitate them doing so. They are a 20C Cold War throwback, and no matter what else, we are better off out, in my opinion.
Then you need to change your post from "complete and utter reduction of OUR freedom of movement" to "complete and utter reduction of MY freedom of movement"
This is your own fault. Lots of Tories like Nigel Lawson or hedge fund bosses and Tory donors like Jeremy Isaacs got themselves EU passports. Rees Mogg set his company up in Ireland, Dyson in Singapore, Ratcliffe moved manufacture to the EU. Even Farage’s kids have EU passports. Staying put in the UK is for the plebs.
Most people consider freedom of movement to be about working, but if you want to make up your own definition then you look a bit odd. But, hey, it’s you Crockett who got into the bizarre discussion about 100% effort in footballers so I would expect no less
Freedom of movement in the EU is a calculated mitigation for loss of local fiscal control in the Euro Zone. Moose highlighted a remainer professor who worked for the EU during planning for the Euro, and there is a video in which he literally says that it is a tool that can be used to move cheep labour around the continent, in order to aleviate issues that would otherwise ben addressed by local policy. Basically, you being able to go where-ever you like on the continent is a side effect of Eastern European's being exploited because the Euro poses serious restrictions on nation member states managing their own affairs. Another side effect has been that wages in the UK have been kept down through businesses having access to cheap labour. Freedom of movement is not for your benefit, though you do get some perks from it.
Johnson to focus on ‘levelling up’ in his speech today and good for him. This cobbled together philosophy (which was nowhere to be seen until Labour’s 2019 ‘crazy’ manifesto appeared and Johnson required a riposte) is seeing some rise in wages and projects in the North. Johnson is expected to criticise former Tory leaders, as well he may. He has shattered a century of Tory dogma concerning the necessity of wage suppression. The need for rises in pay, argued for by lefties like me and the unions was apparently possible all the time. They and the Blairites are a cast of effing liars on behalf of the rich and powerful who over the last 40 years have won enormous wealth for themselves to the detriment of state and social assets like housing. Trouble is there will be a sting in the tale. There always is. While other costs, rents and utilities are not capped the value of wages won’t keep up. The Tory dislike of public services will continue to play out, meaning prescriptions, dentistry, even attending school, will come with increasing costs and fragmentation. The levelling up work is also subject to terrible political bias with Labour areas getting minimal support to effectively punish them. But for the moment let’s thank Boris for letting the cat out of the bag. We could always have had a higher waged economy. We just didn’t need the shambles and corruption he has brought with it.
I think if the government truly thought that just raising wages was the answer then they would raise public service workers pay and substantially increase the minimum wage. The truth is that isolated wage growth in certain sectors, especially those involved in the supply chain, will just increase inflation making those people in other sectors, including those in public service and on benefits, poorer.
It will and sectors like care work may never benefit, but who can argue for excessive wage restraint now? Time for the unions to demand that it isn’t simply rhetoric. Who could possibly argue that the unions demanding Johnson keep this promise would be wrong?
Sorry, and with respect, it is difficult to swallow this line. A major factor that has kept wages down until now has been our membership of the EU, and the deliberately exploited use of cheap labour being shipped around the continent. And I don't think it is any secret that if it had been down to "lefties like you", we would still be in yhe EU, and cheap labour would continue to have its downward effect on our wage economy. You can't have it both ways. Brexit set out to improve wages and conditions from the start. The effects of free movement on wages and jobs has been known since its inception. And lefties like you fought against leaving the EU every step of the way, and would have us back in in a moment. Funny though, because lefties like Tony Benn warned lefties like you about those effects from the very start, and wanted nothing to do with it..
An absolutely ridiculous argument as almost every Northern European economy, the French, Germans, Dutch, Belgians, the Scandinavians all pay more within the EU. Try to engage brain before posting. The UK made choices within the EU and you supported the Tories of either hue making them.
Perhaps, but it may have escaped your notice that for all that, migrants would rather risk their own lives to get to the UK than live in those countries, which they have free access to, and that we took in more EU migrants than any of those countries over the years of our membership. Doesn't matter what you say, we were an attractive option to low paid citizens of the EU, and continue to be with migrants who would rather risk death than live in France. It will take more than a smart little sound bite to explain the reasons for that.
How twee for you I care not one jot for those as fortunate as yourself . "I demand to do this , I demand to go there, carbon footprint ? Let the plebs worry about that"
You’ve exchanged it for ‘Global Britain’. Getting the extra workers we need from around the globe and young Brits getting work experience in Australia (ok, the few Aus will allow and can afford it). What about that carbon footprint? I often agree with your complaints. This Country has ripped its citizens off wholesale. But the solution can’t be phoney.
Johnson speech so far very good. I mean horrific too, built on foundation of lies, bluster, incompetence, petty nationalism and obvious false promises, but he’s got ‘em rolling in the aisles, shooting confidence from the hip.
