The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50

ironmike44

Grey - agree entirely. But when he was challenged on why only produce a 'worst case' figure (rather than a Best and Worst case) he became quite flustered and said words to the effect that that was outside their remit.

Perhaps, in the circumstances they should have refused to produce any forecast and stated they had not been supplied with the information they required to produce a meaningful number. This might have helped to reinforce their claimed Independant status - and perhaps done something to help repair their woeful reputation as forecasters ( which isn't particularly good following their pre referendum performance).

TheMadcapLaughs

I have been reading over the last 3000 pages of debate and come to the conclusion that we all want to achieve broadly similar goals. We all seem to want a fairer society, we all want whats best for ourselves and our families, we all want to a little bit of peace for ourselves and peace for the World. In fact we all pretty much agree on all the things that make life a little better. We just can`t decide whether this "good life " can be maintained and advanced in or out of The EU. The debate has been lively and intelligent, and most of the arguments have been presented clearly and concisely and been reasonably easy to understand. One point, though, that I find really, really hard to grasp is why




















you would choose to live in a cold, damp and leaky house. ;biggrin

MrsGrey

NDPBs have a statutory remit, and like LAs, can't go outside that. (Unlike us, who can do anything we like unless it is prohibited, they can't do anything at all unless it is specifically permitted in legislation).

Also, they made very clear what basis they made their forecasts. Note, it is precisely that - a forecast.

Questioning why the OBR used the parameters they did is a nice way to take attention away from the fact that the govt targets set after the election have been missed, massively. And that the measures since then and just announced, are wholly regressive.

While the future absolute figures are obviously estimates, what isn't affected should the actual figures turn out to be higher or lower is the relative gap between the rich and poor has widened (that's fact), and is set to widen further.

Moreover, the policies and budgetary decisions made by the govt have had, and will continue to have, a greater negative effect on the poorest.

MrsGrey

On that ' the estimates about the cost of Brexit could be as much as 50% out....

That's saying they could be 50% lower, or 50% higher.


I don't think, therefore, that it is fair to imply they are being biased to present an very negative scenario.

ironmike44

Mrs Grey - didn't mean to be 'unfair' or suggest they were being biased - although the spokesperson did not shy away from agreeing the numbers produced were a 'worst case scenario'.
Was really responding to C&B's use of that number (without any reference to its status as a forecast) and making a comparison with a totally hyperthetical number that he plucked from mid air to prove a point.

claretandbluesky

Mike I am sure you understood the analogy used, but what it equated to was that in my opinion we have strategically done the equivalent of leaving a house because of finding fault with it without having a stable house to move into. The second part was that the faults we have within the house are pretty small when actually looked at closely and compared to most other houses.

I never claimed that the figures used in the example of Romanian benefit claimants were correct and as I said before the point was to say if something is costing you £5 but to prevent the cost of wasting that £5 you spend £500 it is a massively false economy. The figures were irrelevant and not proposed as accurate and I think that was made clear. I was not using the figures to represent the points being made as I think the points stand up for themselves, whether they are agreed with of course is another thing but I think what I was saying was clear.

TheMadcapLaughs

Mrs G. Very interesting, and still the gap widens between rich and poor. There will come a time, and in the not too distant future I would guess, when the very poorest must say enough is enough. Within our parliamentary system surely there must be a place for a "hard left populist party". Not watered down conservatism or liberalism, but a real, concrete alternative to the middle ground. I know we Brits tend to be conservative and tolerant, but there must be a tipping point. What makes it worse is the sheer blatentness (?) of the modern nouveau riche. The unabashed, raw, arrogant greed and showy offness. I know I`m inventing adjectives now, but I get angry and all rational thought starts to evaporate. ;champagne

thornburyiron

The head of the OBR is a committed europhile who vehemently wanted a remain vote and who was appointed by Osborne. There is no impartiality at all although they're supposed to be.

IronHerb

But he can't cook the books.....

thornburyiron

There are no books. Anyone can make up numbers. Why do people believe forecasters but not psychics. Nobody can predict the future, except perhaps West Ham fans when we have a big game coming up.

MrsGrey

thorn, there's difference between psychics, and people who make economic projections based on some known facts and some (openly stated) assumptions for the benefit of calculating.

Economic forecasters aren't predicting the future. They themselves are very clear about that. Which is why their figures are always accompanied by a clear statement for all to see of what they are based on (including any assumptions made about, for example inflation rates or the value of sterling). They are in effect saying 'if this happens and that happens' then the result will be X.

Their 'ifs' are openly stated. And the calculations are clear.

Others who think their assumptions are wrong can replace 'if this happens' with 'if something else happens' and come up with a different scenario of what the economy will look like.

MrsGrey

ironmike ;ok

i wasn't meaning that it was you alleging bias, or trying to somehow hide the woeful govt record. Just that it is the agenda of some, and the reason for their criticism of the OBR or IFS or whoever.

MrsGrey

Interestingly, the OBR gives more positive forecasts than the IMF and the Bank of England.

claretandbluesky

Just hypothetically If a figure of 122 billion was correct or lets say for example the figure was 300 billion would anyone who votes leave on here change their mind? I ask because I put the same question to a friend when discussing this yesterday.

MrsGrey

c+b, the 122 is projected borrowing in total.

the proportion of that nominally caused by Brexit is £59bn.

ironmike44

C&B - I really did not understand your analogy - and quite frankly I still don't.

My examples of Romanian issues have absolutely nothing to do with benefit claimants. What I was trying to highlight was a situation whereby current member states are being allowed to transfer their existing and longstanding cultural and economic problems to other member states using the freedom of movement principal. No such reciprocal arrangement exists although I, and others, carrying out short term project work in that country were invited to buy a 'special visa' for circa €2,000.
As to the nationality and EU passporting arrangement - when my company enquired about this (to the EU) they were told this was a long standing arrangement that existed prior to Romania joining and 'it would be looked at in the future when Romania became more integrated'.

Can I respectfully suggest that if you wish to make a point and do not have actual numbers to support that point it's best not to just make some up. Personnally I think your points are well enough made without doing that.

claretandbluesky

I will do my best to make the points made and any analogies more easy for you to understand in future Mike.

MrsGrey

ironmike44 said:

Additionally, I found out the the Romanian government are selling a 'nationality and EU passport package' to non EU nationals.

Have you got a link to this info, that explains more about it, Mike?

AdMeus_CaputFilius

TBH I think the UK Exit negotiations with the EU are pretty much some way down their priority list at the moment. They have stated their current stance at this time for a clean Exit - not hard, although behind the scenes some key players have said this will change during the negotiations as the EU or certain countries in the EU will suffer as much, if not more then the UK. Also others (in particular Germany) ministers have openly said they want free trade deals at least on some goods/services.

The use of the word hard, as acknowledge on the AM show today by the people on the remain side is a deliberate misdirection to invoke fear, also it was acknowledged that a lot of the experts who predicted doom and gloom are (even though there has been little of it so far) continuing to do so to try and talk it in to happening so they were proved right. There was further acknowledgement that slowly acceptance of the leave vote is happening and the realisation we must work together to get the best deal.

More pressing for the EU are:

Next week Italy has a referendum which the current PM is expected to lose and therefore resign. The vote is to strip the Italian Gov't and senate of numbers and their powers and also making the senate appointed not elected, and giving more sovereign powers to Brussels/Strasbourg - although not that reliable in the UK, ALL the polls in Italy give the current prediction of a 'No' win by between 5 -8% with one predicting more than 55% . If the PM then resigns as he has promised to do so if it is a 'No' it will spark a general election that will be won by a more nationalist PM/Party who will want to claw powers back from the EU.

Then there are both the French and German Elections, not to mention the Turkish problem that has now blown up again.

Swissiron

In my opinion Fillon's selection as candidate for the right will make it a race for the presidency between him and Marine Le Pen, which Le Pen will win

Yeoldhammer

Would be very interesting to see Referendums in other countries and the results that come from them if they were asked if they wanted to "Remain apart of the EU"

NEoldiron

Forget about Project Fear and Remoaners - let's just call it Project Chaos

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38168942

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/robin-lustig/brexit-cost-donald-trump_b_13220674.html

Do we really want this bunch of clowns to decide our future?

MrsGrey

I'm quite amused* by the idea that even after Exit, the UK will still have to keep paying in to meet obligations that have accrued during their membership and are not voided by leaving. ;doh ;lol




*I'm not really amused.

MrsGrey

I was also quite amused* by #cakegate and Boris's latest thing.



*other emotions are available. And may actually be more accurately what I feel.

NEoldiron

MrsGrey, do you have much of your tongue remaining, because I don't ;biggrin

ironmike44

Mrs Grey - sorry I just spotted your request for a link to the comments I posted ref Romanian sale of 'nationality/passport' packages.

Short answer is - no I cannot provide a link. The comments I made were based on a) personal experience and b) conversations with HR professionals from the construction/civil engineering/infrastructure industries - a profession and industry sector I was employed in until recently.

A bit of background:

In the early 2000s I worked for an American company - one contract was to construct roads and accommodation in a remote region of Russia for workers engaged in the decommissioning of the Russian/Soviet Union fleet.
As a contract condition the company had to employ 'trades staff' who were Russian nationals through designated recruitment agencies (based in the Eastern bloc). We quickly found out that many of the staff provided had Russian passports but were from other Eastern European states (Hungary/Bulgaria/Poland etc).

Moving on to 2010/12 I was working on civil contracts for a UK company in Romania. Again we were required (by contract) to recruit Romanian nationals through the same designated agencies. Again we found many of the staff presenting Romanian passports were from other countries - predominantly Russia. When we questioned this we were informed that legitimate 'duel nationality' arrangements were in place and this was confirmed by the Romanian authorities.

In 2014 the same UK company, now with major contracts in the UK, was approached by the same designated agencies looking to provide 'trades qualified staff' for the UK contracts. Although I had retired I was asked to return to work in an advisory capacity to help in the significant recruitment drive. We were assured by the agencies that all staff presented had EU citizenship - subsequently it became clear that many (with Romanian passports) were, in fact, Russian nationals with 'duel nationality'. When we questioned these people they freely admitted they were Russian but had qualified as Romanian (and by default EU citizenship) on payment of a fee and a 6 week qualifying period. Although I have now left/retired I understand from ex HR colleagues that the validity of these arrangements has been checked with both UK and EU authorities - the response has been, apparently, as this is 'a legacy arrangement' it is allowed but will be addressed when the Romanian membership of the EU has settled down. Nobody appears willing or able to say if or when action will be taken to address this.

Incidentally, this might help to explain in part why the highest numbers of EU migrants arriving in the UK now come from Romania.

MrsGrey

From the bit of research I have had time to do, it is because effectively part of what is now Romania was (historically) hoiked off and made part of the USSR. After the disintegration of the USSR, that bit which had been annexed was then 'released' and was called Moldova. But there is strong grounds for saying they are actually Romanian.

Hence the arrangements for some Moldovans to be able to claim Romanian dual nationality.

I think that's fair enough, tbh.

Bit like folks in the UK who were born there, but whose parents were born in Ireland, to be able to claim dual Irish nationality. There are issues of geography, ethnicity, patrimony and history.

Preparing for Brexit, hundreds of thousands of UK citizens will be getting themselves Irish passports, and thus securing rights as EU members. Would you take the view that Ireland is 'selling citizenship to Brits' so they can travel, live and work in EU countries when they would otherwise have been barred by virtue of being British?

I don't think it is fair to specify a single cut-off date - and anybody a citizen of an EU country at that point is OK in perpetuity, but anybody not is barred in perpetuity.

It is quite interesting and I will try to find out more.

And while I have no doubt you, and your colleagues re giving information in good faith, I'm not sure I feel confident trusting to their accuracy.

You refer to 'Russia' but for many people, and for a long time, that term was used interchangeably with 'USSR'. But they are distinct. And post-dissolution, many 'countries' that had been part of the USSR but that were NOT Russia, were trying to establish a new identity (including a democratic political system). So saying their citizens were Russian just because they were citizens of the USSR (sometimes unwillingly) is a bit confusing, imo.

I just think we need to be clear on our terms, and also on whether the facts bear out (only) the interpretation that Romanians are selling 'fake' EU passports to (non-eligible) Russians. Or whether there's a legitimate process going on (a matter of opinion, obviously) that is being exploited by crooks (who will always be with us).

MrsGrey

Another parallel - look at the Gurkhas. No EU rights, but can get in 'by the back door' -- if they live in the UK they get automatic citizenship after a year?

(Will check if that is still the case, but I think it is.)

ironmike44

Mrs Grey - wasn't offering an opinion - it was an observation. My opinion is that citizens of a non EU state are being allowed to buy documentation from a government agency of a member state of the EU, with the express purpose of circumventing the rules on freedom of movement which apply to non EU citizens. The crooks, as far as I'm concerned, are the officials of the EU, Romanian and UK governments who are knowingly allowing this to happen. I never said the passports were fake.
If you want to extend your research I can probably introduce you to a few of the English guys working on building sites in London. They in turn will be able to introduce you to some of the Russians (and they are Russians) working on the sites who, I'm sure, will be happy to tell you how much they paid for their EU passports. They will probably also tell you proudly about how much money they are able to send home to meet their plan of buying a nice apartment on the outskirts of Moscow in a couple of years time.

NEoldiron

RIP, Manuel (Andrew Sachs) comic genius in Fawlty Towers, aged 86 ;weep