Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

Media tells us there’s a petrol shortage at a handful of petrol stations and 24 hours later we run out of fuel, people really need to turn their TVs off.

I hope the media never tell us there’s a deadly virus……

Edited by KernowCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

That's the sort of electoral winner headline policy.

So long as they don't add loads and loads, as it felt like last time. Keep it simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really decent piece here. Balanced, succinct and (ultimately) rather dispiriting.

The petrol queues seem like a throwback. But at least in the 70s our leaders weren’t so callow

We’re faced with empty shelves and driver shortages. Yet those in charge today seem totally out of their depth

September 2021

Among the words that will send the collective British psyche into panic, three are among the most potent: Christmas, petrol, and winter. Put them together, and you have the perfect ingredients for a crisis, made all the more surreal by the fact that one of its key causes – Brexit – is a word no one in politics wants to mention.

Despite ministers’ assurances that the lack of fuel is all in our heads, queues at garage forecourts extend into the distance. Supermarkets are full of empty shelves; rising energy prices threaten household budgets. Everybody knows that the UK’s labour shortages are dire, and that a deficit of 100,000 hauliers is serious indeed.

The government, meanwhile, is once again all over the place, first refusing to look at its impossibly stringent visa rules, before announcing yet another U-turn. We are now, it seems, offering EU workers who have gone home the most Brexity of re-enticements: 5,000 fuel tanker and lorry drivers, along with 5,500 “poultry workers”, will apparently be eligible to work in the UK until Christmas Eve … whereupon, having ensured the festive season can go ahead, they will be sent packing.

Headlines over the past week have repeatedly drawn comparisons with the fabled winter of discontent of 1978-79. For a few people, that might also evoke hopes of some Margaret Thatcher-esque saviour sooner or later coming to clean up the mess. But most seem to implicitly acknowledge that, with the endless consequences of Brexit and the unfolding effects of the climate crisis, life is going to be full of trouble and uncertainty for a long time to come. That, in turn, leads to two questions: who might have the skills to somehow lead us through it all? And why do our current front-rank politicians hardly inspire confidence?

The answer to the latter question, it seems to me, is partly generational. Not long after the 2008 crash, I interviewed Denis Healey, the Labour elder statesman who had been chancellor from 1974 to 1979, in truly dreadful circumstances. When we met, Gordon Brown was sliding towards eventual defeat, while the comparatively callow David Cameron and George Osborne prepared for power.

Healey’s time as chancellor, he told me, had been defined by “****ing disaster”. We talked about inflation, strikes, shortages and a plunging pound. And about the stress such things caused: he had developed shingles, as well as repeatedly suffering colds and flu. “I wanted to make a success of the job,” he said. “It was very tiring, but I’d been in the army for five years in the war, so I’d learned to put up with things.”

This latter point was rather understated: his political generation had come of age in the 1930s, put their lives on the line as the world fell apart (while serving with the Royal Engineers, Healey was a beachmaster at the Battle of Anzio in 1944), and then played their part in both postwar reconstruction and managing the social and political disasters that followed the oil price shock of 1973. What they experienced highlighted something latter-day politicians often seem not to understand – that power is usually not about great political victories or even modest success, but crisis management, the probability of failure, and the skills and experience needed to cope.

As well as recklessness and ideological zeal, Thatcher – who was born in 1925 – had some of the war generation’s air of heft and seriousness, but such qualities began to dwindle away in the John Major years. And when New Labour took power, though Brown often resembled the kind of politician that had defined the decades after the war, Tony Blair heralded the arrival of something much flimsier. Healey told me it eventually amounted to “**** and nothing else”; JG Ballard caught its essential flavour when, at the end of the Blair years, he wrote about a politics of “fleeting impressions, [and] an illusion of meaning floating over a sea of undefined emotions”.

And then came people of my age, members of what was termed Generation X. On the whole, the more privileged members of that cohort had cut their teeth in a world that was economically stable, in which consumerism was king. Some were maligned as slackers, but other accounts of Generation X tended to include such adjectives as “pushy” and “motivated”. After the Berlin Wall came down, party politics was eventually erased of much ideological content, and personal ambition often seemed to be the main currency. Besides, among many who either considered themselves bright and capable or were told they were, politics seemed to be the last thing anyone wanted to get involved in (“I saw the best minds of my generation accept jobs on the fringes of the entertainment industry,” wrote Zadie Smith).

These days, I sometimes wonder whether the few members of my generation who chose that vocation simply ended up in over their heads. The years of Cameron, Osborne and Nick Clegg, and the calamities they caused, are a good case in point. So too is the recent history of the Labour party: in 2015, in the race to succeed the Gen-Xer Ed Miliband and up against three leadership candidates of a similar age, the then 66-year-old Jeremy Corbyn presented a picture of conviction and authenticity and won a massive victory. But when the baton was then passed to his younger parliamentary allies, the movement he had spawned fell apart.

In the US, Gen X’s lack of impact on liberal politics speaks volumes: the Democratic party’s last nomination contest came down to a choice between Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, and radical hope now lies with that inspirational millennial Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer are at the upper end of the Generation X demographic; given that he was born in 1962, Starmer might actually belong in the dread category of Boomer. But they and many of their colleagues fit the profile of people big on ambition yet devoid of substance and grit. In search of those things, both reach for scripts left behind by previous political generations: Johnson has his Churchill fixation; and in his half-cocked confrontations with his party’s left and use of a very clunky political argot (repeated mentions of people who “work hard and play by the rules”, the tired cliche of “hardworking families”), Starmer looks like someone bumbling through a school play about Blair.

Given time, perhaps younger people who have come of age in an increasingly troubled world and have no notion of returning to old and comfortable certainties might do a better job. For now, there is only the unsettling combination of a mounting social and economic crisis, and political responses so unconvincing they suggest the Nirvana lines to which I and my fellow Gen X-ers once bellowed along, almost as an apology: “Oh well, whatever, never mind.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Well b back said:

But that’s not what they said, I remember because I voted for it. They said these jobs are to be for the British, not Europeans and the British would be queueing up, however you are now saying nobody wanted those jobs as they were low paid so basically they lied. Even if I still agreed with the way I voted what point was there as Europeans are now being brought in to do the jobs, so I don’t get the point why was there a vote for them not to do it ?

If you or your children were not prepared to do the jobs, why did we vote to change the status quo, I understood people like yourself were desperate for these jobs so I understood I was helping people, now you say you never wanted the jobs, I was conned.

I voted to change the status quo because I believed that firms being able to import vast amounts of workers from poorer countries was keeping wages in those sectors lower than they should be. I believe wages are largely set by supply and demand in the private sector and the free movement laws were being abused to allow companies to have plenty of supply of labour, and thus never have to compete for workers by offering better pay and working conditions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, horsefly said:

You really are a moron if you don't understand how plurals work in the English language. This is primary school level knowledge. Jesus Christ! no wonder you make so little sense.

I’ll ask one more time and then I’m done. Where have a written that I’m against the minimum wage in any way, shape or form? If you can find it please quote it for everybody to see, otherwise kindly stop replying to my comments with childish insults.

I have a question for those on here who disagree with me on the EU referendum, which to be fair is most on this board. Do you find Horses antics ruin a sensible discussion, or do you think his attitude towards those he disagrees with is the correct one? I like to think I can hold a reasonable debate with most on here even if we don’t agree on the subject, but I find Horse frankly to be childish and shuts down and drowns out any sensible discussion that may take place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

Petrol is a fossil fuel, don't forget. It is what you lefties and climate changers voted for, remember? This is yet another glimpse of the future that awaits us unless we get back to sane living. In the future every time the wind drops we'll all be stranded without power. Some of us who remembers Ted Heath's 3 day week will be looking forward to 7 day weeks of power shortages and empty supermarkets, if we live long enough.  

Think that's a bit of a cheap shot RTB. You can use climate change to trump anything. It's a bit like saying "yeah, but we're all going to die anyway"...a truth but not really relevant to the point in hand. I was making reference to the planning that went into Brexit and the subsequent problems in implementation. It's not unreasonable to want decent stewardship from a government.

I don't disagree with the thrust of your latter point...maybe you're a green voter to be (!) but as to us "lefties" - again that's just labelling. I've posted another article link (John Harris) on the Brexit thread, which raises interesting questions and challenges left and right politicians and the poverty of leadership (like going back to the 1970s but this time with less gravitas and depth). 

I remember those 3 day weeks btw.

The future has to be based on more collaboration, community and not empty rhetoric about left and right.

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sonyc said:

Think that's a bit of a cheap shot RTB. You can use climate change to trump anything. It's a bit like saying "yeah, but we're all going to die anyway"...a truth but not really relevant to the point in hand. I was making reference to the planning that went into Brexit and the subsequent problems in implementation. It's not unreasonable to want decent stewardship from a government.

I don't disagree with the thrust of your latter point...maybe you're a green voter to be (!) but as to us "lefties" - again that's just labelling. I've posted another article link (John Harris) on the Brexit thread, which raises interesting questions and challenges left and right politicians and the poverty of leadership (like going back to the 1970s but this time with less gravitas and depth). 

I remember those 3 day weeks btw.

The future has to be based on more collaboration, community and not empty rhetoric about left and right.

I think the poverty of leadership stems from a lack of diversity in parliament. I don’t mean skin colour or sex but lack of diversity in terms of upbringings or life experiences. I don’t agree so much with the article you posted that it is generational as such (at least that was how I read it) but more to do with the fact almost all of those at Westminster come from the same comfortable backgrounds, went to university studying similar courses then straight into jobs for the political parties. None have worked in factories, on farms or building sites, been involved in haulage, worked as teachers or nurses etc.

While this means they’re able to navigate politics, I’m not sure it leaves many with too much understanding of the country outside of politics. The election between Cameron, Clegg and Miliband being a prime example, if it wasn’t for the colour tie they were wearing you’d barely know which party they were representing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"This is all happening because David Cameron was scared of losing a few seats to Nigel Farage."

Remember this next time you're blathering on about wages or the forgotten and making excuses for absolutely trashing this fine country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Herman said:

"This is all happening because David Cameron was scared of losing a few seats to Nigel Farage."

Remember this next time you're blathering on about wages or the forgotten and making excuses for absolutely trashing this fine country.

I thought most of the Remain crowd thought it was a backwards, racist hell hole?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

 

I have a question for those on here who disagree with me on the EU referendum, which to be fair is most on this board. Do you find Horses antics ruin a sensible discussion, or do you think his attitude towards those he disagrees with is the correct one? I like to think I can hold a reasonable debate with most on here even if we don’t agree on the subject, but I find Horse frankly to be childish and shuts down and drowns out any sensible discussion that may take place

I should ask Bill😉

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I think the poverty of leadership stems from a lack of diversity in parliament. I don’t mean skin colour or sex but lack of diversity in terms of upbringings or life experiences. I don’t agree so much with the article you posted that it is generational as such (at least that was how I read it) but more to do with the fact almost all of those at Westminster come from the same comfortable backgrounds, went to university studying similar courses then straight into jobs for the political parties. None have worked in factories, on farms or building sites, been involved in haulage, worked as teachers or nurses etc.

While this means they’re able to navigate politics, I’m not sure it leaves many with too much understanding of the country outside of politics. The election between Cameron, Clegg and Miliband being a prime example, if it wasn’t for the colour tie they were wearing you’d barely know which party they were representing 

I think your point is valid and I'd agree here. I think too though that Harris alludes to this in his penultimate paragraph "devoid of substance or grit" and generally it's a theme in the piece, albeit more opaque, beneath his generational focus. Harris is very interested in how communities think and much of his journalism draws from on-the-ground research. A rarer thing nowadays. Check out his recent town tours programmes on R4. He has covered food poverty and the lives of working folk during the pandemic too.

The political 'class' is indeed a problem. Whilst I don't necessarily support Raynor saying the word "scum" as an elected politician (because if everyone spoke like this about one another it wouldn't elevate public life), I believe she is right. And she speaks from her experience. Let's be truthful Johnson has said appalling things but  mostly it has been accepted by our media. He is quite shameless too with it. 

It won't go down well on this board that I agree with Raynor  (the majority of folk tend to hate Labour politicians I've found over the years) but I've spent 40 years working in and amongst northern working class communities and feel a natural affinity. My own background (most people would say the same?) is very humble but through work really I tried to focus on making the family comfortable. Lots of activists I know would agree with your points too. Can't see it happening but a Labour government would bring more people of "diversity" rather than a private school base. 

I know why many voted for Brexit too. Many governments of both colour deserted the working classes for decades. Industrial decline is deep in many areas of the north. Blair's government followed much of Thatcher economic policies too I would suggest (private public) and the social security system entrenched people too . Complex subject. That said, child poverty was beginning to reverse. Inequality under this current lot will worsen. Levelling Up is nonsense on stilts.

 

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I’ll ask one more time and then I’m done. Where have a written that I’m against the minimum wage in any way, shape or form? If you can find it please quote it for everybody to see, otherwise kindly stop replying to my comments with childish insults.

Jesus Christ! It seems I'm going to have to provide a primary school level explanation of how the English Language works, although having already explained this point three times I don't hold out any hope that you will understand.

"Where have a [sic] written that I’m against the minimum wage in any way, shape or form?"

Conversations in English rely on a grammatical convention of a form of ellipsis to allow unnecessary and stultifying repetition of references. For example imagine the following Email exchange:

Person A: "Are you going to the City game tomorrow?"

Person B: ""No! I'm going for a walk"

Nobody (except you it seems) is any any doubt whatsoever that Person B is referring to the "City game" mentioned by Person A. He neither wrote the actual words "No I'm not going to the City game", nor did he need to in order make himself clear. In fact it would have been stylistically weird and clumsy to have done so. This form of ellipsis is how normal conversations (written or spoken) work.

Now imagine the following exchange on social media:

Person A: "The government has ALWAYS had the power to change that situation through wages councils (or their like), and the minimum wage. ."

Person B: "That would be the same policies that almost caused the country to go bankrupt in the 70’s, that almost every country has since abandoned?"

Nobody (except you it seems) is in any doubt whatsoever that person B is referring, by his use of the expression "the same policies",  to  the "wages councils" and "minimum wage" mentioned by person A.  Otherwise his use of the expression "the same policies" if he didn't mean "the same policies" would have been recklessly stupid.

But, of course we don't need to imagine that second example because that is EXACTLY the exchange that occured in your post halfway down page 844 on this thread.

 

As for your further "point", "otherwise kindly stop replying to my comments with childish insults". It really is best not to whine about someone insulting you when it is a response to an insult that YOU started off, "You’re an idiot", were your exact words, to which I responded in kind.

Now perhaps you can stop wasting my time requiring me to explain the most fundamentally obvious features of normal English conversation.

 

 

 

Edited by horsefly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Jesus Christ! It seems I'm going to have to provide a primary school level explanation of how the English Language works, although having...

Let it go horsefly. You don't need the final word. Your's is an argument that matters only to the two of you.

Sonyc is involved in a debate about whether or not the parties need more diversity of background in parliament and Fen Canary is describing a Bennite success of brexit.  What are your views on these?

 

Edited by Barbe bleu
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Barbe bleu said:

Let it go horsefly. You don't need the final word. This is a debate that matters only to the two of you.

Sonyc is involved in a debate about whether or not the parties need more diversity of background in parliament and Fen Canary is describing a Bennite success of brexit.  What are your views on these?

 

I would be happy to do so but he called me an idiot on the grounds that he had not said what he clearly did say. All he needed to do was say that he had misspoken (or whatever), but he chose instead to go on the attack and attempt to traduce me to cover up his own error. That, alas, is not something I am simply going to let pass.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm waiting for the announcement that we are going to build lots of Royal Tankers that will be pilotted by the Royal Cavalry. Each morning there will ne a ceremonial Changing of the Pump Prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Let it go horsefly. You don't need the final word. Your's is an argument that matters only to the two of you.

Sonyc is involved in a debate about whether or not the parties need more diversity of background in parliament and Fen Canary is describing a Bennite success of brexit.  What are your views on these?

 

Quite agree BB.

However one little thing which clearly shows the s h i t zophrenia (pun) at the hearty of Brexit is indeed Fens 'Bennite' comments. Most of the Tory Brexiteers are desperately trying to say Brexit has nothing to do to with the driver shortage fiasco (only fools believe them) - yet 'Bennite ' Fen thinks it's exactly what he voted for.

Its no wonder Brexit and this government is a hopeless mess. It is logically inconsistent with itself even on its own terms.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Jesus Christ! It seems I'm going to have to provide a primary school level explanation of how the English Language works, although having already explained this point three times I don't hold out any hope that you will understand.

"Where have a [sic] written that I’m against the minimum wage in any way, shape or form?"

Conversations in English rely on a grammatical convention of a form of ellipsis to allow unnecessary and stultifying repetition of references. For example imagine the following Email exchange:

Person A: "Are you going to the City game tomorrow?"

Person B: ""No! I'm going for a walk"

Nobody (except you it seems) is any any doubt whatsoever that Person B is referring to the "City game" mentioned by Person A. He neither wrote the actual words "No I'm not going to the City game", nor did he need to in order make himself clear. In fact it would have been stylistically weird and clumsy to have done so. This form of ellipsis is how normal conversations (written or spoken) work.

Now imagine the following exchange on social media:

Person A: "The government has ALWAYS had the power to change that situation through wages councils (or their like), and the minimum wage. ."

Person B: "That would be the same policies that almost caused the country to go bankrupt in the 70’s, that almost every country has since abandoned?"

Nobody (except you it seems) is in any doubt whatsoever that person B is referring, by his use of the expression "the same policies",  to  the "wages councils" and "minimum wage" mentioned by person A.  Otherwise his use of the expression "the same policies" if he didn't mean "the same policies" would have been recklessly stupid.

But, of course we don't need to imagine that second example because that is EXACTLY the exchange that occured in your post halfway down page 844 on this thread.

 

As for your further "point", "otherwise kindly stop replying to my comments with childish insults". It really is best not to whine about someone insulting you when it is a response to an insult that YOU started off, "You’re an idiot", were your exact words, to which I responded in kind.

Now perhaps you can stop wasting my time requiring me to explain the most fundamentally obvious features of normal English conversation.

 

 

 

I shouldn’t have called you an idiot, clearly you’re a f***ing idiot.

Try and dress it up however you please if it makes you happy, but I’ve never said I’m against the minimum wage. However you interpreted it was incorrect as I’ve stated numerous times, I’ve told you I think it’s a good thing. If you choose to ignore that then that’s up to you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sonyc said:

I think your point is valid and I'd agree here. I think too though that Harris alludes to this in his penultimate paragraph "devoid of substance or grit" and generally it's a theme in the piece, albeit more opaque, beneath his generational focus. Harris is very interested in how communities think and much of his journalism draws from on-the-ground research. A rarer thing nowadays. Check out his recent town tours programmes on R4. He has covered food poverty and the lives of working folk during the pandemic too.

The political 'class' is indeed a problem. Whilst I don't necessarily support Raynor saying the word "scum" as an elected politician (because if everyone spoke like this about one another it wouldn't elevate public life), I believe she is right. And she speaks from her experience. Let's be truthful Johnson has said appalling things but  mostly it has been accepted by our media. He is quite shameless too with it. 

It won't go down well on this board that I agree with Raynor  (the majority of folk tend to hate Labour politicians I've found over the years) but I've spent 40 years working in and amongst northern working class communities and feel a natural affinity. My own background (most people would say the same?) is very humble but through work really I tried to focus on making the family comfortable. Lots of activists I know would agree with your points too. Can't see it happening but a Labour government would bring more people of "diversity" rather than a private school base. 

I know why many voted for Brexit too. Many governments of both colour deserted the working classes for decades. Industrial decline is deep in many areas of the north. Blair's government followed much of Thatcher economic policies too I would suggest (private public) and the social security system entrenched people too . Complex subject. That said, child poverty was beginning to reverse. Inequality under this current lot will worsen. Levelling Up is nonsense on stilts.

 

Johnson is an absolute chancer, however he can do as he pleases currently because of the weakness of Labour, and it’s not something I can see changing anytime soon which is a shame because a decent opposition is vital.

Starmer couldn’t do a great deal during the pandemic admittedly, however he didn’t appear capable of facing down the more lunatic fringe that’s currently setting the narrative for Labour. The first proper conference he’s had and instead of any policies instead the talking points are Rosie Duffield being threatened by the trans lobby and Starmer being too cowardly to back her up or even say only women have a cervix to Andrew Marr. If he can’t even pick a side in an issue like that then frankly he’s never going to win back those small c conservative northern towns he so desperately needs. Kinnock faced down the hard left when he was leader and ultimately cleared the path for Blair to win his elections, I just can’t see Starmer doing the same. Realistically it’s probably only the FPTP voting system that’s keeping them as large as they are currently.

As I say I want to see Labour strong again, as while socially I’m more conservative/centre right than most on this board, I’ve always been centre left economically so my vote does chop and change. I just can’t see it changing back anytime soon until Labour realises Twitter and Reddit aren’t the real world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Quite agree BB.

However one little thing which clearly shows the s h i t zophrenia (pun) at the hearty of Brexit is indeed Fens 'Bennite' comments. Most of the Tory Brexiteers are desperately trying to say Brexit has nothing to do to with the driver shortage fiasco (only fools believe them) - yet 'Bennite ' Fen thinks it's exactly what he voted for.

Its no wonder Brexit and this government is a hopeless mess. It is logically inconsistent with itself even on its own terms.

To be fair the driver shortage isn’t just affecting the UK, most other EU countries are also short of drivers currently. However you’re correct that the restriction of cheap labour from abroad was one of my reason for voting to leave.

Im not saying I trust the Tories to deliver on it, though I must say they seem to be (reasonably) sticking to their guns so far, but at least if they renege on their promises I can vote for a different party who say they’ll put a stop to it. At least now I have that option, while we were a member any party was powerless to stop companies hiring cheap labour from the poorer EU nations 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I thought most of the Remain crowd thought it was a backwards, racist hell hole?

No it was a great country. It had its flaws but we all knew you were blaming the wrong thing for the majority of those flaws. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I shouldn’t have called you an idiot, clearly you’re a f***ing idiot.

I cant really bemoan horsefly for wanting he last word on a pointless argument and not say the same here. So I am!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I cant really bemoan horsefly for wanting he last word on a pointless argument and not say the same here. So I am!

Your patience just wears thin with him quite frankly, there’s only so many times you can be insulted and told you’ve said something you clearly haven’t before you retaliate and snap back.

I’m not sure how many times I need to say I support the minimum wage before he accepts the fact I do but hopefully others on this thread can see that’s clearly the case. Anyway I’ll leave it there, it’s not an argument that contributes anything of any value 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has to be asked again. Some of you brexiters that were "concerned" about workers wages and conditions not stop to look at the people running the vote leave campaign. The vast majority were greed is good extreme capitalists, hedge funders, anti union, Thatcherites and anti worker tories. It was pretty obvious brexit was never for the working man and would be of no benefit. 

You could also see nazis jumping in head first to the campaign. It was quite clear. Surely you could be anti EU but have seen no good would come out from joining in with them?+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

If the money is right there’s no reason they can’t employ British workers. Would you work the long hours in haulage for the pay on offer though? I know I wouldn’t personally yet you seem happy to exploit those from poor nations who will

This is what I find very strange about the Left. They bemoan our history of colonisation on the basis that we apparently plundered the third world of their resources according to their left narrative, yet today they are quite ok with the UK plundering low-income countries for work skills and depriving those countries of their best talent. I imagine in a hundred years from now historians will be writing about this period and will be equally shocked at how blasé we are about exploiting others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

This is what I find very strange about the Left. They bemoan our history of colonisation on the basis that we apparently plundered the third world of their resources according to their left narrative, yet today they are quite ok with the UK plundering low-income countries for work skills and depriving those countries of their best talent. I imagine in a hundred years from now historians will be writing about this period and will be equally shocked at how blasé we are about exploiting others.

Some on the left were in favour of brexit. I  was an occasional reader of The Morning Star a few years back, they were all for it

There was quite a lot of unemployment in some places in Eastern Europe. We had vacancies and they had available labour...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

This is what I find very strange about the Left. They bemoan our history of colonisation on the basis that we apparently plundered the third world of their resources according to their left narrative, yet today they are quite ok with the UK plundering low-income countries for work skills and depriving those countries of their best talent. I imagine in a hundred years from now historians will be writing about this period and will be equally shocked at how blasé we are about exploiting others.

Well the 'plundering' in this case was somewhat less enforced- ie those people had a choice to move to the UK and work, we didn't forcibly move the UK to them.

However I do generally agree- when I was a teenager I worked in a hotel and it was eye opening to be working with qualified teachers and other similar professions from various Eastern European countries. The brain drain can't have been ideal for them.

The idea of training up British workers is a good one but lets be honest, do you trust this government to do it? I don't. You've already got John Redwood tweeting out that online delivery companies like Hermes have managed to find drivers, apparently entirely ignorant of the fact that you don't need to take a 10 week training programme to drive a van like you do with an HGV. 

Another great example was the Tory government in 2015 scrapping grants for trainee nurses, kneecaping the number of people applying for these courses and thus forcing an added reliance on importing workers from abroad for this key role. Just no joined up thinking at all- if you want to reduce reliance on foreign labour in certain industries you don't just cut off the supply line- you actually need to incentivise people to pursue those fields.  

Edited by king canary
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see Insulate Britain showing some consideration for the public  and glueing themselves to the M25 on a day nobody's got fuel.....

What the UK needs right now, and I'm disappointed No. 10 hasn't done anything about this, as they are normally so good at it, is a 3 word slogan. In case they are passing by, I have some suggestions 

HELP US, LORD!

TAKE THE TRAIN!

WE'VE LOST CONTROL!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...