Jump to content

EU Trade Talks Thread

keano77

By keano77
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

You can see whats going to happen - those unemployed or ill or not working for other reasons are going to be forced into these jobs whether they're fit to do them or not.


"Business groups from the CBI to the bodies representing the farming, hospitality and care work sectors have all raised the alarm about the new system, saying it will cause labour shortages."


"But Patel insisted it would be necessary for businesses to look more to potential British workers, helping them to ?up their skills and make their skills relevant? to the job market."


But these are non skilled jobs Priti - or you define them as such for immigration purposes ?

stepdown

stepdown

Posted
Posted

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What does 'economically inactive' mean? Surely not

> unemployed?


I imagine it's worded that way so that it doesn't impact wealthy people who are unemployed and living off income/capital gains from assets.

TheCat

TheCat

Posted
Posted

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> keano77 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > How things work today pk might not be how they

> > work tomorrow. It?s called change or adaption

> or

> > evolution etc

> >

> But as we?re here today why not deal with today

> rather than speculate about some bizarre future

> where countries don?t have free trade arrangements

> but don?t have border controls either?


I find this a puzzling perspective. Many remainers want to berate leavers for not having a clear plan for the future. And while I acknowledge that brexit is clearly significant more change than remaining, the 'status quo' does not exist, the EU will continue to evolve, so while there is uncertainty in leaving, there is also uncertainty in remaining. I don't think anyone can accuratley predict what the Eu will look like in 10 years time.

Sephiroth

Sephiroth

Posted
Posted

But just because no one can predict anything with 100% accuracy doesn?t mean we can?t weigh up probabilities. The eu has been a stable and useful environment for its existence - it will evolve and if we stayed we would have helped shaped that evolution. As it is we will be a small country alone, buffeted by other larger blocs. So on balance remaining provides that far better probable outcome


Remainers have lots of reasons to complain. One of them

Being Dealing with keano and uncle and their bizarro world interpretation of events (the eu will impose a border. Not us!!) and yet here are on the day the government publishes its point system to keep people out (without a border how does it propose to do that?)

pk

pk

Posted
Posted

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > keano77 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > How things work today pk might not be how

> they

> > > work tomorrow. It?s called change or adaption

> > or

> > > evolution etc

> > >

> > But as we?re here today why not deal with today

> > rather than speculate about some bizarre future

> > where countries don?t have free trade

> arrangements

> > but don?t have border controls either?

>

> I find this a puzzling perspective. Many remainers

> want to berate leavers for not having a clear plan

> for the future. And while I acknowledge that

> brexit is clearly significant more change than

> remaining, the 'status quo' does not exist, the EU

> will continue to evolve, so while there is

> uncertainty in leaving, there is also uncertainty

> in remaining. I don't think anyone can accuratley

> predict what the Eu will look like in 10 years

> time.


You think that dealing with where we are today is a puzzling concept? And that a no deal without borders isn?t?


Perhaps you can explain that?

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted

Just back on the unemployed taking up those low skilled jobs that immigrants will no longer fill. Priti seems to forget that those in receipt of UC (and not sick or disabled) are already required to apply for those jobs if they live near to them. But where are the hoards of unemployed living around farms to go and pick lettuces for min wage?


The full employment claim is also a red herring as a person only has to be doing one hour of work a week to be classed as employed by government figures. Zero hours contracts and a million plus full time workers in need of top up benefits to meet basic living costs is the real story behind those figures.


The figure for long term unemployed has consistently sat at around 240k ish. Using the term 'economically inactive' may indeed signal a move to force those beyond the category of 'able bodied' unemployed into jobs, although quite how they intend to manage this is going to be another matter. Employers don't want unsuitable people foisted onto them either.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Priti causing trouble in the Home Office now.


?If this were any other environment Philip Rutnam would not only be sacked he?d be denied a pension.'


It worries me that this government thinks it can threaten the pensions of civil servants. Not only the civil service but pension schemes should be separate from politicians. Any other environment has contribution based pensions and it's your money (mine shows up on my bank account app - Priti's not having it).


https://metro.co.uk/2020/02/20/priti-patel-accused-bullying-staff-trying-oust-senior-civil-servant-12270747/

Seabag

Seabag

Posted
Posted

I work closely with the restaurant industry, and this restriction is worrying as there?s a 4.00 vacancies per 100 jobs in the industry, compared to 2.6 for the wider economy.


?Low skill? doesn?t account for ability and aptitude. At Pret A Manger they get 1 in 50 applications by British people and 65% of their work force are from EU countries.


It?s going to impact business badly. Being told to up staff retention and bring in automation (the governments helpful advice) isn?t the answer.


I have this vision of the restaurant industry looking like a Homebase store, with senior citizens working as waiters and baristas.


God help us, it?s all a bit Dad?s Army.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I work closely with the restaurant industry, and

> this restriction is worrying as there?s a 4.00

> vacancies per 100 jobs in the industry, compared

> to 2.6 for the wider economy.

>

> ?Low skill? doesn?t account for ability and

> aptitude. At Pret A Manger they get 1 in 50

> applications by British people and 65% of their

> work force are from EU countries.

>

> It?s going to impact business badly. Being told to

> up staff retention and bring in automation (the

> governments helpful advice) isn?t the answer.

>

> I have this vision of the restaurant industry

> looking like a Homebase store, with senior

> citizens working as waiters and baristas.

>

> God help us, it?s all a bit Dad?s Army.


It's already making bad service too. A few pub managers have mentioned they lost all there staff erlier this year and I'm seeing people behind the bar making a foamy mess of pouring a pint - I suppose they'll get better.


My 20% reduction in certain pubs and free coffees at Pret seems to have gone with the East Europeans mind you (maybe it'll return) :)

keano77

keano77

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yes Seabag. I think the immigration proposal needs to be re-thought.


There?s been talk of an ?Australian system?. I?ve no idea what system Australia currently operates but I remember years ago it was based on needs and shortages. Some friends of mine who were nurses were refused visas as Australia has its own nurses. Pastry chefs and many restaurant, catering and hotel staff were much in demand but Australia didn?t want many professionals such as accountants etc. If you were prepared to be a cook at an outback sheep or cattle ranch you were welcomed with open arms as were jackeroos and jilleroos.


Such an approach by Britain should be seriously considered to cover catering, hospitality and the care crisis to name just a few.

Blah Blah

Blah Blah

Posted
Posted
This is precisely why I think it will be rethought Keano, as the obvious problems emerge in practise. Priti has a track record of poor understanding of most of the things she expresses views on, so I take her comments with a pinch of salt. She also has poor judgement and it is only a matter of time before she messes up, as she did when she unofficially met Isreali officials.
JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> THAT woman on question time last night seemed very

> keen on borders. She wanted a total lock down.

>

> I keep asking keano how he imagines this is

> possible without a border but all I get is ?we

> don?t want a border the eu does?


This one I guess you mean


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/question-time-audience-member-uk-immigration-a4367956.html

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

These immigration rules are being pushed as fairer as they don't give Europeans preference - but thats not where the people with the leave agenda want to end up. The Express (and others) are still pushing CANZUK.


from 2nd Feb 2020 not last year as we thought this had disappeared.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1236734/brexit-news-uk-trade-union-canada-australia-new-zealand-Erin-O-Toole-Canzuk-plan

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...