[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

[WATFORD zero]

It’s not just Farage is it. Whilst this concession is a typical trade deal arrangement, the optics are problematic given the Government’s recent NI hike for British companies and workers.

Indians are moving to the U.K. in unprecedented numbers and this deal creates another pull, so I’m surprised no one in Government considered changing that clause so that it doesn’t translate to a 3 year exemption (e.g. as it is supposed to be for temporary working arrangements Indian workers could get their contribution back once they return to India).

Also, and far more problematic for Labour is the optics of providing tax concessions to Indians, who (based on current trends) further increase inward migration numbers, and as commonwealth citizens have the right to vote in elections.

That issue may well be in the post………….

It definitely said "Leopards eat THEIR faces" when you voted for exactly this ? You definitely checked and did know what you were campaigning and voting for ?

 

[cunning fergus]

It’s not just Farage is it. Whilst this concession is a typical trade deal arrangement, the optics are problematic given the Government’s recent NI hike for British companies and workers.

Indians are moving to the U.K. in unprecedented numbers and this deal creates another pull, so I’m surprised no one in Government considered changing that clause so that it doesn’t translate to a 3 year exemption (e.g. as it is supposed to be for temporary working arrangements Indian workers could get their contribution back once they return to India).

Also, and far more problematic for Labour is the optics of providing tax concessions to Indians, who (based on current trends) further increase inward migration numbers, and as commonwealth citizens have the right to vote in elections.

That issue may well be in the post………….

Time will tell if it’s a significant economic win, I have no difficulties with the quid pro quo on reducing tariffs that makes sense to us and India.

However, the NIC concessions made to India in the deal following NIC increases to British businesses/employees are a political gift to Farage and the Tories. Similarly if significant numbers arrive with voting rights that’s just another political stick handed to Reform.

There were ways around both issues and I’m surprised they were not picked up by the gurus…..

Like the WFA and other matters since the GE the label Two Tier Kier is sticking……..

 

[cunning fergus]

It definitely said "Leopards eat THEIR faces" when you voted for exactly this ? You definitely checked and did know what you were campaigning and voting for ?

Sure, the electorate want direct accountability for those in power when they make key decisions. Trade deals, and how they work are grist to the mill in all other sovereign countries. If we don’t like the trade deal we can out the PM.

What political accountability exists for EU trade deals?

 

[rogersix]

Sure, the electorate want direct accountability for those in power when they make key decisions. Trade deals, and how they work are grist to the mill in all other sovereign countries. If we don’t like the trade deal we can out the PM.

What political accountability exists for EU trade deals?

Do we not like the trade deals the EU manage to achieve?

 

[Kit Napper]

Time will tell if it’s a significant economic win, I have no difficulties with the quid pro quo on reducing tariffs that makes sense to us and India.

However, the NIC concessions made to India in the deal following NIC increases to British businesses/employees are a political gift to Farage and the Tories. Similarly if significant numbers arrive with voting rights that’s just another political stick handed to Reform.

There were ways around both issues and I’m surprised they were not picked up by the gurus…..

Like the WFA and other matters since the GE the label Two Tier Kier is sticking……..

It's just a standard clause, which already exists in trade deals covering 50 other countries, so that people on secondment continue to pay tax in their home country rather than their temporary place of residence. It already applies between the UK and India except it currently covers one year secondments only and is now being extendeded to three years (which is normal in trade agreements).

There are no plans for additional visas (permanent residents) under this agreement and no prospect of voting rights.

 

[nicko31]

It's just a standard clause, which already exists in trade deals covering 50 other countries, so that people on secondment continue to pay tax in their home country rather than their temporary place of residence. It already applies between the UK and India except it currently covers one year secondments only and is now being extendeded to three years (which is normal in trade agreements).

There are no plans for additional visas (permanent residents) under this agreement and no prospect of voting rights.

Thanks, but it won’t stop Farage spewing shite as usual. The twats that follow him will lap it up

 

[Peteinblack]

Thanks, but it won’t stop Farage spewing shite as usual. The twats that follow him will lap it up

Farage could announce that the Earth is flat, and the Moon is made of cheese, and his fanatical f***-wit followers would snarl that it was true, and accuse the rest of us of peddling Woke Fake News when we disagreed.

 

[TomandJerry]

I wonder what Farage will say about our new trade deal with the US?

 

[Peteinblack]

I wonder what Farage will say about our new trade deal with the US?

That if he was PM, he'd have negotiated a much better one!

 

[WATFORD zero]

Why do we need a European Court of human Rights rather than a British one? Genuine question as I have no idea why and to me it doesn't matter provided humans rights are respected, but is the issue (for some) the European nature of the ECHR and therefore if we had a BCHR with exactly the same remit and rights, would the arguments go away?

The Council of Europe was formed in 1949 in the aftermath of the defeat of the Fascists across Europe 80 years ago today, with Winston Churchill being one of the prime instigators.

The United Kingdom's wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill first publicly suggested the creation of a "Council of Europe" in a BBC radio broadcast on 21 March 1943,while the Second World War was still raging. In his own words, he tried to "peer through the mists of the future to the end of the war", and think about how to rebuild and maintain peace on a shattered continent. Given that Europe had been at the origin of two world wars, the creation of such a body would be, he suggested, "a stupendous business". He returned to the idea during a well-known speech at the University of Zurich on 19 September 1946, throwing the full weight of his considerable post-war prestige behind it.

The European Convention on Human Rights was one of the first things it did in 1950.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, the convention, drawing on the inspiration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can be seen as part of a wider response from the Allied powers in delivering a human rights agenda to prevent the most serious human rights violations which had occurred during the Second World War from happening again.

At the time, I don't think that Winston Churchill envisaged a time when it would be under threat from British Fascists through the ballot box

 

[Guinness Boy]

Why do we need a European Court of human Rights rather than a British one? Genuine question as I have no idea why and to me it doesn't matter provided humans rights are respected, but is the issue (for some) the European nature of the ECHR and therefore if we had a BCHR with exactly the same remit and rights, would the arguments go away?

I'd turn that back and say 'why don't we?'.

If the British one had exactly the same remit and rights it would be a colossal waste of time and money to create. And, if it didn't, why should I have less rights than a Frenchman or German?

 

[nicko31]

The Council of Europe was formed in 1949 in the aftermath of the defeat of the Fascists across Europe 80 years ago today, with Winston Churchill being one of the prime instigators.

The United Kingdom's wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill first publicly suggested the creation of a "Council of Europe" in a BBC radio broadcast on 21 March 1943,while the Second World War was still raging. In his own words, he tried to "peer through the mists of the future to the end of the war", and think about how to rebuild and maintain peace on a shattered continent. Given that Europe had been at the origin of two world wars, the creation of such a body would be, he suggested, "a stupendous business". He returned to the idea during a well-known speech at the University of Zurich on 19 September 1946, throwing the full weight of his considerable post-war prestige behind it.

The European Convention on Human Rights was one of the first things it did in 1950.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, the convention, drawing on the inspiration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can be seen as part of a wider response from the Allied powers in delivering a human rights agenda to prevent the most serious human rights violations which had occurred during the Second World War from happening again.

At the time, I don't think that Winston Churchill envisaged a time when it would be under threat from British Fascists through the ballot box

Just minor detail, a red white and blue human right convention would have been way better, Churchill bottled it and was too woke

 

[cunning fergus]

Do we not like the trade deals the EU manage to achieve?

Depends who you trust and how much accountability you want those negotiating the deal to have with the British electorate.

In the run up to 2016 Brexit vote the UK Government said the proposed TTIP deal between the US and EU was good news…..

Stop TTIP - Defend the NHS

www.rmt.org.uk

Tories eh.

 

[TomandJerry]

I'd turn that back and say 'why don't we?'.

If the British one had exactly the same remit and rights it would be a colossal waste of time and money to create. And, if it didn't, why should I have less rights than a Frenchman or German?

Forgive me for my simple thinking, wouldn't it cost less if we didn't have to go to the ECHR for appeals? Thus then reducing amount of time spent on appeals since the final judgement of the British courts being final?

 

[abc]

The Council of Europe was formed in 1949 in the aftermath of the defeat of the Fascists across Europe 80 years ago today, with Winston Churchill being one of the prime instigators.

The United Kingdom's wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill first publicly suggested the creation of a "Council of Europe" in a BBC radio broadcast on 21 March 1943,while the Second World War was still raging. In his own words, he tried to "peer through the mists of the future to the end of the war", and think about how to rebuild and maintain peace on a shattered continent. Given that Europe had been at the origin of two world wars, the creation of such a body would be, he suggested, "a stupendous business". He returned to the idea during a well-known speech at the University of Zurich on 19 September 1946, throwing the full weight of his considerable post-war prestige behind it.

The European Convention on Human Rights was one of the first things it did in 1950.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, the convention, drawing on the inspiration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, can be seen as part of a wider response from the Allied powers in delivering a human rights agenda to prevent the most serious human rights violations which had occurred during the Second World War from happening again.

At the time, I don't think that Winston Churchill envisaged a time when it would be under threat from British Fascists through the ballot box

My late Father served in the RAF during the war. He often referred to the EU and its components as ‘what he fought for’. He believed in nations coming together economically, socially and politically in order to avoid future wars.
I think he would have been appalled by Brexit, Reform and anything else that added to division between the allies and axis of the past; the latest example being division over human rights, a subject that could not be more fundamental to peace and unity.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Forgive me for my simple thinking, wouldn't it cost less if we didn't have to go to the ECHR for appeals? Thus then reducing amount of time spent on appeals since the final judgement of the British courts being final?

Sorry, you've lost me.

If we created an exact same British equivalent then we'd spend a huge amount of money replicating a court and legislation that already exists. The cost of drafting and enacting that would be far higher and we'd have the overhead of keeping it in line with the European one ourselves. And, given we already have a Supreme Court and the House of Lords, we'd also potentially have additional hearings, AND have to determine where in the hierarchy a BCHR would sit.

The cost of all of that would far surpass sending a few lawyers on a flight to Strasburg. And it would be completely pointless.

 

[TomandJerry]

Sorry, you've lost me.

If we created an exact same British equivalent then we'd spend a huge amount of money replicating a court and legislation that already exists. The cost of drafting and enacting that would be far higher and we'd have the overhead of keeping it in line with the European one ourselves. And, given we already have a Supreme Court and the House of Lords, we'd also potentially have additional hearings, AND have to determine where in the hierarchy a BCHR would sit.

The cost of all of that would far surpass sending a few lawyers on a flight to Strasburg. And it would be completely pointless.

Thank you for explaining