• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

He's being deliberately obtuse, I suspect - that or his carer makes the phone do the Twitter thing for him.

The EU is no longer the deciding party as to what does and doesn't break rules. We can now choose not to conform to some rules and pay a tariff for it (for the small part of our market that can be applied to).

Those are very real and absolutely vital differences between this deal and EU assimilation.

You are right. Sovereignty, a distinctly abstract concept, has been pursued by Boris and he has delivered bucket loads of sovrignity. Has it been at the cost of the economy? According to our government, absolutely. They project around a 4% loss to GDP which is huge. Will you notice the extra sovereignty?
 
You are right. Sovereignty, a distinctly abstract concept, has been pursued by Boris and he has delivered bucket loads of sovrignity. Has it been at the cost of the economy? According to our government, absolutely. They project around a 4% loss to GDP which is huge. Will you notice the extra sovereignty?
I will, yes. Our trade federation will begin lobbying again in the spring to convince the govt there's no reason to apply EU regs to trade with RoW.
 
What makes them banned if not harmful?

Do you have extra paper work to fill in on exports now? Any rule of origin considerations?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
They're harmful in the same way as bleach is harmful. Drinking it would be really bad for you (and definitely don't inject it) but products it has been used on are perfectly safe.

We only have to do what we do for RoW, no real hard work at all. The information we have to supply to the freight company is no more onerous than that we had to keep for ECSL returns.
 
They're harmful in the same way as bleach is harmful. Drinking it would be really bad for you (and definitely don't inject it) but products it has been used on are perfectly safe.

We only have to do what we do for RoW, no real hard work at all. The information we have to supply to the freight company is no more onerous than that we had to keep for ECSL returns.

I think HMRC, our government, put the extra bureaucratic export cost at circa £7b pa. With the UK needing various government officials. The 'bleach-like' chemicals is a bit of mystery until you can point to a specific law.

Which new markets are you expecting to open up as a consequence of allowing these bleach-like substances?
 
I think HMRC, our government, put the extra bureaucratic export cost at circa £7b pa. With the UK needing various government officials. The 'bleach-like' chemicals is a bit of mystery until you can point to a specific law.

Which new markets are you expecting to open up as a consequence of allowing these bleach-like substances?
The rules were being phased in over the next couple of years, so for us it means keeping the UK/RoW customers we have. So keeping 90+% of our customers.
 
EU share trading flees London on first day after full Brexit
Nearly €6bn of dealing rerouted to newly created European hubs and primary exchanges

London’s financial sector started to feel the full effects of Brexit on the first trading day of 2021 as nearly €6bn of EU share dealing shifted away from the City to facilities in European capitals.

----
What are the implications of this for UK tax revenues?
 
EU share trading flees London on first day after full Brexit
Nearly €6bn of dealing rerouted to newly created European hubs and primary exchanges

London’s financial sector started to feel the full effects of Brexit on the first trading day of 2021 as nearly €6bn of EU share dealing shifted away from the City to facilities in European capitals.

----
What are the implications of this for UK tax revenues?

Don’t worry. We’ll make that back in no time now that the £350 million a week side-of-the-bus money is rolling in.
 
EU share trading flees London on first day after full Brexit
Nearly €6bn of dealing rerouted to newly created European hubs and primary exchanges

London’s financial sector started to feel the full effects of Brexit on the first trading day of 2021 as nearly €6bn of EU share dealing shifted away from the City to facilities in European capitals.

----
What are the implications of this for UK tax revenues?

Given i work in this field... so...

It's a complicated interconnectedness but basically to transact in certain jurisidictions, you need to have a subsidiary based in that location. There's several reasons why, mainly for regulatory oversight, but also it means that obviously taxed earnings within those jurisdictions are taxed as a subsidiary (not a branch) and therefore the local tax revenue is earned. So, in the UK, subsidiaries are UK based and therefore revenues earned into the UK. You also have to hold capital in those jurisidictions and apply for licences from the local regulators.

Now however, due to Brexit, all Banks have effectively created major hubs in other locations as EU financial services have had to shift, so we still keep the UK entities. However, banks have now created major hubs elsewhere, so transactions settled via those entities will now have their financial records reviewed outside of UK jurisdiction and taxes earned to those countries. Germany, France for example. The assets and liabilities have moved on the balance sheet over to those locations.

So yes, we have lost tax revenues into the UK from hubs. Did we lose thousands of workers too? A little bit. Some have shifted abroad, not as many. In some cases we will also lose tax revenue from their earnings but this won't be felt as much to be honest.

Will London remain a financial hub? Yes. definitely. But i want to be abundantly clear here, banks have shifted hubs and will NOT return those hubs to London. We've put in 3+ years of solid work to get this done, even if passporting agreed in the coming months, no Banks are unwinding again, too much effort has been done to move this stuff.
 
Given i work in this field... so...

It's a complicated interconnectedness but basically to transact in certain jurisidictions, you need to have a subsidiary based in that location. There's several reasons why, mainly for regulatory oversight, but also it means that obviously taxed earnings within those jurisdictions are taxed as a subsidiary (not a branch) and therefore the local tax revenue is earned. So, in the UK, subsidiaries are UK based and therefore revenues earned into the UK. You also have to hold capital in those jurisidictions and apply for licences from the local regulators.

Now however, due to Brexit, all Banks have effectively created major hubs in other locations as EU financial services have had to shift, so we still keep the UK entities. However, banks have now created major hubs elsewhere, so transactions settled via those entities will now have their financial records reviewed outside of UK jurisdiction and taxes earned to those countries. Germany, France for example. The assets and liabilities have moved on the balance sheet over to those locations.

So yes, we have lost tax revenues into the UK from hubs. Did we lose thousands of workers too? A little bit. Some have shifted abroad, not as many. In some cases we will also lose tax revenue from their earnings but this won't be felt as much to be honest.

Will London remain a financial hub? Yes. definitely. But i want to be abundantly clear here, banks have shifted hubs and will NOT return those hubs to London. We've put in 3+ years of solid work to get this done, even if passporting agreed in the coming months, no Banks are unwinding again, too much effort has been done to move this stuff.

There is a lot of complex detail. However, the general impacts that we are seeing now were logical and predicted years ago! I am angry at those who told lies to people. Politicians who used Brexit to further careers, and effectively downgraded the UK in the process. They were either incompetent - didn't think there would be losses to the UK - or they were lying. One of the two.

@scaramanga I did not realise Brexit was so vital to your business! It does not seem to stack up though. You're suggesting 90% of your business was going to be lost because of EU legislation? Amazing that you have only just mentioned this...:confused:
 
There is a lot of complex detail. However, the general impacts that we are seeing now were logical and predicted years ago! I am angry at those who told lies to people. Politicians who used Brexit to further careers, and effectively downgraded the UK in the process. They were either incompetent - didn't think there would be losses to the UK - or they were lying. One of the two.

@scaramanga I did not realise Brexit was so vital to your business! It does not seem to stack up though. You're suggesting 90% of your business was going to be lost because of EU legislation? Amazing that you have only just mentioned this...:confused:
It's not an impossible workaround - it won't stop our business. It does mean we'd probably have to move our UK operations overseas. But the clear expectation from our industry groups are that if the govt doesn't repeal the laws, it will offer a dispensation for individual companies that can show harm from it. That wasn't possible within the EU but would be now.
 
Good piece in the Telegraph today about the state of remote teaching in this country.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...or-providing-proper-rigorous-online-teaching/

Looks interesting. Can you paste it? Or what was that site that unlocked newspaper stories?

Shame the author made his name and forged his career as an architect of Brexit over 25 odd years. If he’d focused on pedagogy instead we’d be in a better position. Dont think it’s worked out as he dreamt as a school boy. For example:

Daniel Hannan: “But, to repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market.”


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Last edited:
Looks interesting. Can you paste it? Or what was that site that unlocked newspaper stories?

Shame the author made his name and forged his career as an architect of Brexit over 25 odd years. If he’d focused on pedagogy instead we’d be in a better position. Dont think it’s worked out as he dreamt as a school boy. For example:

Daniel Hannan: “But, to repeat, absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market.”


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Sure.

The first lockdown exposed a vast and rather shaming gap between ambitious and unambitious schools. Good state schools, and most private schools, embraced remote learning. Yes, of course there were teething troubles. It soon emerged, for example, that it is much harder to maintain concentration for a long time while staring at a screen. So teachers adapted, breaking up the Zoom calls with exercises and projects, and asking students to keep their cameras on. Before long, they had settled into a new routine, complete with online assemblies, sports training sessions, music lessons – the works.

At the other end of the scale, tragically, some schools simply stopped teaching. Instead they sent out worksheets – and, incredibly, sometimes refused to mark them. A survey by the Children’s Commissioner found that half of secondary school pupils, and a majority in primary schools, got no online tuition at all.

Why the contrast? For once, the educationalist blob cannot plead poverty: there is no extra cost to online teaching. The difference, rather, is attitudinal. Some schools see the virus as a challenge to overcome, others as an excuse to give up. The teaching unions, needless to say, are in the second category, and have campaigned furiously against any classroom activity – despite a mass of evidence that younger children do not suffer serious Covid symptoms and are unlikely to pass the disease to others.

Last week, the unions won, ensuring that even primary schools have remained shut. They then moved on to campaigning, in practice, against the online teaching that they had demanded as an alternative to classroom tuition. In its official guidance, the NASUWT stresses that “schools should not monitor teacher’s [sic] online lessons for performance appraisal and quality assurance purposes”. To that end, it makes bogus arguments about privacy and the misuse of material, but its bottom line is clear: no recording and, ideally, no live streaming.

The result can already be seen in many schools. A “lesson” will consist of a pre-recorded video and a PDF to complete. That is better than nothing, but it is not, by any normal definition of the word, teaching. Imagine if, pre-lockdown, a teacher simply showed videos and handed out worksheets without saying anything. Would anyone see that as acceptable?

Yes, the lockdown is a massive headache for schools – especially smaller primary schools, which need to offer remote learning to the bulk of their pupils while continuing to take in the children of keyworkers. But we should at least start from the assumption that interaction is desirable – indeed, essential.

Parents know it. Over the summer term, the Invicta Academy was set up by Anna Firth, a mother of three and Sevenoaks councillor, and Stephen James, a Folkestone teacher. It offers free online tuition in maths and English to Kentish children (and children of Kent) up to Year 11. Now it is going national, keeping its formula of a teacher plus an assistant in each group to ensure all the students are engaged.

If you’re a parent and you feel your child isn’t getting enough personal attention, book in. If you work in a primary school, and are struggling to find the time and resources to meet the new requirements, look them up: Invicta offer a free additional resource. If you’re an official in one of the teaching unions, stop treating Covid as an opportunity to bash the Tories. And if you’re an education minister (I know most of you read this column) don’t let this situation drag on past half term.

A month can seem like an eternity to a child; yet the disruption to our schools has now lasted for nearly a year. Some children will have a dent in their knowledge and development that they will never entirely hammer out. And all because of a disease which poses next to no threat to them. Enough is enough.
 

The lack of innovation in school level education is shockingly bad. Even in classrooms. Hannon has to pander to his right-wing audience and bring in the Unions, and sure there is an element of truth to his criticism. However, this is not a union-created issue. Unions' job is to protect teachers, that is all. If you care to look into how education is run in the UK, far more criticism can be levelled at the Department for Education. A monster of a Ministry. Its too big, too cumbersome, and too powerful. Ironic as the succession of Tory governments have sought to make schools run like little independent businesses. However, they answer solely to the Department for Education now. All 33,000 of them. Where there used to be guidance and support from local authorities, or input from organisations like BECTA (a former technology advice body just for schools), there is now just the Department for Education.

Why can't the UK Department for Education, be more agile? Why can't it a. look at best practice and quickly provide guidelines on remote learning? b. set up feedback to improve the guidelines and c. plan ahead?

Schools knew there may well be further lockdowns coming. The Department for Education stuck to government policy and did not entertain the possibility. Hence schools not having laptops for poorer kids etc which the Department for Education promised to provide.

So a typical Hannon piece then which has some value - identifies how things could and should be improved - but it is naive in its criticism. Neither identifying where the core problems lie or isolating real-world solutions.
 
The lack of innovation in school level education is shockingly bad. Even in classrooms. Hannon has to pander to his right-wing audience and bring in the Unions, and sure there is an element of truth to his criticism. However, this is not a union-created issue. Unions' job is to protect teachers, that is all. If you care to look into how education is run in the UK, far more criticism can be levelled at the Department for Education. A monster of a Ministry. Its too big, too cumbersome, and too powerful. Ironic as the succession of Tory governments have sought to make schools run like little independent businesses. However, they answer solely to the Department for Education now. All 33,000 of them. Where there used to be guidance and support from local authorities, or input from organisations like BECTA (a former technology advice body just for schools), there is now just the Department for Education.

Why can't the UK Department for Education, be more agile? Why can't it a. look at best practice and quickly provide guidelines on remote learning? b. set up feedback to improve the guidelines and c. plan ahead?

Schools knew there may well be further lockdowns coming. The Department for Education stuck to government policy and did not entertain the possibility. Hence schools not having laptops for poorer kids etc which the Department for Education promised to provide.

So a typical Hannon piece then which has some value - identifies how things could and should be improved - but it is naive in its criticism. Neither identifying where the core problems lie or isolating real-world solutions.

Easier to blame the ‘lefty’ teaching unions though - despite the fact they have been shown to be right in every aspect of their analysis during this pandemic so far.

Hanrooster was up to the same thing this morning on Marr and Sophie Ridge - it’s all the public’s fault, guv, nothing to do with the government’s tinkle-poor response since last January.
 
Back