Politics, politics, politics

[Gutter Boy]

Sections of the UK car industry face extinction unless the UK stays in the EU customs union, the president of the CBI has said.

Paul Dreschler also said there was "zero evidence" that trade deals outside the EU would provide any economic benefit to Britain.

He blamed a "tidal wave of ideology" for the government's Brexit approach.

But the government said it was "focused on delivering a Brexit that works for the whole of the UK"

That is based on the impossible premise that the EU would put up tariffs against us, while we wouldn't on them. In reality in such a situation we'd equally disincentivise imported German cars, so the UK consumer would buy these Japanese-British ones instead.

 

[SpurMeUp]

That is based on the impossible premise that the EU would put up tariffs against us, while we wouldn't on them. In reality in such a situation we'd equally disincentivise imported German cars, so the UK consumer would buy these Japanese-British ones instead.

If you are outside the customs union, there will likely be disruption, beit tariffs or customs checks on car parts or both. But what does the president of the CBI know? It's not his business to understand how UK commerce works. If you still don't believe him and the people making cars, you could simply look at the current trends and levels of investment into the UK car industry post Brexit vote... Land Rover production is being moved into the EU and there has been a massive cut in investment into the UKs car manufacturing. This is from a year ago:

Investment in the UK car industry has fallen to just £322m in the first half of 2017, in a sign that companies are delaying or cancelling spending ahead of the UK leaving the EU. Last year £1.66bn was invested in the auto sector, more than 30 per cent down from £2.5bn in 2015, as carmakers and their suppliers delayed non-essential investment following the EU referendum in June 2016.

https://www.ft.com/content/0c3427b2-5ce1-11e7-9bc8-8055f264aa8b

The facts don't support the Leave rhetoric. It's sad - as I like revolution and change - but true.

 

[scaramanga]

We could log every EU citizen who comes into the UK and if they are not working within a month or whatever, we can deport them.

No we can't.

As with many of the things you've posted in this thread, this point was discussed, evidence was shown and quite the opposite proven to be true. Yet, once again, you pretend it hasn't happened and continue with baseless statements. IIRC., I quoted the EU law directly when this was last brought up, and it is nothing like you've described.

 

[Gutter Boy]

If you are outside the customs union, there will likely be disruption, beit tariffs or customs checks on car parts or both. But what does the president of the CBI know? It's not his business to understand how UK commerce works. If you still don't believe him and the people making cars, you could simply look at the current trends and levels of investment into the UK car industry post Brexit vote... Land Rover production is being moved into the EU and there has been a massive cut in investment into the UKs car manufacturing. This is from a year ago:

Investment in the UK car industry has fallen to just £322m in the first half of 2017, in a sign that companies are delaying or cancelling spending ahead of the UK leaving the EU. Last year £1.66bn was invested in the auto sector, more than 30 per cent down from £2.5bn in 2015, as carmakers and their suppliers delayed non-essential investment following the EU referendum in June 2016.

https://www.ft.com/content/0c3427b2-5ce1-11e7-9bc8-8055f264aa8b

The facts don't support the Leave rhetoric. It's sad - as I like revolution and change - but true.

Or does the head of the CBI complainbecause Honda are complaining to him that they will have to employ mackems - who want holiday, pay and lunch - rather than being able to import a Romanian workforce who will largely make do without them?

The car industry problems are all to do with the diesel scandal, which was actually caused by the EU (actively ignoring NO because the Germans and French had banked on diesel, while the Americans had gone for petrol)

 

[SpurMeUp]

No we can't.

As with many of the things you've posted in this thread, this point was discussed, evidence was shown and quite the opposite proven to be true. Yet, once again, you pretend it hasn't happened and continue with baseless statements. IIRC., I quoted the EU law directly when this was last brought up, and it is nothing like you've described.

Are you saying EU states can not log visitors into their country? I remember Milo had to register at the local police station when he was in an EU country. Are you saying that if someone is not working for a period of time, there isn't an EU law saying they can be sent home?

Why be so coy with your evidence? If you have a point to make, make it!

 

[SpurMeUp]

Or does the head of the CBI complainbecause Honda are complaining to him that they will have to employ mackems - who want holiday, pay and lunch - rather than being able to import a Romanian workforce who will largely make do without them?

The car industry problems are all to do with the diesel scandal, which was actually caused by the EU (actively ignoring NO because the Germans and French had banked on diesel, while the Americans had gone for petrol)

Land Rovers were made in Birmingham. They won't be anymore. They will be made in the EU. 2.6billion used to be invested into UK car manufacturing. It's now a fraction of this figure. That equates directly to jobs, commerce, taxes, wealth. It would be better to say, okay Brexit has serious challenges for our economy, but not everything is about money....then focus on the positive things that Brexit could deliver. What are they again? It's certainly not prosperity for the UK. A few biz people who don't have to follow EU regulations might make a mint, but most will lose out, like the people who used to build Land Rover cars.

 

[scaramanga]

Are you saying EU states can not log visitors into their country? I remember Milo had to register at the local police station when he was in an EU country. Are you saying that if someone is not working for a period of time, there isn't an EU law saying they can be sent home?

Why be so coy with your evidence? If you have a point to make, make it!

That's precisely the issue - this point has been made, thoroughly discussed and evidence shown. This happens repeatedly in this thread - I show figures/evidence to back up claims and then 5 pages later you start again as if it had never been discussed. Much like the EU - it appears to be a tactic of simply repeating a point and ignoring other evidence until it becomes the new truth.

Have a search back through this thread - it absolutely isn't the case that we can quickly remove an EU citizen, neither is it particularly easy nor clear if we can remove them after a long period of not working. I quoted and linked the EU law directly on this thread.

 

[scaramanga]

Land Rovers were made in Birmingham. They won't be anymore. They will be made in the EU. 2.6billion used to be invested into UK car manufacturing. It's now a fraction of this figure. That equates directly to jobs, commerce, taxes, wealth. It would be better to say, okay Brexit has serious challenges for our economy, but not everything is about money....then focus on the positive things that Brexit could deliver. What are they again? It's certainly not prosperity for the UK. A few biz people who don't have to follow EU regulations might make a mint, but most will lose out, like the people who used to build Land Rover cars.

Things should be made in the cheapest place they can be made. With cars, the UK hasn't been that place for a long time.

 

[SpurMeUp]

That's precisely the issue - this point has been made, thoroughly discussed and evidence shown. This happens repeatedly in this thread - I show figures/evidence to back up claims and then 5 pages later you start again as if it had never been discussed. Much like the EU - it appears to be a tactic of simply repeating a point and ignoring other evidence until it becomes the new truth.

Have a search back through this thread - it absolutely isn't the case that we can quickly remove an EU citizen, neither is it particularly easy nor clear if we can remove them after a long period of not working. I quoted and linked the EU law directly on this thread.

From what your saying, its ambiguous. So why doesn't our government give it a bash? Interpret the law to suit our goals. And if the EU think its not legal they can question it. Like you, I can't be bothered to trall back through this monolith thread.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Some highlights from that page:

"Job seekers have the right to reside for a period exceeding six months (CoJ, Case C-292/89 Antonissen) without having to meet any conditions if they continue to seek employment in the host Member State and have a ‘genuine chance’ of finding work; during this time they cannot be expelled. "

"The status of first-time job seekers is currently the subject of intense discussion, as they do not have a worker status to retain. In Cases C-138/02 Collins and C-22/08 Vatsouras, the CoJ found that such EU citizens had a right of equal access to a financial benefit intended to facilitate access to the labour market for job seekers"

"Article 14(4)(b) of the directive prohibits the expulsion of unemployed EU citizens as long as they continue to seek employment,"

" the mere fact of claiming a benefit is not sufficient to prove that a person is not self-sufficient," - this is with regard to deciding whether an immigrant is a burden on the state or not

Add to that the following conditions required to deport an EU citizen:

• Public policy or public security decisions to deport someone should be “proportionate”, and based exclusively on the behaviour of the individual involved
• Previous criminal convictions aren’t on their own a valid reason to deport someone
• The person’s behaviour must be a “genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”
• Countries can’t deport a person just to make an example of them

Then add the fact that each of these cases would likely be taken all the way through the courts by some Huffington Post type and you have an incredibly expensive way of removing unwanted immigrants.

On top of that we have the payment of child benefit to children who don't even live in this country.


Now I'm all for freedom of movement - I think it should be in place globally, not just in the EU. My business (so, by extension, me) benefits very well from freedom of movement and the correcting effect it has on lowly skilled pay in this country. Without it my business would be looking at a far smaller profit, which means I'd have to cut down on the number of hookers n coke parties I have a month.

That said, none of the above look at all like desirable outcomes for a country at the upper end of the financial scale in a "trading bloc". The whole idea of treating all EU citizens equally is just preposterous. If they want to work in the UK and are demonstrably better than an anyone else applying for that job, then great. fudge paying out benefits though - that's not free trade, that's political union.

Page 604

 

[SpurMeUp]

Things should be made in the cheapest place they can be made. With cars, the UK hasn't been that place for a long time.

Yet private profit making car companies have been keen to invest in UK production. We have great engineering knowledge, a well educated workforce and until recently stability and access to 550 million consumers without tariffs or impediment. A huge attractive open market.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Page 604

Are you indexing this thread!? Impressive.

"Job seekers have the right to reside for a period exceeding six months (CoJ, Case C-292/89 Antonissen) without having to meet any conditions if they continue to seek employment in the host Member State and have a ‘genuine chance’ of finding work; during this time they cannot be expelled. "

"The status of first-time job seekers is currently the subject of intense discussion, as they do not have a worker status to retain. In Cases C-138/02 Collins and C-22/08 Vatsouras, the CoJ found that such EU citizens had a right of equal access to a financial benefit intended to facilitate access to the labour market for job seekers"

It is hardly the conclusive cut and dry tight refutation that Scara has made it out to be. Would you disagree, that the UK could do more to track and potentially control EU migration where people are just claiming benefits? If Hungry or wherever could get Milo to check in at the police station each week, why can't we? Why is everything the EUs fault, and none of it the UK Government - who control almost everything in the UK. Does the EU control UK taxes, education, health or social services? The EU is very limited. Why exaggerate the EUs effect on us? Maybe so we can blame all the UKs issues on the EU, rather than take responsibility at home to address?

Or put another way, what would you expect to see improved and addressed with no EU?

 

[Gutter Boy]

Land Rovers were made in Birmingham. They won't be anymore. They will be made in the EU. 2.6billion used to be invested into UK car manufacturing. It's now a fraction of this figure. That equates directly to jobs, commerce, taxes, wealth. It would be better to say, okay Brexit has serious challenges for our economy, but not everything is about money....then focus on the positive things that Brexit could deliver. What are they again? It's certainly not prosperity for the UK. A few biz people who don't have to follow EU regulations might make a mint, but most will lose out, like the people who used to build Land Rover cars.

Or you could say that before the EU we had a strong British car industry. Now we are hostages to foreign owners who have no value for place, and are just looking to squeeze every drop of profit, however they can. Brexit will allow us to have an industrial strategy again - maybe even restart our own car industry

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I used the search funciton, thats the first thing I found relevant. Scara will tell you if its what he meant.

 

[scaramanga]

Are you indexing this thread!? Impressive.

"Job seekers have the right to reside for a period exceeding six months (CoJ, Case C-292/89 Antonissen) without having to meet any conditions if they continue to seek employment in the host Member State and have a ‘genuine chance’ of finding work; during this time they cannot be expelled. "

"The status of first-time job seekers is currently the subject of intense discussion, as they do not have a worker status to retain. In Cases C-138/02 Collins and C-22/08 Vatsouras, the CoJ found that such EU citizens had a right of equal access to a financial benefit intended to facilitate access to the labour market for job seekers"

It is hardly the conclusive cut and dry tight refutation that Scara has made it out to be. Would you disagree, that the UK could do more to track and potentially control EU migration where people are just claiming benefits? If Hungry or wherever could get Milo to check in at the police station each week, why can't we? Why is everything the EUs fault, and none of it the UK Government - who control almost everything in the UK. Does the EU control UK taxes, education, health or social services? The EU is very limited. Why exaggerate the EUs effect on us? Maybe so we can blame all the UKs issues on the EU, rather than take responsibility at home to address?

Or put another way, what would you expect to see improved and addressed with no EU?

I'd say it's very clear.

The EU puts the burden of proof on the member state that the person the state wishes to deport or deprive of benefits is clearly detrimental to that state. That person simply needs to show that they are seeking (not necessarily gaining) employment in order to remain indefinitely. That's a very low bar for anyone to pass.

As someone who has had to trawl through and apply huge amounts of EU legislation, the way judgement will fall in this case is clear - the case history points to that.

Yes we can make EU migrants show ID cards (as long as we implement them for UK citizens too - not an appealing idea) and yes, we can make them turn up at police stations should we so choose. What we can't do is deport them or refuse them entry at will, nor can we refuse them benefits.

 

[SpurMeUp]

I'd say it's very clear.

The EU puts the burden of proof on the member state that the person the state wishes to deport or deprive of benefits is clearly detrimental to that state. That person simply needs to show that they are seeking (not necessarily gaining) employment in order to remain indefinitely. That's a very low bar for anyone to pass.

As someone who has had to trawl through and apply huge amounts of EU legislation, the way judgement will fall in this case is clear - the case history points to that.

Yes we can make EU migrants show ID cards (as long as we implement them for UK citizens too - not an appealing idea) and yes, we can make them turn up at police stations should we so choose. What we can't do is deport them or refuse them entry at will, nor can we refuse them benefits.

That's very deafeatest. I would act first think later on this one.

1. Find any layabouts who are clearly not trying to find work. Don't give benifits and send em home. Big political cache for whoever does that.

2. "The status of first-time job seekers is currently the subject of intense discussion, as they do not have a worker status to retain." Use this premise - first-time in the UK job seekers do not have worker status full stop. They don't qualify. Act on this, and let someone try and prove it wrong. Would take years to prove one way or the other. Other EU nations like Hungry would be all over it too, massively supporting the UK.

3. Having a 'genuine chance' to find work is also extremely ambiguous and open to interpretation by a member state. For example, you could say that not speaking English precludes a person from having a genuine chance of finding work in a certain geographic area.

There is plenty the UK *could do. Just not the leadership to do it. It's like some geezer who blames his own malase on everything but his own actions. At some point you have to deal with the hand you have and take action not blame everyone else.

On top of these more draconian measures the UK government could do a lot more to educate and develop Brits so they can get better employment. The UK could also address non-EU imigration - which is the majority of immigration. Or....we could sit back do nothing and blame Brussels.

 

[milo]

This thread is worth a court of minutes of your time

https://twitter.com/x/status/1007360551981379585

 

[Baleforce]

Surely we can just use all that extra sovereignty instead of these silly foreign isotopes?

 

[Trixster]

A tad out of context with the current ramblings in the thread, but have they decided anything yet for UK citizens living in the EU with spouses whom have the family member of EU citizen card? I travel back n forth to see the family and after all this debacle has concluded then I would still like to do so with the missus in tow.

I can't find anything substantial that provides any answers, but to be honest news in general around most things is still flimsy at best. :/

 

[Baleforce]

Wow, Brexit dividend for the NHS...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1008224284945403904