EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’... | Page 228 | Vital Football

EU strategy to destroy the Chequers ‘agreement’...

MedwayModernist said:
We don't have spare capacity?
Northumberland is fucking empty mate
Click to expand...

You have made a very good point there, MM.

It would be very hard to describe the UK as being full up as areas like Northumberland do have a low population. It is obviously also why Sturgeon is quite happy for unlimited EU immigration to continue as Scotland is also similarly populated.

The problem is that, once in the UK, migrants have the freedom to go where they please and most do not seem to move on from the South East, certainly not beyond London.

I am sure that Kent already has the biggest mileage of motorway in the UK, and yet it still frequently grinds to a halt. House building in Kent Villages is turning them in to towns, only not with the commensurate infrastructure. A large proportion of my village sits on a flood plain but that has not stopped hundreds of extra houses being built within the last 2 to 3 years. With the increase in concrete and tarmac it is only a matter of time before we get the same problem that the Somerset levels had a few years back.

If it is was legal, we could perhaps have a system where, beyond a certain agreed number, only those with permanent addresses outside of London and the South East could be granted work permits.

Otherwise, maybe some form of incentive system could result in a better geographic spread?

The pressure down here definitely needs to be released and, although EU migration is not the only reason for it, it is a contributory factor.
 
'A site has been proposed for a garden village of 5,000 homes just south of Faversham.

The 319-hectare plot of land at Ashford Road, stretching from the M2 to Sheldwich, is one of four in Swale being considered for major development in order to meet housing targets.

A second site in Faversham is also under consideration, consisting of 131 hectares of land belonging to the Duchy of Cornwall’s royal estate in Selling Road between the A2 and the M2, which would include 2,500 homes.

This would increase the number of people living in the Faversham area by 15,000 - doubling the population of Faversham. Madness in my opinion when many areas of the country don't have any population pressures.
 
GillsBluenose said:
Great in theory but how would you enforce that caveat? Would you take their passport away? Control their National Insurance number?

What if they decide to start a family as soon as they finish their training? Or for instance just marry someone with a high salary and decide not to work full time.

I suppose you could resurrect their student debt but isn't that only payable if they earn over a certain amount? Even working part time should avoid that.

Maybe you could try to claw back any salary they were paid during training.

It's just hard to see as workable or enforceable.
Click to expand...

This is already the case with many NHS funded training, if you leave early without a good reason then you have to pay back the training.
It was also policy for many years. The issue is that there are not enough training places.
The people with adequate training entry requirements far outway the number of positions available e.g. only 6 child psychotherapy doctorate training places a year with over 100 people waiting.

If it is so bad that we need to bring ready trained people in from overseas then why have the training levels never been raised by successive governments since the early seventies, maybe its cheaper lol.
 
A garden village in the garden of England or a rustic cottage at Carter Bar? You decide (hint, there's no bar at Carter Bar).
 
Jerryattrick said:
The people with adequate training entry requirements far outway the number of positions available e.g. only 6 child psychotherapy doctorate training places a year with over 100 people waiting.

If it is so bad that we need to bring ready trained people in from overseas then why have the training levels never been raised by successive governments since the early seventies, maybe its cheaper lol.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I am certainly no apologist for the short sighted approach of successive governments.

That is why I am always cynical when there is a tax cut of any kind. My first thought is always what are they going to cut next in order to pay for this one? That is certainly always the approach of the Tories who buy so many votes by claiming to be the party working to reduce the "tax burden" while starving local authorities of funds. At what cost?
 
"The problem is that, once in the UK, migrants have the freedom to go where they please and most do not seem to move on from the South East, certainly not beyond London."

They do, Crewe has the highest proportion of Poles for instance. Boston is home to a large number, who never entered via London.

People move to join friends and family and all the major citries are home to particular groups of people, Somalis in Sheffield for instance.

I struggle with this apply for asylum at point of entry refrain. This presumably means that Britain would only ever take the few, who board a plane direct from their original homeland to our shores. Quite bizarre.

Men of fighting age, we'll be on to women of child bearing age and so on until we get to those not worth keeping alive soon.

Fear not brave Brexiteers the migrants will keep coming but they will become browner and less Christian.

Let's not be tethered to planet earth in our fantasies.... Kent is not very high in the total of motorway miles. Manchester is way ahead of us. There are queues and congestion in other parts of this country and the South East is not uniquely blighted. It's the modern world and it's all over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motorways_in_the_United_Kingdom
 
Last edited:
GillsBluenose said:
Great in theory but how would you enforce that caveat? Would you take their passport away? Control their National Insurance number?

What if they decide to start a family as soon as they finish their training? Or for instance just marry someone with a high salary and decide not to work full time.

I suppose you could resurrect their student debt but isn't that only payable if they earn over a certain amount? Even working part time should avoid that.

Maybe you could try to claw back any salary they were paid during training.

It's just hard to see as workable or enforceable.
Click to expand...

Up until the 1980s, about 1 in 7 went to uni. Now it’s about 1 in 2.

It is an economic reality that with this many people going in to tertiary education, student grants for everyone were unsustainable.

It is fair that those who are the primary beneficiaries of education have to pay for it.

Hence, I have no real issue with the Student Loan. And, since repayment is contingent on your earnings, it acts more as a tax on those who earn th


always gets a lot of negative press but it’s not a conventional loan because it is contingent on the amount you earn. And it is equitable for those
Arthurly said:
Government announces £65 fee for settled status then rescinds the fee the following day. Do they know that they're doing ??
Click to expand...

No.
 
Trashbat said:
Up until the 1980s, about 1 in 7 went to uni. Now it’s about 1 in 2.

It is an economic reality that with this many people going in to tertiary education, student grants for everyone were unsustainable.

It is fair that those who are the primary beneficiaries of education have to pay for it.

Hence, I have no real issue with the Student Loan. And, since repayment is contingent on your earnings, it acts more as a tax on those who earn th


always gets a lot of negative press but it’s not a conventional loan because it is contingent on the amount you earn. And it is equitable for those


No.
Click to expand...

Yet we decide not to train doctors etc lol.
 
F EU rules.

France just fined Google $56m under the EU data protection law. Lucky we are leaving the EU and their terrible laws lol.

Under GDPR, companies are required to gain the user’s “genuine consent” before collecting their information, which means making consent an explicitly opt-in process that’s easy for people to withdraw. What a f terrible law!
 
Last edited:
Jerryattrick said:
F EU rules.

France just fined Google $56m under the EU data protection law. Lucky we are leaving the EU and their terrible laws lol.

Under GDPR, companies are required to gain the user’s “genuine consent” before collecting their information, which means making consent an explicitly opt-in process that’s easy for people to withdraw. What a f terrible law!
Click to expand...

The EU fined Google €2.4B in 2017. They didn't pay that either lol
 
LSB2 said:
The EU fined Google €2.4B in 2017. They didn't pay that either lol
Click to expand...

In theory the new law which came into force in may 18 has closed the loopholes but as you say dont hold your breath.
Main problem is that the US does not have strong data laws and is even talking about charging for using the internet.
 
Arthurly said:
Government announces £65 fee for settled status then rescinds the fee the following day. Do they know that they're doing ??
Click to expand...
So, people who have paid will now have to claim a refund and the website hasn't been updated. Plus, the Govt has only provided the APP on Androids overlooking the fact that the majority own iPhones
 
Many people complaining about it also have existing nationalisation/naturalisation laws that they could have followed so its obviously not been explained very well.

Also as WK says, why just an android app. If you cannot do an ios one then why bother at all, all phones, PCs, or tablets have a browser.
 
Last edited:
Jerryattrick said:
Many people complaining about it also have existing nationalisation/naturalisation laws that they could have followed so its obviously not been explained very well.

Also as WK says, why just an android app. If you cannot do an ios one then why bother at all, all phones, PCs, or tablets have a browser.
Click to expand...
As someone said yesterday, the most annoying three words used to be 'rail replacement bus' now it's 'government IT project'.
 
Public sector contracts for i.t are generally given to large consultancies that always go late and over budget
Where they are inhouse they only employ contractors that have worked in public sector before so basically they continue engaging the same people that went late and over budget before.
 
One for VG. Sky News report. Really sounds like we’re improving border security.

“Border Force planning for a possible "no-deal" Brexit warns the government of "significant outbound queues" at the Eurostar and a "degradation of border security".
In a leaked presentation, the key Home Office agency admits for the first time it will not be able to distinguish between EU residents and new EU arrivals.

It says there is the possibility of "disruption", "loss of data" and an "additional clandestine threat" emerging from less co-operation with EU nations.

The no-deal plan - which would come in if the UK leaves the EU with no agreements on a future relationship - also assumes that UK citizens will no longer have access to "e-gates" when travelling to the EU, but EU citizens coming to the UK will be allowed access.”
 
Jerryattrick said:
Public sector contracts for i.t are generally given to large consultancies that always go late and over budget
Where they are inhouse they only employ contractors that have worked in public sector before so basically they continue engaging the same people that went late and over budget before.
Click to expand...
The other real problems are that [1] they never spec the task properly and [2] they then change their minds on everything.
 
Last edited:
Therealwaldo said:
One for VG. Sky News report. Really sounds like we’re improving border security.

“Border Force planning for a possible "no-deal" Brexit warns the government of "significant outbound queues" at the Eurostar and a "degradation of border security".
In a leaked presentation, the key Home Office agency admits for the first time it will not be able to distinguish between EU residents and new EU arrivals.

It says there is the possibility of "disruption", "loss of data" and an "additional clandestine threat" emerging from less co-operation with EU nations.

The no-deal plan - which would come in if the UK leaves the EU with no agreements on a future relationship - also assumes that UK citizens will no longer have access to "e-gates" when travelling to the EU, but EU citizens coming to the UK will be allowed access.”
Click to expand...

Yeah , I saw that. Sky's Political Editor , Faisal Islam , telling us Brits scary stories !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.