Westminstenders: Boom. The Brexit Backlash starts to hit.

[RedToothBrush]

So it turns out that immigration figures that stated students overstayed were wrong. The home office knew this. And sat on it. Since 2015. Under Theresa.

That smells a bit doesn't it?

Imagine it: "Let's do lunch Paul. I'll cover up and give you a nice immigration story for your front page. In return, crown me PM."

Then tonight BOOM. Labour look like they have made a move. Soft very swishy Brexit. Even less brexity than the Beano Brexit that the Tories have been trying to announce on the quiet over the summer whilst Brexiteers are on holiday.

amp.theguardian.com/global/2017/aug/26/labour-calls-for-lengthy-transitional-period-post-brexit
Labour makes dramatic shift on Brexit and single market
Party opens clear divide with Tories, with support for free movement and paying into EU budgets for up to four years

Labour is to announce a dramatic policy shift by backing continued membership of the EU single market beyond March 2019, when Britain leaves the EU, establishing a clear dividing line with the Tories on Brexit for the first time.

In a move that positions it decisively as the party of “soft Brexit”, Labour will support full participation in the single market and customs union during a lengthy “transitional period” that it believes could last between two and four years after the day of departure, it is to announce on Sunday.

This will mean that under a Labour government the UK would continue to abide by the EU’s free movement rules, accept the jurisdiction of the European court of justice on trade and economic issues, and pay into the EU budget for a period of years after Brexit, in the hope of lessening the shock of leaving to the UK economy. In a further move that will delight many pro-EU Labour backers, Jeremy Corbyn’s party will also leave open the option of the UK remaining a member of the customs union and single market for good, beyond the end of the transitional period.

Why would Labour suddenly do this? It's not just because of the youth vote. What about their leave voters?

Faisal Islam on the subject:
2. On Labour Leavers is very very interesting and involves quite the psephological judgement re the election....
...the calculation appears to be that Labour Leave voters had the chance to vote for Theresa May's brand of Brexit, and bar 5 seats, said No
Was that because Lableave voters were already signalled "hard Brexit"? Or many millions such voters much more concerned about other things?

Have Labour been polling their voters on this?

Theresa has also apparently set her sell by date: Friday 30th August 2019.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-sets-date-shell-quit-11061894.amp
Theresa May sets date she'll quit as Prime Minister - giving herself time to see Britain through Brexit

The longer the transition and the squishier it gets, the more the more you wonder.

Mr Barnier will enjoy his coffee and newspapers tomorrow as he prepares for round two of Brexit talks starting next week.

The question on his mind most: Will David Davis remember to bring his notes this time?

because candidates have to give notice to their current employer when they are offered the job.

As a rule, the best candidates aren't tied up with troublesome contracts and dictate their own terms. Almost diametrically opposed to the sort of person the civil service tends to recruit.

(on a related note, has anyone else been following the fascinating discussion of the new internet-regulation laws, which seem to suggest the government can force someone to work for them against their will ?)

As a rule, the best candidates aren't tied up with troublesome contracts and dictate their own terms.

Or at least, are released almost immediately, because they no longer have a commitment to the old employer, so may as well be gone. Looking at the salary on offer, it wasn't exactly top notch, was it? Which in part explains why they can't get recruits.

Bear the 7 or 8 is for England including London and the South East upwards distortion (London and South East account for about 1/3 of England by population and so this is significant). Scotland, Wales and N Ireland are around 5.

So the average isn't 4 or 5 then:

Light relief: Brexit A Titanic Disaster
(Democrats UK twitter is very lively today)

howabout The London property market is distorted by the top end which has seen a lot of overseas buyers/ investment but is cooling now, and will do further since the Chinese government's crackdown on corporations investing in the London property market. However the stagnation is also at the lower and middle ends and reaches right out into the Home Counties. It isn't that prices are falling, there is a lack of supply as well as demand, since people just are not moving, even those moving out of the country are putting their properties into the rental market rather than risk the current market. Remember that the last time prices fell in London it was related to the fact that mortgage lenders had been over lending and to too many risky borrowers. That is not the case now so any freefall in prices will be the result of people losing their jobs and damage to the London economy and that hardly seems a price worth paying.

As to the banks contingency plans, they certainly were not part of their strategic direction prior to the Brexit vote, the frenzy of planning activity has been since. Whilst the changes are not all directly related to loss of passporting eg our move East, they are related to shifting activities out of London whose brand has been severely tarnished by the vote and consequent failures of sound economic governance. Whilst the wheeler dealers and hedge funds may see opportunity global corporations want stability and a sound economic environment for their activities.

As to the study of EU postgrads KPMG is not given to hyperbole, it isn't good for their brand, but they will be very familiar with the strategic concern about the ability to recruit the brightest and the best. In common with the rest of the big 4 being global is a strategic priority and as a result they aim to recruit without regard to nationality, though greatly hampered by May and her deterrents to immigration.

These Democrats are fiercely moderate, worth checking their twitter feed.

Or at least, are released almost immediately, because they no longer have a commitment to the old employer, so may as well be gone. Looking at the salary on offer, it wasn't exactly top notch, was it? Which in part explains why they can't get recruits.

Never say never, but on discovering that merely by an accident of birth I would be paid £2,000 less than a fellow student if I were to work in the civil service, I made a vow that I wouldn't consider it again.

I imagine that rule has gone for the purposes of not getting sued, but from contacts with various government departments over the years, it's still going strong in spirit.

That said, P.J. O'Rouke was (rightly) contemptuous when he learned that it paid more to work for the US government than for yourself (Parliament of Whores).

The attraction of the Labour party for me at the moment is that they are the only people putting forward the argument that I believe in, namely that the country is in dire need of serious longterm investment (in healthcare, education, transport infrastructure, ...) and that after 35 years of that investment failing to trickle down from the magic money tree that is private wealth acquired through entrepreneurship, we need to reconsider whether old-fashioned approaches like raising taxes or borrowing might serve us better in the long run. This is not to say I fully endorse that manifesto in the last election (re-nationalisation of the Royal Mail seems particularly pointless; but let us not forget that it was St Vince who sold it off way below the market rate in the first place...)

Very neatly phrased. I'm lukewarm on Corbyn, not least because I don't trust him on the EU issue due to Lexitism for much of his career, but this is basically why I voted Labour at the last GE. And almost certainly will at the next one, given today's policy change.

Olenna A few years back.... exactly, and partly a result of the governments mishandling of the introduction of the free market to the education sector.

Now we have a deterrent immigration system for overseas students, and on top of that we have actually wrongfully deported and even detained 48000 students. The result is a very significant damage to the education sector, eg the halving of the number of students coming here from India. You do realise that as well as the loss of soft power some big name universities with international reputations could well be casualties in coming years and these policies towards overseas students will be one of the nails in the coffin. And all because people harbour outdated and misguided perceptions and perspectives like yours.......

Senator - It would be if it weren't for the years and years of Labour government we had in the midst of this 35years you mention! Was that not the labour government that over spent and over borrowed to the extent that there was 'nothing left' when the Tories came in! Short memories.

(re-nationalisation of the Royal Mail seems particularly pointless; but let us not forget that it was St Vince who sold it off way below the market rate in the first place...) We have had this debate, Royal Mail is now trading at exactly the price that was envisaged. Personally with very detailed knowledge of it's economics and markets, I think that there is no long term future for a privatised Royal Mail with a Universal Service Obligation, ultimately that will have to go and rural areas will be getting their post from counters / delivery offices or that service is nationalied

Not really, corcory. Whatever else New Labour did, they certainly didn't implement the sort of policies referred to above. Additionally, Conservative austerity has been ideology driven. You can agree with it on principle or disagree, that's fine, but the idea that they had no choice because Labour overspent is rather over-simplistic and naïve.

Also I should've left out the PO bit, I'm not arsed about that.

Red you're amazing.

I'm praying this change of tack from Labour can save the UK from brexit. Praying.

Austerity measures are Not the result of labour overspending but because the government bailed the banking system out to the tune of billions and billions.

Link to the ONS house price affordability criteria for England and Wales (latest version, 2016).

Senator Nobody is arsed about the Royal Mail (as opposed to Postman Pat or the Village Postmistress who are a beloved part of the Little England hankered after by Tory backbenchers, or in the case of the other side of the house, the CWU ). That is why it is in such a mess......

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3017490-Really-fucked-off-with-Euro-exchange-rate?trending=1

Thanks for that link random, so between 7 and 8 times income then, not 4 to 5.

Yes there are a few places below that but there's a direct correlation between those and lack of opportunities for work etc.

I know it's a minor example but it continues to frustrate me that leavers are peddling absolute nonsense dressed up as 'facts'.

And all because people harbour outdated and misguided perceptions and perspectives like yours....... Eh? Care to elaborate on what you think my outdated and misguided perceptions are, whatwouldrondo?

LurkingHusband - what was this "accident of birth" that would have seen you paid less? I'm intrigued!

Like I said, and you are choosing to continually ignore Bear, the 7 to 8 includes the London and S East distortion, but since you are happy as you were.

Also as I said earlier the multiple for 1997 was 3.6 per the ONS link.

Some interesting ONS facts and figures on migration. Still not seeing where KPMG as interpreted by the Guinard are getting to 1 m since by my calc 37% of EU14 +8% of EU8 and 11% of EU2 in high skill professions only comes to a total of about 450,000. Feel free to dissect my off the cuff calcs.

visual.ons.gov.uk/migration-the-european-union-and-work-how-much-do-you-really-know/

what was this "accident of birth" that would have seen you paid less? I'm intrigued!

Being 20, not 21.

Bear Scottish cities generally have price to earnings ratios of between 5 and 6, with only Stirling being below 5 (at 3.7):

www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/globalassets/documents/media/press-releases/bank-of-scotland/2017/home-affordability-deteriorates-for-fourth-year-in-scotlands-cities.pdf

Changing the subject ever so slightly, but this article by Simon Jenkins, who purportedly vote Remain, is symptomatic of the narrow-minded Anglo-centred arrogant approach that has led us to this pickle.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/25/languages-exams-test-league-tables-schools-fall-pupils

If you go by his logic, then we should stop all education for the "masses" beyond the 3 Rs of Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic, as there's no real need to know about algebra, the periodic table, history who learns anything from the past anyway?, literature why bother reading books or poetry?, the laws of Physics to name just a few topics off the top of my head as our young people except for the elite creamed off to go to Eton are just going to end up as factory call centre fodder

But there again, there are some of the rich Brexiteers who would love that approach. Why waste money on the undeserving young?

Urgh - that Simon Jenkins article is awful. Presumably churned out from the side of a swimming pool without really engaging his brain.

Languages are so so important for our children to learn. Not least, I learnt so much about how English works from learning other languages. We cannot possibly aspire to continue to be a global leader whilst also thinking that our children only need to know one language

howabout it's not just London and the SE with high price to earnings ratios - its the whole of the south of England, including the south west, the majority of the Midlands and East Anglia, large swathes of Wales. Powys, for example, is very rural and has a ratio of 7.2.