Westministenders: BAH HUMBUG said Mr Rees-Mogg

[RedToothBrush]

"At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge Rees-Mogg, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."

"Are there no prisons hostels?"

"Plenty of prisons hostels..."

"And the Union workhouses foodbanks." demanded Scrooge Jacob. "Are they still in operation?"

"Both very busy, sir..."

"Those who are badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die," said Scrooge ^Rees-Mogg, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

He continued "Besides I do not believe that anyone would die without them. I think Theresa is right, there are many complex reasons why nurses go to food banks. The real reason for the rise in numbers is that people know that they are there and Labour deliberately didn't tell them. To have charitable support given by people voluntarily to support their fellow citizens I think is rather uplifting and shows what a good, compassionate country we are"

------------------------

This thread is dedicated to Mrs8 and anyone else who is working to make life just a little better in the difficult circumstances that ALL politicians are currently doing their best to ignore (despite what they profess).

No Deal = even more poverty and destitution.

MERRY CHRISTMAS & HERES HOPING FOR A HAPPIER NEW YEAR
especially to those of you, who might be having a tough time or facing real uncertainity.

I guess what I want to understand is that for decades certain ' news' papers have been brainwashing voters that relinquishing EU membership is the only way to resolve their ( misplaced) immigration concerns. The brainwashing paid off, the vote happened.

The press should now be delivering to certain parts of their readership by saying " Well done - these are the Last boats to arrive- all this ends on March 29 th"

Why are the press not saying this?

{As an anti-immigration tactic, crashing the economy so we can’t afford a social safety net and public services and are returned to Victorian times might be successful long term strategy to deter migrants but a tad nihilistic for most of the population.}
If it is anti 'illegal' immigrants, the ones fleeing an actual war zone and starvation, then the UK has a long way to sink before it gets 'unattractive'.

The 'immigrant' boats are of course not carrying Europeans, as they would have a passport and come on the ferry.

My post was a belated one written last night in response to Sos's paean to the resilience of the poor and exhortation to us to mitigate the negatives of Brexit

Listening to/reading the news this morning, like others on here I am that we are spending all this money and effort to stop the harm of a self inflicted action No, strike that: it is not "We" It is the UK Government, because it is not being done in my name

Of course 1tis the EU arrivals come on a plane, the Eurostar or a ferry. Will seeing the boat immigration attempt make the penny start to drop, especially for any Leavers?

Boats like this -carrying non EU citizens who are desperate to find refuge will continue, regardless of the U.K.s EU membership.

The racist element in the Leave camp, which probably swung the ref, voted to police beneficial apples because they don't like pears.

Also at least BBC reporting has now shifted. £108 million on ferries- why wasn't that on the side of the spin bus?

UK to spend £108m on no-deal ferries www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46704522

I am really please that

£46.6m goes to the French Brittany Ferries

£47.3m to Danish shipping firm DFDS

I wonder if that's the tip of the iceberg too as the additional crossings are only equivalent to about 10% of existing traffic across the Dover strait. So the half a million tonnes a month in extra capacity really needs to be much more.

Wonder if the Tory right have invested in these EU based shipping firms?

Of course the real question about the ferries is 'what are they doing'?
All the transport that is necessary is happening now and has been for years with well honed delivery schedules. Why do they need 'extra' capacity when the whole thing is a paperwork and payments exercise.
The physical transportation is fine, it is the documentation that is 'wrong'.
If you have a car and the road tax is out of date, do you keep taking the bus or do you sort out the road tax?
With the ferries, the issue won't jut be ferries (which isn't an issue) but getting trucks and drivers suitably reorganised in terms of the paperwork. All the transport systems are already working.

In documents outlining the agreements, the DfT states that an "unforeseeable" situation of "extreme urgency" meant there was no time for the contracts to be put out to tender .

This situation is not "unforeseeable" It was and is entirely foreseeable And the date has been known for oooh, 1 year and 9 months. So it is hardly an unknown "urgent" event - unless of course you are incompetent and have been sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the fact that the date was fast approaching

Might make for an interesting legal challenge from companies that weren't awarded the contract

IIRC it is the TIPP trade negotiations that the UK signed up to with the likes of Nissan and many others that guarantee continuity of trade environment, which by leaving the EU the UK will fall foul of, rendering it liable to prosecution. If I am correct then not only may factories like Nissan close but the UK will be fined on top of that for breach of contract.

Choosing EU transport firms might even be deliberate, as they would continue to operate longterm after No Deal

The No Deal contingency plan from the EU says they will let certain UK business / transport run that they need, like planes

• I haven't checked to see if this applies to UK ferries and ships too, but I'd expect these to be allowed to run too.

However, all these extensions for transport etc are only for the benefit of the EU
and would be stopped anytime they no longer need them, i.e. time-limited
or if the UK starts playing awkward e.g. with the Irish landbridge

£46.6m goes to the French Brittany Ferries
£47.3m to Danish shipping firm DFDS

I wonder if both firms have leant on the UK Government and told them that their dithering is causing them a loss of bookings and how about some compensation, or we will make a stink about it?

I know that I for one, and am no means alone, am not making bookings post February - I can't afford to throw money away, and wouldn't expect the Insurance to pay out if I were to risk it and lose.

Taken from Guardian reporting of Gatwick drone.
{He was then asked whether that uncertainty “amplified the chaos” surrounding the incident. “Certainly that was amplified at the time, but we have been able to corroborate 115 reports [since then], 92 of them are from credible people,” he said.
“Of course, we will have launched our own Sussex police drones at the time with a view to investigate, with a view to engage, with a view to survey the area looking for the drone, so there could be some level of confusion there.”}
I think we can all sleep safely in out beds come Brexit time with the 'Keystone Cops' in charge.

Leclerc I don't think it's TTIP

However, several legal bods have said that foreign investors’ rights are protected under bilateral investment treaties (BITs) - UK has signed 110 BITs with many countries and also the ^ Energy Charter Treatyy (ECT)
so foreign investors may be able to sue the UK for any losses from Brexit

e.g.
CAN FOREIGN INVESTORS SUE THE UK FOR BILLIONS OVER BREXIT?

http://www.keepcalmtalklaw.co.uk/can-foreign-investors-sue-the-uk-for-billions-over-brexit/

International investment law aims to protect foreign investors from unpredictable, unstable, and vague environments
in order to ensure that investors can invest safely and securely.

Misti I would expect the UK govt to try to keep trains running above all else,
as they can move large numbers of goods and people far more efficiently than private transport
So - if they have sense - they would stock what they need to keep the rail system running

I admit that I am looking back to WW2 (!) and other 20thC wars, where the railway system in each country was a key asset, protected by them and attacked by their enemy

Thanks BCF,
It was something in the back of my head rather than details, however the UK being sued takes it even further away from the sunny uplands that were promised. Maybe China will decide top call in it's loans to the UK to help it fund the Chinese trade war against the USA? That would bring a whole new meaning to 'can't pay, won't pay'.

{where the railway system in each country was a key asset, protected by them and attacked by their enemy}
Fear not, Grayling's in charge!

Misti I would expect the UK govt to try to keep trains running above all else,
as they can move large numbers of goods and people far more efficiently than private transport
So - if they have sense - they would stock what they need to keep the rail system running

I agree with this. The problem with the last sentence is that the transport secretary is possibly the most useless member of the most useless cabinet in British history.

Plus, keeping the trains running but denying car drivers of fuel won't please the sort of driver who might don a yellow jacket. I've been very sceptical about unrest, but the last few weeks have persuaded me that if it happens, it's more likely to be in response to a lack of availability or increase in the cost of fuel for private vehicles than anything else.

People who drive large vehicles and are ideologically attached to the idea of driving what they want, how they want and when they want, at the least cost possible, are potentially quite a large and vocal section of the electorate that crosses normal political boundaries, as we've seen here in France.

Yes, that bit about the garden - only half of it as well - being turned over to provide "enough food to feed all my family fruit and veg wise" is delusional. We had an allotment for years. Potato blight can easily destroy all your crop, plus some years, you simply don't get a good harvest because of that Great British weather. Nice romantic idea though.

So all these extra chartered ferries - presumably they’ll be full of food coming this way? And going back to the EU? Full of desperate UK stowaways fleeing a country in chaos?

How the mighty can fall...

Potato harvest this year was crap even without blight . My 6ft by 3ft raised bed only produced enough potatoes for about 6 meals for 2 people (I'm on the MN HFLC Way of Eating so rarely have potatoes) and I kept back enough King Edwards for Christmas Dinner for 10 - but some of them disintegrated while being parboiled (apparently a function of the drought), so there was only just enough for all of us and not enough for dh even though I only had one tiny one

{Full of desperate UK stowaways fleeing a country in chaos?}
No, you own this chaos, jolly well stay there and leave the EU in peace.

TTIP was never signed by the EU - despite the Conservatives saying they'd be happy to sign it. Fortunately there were enough EU countries saying that they were unhappy with the international trade resolution process and the lack of protection for the public sector.

Unfortunately, I know SNP members who voted Leave because they were concerned about TTIP and thought that its signing was imminent despite my best efforts to disabuse them

A ‘managed no deal’ is not an acceptable Brexit deal, says FTA

https://fta.co.uk/media/press-releases/2018/december/a-managed-no-deal-is-not-an-acceptable-brexit-deal

FTA, the organisation which represents the UK’s logistics sector, has rejected ministerial claims that a “Managed No Deal” Brexit is possible
when the UK leaves the EU on 29 March 2019.

As James Hookham, FTA’s Deputy CEO explains, the concept is more to do with semantics than actual actions
and would leave the UK’s logistics industry carrying the can for political failure to negotiate an effective withdrawal agreement:

“A ‘managed no deal’ outcome is an idea contrived by politicians to shift the consequences of a No Deal departure from the EU onto the very people whose lives depend on the smooth movement of goods and services to keep Britain trading.

This concept is a deflection of responsibility by the politicians responsible for the country’s future success onto the businesses which will be most affected by their failures.

“No Deal is not an option for logistics businesses, which have been lobbying government for two years for detailed information and support to ensure that the nation can continue to trade efficiently after Brexit.

Logistics businesses need and deserve workable solutions to ensure they can keep the nation’s supply chain intact and working effectively,
and will not take the blame for failures of government negotiation and planning which could lead the country to the cliff edge of a No Deal departure from the EU.”

I don’t think the poor are that resilient...

Life expectancy drops for Britain's poor for first time since Second World War

It started going downhill in 2011. You don’t need rocket science to work out why. And remember - this is already happening before Brexit.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/life-expectancy-drops-britains-poor-13720058.amp