https://t.co/aFzelRLlEX
BREAK: ๐จ๐จ๐ซ๐ท๐ฌ๐ง๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ซ๐ท๐ฌ๐ง๐ข๐ข๐ข๐จ๐จ The UK rejects Dover funding bid to double French passport booths via @FT - long queues ahead...as other ports also donโt get money they asked for to build #brexit border. Stay with me/1 thread
https://t.co/aFzelRLlEX
https://t.co/K77Is5tfxk
https://t.co/6989KZPHqQ
Portsmouth got ยฃ17.1m - which is about ยฃ8m short of what they asked for, I am told. /10
Humber ports like Purfleet & Killinghome that deal with 'trailer' freight from the EU on short-sea crossings also have lots to do. Holyhead must deal with huge new Irish freight issues etc. /13
@timgmorris Chief Exec UK Major Ports Group says they're "very disappointed that the allocations of funding are so late in the day and significantly short of what many ports require."/14
More from Peter Foster
So. The hunt is on in Whitehall for #brexit dividends...to show some clear value in the freedoms given by Brexit.
As we report today one area being looked at is workers' rights...but it is politically difficult territory.
No cabinet decisions have been taken, but per sources, three potential areas been identified in Business Dept...
- the 48 Hour Week
- holiday pay/overtime calculations
- new EU rules on reporting hours worked...
All potentially possible post #brexit /2
The government says it has no intention of โloweringโ workersโ rights....and notes that UK has actually gold-plated many EU regulations...BUT (think of government saying it won't "lower" animal welfare standards)...the devil will all be in the detail, if and when it comes /3
So the government likes to talk about ensuring workersโ rights are protected but ALSO making sure businesses has freedoms and flexibility to grow...so one man's reduction in rights is another freedom to get richer/work harder/be more prosperous. It depends how you sell it. /4
So take this 2017 story from The Sun on the cash bonanza that will be rained down on hardworking families by Brexiteers' (long standing) desire to scrap the 48-hour week. Overtime booooom..../5
https://t.co/QLqQ7rCzkv
As we report today one area being looked at is workers' rights...but it is politically difficult territory.
No cabinet decisions have been taken, but per sources, three potential areas been identified in Business Dept...
- the 48 Hour Week
- holiday pay/overtime calculations
- new EU rules on reporting hours worked...
All potentially possible post #brexit /2
The government says it has no intention of โloweringโ workersโ rights....and notes that UK has actually gold-plated many EU regulations...BUT (think of government saying it won't "lower" animal welfare standards)...the devil will all be in the detail, if and when it comes /3
So the government likes to talk about ensuring workersโ rights are protected but ALSO making sure businesses has freedoms and flexibility to grow...so one man's reduction in rights is another freedom to get richer/work harder/be more prosperous. It depends how you sell it. /4
So take this 2017 story from The Sun on the cash bonanza that will be rained down on hardworking families by Brexiteers' (long standing) desire to scrap the 48-hour week. Overtime booooom..../5
https://t.co/QLqQ7rCzkv
More from Brexit
On this, I think itโs highly unlikely to occur in the timeframe given. For several reasons, I donโt think itโs realistic for Scotland to secede, and then join the EU, in 9 years.
For that, thanks goes to Brexit.
A thread because why not...
Two important dates: March 2016 and January 1st 2021.
Firstly, prior to the 2014 referendum, the Nationalists proposed a date of March 2016 to secede.
Secondly, today - the end completion of Brexit five-and-a-half years after Cameronโs majority in 2015.
Brexit has demonstrated many things, primarily that splitting unions is not easy. The UKs membership of the EU was 47 years and by the end it was not at the heart of the EU. The Union has existed for over 300 as a unitary state.
Dividing a unitary state, like the UK, will not be easy. Frankly, it will make Brexit look simple. Questions of debt, currency, defence, and more will need to be resolved ... something not addressed with Brexit.
Starting with debt. Scotland will end up with its proportionate share of the UKs national debt. Itโs not credible to suggest otherwise. Negotiating what is proportionate wonโt be easy when both sides disagree.
Itโs importance will be seen shortly.
For that, thanks goes to Brexit.
A thread because why not...
On the current trajectory, I think this is likely to be the map of Europe of 2030. pic.twitter.com/65i1A8CiP8
— Ben Judah (@b_judah) January 1, 2021
Two important dates: March 2016 and January 1st 2021.
Firstly, prior to the 2014 referendum, the Nationalists proposed a date of March 2016 to secede.
Secondly, today - the end completion of Brexit five-and-a-half years after Cameronโs majority in 2015.
Brexit has demonstrated many things, primarily that splitting unions is not easy. The UKs membership of the EU was 47 years and by the end it was not at the heart of the EU. The Union has existed for over 300 as a unitary state.
Dividing a unitary state, like the UK, will not be easy. Frankly, it will make Brexit look simple. Questions of debt, currency, defence, and more will need to be resolved ... something not addressed with Brexit.
Starting with debt. Scotland will end up with its proportionate share of the UKs national debt. Itโs not credible to suggest otherwise. Negotiating what is proportionate wonโt be easy when both sides disagree.
Itโs importance will be seen shortly.
A quote from this excellent piece, neatly summarising a core impact of Brexit.
The Commissionโs view, according to several sources, is that Brexit means existing distribution networks and supply chains are now defunct and will have to be replaced by other systems.
Of course, this was never written on the side of a bus. And never acknowledged by government. Everything was meant to be broadly fine apart from the inevitable teething problems.
It was, however, visible from space to balanced observers. You did not have to be a trade specialist to understand that replacing the Single Market with a third country trade arrangement meant the end of many if not all of the complex arrangements optimised for the former.
In the absence of substantive mitigations, the Brexit winners are those who subscribe to some woolly notion of โsovereigntyโ and those who did not like freedom of movement. The losers are everyone else.
But, of course, thatโs not good enough. For understandable reasons Brexit was sold as a benefit not a cost. The trading benefits of freedom would far outweigh the costs. Divergence would benefit all.
The Commissionโs view, according to several sources, is that Brexit means existing distribution networks and supply chains are now defunct and will have to be replaced by other systems.
Brexit reality bites: The new dawn of trade friction via @RTENews https://t.co/p6VdlhZUAN
— Tony Connelly (@tconnellyRTE) January 9, 2021
Of course, this was never written on the side of a bus. And never acknowledged by government. Everything was meant to be broadly fine apart from the inevitable teething problems.
It was, however, visible from space to balanced observers. You did not have to be a trade specialist to understand that replacing the Single Market with a third country trade arrangement meant the end of many if not all of the complex arrangements optimised for the former.
In the absence of substantive mitigations, the Brexit winners are those who subscribe to some woolly notion of โsovereigntyโ and those who did not like freedom of movement. The losers are everyone else.
But, of course, thatโs not good enough. For understandable reasons Brexit was sold as a benefit not a cost. The trading benefits of freedom would far outweigh the costs. Divergence would benefit all.
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".