MinBane

Helt ute av sporet (Okumala ekigwo okulyaku kya okuziga)

Archive for the tag “CP”

Brexit: Tories Government – “Future Costums Arrangements” paper are made of “dreams” and not reality!

On 15th August 2017, the United Kingdom or the Her Majesties Government laid out there paper on the Costums Union with the European Union. You would imagine that this one would be a paper drawing the lines in the sand and putting things in order. They are apparently not so, not surprising that people have called the Brexit Minister David Davis lazy, the reasons for doing. Is by looking at the paperwork and the white papers who are initially spelling out the policies for the break-up. These are supposed standards of acts and of understanding from one part to the other. Therefore, the quotes and the basic framework says a lot. That is why it is intriguing how little dep’t there are in the “Future customs arrangements – A FUTURE PARTNERSHIP PAPER”, it is insane how little it says at this point.

Let’s be brief about the quotes worth mentioning from this “paper”:

“As a first step, we will seek continuity in our existing trade and investment relationships, including those covered by EU Free Trade Agreements or other EU preferential arrangements. Our exit from the EU will provide considerable additional opportunities for UK business through ambitious new trade arrangements and comprehensive trade deals that play to the strengths of the UK economy of today and the future, including in areas such as services and digital trade, as well as trade in goods. As a services-based economy, services account for around 80 per cent of UK GDP6 and the UK is the second largest exporter of services worldwide.7 Services exports accounted for £246 billion in 2016.8 The share of services in total UK exports has increased from around 27 per cent in 1990 to 45 per cent in 20169 – the largest share of any of the G7 economies.10 To capitalise fully on those opportunities, the UK will need an independent trade policy, with the freedom to set for ourselves the terms of our trade with the world” (HM Government, P: 4, 15.08.2017).

So again, the Conservative Party and the Democratic Unionist Party Government comes with statements that underline the possible positives about the break-up without considering the real implications of the act. They are playing safe and promising excellent opportunities, without underlining the doubts of trade and border issues, granted the exit. It is like the doors open and they are coming directly into Narnia and not upon a new unknown quest.

Therefore the next statements saying this: “In assessing the options for the UK’s future outside the EU Customs Union, the Government will be guided by what delivers the greatest economic advantage to the UK, and by three strategic objectives:

  • ● ensuring UK-EU trade is as frictionless as possible;
  • ● avoiding a ‘hard border’ between Ireland and Northern Ireland; and
  • ● establishing an independent international trade policy” (HM Government, P: 6, 15.08.2017).

It is like the UK Government and their negotiation team is dreaming that the EU will grant them all of their wishes and make the world a peaceful and lovable space, where anyone living wants to have a house in Nothing Hill or in Yorkshire. But, alas that is not case. That the UK-EU trade will not be frictionless, if it was so, the massive amount trade-agreements would be settled, also the businesses would start to move to European cities for security of future transactions, like to Dublin or Frankfurt. Therefore, the Tories frictionless is near impossible and will implode on them at one point!

The border question on Ireland is another subject, which will be hustled and bustled, where nothing is certain. What that it will be, is an advantage standpoint for Unionists, but not for the Irish or the European Union, which would like similar rules for all their Member States. The last one is something the UK has to work upon and find-out as the directives and the legislation for trade from Brussels will cease, but that also makes it hard to be very independent if the EU are their major trading-partner.

One potential approach the UK intends to explore further with the EU would involve the UK acting in partnership with the EU to operate a regime for imports that aligns precisely with the EU’s external customs border, for goods that will be consumed in the EU market, even if they are part of a supply chain in the UK first. The UK would need to apply the same tariffs as the EU, and provide the same treatment for rules of origin for those goods arriving in the UK and destined for the EU” (…) “By mirroring the EU’s customs approach at its external border, we could ensure that all goods entering the EU via the UK have paid the correct EU duties. This would remove the need for the UK and the EU to introduce customs processes between us, so that goods moving between the UK and the EU would be treated as they are now for customs purposes. The UK would also be able to apply its own tariffs and trade policy to UK exports and imports from other countries destined for the UK market, in line with our aspiration for an independent trade policy. We would need to explore with the EU how such an approach would fit with the other elements of our deep and special partnership” (HM Government, P: 10, 15.08.2017).

This here proves that UK Government thinks the EU will accept free-trade and movement of goods, without taking one of their pillars, the movement of people. Like the borders was made for cows, Iphone’s and automobiles, but not made for securing people trespassing from one garden to the next. The fences and guidelines of crossings, will be within concern of the status of the UK deal with the EU, as a non-EU State. Meaning, the Third Party state, has to reissue boundaries and extended efforts on trade, to justify itself concerning the ones that are Member States already. This should be obvious to the UK Government and the Tories, but their paper is disregarding this mere facts.

It is amazing how this is the sort of framework and due diligence, the government operates within. That they are not thinking in the prospects of not their dream-world, but the reality of the ones they are negotiating with. It is as if they think only on their own behalf, and not of the reactions from the Union, they are leaving. Instead of being concern with by-laws and regulations that are already on “third-nations” and “non-Member-States”, the United Kingdom government should operate like that and not as it is today. The dreams has to stop and the shattered glass has to appear. The broken screens and the trouble of scrolling has to happen. Peace.

Opinion: Akena are officially a NRM-Stooge, as he was heckled defending the Land Amendment!

You know that the Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) are losing its value, when the leader of the Party is heckled in Lira. This is after the proposed agreement between UPC and National Resistance Movement, that have led to UPC Ministers in the growing cabinet of the 10th Parliament. Where even the wife Betty Amogi proposing and working for the constitutional amendment, who gives the state easier access to land. Because of this, UPC Leader Jimmy Akena has tried to promote the Land Amendment, but wasn’t meet with love.

As Mr Akena was trying to explain the merits of the amendment, hundreds of people who felt the area legislator was not making sense in his presentation shouted him down. “If we do not want to listen, I can sit down. I will sit but you give me this one minute…If you ignore [to understand] what is existing, you are not going to help yourselves,” Mr Akena said. The former Otuke District councillor, Ms Dina Bua, said it was “useless” to give Mr Akena more opportunity to talk about land matters. Mr Akena said: “I have heard somebody saying that this law is not relevant. This is the law of the land today.” (Oketch, 2017).

This here is the proof of the fall of the UPC. When Akena, the leader who ousted Olara Otunnu, are now heckled in Lira. Certainly, he sees now how the people understand the newly proposed law. That will make the land more accessible for the government to takeover. Akena are now really a stooge of the NRM. He is under the umbrella of UPC, but that is just convenient. Still, his acts and his words could have been ordered and sanctioned by Museveni.

There is now no difference between the NRM and UPC now, I called them a few months ago NRM-Lite, but that was to soft. They are far-stretched organization connected with the NRM and following the NRM way right now. Sounding and acting alike, there is not really different between Akena and Museveni, the only difference are the NRM are running it all from the State House. Akena are now trying to show his loyalty and making sure NRM see the need for him. Peace.

Reference:

Oketch, Bill – ‘MP Akena booed during debate on land amendment bill’ (14.07.2017) link:http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/MP-Akena-debate-land-amendment-bill-Lango-Obote/688334-4056988-9ieqj1/index.html

President Museveni plans to change his DOB, because he is a SOB!

No-one has the powers to decide when their where born, that happen because their parents fornicated or it was Gods will that you we’re born. Still, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, who was born in Ntare, Rwanda in 1944, plans to change his “date of birth” (DOB). Because, if doing so, he doesn’t need to amend the 1995 Constitution, that puts an age-limit on the President!

Kampala — No bill seeking to remove the 75-year age limit on the presidency has been tabled but the head-butting around the issue is intense. When, on Aug. 07, President Yoweri Museveni’s staff posted a photo on his Face Book page mentioning him and a date in 1947, opponents to lifting the age-limit sprung into a Twitter frenzy. That is a ploy by the president to amend his birth date from 1944 to 1947, many of them claimed, thereby reducing his age by a solid three years, which would then make him legible to contest in 2021 without having to amend the constitution. In reality, they were calling in the fire brigade to switch off a light bulb” (Matsiko, 2017).

You can see, the man doesn’t have any quarrels or issues with misusing his powers, to even change his birthday, a day given to him like anyone else. He wants to amend his age so he can continue to rule, since he knows there will be issues with changing the article 102(b). No matter what, he still play around like he is an eternal god if doing so. He changes his past, rewrites it to fit himself and will use all tricks to become eligible for another election and 8th Term in office. Since he is just in his 7th term, but officially 5th.

I will say if he changes his date of birth, he is officially a “son of a bitch” or a SOB. Since, he uses all sort of maneuvers and put in gear his loyal minions in the National Resistance Movement (NRM) or NRM-O, even NRM Poor Youth to trigger their praise of the old-man. He will hire anyone who can be a shield and say it was their idea, but the State House clearly, sanctioned this sort of idea. This isn’t for building the state, but keeping President Museveni forever.

This is just insane, but fits the program of Museveni of late, it is all about his possible continuation of office. Not for some real progress, the steady progress of the republic. That comes in-second.. or in third. Since, now President Museveni is an SOB if he changes his DOB. Peace.

Reference:

Matsiko, Haggai – ‘Uganda: The New Museveni Age-Limit Plan’ (14.08.2017) link: http://allafrica.com/stories/201708140067.html

Brexit: House of Lords – European Union Commitee letter to David Davis “Asking for access of Information on the on-going process” (10.08.2017)

President Yoweri Museveni Age Con-undrum!

It is strange how this becomes a thing, how these sort of things suddenly means so much. That is because someone loves to rewrite history and also his own. Since the Age Limit of the Presidential Candidate is fixed in the 1995 Constitution and Article 102(b). Which states the age that a President can have when running. For the old liberation hero, or liberator are trying to liberate himself from his past and his age. So he can run without amending the constitution, even if he has already pigeon-holding it.

Article 102 states: “A person is not qualified for election as President unless that person is—

(a) a citizen of Uganda by birth;

(b) not less than thirty-five years and not more than seventy-five years of age; and

(c) a person qualified to be a member of Parliament” (Constitution of 1995).

So in Mbarara, St Luke Kinoni Church of Uganda, the archives there are settling that Yoweri Museveni was baptized on the 3rd August 1947. In the first edition of the Mustard Seed he himself remembers: “The third childhood memory I retain was when we were baptised, along with Mzee Amosi Kaguta and Esteeri Kokundeka, on the 3rd of August 1947, at Kikoni Rwampara. By that time, I was almost three years” (Yoweri Museveni, Sowing the Mustard Seed, 1997). If his memory is correct when writing in 1996/1997, then he would be born about 1944 and would be 73 years old in 2017.

Well, there are documents proving it difficult to know his age. He got married on the 25th August 1973 at Christ Church at Turnham Green in London. Where he married his wife Janet Museveni. At this document. At this document he was an Army Officer and bachelor at the age of 27 years. That means he was born in 1946. This would mean that with this document and some easy calculation, say that the President is 71 years old.

The the latest official document is the birth certificate of Mohoozi Kainerubaga Tubuhaburwa who was born on the 24th April 1974, where Yoweri Museveni was the father and the mistress Hope Rwaheru. At this document it said his birthplace was Tare, Rwanda, but also said he was 30 years old. Another different was his occupation, he was an Operative in the Uganda State Research Bureau. This means again he was born in 1944. To settle him again to be 73 years old.

So there is a few lies somewhere as the documentation of his life is seemingly showing different ages and times. So he is twice said to be born around 1944, while his marriage certificate from United Kingdom says something else. What is inspiring is that on 25th August 1973 in the United Kingdom as he got married to Janet he was 27 years old, but by the birth of his son Muhoozi, he became 30 years old at the Loitokitok General Hospital, Coast Province in the Republic of Kenya, on the 24th April 1974. All of this is inspiring how the President could be 27 years old in United Kingdom and in Kenya, in the year after become 30 years of age. Also, either he was an operative at the Uganda State Research Bureau or he was Army Officer. This again proves how the records are differing in quick phase.

His documentation even says he was born in Tare, Rwanda, so if it wasn’t for the coup d’etat and the bush-war. Than he would have been dismissed for his birthplace, but none will challenge him on that. Then again to be running for 2021. He would no matter how you see it be older than 75 years, by both admissions. Since you have to add the years in-between 2016-2021. So with being either 71 or 73. Means you will add 4 years to the tally. It means if he was 71 years old, means he is 75 years old in 2021 and the other 77 years old. Which means he is to old to run!

But it is allowed to question the paperwork and difference in it, as it is in such short time, such massive differences! Peace.

Houses of the Oireachtas August report explaining the grand-issues remaining between Ireland and NI because of the Brexit!

Taoiseach Enda Kenny, speaking in Brussels on the 2nd of March 2017 said, “the Good Friday Agreement contains the opportunity to put in these negotiations language that has already been agreed in internationally binding agreement, that at some future time were that position to arise, that if the people by consent were to form a united Ireland that that could be a seamless transfer as happened in the case of East Germany and West Germany when the Berlin Wall came down.” (Houses of the Oireachtas, P: 248, 2017).

There must be times that the ones who voted for Brexit must regret it. Since the challenges and consequences are now unraveling. The House of the Oireachtas has come with an extensive report. That you should read yourself to get the deepness of the issues and the wishes of the Republic of Ireland, who in dept hope that Northern Ireland and Ireland get reunited like Germany did in the 1990s. There are more the things to look into, like the clear deficit between the United Kingdom, the Northern Ireland and Republic.

The are other issues like the border, which will be a genuine issue for both United Kingdom, European Union, the Member State Ireland and the nation within United Kingdom Northern Ireland. That the border, with the movement of trade, people and all other co-operations. Not just immigration with the Irish, who can pass and who has to apply between the borders of Northern Ireland towards Ireland. It will require direct borders on the crossings and also visas. Not only economical pressure because of the Brexit, but all the other grand issues.

Northern Irish Deficit:

The theoretical question of the Northern Ireland contribution to the EU through the UK annual contribution and a subsequent financial benefit from ending those contributions is a moot one. The deficit in Northern Ireland is such that any theoretical contribution is in fact made with money borrowed from central government. The Northern Ireland deficit (confining the spending definition rather generously as identifiable spending under the block DEL grants plus Annual Managed Expenditure) is 15% of GVA versus a UK budget deficit of 3.4% (in 2016). Given the UK Treasury intends to have a surplus in the next parliament, along with the potential for a large final exit bill and the threat to tax revenues, should Brexit cause an economic slowdown any benefit from ending the UK contributions to the EU is likely to be small if at all and for Northern Ireland will be irrelevant. Therefore, for Northern Ireland to be net neutral after Brexit the UK government will have to sponsor all current EU programmes” (Houses of the Oireachtas, P: 40, 2017).

United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland – Hard Border:

However, a memo from the European parliament’s legal affairs committee, which is helping shape the negotiating position of the European commission and the red lines of the European parliament, rebuffs that suggestion: “The [Good Friday] agreement makes it abundantly clear that the fact that both parts of Ireland and the UK are within the EU is a basis for the agreement. Moreover, the fact that Brexit could result in the reintroduction of border controls and controls on the free movement of persons between Ireland and Northern Ireland means this is a question for the EU, and not only Ireland and the UK.” (…) “Historically, customs controls have operated on both sides of the border from 1923 until their abolition on 1 January 1993, when the EU Single Market came into effect. In addition, security checkpoints operated on both sides of the border during the Troubles, from 1970 to the late 1990s—although the border security regime operated only partially, even at the height of the Troubles, because the Government in London recognised that a ‘hard’ border would inflame tensions in the Nationalist community. Other controls have been instituted on an ad hoc basis. For instance, in 2001 the Republic of Ireland operated systematic controls at the Irish border to curtail the spread of foot and mouth disease” (Houses of the Oireachtas, P: 69, 2017).

Visa Issues:

The UK’s exit from the EU will remove this basis of entry and residence in the UK. It will therefore directly affect the position of EU citizens and the members of their families who seek to enter or reside in the UK. EU citizens who are Irish citizens are, as previously outlined, subject to a separate regime under the UK’s Ireland Act 1949 and Immigration Act 1971. However, family members of those Irish citizens who are not themselves Irish citizens will not qualify for that status” (…) “The UK’s exit from the EU raises questions concerning the minimal checks on travelers between the Republic and Great Britain and the virtual absence of such checks on travelers between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. The Republic of Ireland is not a party to the Schengen arrangements removing border restrictions between EU Member States, but it remains subject to Article 21 of the TFEU and Directive 2004/38. These oblige it to admit EU nationals subject only to the conditions outlined earlier in this paper. If, after its exit from the EU, the UK chooses to limit the access it grants to non-Irish EU nationals, such restrictions will very likely require some sort of checks or inspections on arrivals from the Republic at ports, airports and even border crossings with Northern Ireland. This would amount to a fundamental change in the nature of the CTA” (Houses of the Oireachtas, P: 82-83, 2017).

Northern Ireland is more in the squeeze by Brexit, than the Republic:

For Ireland, the longer-term effects of Brexit on trade are uncertain and are also predicated on the outcome of negotiations. In the immediate term, the fall in the value of Sterling has meant that Irish exports are less competitive in the UK market. The UK export market accounted for 13.8 per cent of total Irish exports in 2015 (See Figure2). Northern Ireland is a relatively small export market for Ireland, accounting for just 1.6 per cent of total exports in 2015. The UK was the source of 25.7 per cent of Irish imports in 2015. From an overall trade perspective, therefore, the Republic is a much more significant trade market for Northern Ireland, than Northern Ireland is for the Republic, both in terms of export and imports” (Houses of the Oireachtas, P: 138, 2017).

All of this should worry the Northern Irish, the United Kingdom, that they have these issues to deliver. To fix the problems with the border, with the Schengen and Visa’s that are not valid as a non-member state of the European Union. The Northern Ireland will have both a harder border and with the trade. The deficit and the loss of EU programs that are suspended. So the UK has to fix their budget to make sure the government of Northern Ireland has enough funding after the suspension of programs. The second is to find solutions to the trade between the borders after the grand-issue of trade agreement with a third-party nation of United Kingdom. Since the UK and Northern Ireland has to create another agreement with Ireland to fix the issues, but they are a Member State in the EU, so they have to follow the procedures of Brussels and apply for special provisions.

We can also see that the Republic of Ireland in the is report wants a United Ireland. That is not surprising, that they want the whole island to be united and one. Not be separated, but the colonial and historical unionist wants to separate the Irish, to be able to control the Irish. That is why the London government in the past has created issues on the Island. To say something else, is to forget history. Now, the United Kingdom needs Northern Ireland and they are in bed with Unionists. Therefore, the United dream of Ireland, will not be an effort that the UK and Northern Irish will fight for. Even if the NI leaders will not give away their power in London for being united with Dublin. Clearly, this report shows the struggles of Brexit and their relationship with Ireland. Peace.

Reference:

Houses of the Oireachtas – ‘Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement Brexit and the Future of Ireland – Uniting Ireland & Its People in Peace & Prosperity’ (3 August 2017)

The Tories-DUP Government gotten many new Brexit hurdles to crossover!

This wasn’t supposed to be this hard, never was it supposed to be so tricky and rocky, but Prime Minister Theresa May and her friend in Downing Street are not composing themselves in a simple way. From the outside, there are made to many rookie mistakes and also not enough precautions of the reactions to the United Kingdom Government own activity. Certainly, the alliance with Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland isn’t making it easier. Since the London Government needs the Belfast ally to stay alive and breathing. That Issue has really come alive in the last two weeks, bot the value of the Nations within in the Union itself can be questioned, because the acts of Prime Minister May.

You are reckless and ruthless when your a nation of Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and England, plus a bunch of other territories, part of the Commonwealth. The United Kingdom Government, the Her Majesties Government, the Tories-DUP, the London-Belfast Alliance, should work carefully to the pledges and promises of impartiality, that meaning if the Welsh First Minister ask for more funding. It should happen, since the Northern Irish had a massive pay-day. When the Supply-And-Demand Agreement got signed. Also when the First Minister of Scotland needs to strengthen her seal and represent the Scottish Government. That FM should be respected by the Prime Minister. But in our days of loyalty to the Belfast. The PM only respect First Minister of Northern Ireland Arlene Foster and not FM of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon. Even pay her respects to First Minister Carwyn Jones. Just take a look!

Ditches the First Minister of Scotland:

A Tory minister quoted in a newspaper report yesterday signalled the end of the one-to-one meetings between the two party leaders. The “First Minister will no longer get access to the Prime Minister. She should be meeting David Mundell because he is the same level as her,” the source said. Reportedly, the Tories believe May coming to Scotland and making her first meeting as prime minister with Sturgeon, and posing for photographs on the steps of Bute House, made the Scottish leader “look like an international dignitary, rather than the leader of a devolved nation”. The remarks will infuriate not just SNP supporters but many in the Scottish Parliament, incensed that Downing Street believe the position of First Minister is equal to that of Secretary of State for Scotland” (Learmonth, 2017).

So it is not enough issues that the Prime Minister acts as a Royal and disgraces the First Minister of Scotland, because she favors her new friend in First Minister of Northern Ireland, Arlene Foster gave her the needed bump to still stay in Downing Street. That is why she can recklessly put First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in the shadow, but would she do the same to First Minister Carwyn Jones of Wales? Because of all of them are wearing their seals of their nations, which is part of the United Kingdom, a Union itself. It is not like London and England can rule over the territories without any checks- or balances. That is how it seems, since now the FM of Scotland has to be connected with Scottish State Secretary David Mundell before getting time with PM Theresa May. Wonder if FM Jones has to meet the Wales State Secretary before talking to the PM. We all know that FM Foster can walk straight into the Downing Street and demand respect because their agreement. It shows the political value of Northern Ireland and DUP, compared to the rest. While the DUP are not supposed to create an impartiality problem within the PM May government compared to the devolution and Stormont. Still, it seems so now, since Foster has elevated, while the Scottish are put into the shadow. That is why the Irish questions by the Brexit, makes it even further tumultuous in the negotiations with the EU. Since the Republic of Ireland want it to just and fair border. Something the House of Lords looked into in 2016. Take a look at what the Lords said and what the Taiseach said this week!

House of Lords Report No. 76:

Retaining customs-free trade between the UK and Ireland will be essential if the current soft border arrangements are to be maintained. The experience at other EU borders shows that, where a customs border exists, while the burden and visibility of customs checks can be minimised, they cannot be eliminated entirely. Nor, while electronic solutions and cross-border cooperation are helpful as far as they go, is the technology currently available to maintain an accurate record of cross-border movement of goods without physical checks at the border” (…) “The only way to retain the current open border in its entirety would be either for the UK to remain in the customs union, or for EU partners to agree to a bilateral UK-Irish agreement on trade and customs. Yet given the EU’s exclusive competence to negotiate trade agreements with third countries, the latter option is not currently available” (HL Paper 76, 12.12.2016).

Taiseach Leo Varadkar statement on the border:

Varadkar said: “What we’re not going to do is to design a border for the Brexiteers because they’re the ones who want a border. It’s up to them to say what it is, say how it would work and first of all convince their own people, their own voters that this is actually a good idea. As far as this government is concerned there shouldn’t be an economic border. We don’t want one.” The Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin has said avoiding a hard border after Brexit will require “flexible and imaginative solutions”. The foreign affairs minister, Simon Coveney, told the Irish national broadcaster, RTE: “There is no proposal that is suggesting that there be a border in the Irish Sea.” (The Guardian, 2017).

When the UK-Irish agreement will be put on hold and made sure of a reasonable border, the United Kingdom will have another type agreement with the EU. Since they are not a direct member, but their whole arrangement will be concerning, which sort of trade agreement the UK will have with the EU. Since Ireland is part of the EU, the basic deal that UK will have with EU, will involve directly the manner of how the border will look. The open border will not be to Northern Ireland, if they become a third nation towards the EU, they will have to follow the measures that entails. It is not just customs, but migration in general.

So the Taiseach says the United Kingdom has to make a border that is fair since the voted for it. This shouldn’t hurt the Irish, because it was UK election who decided to have this and control their borders. That means, they also wants secure the borders towards Ireland and between Northern Ireland. Not only towards the rest of Europe and Calais, it must be broader and more systematic. Certainly, the Tories and the Brexiteers didn’t think this would be an issue, but they have to by all means work with a reasonable border, compared to how it is today. The UK has to respect their will to divorce themselves and the possible trade-agreement will affect their relationship with Ireland. Also, the effects between the joint peace agreement in Northern Ireland and how the border agreements there was written in.

This will be rocky road and nothing is certain, even the seals of the Scottish isn’t respected, only the Northern Irish FM Foster has that, wonder what sort of relationship the FM of Wales has with the PM. Especially, since the FM of Wales, also wants a payout to his Nation, since the Northern Irish got a massive pay-day after the snap-election. This Brexit will make the internal Union ugly, not only throwing trash at the Brussels, they have to clear-up show in Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast, as of their standing within the Union of United Kingdom. Peace.

Reference:

Learmonth, Andrew – ‘First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon told that Theresa May is too important to meet with her’ (22.07.2017) link: http://www.thenational.scot/news/15427709.First_Minister_of_Scotland_Nicola_Sturgeon_told_that_Theresa_May_is_too_important_to_meet_with_her/

The Guardian – ‘Ireland ‘will not design a border for the Brexiteers’, says taoiseach’ (28.07.2017) link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/28/taoiseach-leo-varadkar-ireland-not-design-border-brexiteers?CMP=share_btn_tw

UPF: Suspending Officers from duty for findings connected with the Land Probe (25.07.2017)

IGP Kale Kayihura orders all Public Meetings concerning the Constitutional Amendment Act of 2017 have to notify the Police (21.07.2017)

House of Lords recommend flexible approach to migration because of Brexit!

The United Kingdom and their tales of glory, the former Empire and giant industrial hub of Europe, clearly have forgotten their place and trying to distance themselves from Europe. It will not be as easy as the Brexiteers and the Conservative Party. The Tories has to find their way while the negotiations are continuing with the European Union (EU). The leaving will cause grand-issues with migrations and also how the borders will close or be have different visa procedures. Therefore, the labour market and businesses will be hurt by this. Not only the direct trading between the UK and EU, but who get ability to be hired and who cannot come and work in low-educated jobs and low payed jobs. This is what the House of Lords looked into, and it is important to look into the matter. Because the matter isn’t straight forward. The answer is more flexible than what the UKIP and Brexit supporters inside the Conservative Party. Just take a look!

Labour and Immigration:

EU nationals make up 7 per cent of the total workforce. The Labour Force Survey provides estimates of the number of EU nationals working in particular sectors and the proportion they make up of the overall total. For example, the concentration of EU nationals is significantly higher in some sectors, reaching 14.2 per cent in accommodation and food services” (House of Lords, P: 19, 2017).

We strongly recommend that the Government develop a new immigration policy for implementation once the UK has left the European Union. It should consult on the needs of business and on a

time frame for implementing the new policy. Any new immigration system should not make an arbitrary distinction between higher skilled and lower-skilled work on the basis of whether a job requires an undergraduate degree. British businesses must have access to expertise and skills in areas such as agriculture and construction that would at present be categorised as lower-skilled occupations” (House of Lords, P: 24, 2017).

Lack of Migration workers – higher cost for consumers:

As some of our witnesses highlighted, pay is not the only consideration but there are now a large number of migrant workers in some sectors who will not easily be replaced by domestic workers. Competitive labour markets will see some price adjustment in response to labour shortages, with an associated increase in local labour supply. However, in some sectors, business models may have to change. As noted in the example of agriculture, this is likely to lead to higher prices for consumers” (House of Lords, P: 26, 2017).

We warned in our 2008 report on immigration that employment of migrant workers could lead to businesses neglecting skills and training for British workers. As the example of nursing highlights, these fears appear to have been realised. Training for the domestic workforce needs urgently to be given a higher priority” (House of Lords, P: 28, 2017).

The Government must also acknowledge that in order to achieve some of its other policy objectives, such as building 225,000–275,000 new homes each year, lower-skilled immigration may be required in the medium term to provide the necessary labour” (House of Lords, P: 31, 2017).

The objective of having migration at sustainable levels is unlikely to be best achieved by the strict use of an annual numerical target for net migration. Instead, such a target runs the risk of causing considerable disruption by failing to allow the UK to respond flexibly to labour market needs and economic conditions, as the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union has suggested is necessary. The objective of reducing migration to sustainable levels should be implemented flexibly and be able to take account of labour market needs, in particular during the implementation period” (House of Lords, P: 37, 2017).

You can easily see and envision the lack of agricultural short-term workers for heavy and low-paying jobs. This has to be hired by others and if they are UK citizens and such, they will not work for slice, but wont the whole pizza. That is why the end-game will be more cost for the consumer for what they in the past paid less for. Since the salaries of the UK citizens over the migrant worker are vastly different. Also, the possible problems of getting enough nursers and other educated to take the low-paying civil servants positions needed in the National Health Service. The House of Lords report can really show the implications of the migration and labour market the Brexit will have. Unless, the UK are planning such a soft border and open for EU nationals, than the changes will not be like night and day, but more like a similar day and just a little bit later on the same day.

Then the whole anti-Europe parades and campaigning lost. Since the Brexit became a shell of what it was supposed to be. It will be good for Europe and a pain for the Right in the UK. Certainly, the Farage’s of the world will hate this sort of report. Since the needed flexibility flexes against the will of the UKIP and Brexiteers amongst the Tories. They will be attacking this sort of report. Even if the Lords are impartial and uses accurate data. This shows the estimated effects of Brexit and the words of the Lords wasn’t dim! It can bring hope to Europe, but if the government will follow the recommendations and advise from the Lords; is something that time only can tell. Since the Tories would be showing weaker will to implement the idea behind the Brexit election, if they follow the advice of the Lords. That is not a easy bargain, but who said it would be? Peace.

Reference:

House of Lords – HL 11 – ‘Brexit and the Labour Market’ (21.07.2017)

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: