Westminster Election 12th December 2019

[dec]

In terms of payments, GB might - might- agree to fund the commitments they already made to NI in GB budgets. In return they'll want the ROI to take on NI's share of sovereign debt, public sector pensions, etc etc.

The UK government will still be responsible for paying any pension rights accrued while working for the UK government. The same goes for old age pensions etc. The British OAPs who retire to the Costa del Sol still are eligible for UK pensions. My parents who worked in the US in the 60s and paid social security contributions received US social security payments when they reached retirement age even though they no longer lived in the US.

-- adding
also I worked for a few years in NI before moving to the US and I will receive some UK pension benefits when I reach retirement age.

[trailer]

I don't think they're "fantastic" which is so subjective but MPs who've made significant contributions

Mark Durkan - Forced the British Gov to admit that if NI voted to unite with ROI they would be re-accepted into the EU without application process. Called out the SF and British dirty deal to give amnesty to Soldiers and Terrorists involved in the Troubles.

Aneran Bevan - Minister for Health

Parnell - Leader of Irish Nationalism

Leo Abse - Proposed Homosexual law reform

John Bercow - There's a case to be made here for how he has steered the Brexit debate

Seamus Mallon - Patten report was improved of the back of Mallon's work in the Commons

LSH - While a Unionist has fought as the lone NI Remain voice despite quite a vitriol from the DUP.

Jess Phillips
Iain Blackforth
Maidri Black

That's just off the top of my head. And you can pick holes and say they did that and this one did this and so on and so on. Such is the luxury of those on the sideline who don't have to make a stand.

No Minister is universally popular and they will have to make decisions that will make them unpopular or popular with their base. But they make decisions nonetheless and sometimes it's those unpopular decisions that we remember them for so perhaps electing MPs to go and argue in our favour isn't a bad idea. After all this is exactly what SF do in the Dail and in Brussels.

I support a United Ireland but to think it can be achieved by disengaging with the British state isn't a credible position. After all, the new Ireland will require significant support both politically and monetary from the UK Government.

A united Ireland will require financial and political support from Britain? Are you for real?

Whether you care to accept it or not, this will be a reality. Not even the most romantic dreamer would claim that it will be some sort of economic utopia from day 1. It would have to be carefully managed and would probably take 10 years or more to be fully operational in terms of the integration of sectors within the all island economy. Not to mention working out how to subsume education and health sectors. There may be short term pain which may require a gradual phasing out of UK subvention monies which I think UK government could be willing to pay if it meant a complete withdrawal was assured.

Even politically speaking there may have to be some sort of role for Stormont inside a new unified Ireland whilst the transition is being made and I think most rational people would be ok with that.

There is no point asking for independence if we aren't prepared to pay our own bills and accept the financial and economic consequences. Post independence  British subventions have no place in any mature conversation on a United Ireland. Why would they pay the costs but then neglect to take a share in any future economic benefits?

Well then why are the EU asking the Brits to pay up? Should they be allowed to walk away from their financial commitments? Remember this will be a UK withdrawal. Same as with the EU.
There's a real immaturity on show here with a few posters. Any new Ireland will still be have an economy deeply linked with the UK. That's going to need support from the UK government especially politically.
If Unionists have a long way to go, this thread shows that many Nationalists and Republicans also have a long road to travel.

I think your confusing the economy with payments.

Of course the economy in the north will remain linked closely to GB - it goes without saying (almost).

In terms of payments, GB might - might- agree to fund the commitments they already made to NI in GB budgets. In return they'll want the ROI to take on NI's share of sovereign debt, public sector pensions, etc etc.

Any notion of any further "goodwill" payments from GB to help a UI become a success will be a no-go from their perspective. Why would they? From their perspective after all it is us that would be leaving them.

A UI will have to stand on its own two feet from day one, and it will have to either borrow, raise taxes, or cut public services to do so. That's the harsh reality of it. The trick is persuading people that this is a price worth paying , if we're not willing to pay that price then we don't deserve independence,

I'm not confusing anything.
I said originally that the UK would have to support any New Ireland financially and politically.
Financially - honour their financial commitments. Debt. Pensions. Budgets. Integration of services there is a whole host of issues to be agreed but they need to pay their fair share.
Politically. As in political support for the New Ireland. That they recognise the state. That they encourage GB companies to continue their involvement in Ireland whether as employers or trade partners. In short, be a dead on neighbour.


There are so many benefits for everyone in a New Ireland. For people in Coleraine and Cork. But we need a mature grown up conversation to take place. Not this "stick it to the prods in a 50+1 vote. f**k them. We're big enough to see out an economic nuclear winter. This is Ireland. We've seen of the Brits before and we'll do it again. We just need to invoke the spirit of the battle of Clontarf!" This is the same w**k argument that many Brexit supporters make. It's not good enough for Brexit and it's not good enough for a New Ireland.
I'm not directing this to anyone in particular. It's just a general thought.

[Lar Naparka]

Population of the 6 Cos c1.9m
Hardly 1.25m Unionists/Brits Farr??

I am going by what Evil Genius has said and I imagine he is including Castle Catholics here.If push ever comes to shove, I'd say a lot of nominal Nationalists will think long and hard about cutting economic ties with Britain.

[Rossfan]

I'd expect that the 6 Cos wouldn't inherit any part if the "UK's" National debt but in return the new Irish Entity would pay all SW pensions and benefits from day 1.
Ex British Civil servants, Soldiers and similar would continue to receive pensions from the GB Governnent.

[Kidder81]

So the Institute for Fiscal Studies have said Labours manifesto spending and taxation pledges are "colossal" and "not credible"

No doubt they are a right wing Tory mouthpiece

[trailer]

Labour are planning on injecting £135 billion into economy in the next 5 years. Jesus Christ. 

[armaghniac]

Labour are planning on injecting £135 billion into economy in the next 5 years. Jesus Christ.

they'll take it from one arm and inject it into the other.

[seafoid]

Labour are planning on injecting £135 billion into economy in the next 5 years. Jesus Christ.

Do you know how much money the Bank of England pumped into
the economy via QE ? Do you know where it ended up?

[RadioGAAGAA]

So the Institute for Fiscal Studies have said Labours manifesto spending and taxation pledges are "colossal" and "not credible"
No doubt they are a right wing Tory mouthpiece

There was a piece on Sky earlier giving figures (dunno where they were sourced) that showed it all added up.

Here, found it: https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1197485459200466944

edit: But yeah, no way are they raising £80B extra income tax from the top 5% and via corporation tax alone*. I'm not convinced their numbers add up.

*although if they can seal off the loopholes multinationals use to move tax abroad, there is undoubtedly tens of billions to potentially be found there.

[RadioGAAGAA]

https://youtu.be/rTmSfzeHdEo

Andrew Neil vs. Liz Truss on housing.

Also this  :
https://www.thetorymanifesto.com

[Kidder81]

Missed this Financial Times link from Seafoid 


Labours manifesto adds up to a recipe for decline

www.FT.com

The Labour party manifesto is nothing more than a blueprint for socialism in one country. The combination of punitive tax increases, sweeping nationalisation, and the end of Thatcher-era union reforms turn the clock back 40 years. Set alongside a vast expansion of the state — based on spending amounting to six per cent of national income — Labour's plans are a recipe for terminal economic decline.

Whereas previous Labour leaders, from Tony Blair to Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, accepted the market economy, the hard left clique around Jeremy Corbyn have elected to replace it with their own statist model. This owes more to François Mitterrand's socialist programme in 1981 than to a realistic prescription for reforming a modern economy, still less preserving the UK's treasured status as a beacon for foreign investment.

The tragedy of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour party, like so many populist movements, is that it does identify areas that genuinely need fixing. Nearly a decade after the Conservatives returned to power, real wages have still not returned to their pre-crisis peak. Homelessness has risen. Basic public services such the criminal justice system, social care and local government are dire. Privatised water and rail companies are not delivering for users. Large parts of the population feel excluded from the bright spots of prosperity, mainly in the south-east.


Yet virtually all of Labour's prescriptions to tackle these challenges are misguided. Mr Corbyn's original sin is to cast private enterprise as a necessary evil to be managed rather than being part of the solution to the problems his party has identified. The assault on business is an attack on wealth creation.

First, Labour is proposing a staggering increase in taxes — close to £83bn a year by 2023-24, with the bulk coming from higher levies on business investment, much of it being squeezed out of the private sector in year one.

Second, the nationalisation programme goes far beyond anything contemplated in a generation. True, private monopolies in rail and water have fallen short in performance. There is a case for re-regulation or indeed re-examining ownership; but to extend nationalisation to the energy utilities, broadband and Royal Mail is an unwarranted interference which will shatter confidence and deter investment.

Third, the party proposes collective sectoral bargaining over pay and conditions, claiming this "will increase wages and reduce inequality". It would instead stifle innovation and lock workers out of employment. Similarly, plans for rent control would advantage "insiders" who already rent and push "outsiders" into an unregulated black market.

In some areas, the manifesto is less radical than expected. It has dropped the fantasy target of hitting net zero carbon emissions by 2030, which would require a hugely expensive and near-impossible transformation of the economy. Also gone are proposals to bring private schools into the state sector, and a mooted idea to give private tenants a right to buy their home from their landlord. On security and defence it commits to renewing Trident, remaining part of Nato and keeping to the alliance's target for military spending of 2 per cent of national income.

The British economy is not broken. It has proven remarkably resilient in the face of Brexit uncertainty. Labour's plans would exponentially increase the risks to the economy. A responsible centre-left programme to restore fairness and opportunity, to rebuild public services, and preserve private sector incentives, was there for the taking. Mr Corbyn has missed an open goal.

[whitegoodman]

Thought Eastwood spoke very well on the view there.  Talks sense which is rare for politicians here and in London.

[johnnycool]

Gotta love Mark Carruthers on the View last night.

He gave Steve Aitken an awful time last night and the previous week gave Naomi Long a working and then to cap it off he goes to a panel of "political commentators" to see how the interviewee got on and the blonde woman, Fionnuala O'Connor certainly doesn't hold back on her opinions either.

If he keeps that up Michelle O'Neill and Arlene will be torn asunder.

Wee Colum did well last night with Carruthers trying to pick holes in his policies of standing aside in North Belfast yet going full on against Sinn Fein in Foyle.
Liked his line of preferring Finucane sitting in his house than Dodds sitting in the HoC..

Fionnuala wasn't on to give her frank and cutting opinion at the end though.

[marty34]

Gotta love Mark Carruthers on the View last night.

He gave Steve Aitken an awful time last night and the previous week gave Naomi Long a working and then to cap it off he goes to a panel of "political commentators" to see how the interviewee got on and the blonde woman, Fionnuala O'Connor certainly doesn't hold back on her opinions either.

If he keeps that up Michelle O'Neill and Arlene will be torn asunder.

Wee Colum did well last night with Carruthers trying to pick holes in his policies of standing aside in North Belfast yet going full on against Sinn Fein in Foyle.
Liked his line of preferring Finucane sitting in his house than Dodds sitting in the HoC..

Fionnuala wasn't on to give her frank and cutting opinion at the end though.

Wee Colum is always the main man - every type of election, he 'nominates' himself.  Now he wants to go to Westminister after saying leader shouldn't be there.

[trailer]

Gotta love Mark Carruthers on the View last night.

He gave Steve Aitken an awful time last night and the previous week gave Naomi Long a working and then to cap it off he goes to a panel of "political commentators" to see how the interviewee got on and the blonde woman, Fionnuala O'Connor certainly doesn't hold back on her opinions either.

If he keeps that up Michelle O'Neill and Arlene will be torn asunder.

Wee Colum did well last night with Carruthers trying to pick holes in his policies of standing aside in North Belfast yet going full on against Sinn Fein in Foyle.
Liked his line of preferring Finucane sitting in his house than Dodds sitting in the HoC..

Fionnuala wasn't on to give her frank and cutting opinion at the end though.

Wee Colum is always the main man - every type of election, he 'nominates' himself.  Now he wants to go to Westminister after saying leader shouldn't be there.

Thought Eastwood did very well. He simply has to run and not only that he has to win the Foyle seat. SF probably had a bounce last time after the death of Martin McGuinness. It would be a very, very good election if they could win it back as well as SB.