Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Clint Planet]

Sectarianism update:

Michael Gove says Theresa May is a secret Catholic who can’t be trusted to deliver Brexit




The Brexiteers' historical fantasies are out of control

This year marks the quincentenary of Reformation, and Michael Gove is celebrating by claiming that a Catholic plotter has taken over the British government.

In today’s Times, Gove writes that Theresa May’s is not a devout member of the Church of England, as she would have you believe. Her Lenten sacrifice of salt-and-vinegar crisps tells us that she is actually Britain’s ‘first Catholic prime minister’.

It’s hardly the gunpowder plot, but Gove has more! On Desert Island Discs, May selected a Catholic hymn as one of her eight records (she also selected both ‘Walk Like A Man’ and ‘Dancing Queen’, but that’s a conspiracy theory for another day…)

May’s every political act, the cabinet-minister-turned-tinfoil-hat-wearer warns, is infused by Catholic thought. Her emphasis on the common good, resistance to corporate buccaneering and concern for workers clearly links her to a string of papist thinkers, form Pope Leo XIII to John Cruddas.

And most disturbingly of all, May’s closet Catholicism threatens Britain’s future outside Europe.

The man who once thought he could be Prime Minister explains:

“Britain’s path to preeminence in the past followed our break with Catholicism and embrace of the Reformation. We pursued a global, maritime, buccaneering, individualistic, liberal destiny — the spirit of our capitalism was infused with a very Protestant ethic. Now that we are once more freeing ourselves from a conformist Continent to make our own way in the world the question of whether we need to be more radical to maximise opportunities or more cautious to reassure and protect is central to our politics.”

For all the usual verbosity, Gove’s message is simple: Brexit should be delivered by Protestants. And while the delivery is laughable, the premise must be challenged.

This is shameless sectarianism, delivered by a senior politician and published by a supposedly serious newspaper. Gove is claiming that the state has fallen into the thrall of some shady religious influence — that’s a well-worn path that never leads anywhere good.

He’s alleging that one group of people, by virtue of their religion, are better placed than the rest to govern, a claim that has no place in a secular democracy.

It was bad enough when the Brexiteers want to drag us back to the 1900s — the 1600s are out of the question.


https://leftfootforward.org/2017/03...tholic-who-cant-be-trusted-to-deliver-brexit/

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

Sectarianism update:

Michael Gove says Theresa May is a secret Catholic who can’t be trusted to deliver Brexit




The Brexiteers' historical fantasies are out of control

This year marks the quincentenary of Reformation, and Michael Gove is celebrating by claiming that a Catholic plotter has taken over the British government.

In today’s Times, Gove writes that Theresa May’s is not a devout member of the Church of England, as she would have you believe. Her Lenten sacrifice of salt-and-vinegar crisps tells us that she is actually Britain’s ‘first Catholic prime minister’.

It’s hardly the gunpowder plot, but Gove has more! On Desert Island Discs, May selected a Catholic hymn as one of her eight records (she also selected both ‘Walk Like A Man’ and ‘Dancing Queen’, but that’s a conspiracy theory for another day…)

May’s every political act, the cabinet-minister-turned-tinfoil-hat-wearer warns, is infused by Catholic thought. Her emphasis on the common good, resistance to corporate buccaneering and concern for workers clearly links her to a string of papist thinkers, form Pope Leo XIII to John Cruddas.

And most disturbingly of all, May’s closet Catholicism threatens Britain’s future outside Europe.

The man who once thought he could be Prime Minister explains:

“Britain’s path to preeminence in the past followed our break with Catholicism and embrace of the Reformation. We pursued a global, maritime, buccaneering, individualistic, liberal destiny — the spirit of our capitalism was infused with a very Protestant ethic. Now that we are once more freeing ourselves from a conformist Continent to make our own way in the world the question of whether we need to be more radical to maximise opportunities or more cautious to reassure and protect is central to our politics.”

For all the usual verbosity, Gove’s message is simple: Brexit should be delivered by Protestants. And while the delivery is laughable, the premise must be challenged.

This is shameless sectarianism, delivered by a senior politician and published by a supposedly serious newspaper. Gove is claiming that the state has fallen into the thrall of some shady religious influence — that’s a well-worn path that never leads anywhere good.

He’s alleging that one group of people, by virtue of their religion, are better placed than the rest to govern, a claim that has no place in a secular democracy.

It was bad enough when the Brexiteers want to drag us back to the 1900s — the 1600s are out of the question.


https://leftfootforward.org/2017/03...tholic-who-cant-be-trusted-to-deliver-brexit/

Fortunately for everyone we can all dismiss Michael Gove as the ineffective embarrassment he is. He's about as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house and about as popular as STD.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Fortunately for everyone we can all dismiss Michael Gove as the ineffective embarrassment he is. He's about as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house and about as popular as STD.

To be fair though, the same could be said about all of the populist politicians of recent years. Ignore them, they're irrelevant, except they quickly became very relevant (sadly).

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

To be fair though, the same could be said about all of the populist politicians of recent years. Ignore them, they're irrelevant, except they quickly became very relevant (sadly).

The difference is the people who your referring to (I take it you mean Fararge, Trump, La Pen and Boris Johnson ect) all had support long before they became widely popular. They also had "likeable" personality's which won them support (personally I hate all politicians). Gove has neither of these thing's and is overwhelmingly unpopular within his own party. There's more chance of Margaret Thatcher rising from the dead to take the leadership back then of Gove ever being Prime Minister.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The difference is the people who your referring to (I take it you mean Fararge, Trump, La Pen and Boris Johnson ect) all had support long before they became widely popular. They also had "likeable" personality's which won them support (personally I hate all politicians). Gove has neither of these thing's and is overwhelmingly unpopular within his own party. There's more chance of Margaret Thatcher rising from the dead to take the leadership back then of Gove ever being Prime Minister.

I quite agree, he comes across as a complete toad, yet his comment about not trusting experts has become central to the thinking of the populist movement who all position themselves as the 'one true voice' that people can rely on and not the 'establishment' who lie to them. It's a fundamental plank of the post-truth world, and it was arguably him that kicked that off. So he might be a complete weirdo, but that hasn't stopped him being influential.

 

[Clint Planet]

Fortunately for everyone we can all dismiss Michael Gove as the ineffective embarrassment he is. He's about as effective as a cat-flap in an elephant house and about as popular as STD.

Don't write him off so quickly. He's a shameless little git with plenty of allies in the party. He'll be back.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

I quite agree, he comes across as a complete toad, yet his comment about not trusting experts has become central to the thinking of the populist movement who all position themselves as the 'one true voice' that people can rely on and not the 'establishment' who lie to them. It's a fundamental plank of the post-truth world, and it was arguably him that kicked that off. So he might be a complete weirdo, but that hasn't stopped him being influential.

He isn't influential at all imo. He's simply ridden on the coattails of better politicians. The establishment (which Gove is part of) is responsible for the rise in the populist right, they have told us endless lies and treated us with a total contempt. It's no surprise that people have looked elsewhere for answers, however misguided that may be. What we need in this country is for people to start having adult conversations about politics and stop the childish name calling because they disagree. While leave and remain people are still fighting a battle that's over we should be united in demanding reform from our crooked politicians like Gove. Even now though he'll never amount to anything, he's to slimey (even by conservative standards) to stand a chance. He's one of the few Conservatives who would be hammered by Jeremy Corbyn.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

Don't write him off so quickly. He's a shameless little git with plenty of allies in the party. He'll be back.

He's not going anywhere mate. He's a failure and a total irrelevance, he'd be hammered in any leadership challenge. He's one of the most unelectable and unlikable politicians I've ever seen. The only way he'd win a leadership bid was if he was competing with that slimeball Osborne.

 

[Clint Planet]

He's not going anywhere mate. He's a failure and a total irrelevance, he'd be hammered in any leadership challenge. He's one of the most unelectable and unlikable politicians I've ever seen. The only way he'd win a leadership bid was if he was competing with that slimeball Osborne.

He may not be that popular in the Commons but his particular brand of dog-whistle LittleEnglandism will always resonate in the shires, and, of course, he has powerful allies in the press, otherwise this risible claptrap wouldn't be published in the first place.

Write him off at your peril.

 

[Woolly Blue]

Would the home office really do that Bruce? I thought an EU citizen living and working here for 5 years had permanent right to reside?

I may be wrong but just asking...

Apparently not. The law was originally put in place in 2004 when the A8 nations joined the EU to prevent welfare systems being overwhelmed by new migrants. Now, you could argue that the law won't be enforced, but the prospect of it being enforced still leaves an awful lot of uncertainty for many people who have made their homes here.

Funnily enough I was checking this earlier in the week for someone who works for us on a fairly regular basis.

The reality is that anyone, regardless of whether they're from the EC or not, that's been permanently living here for at least five years can apply for UK citizenship with a very good chance of being granted it.

If they're from the EC, have no criminal record, have been here for five years or more and are "of good character", the chances of being turned down are pretty low.

https://www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen/check-if-you-can-apply

 

[Clint Planet]

Funnily enough I was checking this earlier in the week for someone who works for us on a fairly regular basis.

The reality is that anyone, regardless of whether they're from the EC or not, that's been permanently living here for at least five years can apply for UK citizenship with a very good chance of being granted it.

If they're from the EC, have no criminal record, have been here for five years or more and are "of good character", the chances of being turned down are pretty low.

https://www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen/check-if-you-can-apply

Yes, "Indefinite Leave to Remain" - a real ball-ache in terms of time and money, of course:

from Wiki:

Costs[edit]

Prior to 2003, Indefinite Leave to Remain in the UK was free. However, since 2003, fees have been introduced and have risen each year in April. ILR Fees were introduced at £155[8] in 2003. Following record immigration in 2004–05, mainly from Eastern Europe,[9] for the main applicant the fee was raised in 2005 to £335,[10] in 2007 to £750, and in 2009 to £820.

In 2009 the Government introduced a £70m Migrants Impact Fund. Economic migrants and students coming to the UK from outside the EU are charged a £50.00 levy in addition to their normal visa application fee. The fund is used to support the communities in which they live.[11] A fee was also introduced for dependent applicants, at £50.00 each. In 2009 Premium Applications with an in-person appointment at a regional office were introduced at a cost to the applicant of £1020.[12]

In 2010/11 the application fee was raised to £840 (£1095 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[13] The dependents fee was also increased to £129.00 each.

In August 2010, the new government scrapped the Migrants Impact Fund.[14] However, the levy is still charged; the extra income "will now contribute to the cost of the visa and will mitigate increases that the Government would otherwise have had to make."[15]

On 6 April 2011, the application fee was raised to £972 (£1,350 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[16] The dependents fee was also increased to £486 (£675 premium) each.

From 6 April 2012, the application fee was raised to £991 (£1,377 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[17] The dependents fee was also increased to £496 (£689 premium) each.

From 6 April 2015, the application fee was raised to £1,500 (£1,900 premium).

From 6 April 2016, the application fee was raised to £1,875 (£2375 premium) per person (dependants also pay the same fees). [18]

 

[Woolly Blue]

Yes, "Indefinite Leave to Remain" - a real ball-ache in terms of time and money, of course:

from Wiki:

Costs[edit]

Prior to 2003, Indefinite Leave to Remain in the UK was free. However, since 2003, fees have been introduced and have risen each year in April. ILR Fees were introduced at £155[8] in 2003. Following record immigration in 2004–05, mainly from Eastern Europe,[9] for the main applicant the fee was raised in 2005 to £335,[10] in 2007 to £750, and in 2009 to £820.

In 2009 the Government introduced a £70m Migrants Impact Fund. Economic migrants and students coming to the UK from outside the EU are charged a £50.00 levy in addition to their normal visa application fee. The fund is used to support the communities in which they live.[11] A fee was also introduced for dependent applicants, at £50.00 each. In 2009 Premium Applications with an in-person appointment at a regional office were introduced at a cost to the applicant of £1020.[12]

In 2010/11 the application fee was raised to £840 (£1095 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[13] The dependents fee was also increased to £129.00 each.

In August 2010, the new government scrapped the Migrants Impact Fund.[14] However, the levy is still charged; the extra income "will now contribute to the cost of the visa and will mitigate increases that the Government would otherwise have had to make."[15]

On 6 April 2011, the application fee was raised to £972 (£1,350 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[16] The dependents fee was also increased to £486 (£675 premium) each.

From 6 April 2012, the application fee was raised to £991 (£1,377 premium) including the Migrants Impact Levy.[17] The dependents fee was also increased to £496 (£689 premium) each.

From 6 April 2015, the application fee was raised to £1,500 (£1,900 premium).

From 6 April 2016, the application fee was raised to £1,875 (£2375 premium) per person (dependants also pay the same fees). [18]

Quoting Wiki is so very Matt Damon.
Hang on ...

 

[Clint Planet]

*does one*

 

[summerisle]

 

[Woolly Blue]

*does one*

To be serious mate ...

Yes, it costs money, which, if we'd voted to stay in, wouldn't have been needed. But, the electorate have voted so I'm not interested in moaning about the result ( either the vote or the effect ). All I'm interested in is getting on with dealing with the fallout, and that applies in how effects me personally and our business and, a little less so, how it effects the country.

There will be people all over the UK in similar positions to me who will be quietly getting on with stuff to try and limit the effect of the Leave vote.

Jumping up and down saying "It's not fair" ( I exaggerate, but the point still stands ) might make people feel better, but will make no difference. People who've been here for many years can apply for UK citizenship, and will likely succeed. If they're skilled or semi-skilled workers, chances are, the cost will be worthwhile. From my businesses point of view the cost involved is of the same order as getting a non-UK national security cleared to a medium level and it's then a case if finding a way of sharing that cost between employer and employee, so it's not a ball breaker.

Unskilled migrant workers ( EC or otherwise ) will, for the forseeable, still be needed, and a way will have to be found to allow them to work in the UK, though that will likely be on a more transient basis than it currently is.

My main concern is we'll end up with a higher percentage of illegal workers here who aren't contributing to the tax system and will be used as ammunition for the right wing press to be "tougher on immigration" while not acknowledging the need to take those people out of the black economy and finding a way to integrate them into the system.