BREXIT: Planning for No Deal.

Sorr GG misread it.

If the French at Calais say they are not going to do anything different what "planning" has been necessary?

The Calais border people have no need to check vehicles going to the UK, so nothing will change in that respect. However, they would have to check UK vehicles coming from the UK.

As it looks as though the threat of No Deal might be receding a bit this point may now be quite academic.

MPs have approved a rebel amendment to the Finance Bill that could limit the government's tax powers unless it avoids a no-deal.

This is part of our Government's response to a petition to rescind Article 50:

In last year’s General Election, over 80% of people then voted for parties committing to respecting the result of the referendum. It was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected. The Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will of the electorate.

I beggars belief that we are supposed to accept that for two main reasons.

1) It was only 80% of the people who voted and, more importantly:

2) I and I think most people didn't vote in the GE about Brexit, we voted for many different reasons so it is wrong to try and con us into believing it was all about Brexit.

I wish our politicians would read GN, then they would see that most of the old fogies who, it is claimed, blindly voted to leave the EU, think that leaving the EU is a very bad idea especially on the terms of the 'deal'.

I voted for Labour as I didn't want to vote for May and her 'Brexit means brexit' stance. Just as people voted for Brexit in some cases as a vote against austerity cuts, some of us used our vote to curtail the power of one of the worst PM/government in my lifetime. LibDem would have been a wasted vote. in my area Just imagine what would be happening now if May had a huge majority? I'm sick of being branded as 'the will of the people' and I'm sick of being told that I voted Labour because I wanted Brexit to happen.

Too true Labaik I didn't vote in the GE because of Brexit, I voted for a much bigger picture. It is reprehensible of our government to claim the GE result supported Brexit.

Hear, hear Labaik and nonnie

As I recall, there was actually very little mention of Brexit in the 2017 GE campaigning. And yes, there was a much wider picture to consider.

Almost unbelievably Theresa May has had "substantial telephone conversations" with the General Secretary of the Unite Union Len McCluskey and Tim Roach General Secretary of the GMB Union in an attempt to gain their support for her withdraw agreement with the European Union.

In the above, considering that the conservative party has spent the last thirty-nine years trying to destroy the trade union movement by way of countless anti-trade union bills through parliament, the foregoing without doubt demonstrates the desperation that Theresa May now faces in employing such means to save her Brexit policy.

However, I do applaud TM in seeking out the support of the broader labour movement in the country as Brexit will affect every person in Britain whatever their job or position in life. That stated, who would not have wanted to be on an extension line to those telephone conversations, especially the one with Len McCluskey, never a person to be backwards in coming forwards with his views in protection of working people.

For the Conservative party, having the prime minister pick up those phones to speak to the General Secretaries has to be a public declaration of thirty-nine years of a failed policy and anyone has to wonder if the Conservative party can survive as a single identity into the future following this and other such debacles in recent weeks.

It is also being reported that Honda are to close their Swindon assembly plant for at least one week at the beginning of April following talks with their JIT suppliers in regard to the security of deliveries following Brexit on the 29th of March

Link to the above can be found here:- news.sky.com/story/live-no-deal-brexit-would-do-incalculable-damage-business-secretary-11603455?inApp=true

Grandad is Len McC the one who still lives in a council house?

Nonnie, I would not have a clue on that one. It was the fact that a Tory Prime Minister is trying to gain support for a policy from a body they have been trying to destroy for the last thirty-nine years that made me chuckle.

Japanese PM tells May 'whole world' wants her to avoid no deal

www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/jan/10/brexit-latest-news-corbyn-speech-may-press-conference-reaches-out-to-labour-by-welcoming-workers-rights-amendment-politics-live

Grandad, 39 yrs of failed policies, that takes us back to 1980
So I assume that you think that the policies of the 1970s were absolutely fine, just great, wonderful.
It was a result of the union chaos if the 70s that the pendulum swung in the opposite direction, even Blair and his cronies realized that was no way to run a country.
The EU has brought many workplace benefits and protections, more still needs to be done, zero hours contracts, and pension protection to name but two

I could not agree with you more Davidhs in regard to the events of the late 1970s. Indeed, the trade union movement as a whole has accepted that they got things badly wrong at that time. I would also totally agree with you regarding the need to end zero hours contracts and the Gig Economy in what is known as "the race to the bottom."

However, over the last thirty-nine years, the Conservative party have engaged in bringing forward countless anti-trade union bills that have gone far beyond just balancing power in the workplace and country. Those acts in total I and many others believe have been intended to totally destroy the trade union movement and in that also the destroy the Labour party from politics in Britain.

What anyone sees now in the Labour party (for better or worse depending on personal views) is the result of Tony Blair and his cronies not recognising or accepting that the trades unions and the Labour party are linked in one overall Labour movement and always have been.

I believe Jenny Formby in her role as General Secretary of the overall labour movement in the country has this week put forward a discussion document on the future financing and relationship between the parliamentary Labour party and the broader labour movement. I have been very busy workwise, but I will try to find a link to that document or a brief as to its contents and post.

Grandad, I deliberately did not mention the " Gig Economy", which I view as entirely bad and gives unscrupulous employers the chance to exploit workers.
Multinational companies should not be allowed to increase their competitiveness by exploiting employees, nor should they be able to avoid taxation on UK generated income.

At present "union power" is being held in check, but I worry about the Southern Rail dispute and the Birmingham council strike, both in my view unreasonable action by relatively well paid employees. Meanwhile others on minimum wage have no power and no hope of change.

Given the chance the unions will take advantage of a Left Wing Labour administration and we will be back to the 1970s far too easily, there must be a moderate option that gives a fair deal for workers and investors.

I always have been an idealist!.

Labour in government will be prepared to take us back to the days of strike for the sake of it.

' Everybody out '

Labour has said it will restore union “collective action and acts of solidarity”. Meaning unions here could/would strike because they are in solidarity with any country in the world .

Back to the 70's/80's indeed.

I know its off thread but in answer to the comments about the gig economy, if you read beyond the headlines you will find that many people choose to work that way. There are many different reasons for this including students who fit the work around their studies. It is simplistic to suggest stopping it altogether.

POGS in regard to your post @ 10:05 today (12/01/18) in which you sight "acts of solidarity/ collective action" as being negative policy leading to an industrial relations position similar to that of the 1970s-80s. In the above, you fail to appreciate that the industrial world has very much changed since those days with very many companies now being multi-national.

By example to the above, it may well be that a multi-national manufacturer decides to cut terms and conditions to employees in one or more of its Asian or European plants to improve profitability in those plants. Again it may well be that workers in the companies British plant(s) realise that should the management succeed in reducing pay and conditions in the overseas plants, then the same will befall them in Britain.

In the above, should it not be allowed that those employees in all plants support each other in fighting against those cuts on an international basis, because in Britain under present legislation the foregoing is forbidden.

In the 1970s executive pay was on average ten times that of the shop floor worker. Today that disparity is one hundred and sixty times that of the shop floor worker, and the difference is still growing.

So, would it be such a bad thing if British workers were allowed to organise with employees in other same company workplaces (wherever that may be) to protect their terms and conditions and perhaps gain some control over the growing disparity between the executive and average pay in a company?

A Labour/momentum/union Government would succeed in bringing the UK down on its knees, and take us back to strikes and 3day weeks of the 70’s.
Multi-national manufactures would leave the UK in droves.

GrannyGravy13, it can be very well argued that Britain is on its knees already. In the face of the biggest crisis this country has faced since the second world war, we have cabinet ministers openly briefing against each other. That's strong and stable government for you

Also in the above, we have manufacturers already moving production to the continent and retailers trying to stockpile goods at huge cost in case there is disruption through the ports.

We have a prime minister with one plan which even her own party do not support, and in that trying to secure support from the trade unions that the her party has been trying to destroy for the last thirty-nine years.

GrannyGravy, you state that a Labour government would bring this country to its knees, Britain is already on its knees and the laughing stock of the world.

All brought about by the stupidity of the Conservative party and no other body.

UK is far from on its knees, 1.6b came to UK in new “tech” industries alone in 2019, we are still the 5th largest economy in the world. I could continue, but project fear has blinded some of the electorate so much that doom and gloom has become their “default” setting.

Also there are numerous reports coming from the eurozone indicating that it has already heading into a deep recession, sorry I for one do not want to be part of that debacle.

Germany 'may' be in trouble.https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/08/economy/germany-economy-recession-fears/index.html

it can be very well argued that Britain is on its knees already
Judging by reports, if Britain is on its knees then much of Europe must be in a state of collapse.

Why has the pound dropped 20% in value if we are not in trouble? Surely the value of the £ indicates what the rest of the world think about us?

As the whole world seems to be heading for a recession it seems to me to be immaterial whether we are inor out of the EU

www.businessinsider.com/why-global-markets-are-collapsing-and-who-is-to-blame-2018-10?r=US&IR=T