Hammond:
Seems to think he is indispensible so any future tory PM will have to keep him as Chancellor. Dream on you’ll be out mate sitting on the back benches along with Clark and just as relevant as Hessletwerp.
Foreign aid:
It doesn’t matter to me how big or small the foreign aid budget is in comparison to other cost centres. What does matter to me is what happens to the money that I have contributed. I expect it to be spent on some worthy cause, (eg emergency food/ disaster aid etc), just the same as the money I contribute voluntarily. What I do not expect it to be spent upon is a new armoured Mercedes limousine for President Izi Uzumba, or upon guns - with a reciprocal benefit for the UK arms manufacturers as part of the deal - which are going to be used against those of his own people who voted the wrong way.
Franglais:
Back again!
The basic rate of UK has fallen by over 40% since the mid seventies. Higher tax rates have been reduced too. That has MUCH more to do with underfunding of services.
Are you really fooled by a ‘sleight of hand trick’ like that?
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
Makes sense. Reducing public spending means less tax revenue required.
Asking the private sector to bid for care and security provision, well, in the words of TNUK’s resident philosopher CF, ‘what could possibly go wrong’?
Spardo:
Apparently they are. Hysterical outbursts in place of cold careful thought. Rave on Brexiteers, you’ll get your Brexit come what may, why are you all so unhappy? 
To be fair, Brexiteers haven’t got a monopoly on that.
They’re trying hard to corner the market though.
cav551:
Hammond:
Seems to think he is indispensible so any future tory PM will have to keep him as Chancellor. Dream on you’ll be out mate sitting on the back benches along with Clark and just as relevant as Hessletwerp.
Foreign aid:
It doesn’t matter to me how big or small the foreign aid budget is in comparison to other cost centres. What does matter to me is what happens to the money that I have contributed. I expect it to be spent on some worthy cause, (eg emergency food/ disaster aid etc), just the same as the money I contribute voluntarily. What I do not expect it to be spent upon is a new armoured Mercedes limousine for President Izi Uzumba, or upon guns - with a reciprocal benefit for the UK arms manufacturers as part of the deal - which are going to be used against those of his own people who voted the wrong way.
You’re right IMHO to question how well/badly Aid is spent. Agree there.
But is simply chopping it all back going to harm the corrupt or the needy most?
Throwing money at a problem isn’t wise, neither is giving less, surely?
Franglais:
cav551:
Hammond:
Seems to think he is indispensible so any future tory PM will have to keep him as Chancellor. Dream on you’ll be out mate sitting on the back benches along with Clark and just as relevant as Hessletwerp.
Foreign aid:
It doesn’t matter to me how big or small the foreign aid budget is in comparison to other cost centres. What does matter to me is what happens to the money that I have contributed. I expect it to be spent on some worthy cause, (eg emergency food/ disaster aid etc), just the same as the money I contribute voluntarily. What I do not expect it to be spent upon is a new armoured Mercedes limousine for President Izi Uzumba, or upon guns - with a reciprocal benefit for the UK arms manufacturers as part of the deal - which are going to be used against those of his own people who voted the wrong way.
You’re right IMHO to question how well/badly Aid is spent. Agree there.
But is simply chopping it all back going to harm the corrupt or the needy most?
Throwing money at a problem isn’t wise, neither is giving less, surely?
Foreign Aid in itself breeds corruption, proof of that was in ‘93 when American troops began to distribute food in Somalia, the local Somali Guerrilla warlord took charge, confiscated the food and used it for his troops.
Of the 0.7% we as a country spend on Foreign Aid 37% of the total amount goes towards foreign development programs, the other 63% is on food and medical aid. Two of the top five countries which recurve aid are Afghanistan and Syria, which is infuriating being as we send military aid for them to kill each other and cause a crisis so we can send aid to help them.
Grumpy Dad:
Foreign Aid in itself breeds corruption, proof of that was in ‘93 when American troops began to distribute food in Somalia, the local Somali Guerrilla warlord took charge, confiscated the food and used it for his troops.
Of the 0.7% we as a country spend on Foreign Aid 37% of the total amount goes towards foreign development programs, the other 63% is on food and medical aid. Two of the top five countries which recurve aid are Afghanistan and Syria, which is infuriating being as we send military aid for them to kill each other and cause a crisis so we can send aid to help them.
I think you’ll find that’s what’s known as ‘politics’.
dexxy57:
Makes sense. Reducing public spending means less tax revenue required.
Asking the private sector to bid for care and security provision, well, in the words of TNUK’s resident philosopher CF, ‘what could possibly go wrong’?
Agreed, I watched Panorama last night about the struggle to make ends meet looking after elderly, and young, people in real need.
A bloke working as a mobile mechanic but can’t stray more than an hour away from home because he is the full time carer of his 37 year old wife who is practically paralysed by a very bad form of arthritis, plus their young triplets. He never gets a full night’s sleep and sometimes is woken several times in an hour.
A young woman full time carer for her elderly mother with dementia whose only respite has been a special day centre. Now closed for lack of funds.
And a 72 year old man who has dementia brought on by a sudden brain swelling. His wife looks after him 24/7. No money for nurses.
These are people who have contributed and are not work shy scroungers but are caught in a trap not of their making. I had as much sympathy for the man in charge at the council who was obviously stressed out and admitted to being close to resigning because of it. I think the council is already spending over half its revenue on this and still has to make cuts to cope.
OK, not to do with Brexit. But is it? How many elderly and infirm British citizens are living out their lives in France and (particularly) Spain who are close to being forced back to Britain where they will put an increased burden on already overstretched resources? I don’t know that many Brits here but I do know of several who have been forced back by fear of the future. Only this afternoon a single elderly woman is returning ‘home’ (ironically to that council area above, N. Somerset) with her only companions a cat and a dog, but as she doesn’t drive and will take the train, needs somebody like me to take her pets. I make no profits, I work on the bare costs of my vehicle, but even reducing it to the bone by suggesting she meet me at the station in Folkestone, she still can’t afford it.
Spardo:
dexxy57:
Makes sense. Reducing public spending means less tax revenue required.
Asking the private sector to bid for care and security provision, well, in the words of TNUK’s resident philosopher CF, ‘what could possibly go wrong’?
Agreed, I watched Panorama last night about the struggle to make ends meet looking after elderly, and young, people in real need.
A bloke working as a mobile mechanic but can’t stray more than an hour away from home because he is the full time carer of his 37 year old wife who is practically paralysed by a very bad form of arthritis, plus their young triplets. He never gets a full night’s sleep and sometimes is woken several times in an hour.
A young woman full time carer for her elderly mother with dementia whose only respite has been a special day centre. Now closed for lack of funds.
And a 72 year old man who has dementia brought on by a sudden brain swelling. His wife looks after him 24/7. No money for nurses.
These are people who have contributed and are not work shy scroungers but are caught in a trap not of their making. I had as much sympathy for the man in charge at the council who was obviously stressed out and admitted to being close to resigning because of it. I think the council is already spending over half its revenue on this and still has to make cuts to cope.
OK, not to do with Brexit. But is it? How many elderly and infirm British citizens are living out their lives in France and (particularly) Spain who are close to being forced back to Britain where they will put an increased burden on already overstretched resources? I don’t know that many Brits here but I do know of several who have been forced back by fear of the future. Only this afternoon a single elderly woman is returning ‘home’ (ironically to that council area above, N. Somerset) with her only companions a cat and a dog, but as she doesn’t drive and will take the train, needs somebody like me to take her pets. I make no profits, I work on the bare costs of my vehicle, but even reducing it to the bone by suggesting she meet me at the station in Folkestone, she still can’t afford it.
Relax Spardo, her local MP is JRM. She’s in safe hands.
Spardo:
Agreed, I watched Panorama last night about the struggle to make ends meet looking after elderly, and young, people in real need.
A bloke working as a mobile mechanic but can’t stray more than an hour away from home because he is the full time carer of his 37 year old wife who is practically paralysed by a very bad form of arthritis, plus their young triplets. He never gets a full night’s sleep and sometimes is woken several times in an hour.
A young woman full time carer for her elderly mother with dementia whose only respite has been a special day centre. Now closed for lack of funds.
And a 72 year old man who has dementia brought on by a sudden brain swelling. His wife looks after him 24/7. No money for nurses.
These are people who have contributed and are not work shy scroungers but are caught in a trap not of their making. I had as much sympathy for the man in charge at the council who was obviously stressed out and admitted to being close to resigning because of it. I think the council is already spending over half its revenue on this and still has to make cuts to cope.
OK, not to do with Brexit. But is it? How many elderly and infirm British citizens are living out their lives in France and (particularly) Spain who are close to being forced back to Britain where they will put an increased burden on already overstretched resources? I don’t know that many Brits here but I do know of several who have been forced back by fear of the future. Only this afternoon a single elderly woman is returning ‘home’ (ironically to that council area above, N. Somerset) with her only companions a cat and a dog, but as she doesn’t drive and will take the train, needs somebody like me to take her pets. I make no profits, I work on the bare costs of my vehicle, but even reducing it to the bone by suggesting she meet me at the station in Folkestone, she still can’t afford it.
That was very moving actually. It’s almost like the ‘Lions Led By Donkeys’ thing. Every budget cut at Westminster gets trickled down. Someone has to square the circle though. And it’s usually those at the the bottom of the pile that have to bear the pain.
dexxy57:
Grumpy Dad:
Foreign Aid in itself breeds corruption, proof of that was in ‘93 when American troops began to distribute food in Somalia, the local Somali Guerrilla warlord took charge, confiscated the food and used it for his troops.
Of the 0.7% we as a country spend on Foreign Aid 37% of the total amount goes towards foreign development programs, the other 63% is on food and medical aid. Two of the top five countries which recurve aid are Afghanistan and Syria, which is infuriating being as we send military aid for them to kill each other and cause a crisis so we can send aid to help them.
I think you’ll find that’s what’s known as ‘politics’.
It’s not politics, it’s imperialistic control.
Grumpy Dad:
dexxy57:
Grumpy Dad:
Foreign Aid in itself breeds corruption, proof of that was in ‘93 when American troops began to distribute food in Somalia, the local Somali Guerrilla warlord took charge, confiscated the food and used it for his troops.
Of the 0.7% we as a country spend on Foreign Aid 37% of the total amount goes towards foreign development programs, the other 63% is on food and medical aid. Two of the top five countries which recurve aid are Afghanistan and Syria, which is infuriating being as we send military aid for them to kill each other and cause a crisis so we can send aid to help them.
I think you’ll find that’s what’s known as ‘politics’.
It’s not politics, it’s imperialistic control.
Imperialistic control isn’t politics? Enlighten me.
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest. 
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case. 
Carryfast:
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest.
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case.
For once I agree, Churchill was a great man whose leadership went a long way towards winning the war, but it was a war that he was keen on joining and Hitler played right into his hands by invading a country that he knew Britain was treaty bound to defend. Chamberlain was an honest man who believed that to allow Hitler the small piece of Czechoslovakia that he was demanding, because it had a large German speaking population, would save Europe from war or at least delay it till Britain was better prepared.
The lesson is that you should not make alliances with countries who cannot reciprocate to your advantage. The current Yank moron thinks he is doing Europe a favour but people with more commonsense than him know that a united Europe is in the USA’s best interest. It isn’t a one way street. But Britain alone may not command the same loyalty if needed, Nato or no Nato. It has been said in this thread many pages ago that Britain nearly lost in the Falklands because the French sold the Argies Exocets. Of course they did, but western armament nations do that all the time, but it is true that President Mitterand gave Britain as much secret information that he could on the weapons, how, if, they could be defended against, and also where they were deployed in Argentina, how many the Argies had and he further banned all further sales of weapons and spares.
Isolation is a lonely furrow as Britain may well find to her cost.
On the subject of foreign aid,would it not be better to throw a few quid at these countries,to give their inhabitants a half decent way of life,which in turn,may slow down the influx of refugees to your country?
Most,if not all,claim,that they just want a better life.So give it to them,at home.
According to figures the EU member states (collectively, under the EU banner)have given 3.5bn to Somalia over a 5 year period.Internet figures,not mine.
As cav suggested earlier,so long as its not used for the presidents stretch limo,guns,fighter planes,etc.
Answers as to how thats achieved are a different fettle of kish altogether!
Spardo:
Carryfast:
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest.
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case.
For once I agree, Churchill was a great man whose leadership went a long way towards winning the war, but it was a war that he was keen on joining and Hitler played right into his hands by invading a country that he knew Britain was treaty bound to defend. Chamberlain was an honest man who believed that to allow Hitler the small piece of Czechoslovakia that he was demanding, because it had a large German speaking population, would save Europe from war or at least delay it till Britain was better prepared.
The lesson is that you should not make alliances with countries who cannot reciprocate to your advantage. The current Yank moron thinks he is doing Europe a favour but people with more commonsense than him know that a united Europe is in the USA’s best interest. It isn’t a one way street. But Britain alone may not command the same loyalty if needed, Nato or no Nato. It has been said in this thread many pages ago that Britain nearly lost in the Falklands because the French sold the Argies Exocets. Of course they did, but western armament nations do that all the time, but it is true that President Mitterand gave Britain as much secret information that he could on the weapons, how, if, they could be defended against, and also where they were deployed in Argentina, how many the Argies had and he further banned all further sales of weapons and spares.
Isolation is a lonely furrow as Britain may well find to her cost.
No the ‘lesson’ is that Nation states have often had to ally and co operate with each other throughout history,sometimes even on the basis of my enemy’s enemy is my friend,to defeat aggressive take over by whatever type of Federalism.The 3rd Reich just being another.
As for Chamberlain no he just lied in the national interest. 
IE not to fool the country but to placate Hitler and give us the time we needed to re arm and picked his fights wisely on that basis.
All to give us the slightest chance of holding on as a …sovereign independent Nation State and not being taken over by what was just another extension of the German Federalism started by Bismark.The fact that in doing so we ( he ) also saved the rest of Europe from the same takeover and fate being just a bonus.
Oh wait.
Spardo:
Carryfast:
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest.
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case.
For once I agree, Churchill was a great man whose leadership went a long way towards winning the war, but it was a war that he was keen on joining and Hitler played right into his hands by invading a country that he knew Britain was treaty bound to defend. Chamberlain was an honest man who believed that to allow Hitler the small piece of Czechoslovakia that he was demanding, because it had a large German speaking population, would save Europe from war or at least delay it till Britain was better prepared.
The lesson is that you should not make alliances with countries who cannot reciprocate to your advantage. The current Yank moron thinks he is doing Europe a favour but people with more commonsense than him know that a united Europe is in the USA’s best interest. It isn’t a one way street. But Britain alone may not command the same loyalty if needed, Nato or no Nato. It has been said in this thread many pages ago that Britain nearly lost in the Falklands because the French sold the Argies Exocets. Of course they did, but western armament nations do that all the time, but it is true that President Mitterand gave Britain as much secret information that he could on the weapons, how, if, they could be defended against, and also where they were deployed in Argentina, how many the Argies had and he further banned all further sales of weapons and spares.
Isolation is a lonely furrow as Britain may well find to her cost.
No the ‘lesson’ is that Nation states have often had to ally and co operate with each other throughout history,sometimes even on the basis of my enemy’s enemy is my friend,to defeat aggressive take over by whatever type of Federalism.The 3rd Reich just being another.
As for Chamberlain no he just lied in the national interest. IE not to fool the country but to placate Hitler and give us the time we needed to re arm and picked his fights wisely on that basis.
All to give us the slightest chance of holding on as a …sovereign independent Nation State and not being taken over by what was just another extension of the German Federalism started by Bismark.The fact that in doing so we ( he ) also saved the rest of Europe from the same takeover and fate being just a bonus.
Oh wait.
Spardo:
Carryfast:
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest.
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case.
For once I agree, Churchill was a great man whose leadership went a long way towards winning the war, but it was a war that he was keen on joining and Hitler played right into his hands by invading a country that he knew Britain was treaty bound to defend. Chamberlain was an honest man who believed that to allow Hitler the small piece of Czechoslovakia that he was demanding, because it had a large German speaking population, would save Europe from war or at least delay it till Britain was better prepared.
The lesson is that you should not make alliances with countries who cannot reciprocate to your advantage. The current Yank moron thinks he is doing Europe a favour but people with more commonsense than him know that a united Europe is in the USA’s best interest. It isn’t a one way street. But Britain alone may not command the same loyalty if needed, Nato or no Nato. It has been said in this thread many pages ago that Britain nearly lost in the Falklands because the French sold the Argies Exocets. Of course they did, but western armament nations do that all the time, but it is true that President Mitterand gave Britain as much secret information that he could on the weapons, how, if, they could be defended against, and also where they were deployed in Argentina, how many the Argies had and he further banned all further sales of weapons and spares.
Isolation is a lonely furrow as Britain may well find to her cost.
Wasn’t the Battle of Britain October 1940 ?
whiplash:
On the subject of foreign aid,would it not be better to throw a few quid at these countries,to give their inhabitants a half decent way of life,which in turn,may slow down the influx of refugees to your country?
Most,if not all,claim,that they just want a better life.So give it to them,at home.
According to figures the EU member states (collectively, under the EU banner)have given 3.5bn to Somalia over a 5 year period.Internet figures,not mine.
As cav suggested earlier,so long as its not used for the presidents stretch limo,guns,fighter planes,etc.
Answers as to how thats achieved are a different fettle of kish altogether!
Firstly a ‘few’ quid ain’t going to cut it and doesn’t go far anyway when spread across the massive populations in question.So it inevitably turns into a lot more than a few quid.To the point where people suffer at home in a doomed attempt to fix all the problems of the third world.
As for economic migration it’s easier and far cheaper to just forcibly repatriate them when they arrive.Especially bearing in mind that Africa is actually richer in natural resources than we are.It’s up to them to use those resources to look after themselves.Instead of which the place is paraysed by laughable levels of corruption and internal tribal wars and mass export of food while their own starve.That’s not our fault nor problem.
Grumpy Dad:
Carryfast:
gingerfold:
Neville Chamberlain waving his scrap of paper “peace in our time”
Ironically it is possible to lie in the national interest.
The only person who Chamberlain fooled being Hitler.On that note feel free to go to war over the annexation of Czechoslovakia in March 1938.The Battle of Britain would have been interesting in the late Summer of 1938 without Spitfires and less than 100 Hurricanes in that case.
Wasn’t the Battle of Britain October 1940 ?
August/September actually but obviously would probably have been August 1938 ‘if’ Chamberlain had been suicidally stupid enough to declare war on Germany in March 1938.
In which case we’d have been facing a similar situation as the Polish ‘Airforce’ faced in 1939. 
How do I know all that.By actually listening to those of the WW2 generation who weren’t brainwashed by all the anti Chamberlain bs.
birminghammail.co.uk/news/no … g-10105969
Few quid,being a turn of phrase,yes admittedly,a lot of quids.
And no,it wont fix the problems of the third world. A root problem that needs to be sorted out,so those in power,dont have a need to extricate every last ounce of positivity in their people.
Cheaper to repatriate them,yes,most likely.
Not necessarily sure about the easier bit of repatriation to be honest.UKBP hasn`t exactly covered themselves in glory in that department.
Up to themselves to use their resources?Yes,once again to a point.
Paralysed by laughable levels of corruption??Hmmm.Pan to UK government!
Not our (UKs) fault.No absolutely not.(Maybe to a point in historical terms)
But sadly,it is your problem.