How NOT to win friends and influence people on PH

[sidicks]

Tannedbaldhead said:

It'll be lot more than one. Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

Quite possibly, but my point is that this was a meaningless anecdote rather than any useful commentary on resources.

Tannedbaldhead said:

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

It still seems likely that there will be a net reduction!

[mybrainhurts]

Tannedbaldhead said:

Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

How do present numbers compare to numbers before we joined the EU?

[Tannedbaldhead]

sidicks said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

It still seems likely that there will be a net reduction!

That could be achieved. Best way is to "shadow" EU legislation.

Basically UK automatically adopts EU legislation and regulation as its own. EG EU Parliament debates and decides on the likes fishing net mesh size, distance nitrogen based fertilizer can be used from a river, air quality standards, water quality standards at beaches etc. EU civil servants draw up the rules and we just adopt them automatically cost free. Some of the UKIPpy types were less than happy on a point of priciple but, hey, points of pragmatism should piss over points of principle all day every day.

[mybrainhurts]

Funkycoldribena said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

That could be achieved. Best way is to "shadow" EU legislation.

Basically UK automatically adopts EU legislation and regulation as its own. EG EU Parliament debates and decides on the likes fishing net mesh size, distance nitrogen based fertilizer can be used from a river, air quality standards, water quality standards at beaches etc. EU civil servants draw up the rules and we just adopt them automatically cost free. Some of the UKIPpy types were less than happy on a point of priciple but, hey, points of pragmatism should piss over points of principle all day every day.

Basically remain in the eu in all but name.
You can shove that one..

Not sure if TBH serious. If serious, needs strait jacket and gag...

[Tannedbaldhead]

Funkycoldribena said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

That could be achieved. Best way is to "shadow" EU legislation.

Basically UK automatically adopts EU legislation and regulation as its own. EG EU Parliament debates and decides on the likes fishing net mesh size, distance nitrogen based fertilizer can be used from a river, air quality standards, water quality standards at beaches etc. EU civil servants draw up the rules and we just adopt them automatically cost free. Some of the UKIPpy types were less than happy on a point of priciple but, hey, points of pragmatism should piss over points of principle all day every day.

Basically remain in the eu in all but name.
You can shove that one..

I show you how to slash civil service costs and this is the thanks I get.

[Tannedbaldhead]

Funkycoldribena said:

mybrainhurts said:

Funkycoldribena said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

That could be achieved. Best way is to "shadow" EU legislation.

Basically UK automatically adopts EU legislation and regulation as its own. EG EU Parliament debates and decides on the likes fishing net mesh size, distance nitrogen based fertilizer can be used from a river, air quality standards, water quality standards at beaches etc. EU civil servants draw up the rules and we just adopt them automatically cost free. Some of the UKIPpy types were less than happy on a point of priciple but, hey, points of pragmatism should piss over points of principle all day every day.

Basically remain in the eu in all but name.
You can shove that one..

Not sure if TBH serious. If serious, needs strait jacket and gag...

Straight from the Nick Clegg book of slime..

Seriously.

Take the effect nitrogen containing organo-phosphates have on rivers. The nitrogen content feeds algae resulting in green waterways full of dead fish. EU pays for scientific research to see how best to prevent this then the bureaucrats draw up the legislation. It's not a cheap process.
EU scientific research showed net mesh size was causing fish species to evolve into smaller individuals. Again regulations were change and new net sizes had to be legislated for.
There are tens of thousands of such issues requiring legislative and regulatory solutions. Bringing civil service resources to bear to address them all would cost billions. Shadowing the EU process would save that money.

The guy arguing for this wasn't some bleeding heart liberal/socialist type but a hard nosed fiscal conservative.

[fluffnik]

sidicks said:

The EU could choose to lift the threat for UK citizens living in the EU any time it wanted, but it has chosen not to.?

No, it can't.

When the self-harm that is Brexit kicks in, and Brits become non-EU citizens, their immigration status ceases to be an EU matter and becomes a matter for the individual member states.

This is because the EU does not rule its sovereign members, it does useful stuff for them, cheaply, and efficiently on the whole.

(Nice vinyl OP! )

[anonymous-user]

Tannedbaldhead said:

sidicks said:

Derek Smith said:

That's not what is happening. The government is recruiting more bureaucrats. A neighbour, fairly recently retired, has been asked back due to the problems with lack of staff brought on by leaving the EU.

So -3000 + 1 = -2999

It'll be lot more than one. Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

Swap a civil servant, working for the benefit of the EU, in Brussels, paying tax to the EU and paid for by the UK for a cIvil servant working for the benefit of the UK, in the UK paying tax in the UK; done.

[Tannedbaldhead]

fblm said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

sidicks said:

Derek Smith said:

That's not what is happening. The government is recruiting more bureaucrats. A neighbour, fairly recently retired, has been asked back due to the problems with lack of staff brought on by leaving the EU.

So -3000 + 1 = -2999

It'll be lot more than one. Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

Swap a civil servant, working for the benefit of the EU, in Brussels, paying tax to the EU and paid for by the UK for a cIvil servant working for the benefit of the UK, in the UK paying tax in the UK; done.

So we're now agreed on a large increase in UK civil service numbers.

[turbobloke]

Tannedbaldhead said:

fblm said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

sidicks said:

Derek Smith said:

That's not what is happening. The government is recruiting more bureaucrats. A neighbour, fairly recently retired, has been asked back due to the problems with lack of staff brought on by leaving the EU.

So -3000 + 1 = -2999

It'll be lot more than one. Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

Swap a civil servant, working for the benefit of the EU, in Brussels, paying tax to the EU and paid for by the UK for a cIvil servant working for the benefit of the UK, in the UK paying tax in the UK; done.

So we're now agreed on a large increase in UK civil service numbers.

Doesn't look like agreement.

[Tannedbaldhead]

turbobloke said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

fblm said:

Tannedbaldhead said:

sidicks said:

Derek Smith said:

That's not what is happening. The government is recruiting more bureaucrats. A neighbour, fairly recently retired, has been asked back due to the problems with lack of staff brought on by leaving the EU.

So -3000 + 1 = -2999

It'll be lot more than one. Was listening to a very interesting documentary on Radio 4 where politicians and ex senior civil servants were discussing how the civil service would cope with the logistical magnitude of disentangling the UK and and EU followed by having to administer subsequent UK regulation, implementation of legislation and administration of things like regional and agricultural aid.

The consensus was that we are going to need a much larger British civil service in the years to come.

Swap a civil servant, working for the benefit of the EU, in Brussels, paying tax to the EU and paid for by the UK for a cIvil servant working for the benefit of the UK, in the UK paying tax in the UK; done.

So we're now agreed on a large increase in UK civil service numbers.

Doesn't look like agreement.

I pointed out that to replace EU laws and regulation with UK law and regulation a larger Civil Service would be required. FBLM said we should swap EU civil servants for UK civil servants. Where's the disagreement?

Edited by Tannedbaldhead on Tuesday 7th March 09:32

[anonymous-user]

Tannedbaldhead said:

So we're now agreed on a large increase in UK civil service numbers.

It seems likely that you will need more civil servants given the magnitude of the changes coming. Whether or not you get them though is a matter of funding. My point was simply that if you must employ people to shuffle paper on extraordinarily generous terms, at least you can pretend it's for the benefit of the UK and have them resident and taxed in the UK.

[Murph7355]

jeff666 said:

As a Bodywork Man,

That gap around the boot is awful, please say the boot is open ?

You've never worked on TVRs, have you...

(The rest of the thread is just duplicating... Can we keep the mundanity to the 3 or 4 pre-existing threads - and maybe rationalise those!)

[NRS]

ukkid35 said:

If you think the appropriate response is to threaten 3 million EU citizens (some of whom are my friends, neighbours, and colleagues) with deportation then I reckon you are mistaken - that is truly evil.

That is complete nonsense - and that is said as a Brit living in Europe so it comes from someone potentially getting affected more than most posting on here. It's not a nice thing, but at the same time it goes both ways (the EU should do the same if they were not "evil"). It's also the same as many countries around the world - it is a risk to move and get a new job in another country.

Using the same justification you can say it is evil to allow those 3 million EU citizens to go to the UK and put the locals out of a job. I'm not saying that is the case, but just spin the argument around and it's nothing like an easy "Brexit is evil" argument.

[oyster]

ukkid35 said:

phillpot said:

So Brexit means we need 3000 less bureaucrats and pen pushers?

There's a saving already.

Quite apart from the personal cost to those involved, we are about to lose the economies of scale, since we will be 'taking back control' of all the functions whose costs were shared between 28 countries. So if you think we are about to save money, I suggest you are somewhat mistaken.

This.

Anyone who thinks that we'll have less meddling and regulations after leaving the EU has rocks in their head.

[oyster]

loafer123 said:

ATG said:

sidicks said:

ukkid35 said:

If you think the appropriate response is to threaten 3 million EU citizens (some of whom are my friends, neighbours, and colleagues) with deportation then I reckon you are mistaken - that is truly evil.

No such threats are being made. HTH

Weasel words. Their position is clearly threatened just as is the position of UK citizens living in the EU. The UK government could choose to lift the threat from EU citizens in the UK any time it wanted to, but it has chosen not to.

We have offered to guarantee their status. The EU has chosen not to agree to that. Blame the Eurocrats, not our own politicians who are offering to do the right thing.

Can you show me the offer that we have made?

Perhaps reference a press report, press release, Hansard or something similar?

[Jinx]

oyster said:

Can you show me the offer that we have made?

Perhaps reference a press report, press release, Hansard or something similar?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/29/donald-tusk-accuses-british-voters-backed-brexit-creating-anxiety/

[fluffnik]

fblm said:

Swap a civil servant, working for the benefit of the EU, in Brussels, paying tax to the EU and paid for by the UK for a cIvil servant working for the benefit of the UK, in the UK paying tax in the UK; done.

Except what you're actually doing is swapping 1/28th of a civil servant working for all the members of the EU, UK included, with a whole civil servant duplicating the work.

The EU is cheap and efficient, it saves all its members money, including the net contributors.

[Jinx]

fluffnik said:

The EU is cheap and efficient, it saves all its members money, including the net contributors.

[NRS]

fluffnik said:

Except what you're actually doing is swapping 1/28th of a civil servant working for all the members of the EU, UK included, with a whole civil servant duplicating the work.

The EU is cheap and efficient, it saves all its members money, including the net contributors.

And yet you want Scottish independence which is doing the opposite...?

Obviously there will be efficiency due to the scale of the EU, but at the same time big also means more inefficiencies in terms of processes, and also that often there is more compromise for everyone involved.