The EU debate - Part III

Is it going to create jobs for the unemployed? Unlikely.

 

I doubt it. It will probably be given to existing civil servants to do the work .

 

Yup.

 

There isn't enough civil servants to do the work they already have. The days of it being a cushy number are long gone.
They are like headless chickens these days, jumping to many tunes and getting nowhere fast. It's precisely because they are so stretched that private companies run rings round them in tenders.

 

We should draft in some skilled foreign workers then.

 

Well, I did read a while back that the Tories were planning on contracting out all of the financial negotiations out to the big accountancy firms. So not only will it not create jobs, but we've basically handed decisions to private companies that should be being made by elected politicians.

i.e. We got our country back, but then went and handed it to JP Morgan

 

It's a shame Pete isn't still with KPMG.

 

Watching the way IBM and Accenture shaft the government again and again is a real eye opener. All because a contract wasn't watertight or ministers changed their minds after the contract was signed, leaving the private contractor in complete control of price for anything not in the contract.

 

If you really think contractors are going to make decisions regarding trade deals you are seriously deluded.

 

Paul the Plug: "You still don't understand do you"
That must mean I do understand because you haven't produced any proof that I didn't understand.
When did I say that I thought the UK paid £350 per week to the EU?

 

Our legion of politicians and civil servants are sure to nail it.

 

He's definitely flipped. It must be all that Polish sausage!..

 

From the FT. Sorry it's a but long but I realise some don't have access.
' Sir Jeremy Heywood, the country’s top civil servant, has held talks with companies including accountants EY and KPMG, and the consultants McKinsey, as he prepares for a negotiation with Brussels described by outgoing prime minister David Cameron as “the most important task the British civil service has undertaken in decades”.

“We want the brightest and the best working on these complex negotiations,” said a government spokesperson. “It is right to draw on people with the necessary skills and expertise from within the civil service but also to look outside too.”'
The senior partner of a leading London-based law firm said: “We’ve got super-smart people who understand the regulatory framework who will be intensely valuable.”

The companies told Sir Jeremy that their staff were already stretched helping clients deal with the fallout of Brexit and that while they want to help, it will come at a substantial price to the taxpayer.

The government’s professional and business services council, which includes the big four accountancy firms, leading management consultancies and lawyers, has been asked if it would be able to provide staff.

PwC, which, with fellow accountants Deloitte and the law firm Linklaters, was one of the companies represented at a meeting last week of the council, said it was “ready to help as required”.
The civil service is badly underpowered in some areas, notably in trade. Britain has not negotiated its own trade deal since 1973 when it handed over responsibility to the European Commission.

Sir Simon Fraser, former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, said last month that Britain had 20 “active hands-on” trade negotiators, and would be up against 600 experienced trade specialists in Brussels.

The government is believed to have estimated that it needs between 700 and 750 extra staff to negotiate not just with the EU but with the other countries with which the bloc has trade deals.
“The government is going to struggle to gear up to have the bandwidth to properly negotiate the detailed cross-EU and wider bilateral trade deals across the globe,” said Iain Anderson, executive chairman of communications company Cicero.'

 

Brexit: May to introduce EU repeal bill in Queen's Speech
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37532364

 

Labour and the left: A guide to names
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37470750

"Loonyism"?

 

How well do you know Animal Farm?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/art...ign=animalfarm&intc_linkname=radio4_fac_quiz1

 

You said we could give it to the NHS. It is obvious to any normal person that the it you refer to is the £350 million. You make no effort to explain that it is not £350 million so you agreeing with Johnson and the leave campaign that we could give that £350 million to the NHS

[/QUOTE

See above

 

See above[/QUOTE]
I said we could pay any amount to NHS. It's the governments decision.

 

I'll let other, normal, posters make up their minds as to whether you did or not. I know from your ramblings that you fell for the £350 million per week myth no matter how many times you try to squirm your way out of it

 

You just make it up as you go along. I know the government of the day will decide spending. You may think that an organisation set up for the referendum will make government decisions but no Leavers were so stupid.