Theresa May By Kuhlmann-MSC (CC-BY-3.0-DE)

Theresa May By Kuhlmann-MSC (CC-BY-3.0-DE)


Theresa May has been told to ditch her in-house Number 10 negotiator, or face getting the sack from No 10 herself!

The Prime Minister, Theresa May, has been warned that she risks getting the boot from Number Ten unless she gets rid of her Brexit negotiator, Oliver Robbins and also jettisons his plans for a long term customs union with the EU.

In a piece for the Sunday Times, Richard Tice and John Longworth of the Brexit campaign organisation Leave Means Leave argue that Robbins must go.

"In the last few weeks we have witnessed a prince of the civil service, the prime minister’s chief adviser on Brexit, Olly Robbins, changing crucial government policy, with embarrassing and damaging consequences. This is a man who has been allowed to usurp David Davis, the elected secretary of state, as chief Brexit negotiator."

Well, if there's anything that shows how the remain centred civil service is running and ruining Brexit, that's it!

The Sun says that the PM should not allow 'Remoaners, Lib Dems and Lords' to wreck Brexit, but it is now becoming more obvious by the day that the Prime Minister, Theresa May, has no intention of getting the UK truly out of the greedy grasp of the EU. She is looking to compromise on everything, which means the UK will be forever entwined within the the EU.

Not only are we due for a cabinet Brexit sub-committee meeting on Wednesday where it seems the PM will be going for a Brexit breaking customs union with the EU, which I talked about yesterday, but reports are now surfacing that she will be offering the EU freedom of movement in all but name as part of the Brexit deal. No wonder David Davis is said to be on the brink of resigning his position as Brexit Secretary.

In an exclusive report, the Independent says that UK negotiators will be offering a sort of 'high level access' to the UK for EU citizens that could be halted by the UK government with a sort of brake or restriction in certain circumstances.

"The Independent understands that the offer would mean European citizens coming into the UK after Brexit would benefit from visa-free travel.

"They would then be able to gain the right to work in the UK under a new status that would be distinct for people arriving from the EU."

Sounds just like what we have right now, because no government would ever halt freedom of movement under any circumstance in future whatever talk there is of brakes or restrictions today, as there would almost certainly be financial and political ramifications for doing so.

The will of the people is now being disregarded on a monumental scale by the UK establishment!

Oh, and to give you an indication of how powerful the EU really isn't, the US is about to impose tariffs on steel and aluminium imports as of the first of May.

This will hurt many EU countries as, for example, exports of finished steel products from the EU to the US in 2017 were as follows:

  • Germany – 951,000 metric tonnes
  • Netherlands – 632,000 metric tonnes
  • France – 237,000 metric tonnes
  • Sweden – 216,000 metric tonnes
  • Italy – 212,000 metric tonnes

then comes Luxembourg and Spain before we get to the UK with 173,000 metric tonnes.

So you would expect the EU to be concerned about these tariffs, and it is.

The EU's top trade official, Cecilia Malmstrom, said last week that Brussels expects nothing less than to be permanently excluded from the US tariffs. And the EU has said it has prepared countermeasures should tariffs continue.

But during her recent visit to the US Angela Merkel discussed these trade issues with President Trump and didn't get very far.

"Merkel suggested little progress had been made on the issue. – Reports the Guardian – 'The president will decide – that’s very clear,' she told reporters. 'We had an exchange of views on the current state of affairs and the negotiations. The decision lies with the president'."

And at a political rally in Michigan Trump blasted the EU that while it sounded nice, it took advantage of the US. But he did not blame the EU, he said it was past presidents that got his country into such a trading mess with the likes of the EU and China.

And he also said that the days of the US being taken advantage of were over.

Well that's another Remoaner excuse for being in the EU blown out of the water then!

Now onto the housing crisis.

A new report headed up by former Tory minister David Willetts says that Millennials are being forced to live in cramped and expensive accommodation far from their places of work.

And of course we all know what they say the cause is don't we – Oh yes, that's right – old people!

Old people had the temerity to buy a house and now live in it, so it's their fault that Millennials have to suffer bad accommodation.

Nothing to do with the hundreds of thousands of extra people every year we have to find houses for, nothing to do with an economy that cannot build enough houses fast enough to provide everyone who wants one a home to buy at a reasonable price.

No, it's the old people that funded their own homes, that funded the NHS that enabled everyone to live longer – it's all their fault so the recommendation is that they get taxed.

Referring to the report by the Resolution Foundation, the Guardian reports:

"It says that one way of addressing some of the generational implications of tax rises would be to change the age profile that these additional revenues are drawn from. The tax treatment of property and pension wealth may also have to be considered."

Ah, tax old people …. for being old!

And we're trying to get young people to invest in this workplace pension scheme – why? So it can be plundered later of course! You could not make it up.

Housing does not have to be expensive – you either ride rough shod over planning concerns and flatten vast tracts of the UK and fill it full of housing PLUS all the infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, roads and shops etc that go with them, or you limit the huge annual increase in the population by limiting net migration – it is not rocket science.

In either scenario, house prices would start falling as the supply/demand equation normalised.

And to all those people who bleat that we need to import young people to look after the ageing population, then I ask, what happens when those youngsters get old, coupled with people living ever longer lives anyway? Just importing more people to address it, multiplies our future problems because they too get old and will need to be looked after by – yes – multiple times the number of new people in the country.

And as an aside – when we import all those young people to look after our old people, who is looking after the old people they leave behind?

Anyway, as far as I am concerned what is being proposed for taxing the elderly is a sort of financial euthanasia, where the state comes to you when you reach certain age to force you out of your home and redistribute what you have, all because you are deemed 'old'.

What sort of incentive is that for young people when they realise there's no point in saving or investing at all?

Comment Here!