Gnasher

Yet loads loved Johnson? "he just stares at our tits"

But taking these assets back into public hands is a now a no no.

At least Starmer hasn't made the mistake of rushing David Lammy and Rachel Reeves out around the TV studios this morning to soothe things over.

He seems to mis read the room on almost everything lately. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/26/labour-cautious-public-ownership https://inews.co.uk/opinion/labour-stance-nationalising-rail-annoy-everyone-1760189

Civil war,

Editor New Statesman,

No pulling punches with that statement.

That's excellent from Dempsey there.

It's not just a few fellas on twitter having a moan, the dissent and criticism goes far deeper. Here's the head of Britain's biggest union and a huge financial contributor to a party who's funds happen to be going south.

True but looks like Johnsons been getting a bit too pissed on free booze and saying a bit to much to them sly KGB spies, as you do when you're the British foreign secretary.

Youd have to have a heart of stone not smile at that kid enjoying the occasion last night.

Phil Neville.

OK fair enough, I can see it's a difficult situation for you. I thought I heard something about the music industry trying to work out some sort of exemption for musicians although I'm not sure if anything concrete materialised.

I know.

I didn't know that about Aldi and I don't doubt it but the main issue was its another rise given to workers in part because of Brexit. As for business expecting more work for more money they are no longer n a position to demand anything, unless they want to lose more staff.

The reality is in these people's wage packets Everything is temporary and unsustainable to a point, bankers bonuses? Did the rich turn their nose up at them? Anyway If/when rises come to an end the reason will probably be through poor economic governance not through the act of Brexit. Anyway the length is not the whole issue, the worker/employer correlation change was desperately needed. Yours is a rather bizarre argument. More rights are obviously welcome but sky high unemployment has always been the main enemy of job security. We both live in areas blighted by mass unemployment. Thatcher used it in the 80s with an unemployment rate of 3mil plus. Employers knew they have a large pool of workers to call on and use it accordingly to slash pay and conditions. An awful lot of political commentators on both left and right predicted an upturn for the lowest 20% of workers in mainly manual lower paid occupations. Cummings being one of them. It really wasn't a suprise.

I was talking more in general terms. A firm struggling for labour should ensure job security rises, otherwise they'd soon be looking for even more labour. Thatcher used mass unemployment to suppress wages and increase job insecurity, which is what happened. I'm certainly not suggesting this is some kind of boom time for British workers across the card but some in certain low paid professions such as agriculture/hospitality/construction have definitely benefited from our withdrawal.

But they are, an example in the guardian today, or don't the low paid count? https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-sees-fastest-wage-rises-sectors-most-reliant-eu-workers-indeed-2022-02-25/

Well I've posted a link showing a major supermarket giving staff wage rises this very week in part because of Brexit.