RayC

Globally, things vary quite a bit from country to country, and it also can depend on where you departed from, so it is not quite as straightforward as some posters are suggesting. For example, you can bring most fruit and veg but not meat and dairy products into the EU. You can basically bring anything into the UK if it originates from an EU/EEA state. Fruit and veg can be brought in from non-EU/ EEA countries but not meat and dairy. I guess that the moral of this story is: Check before you leave. We arrived at Suvarnabhumi from Turkey yesterday with about 2kg of grapes. Didn't even consider that we might get stopped and there was nothing before boarding or in flight to suggest that importing fruit was banned in Thailand and as it happens, we passed through without a problem. (Grapes were excellent. However, I guess that I should implement my own advice in future!????)

Lot of background detail. Imo most relevant part of article as follows (make of it what you will): "Mr Sunak reportedly wants to agree targets with Mr Macron for stopping boats, and a minimum number of French officers patrolling beaches, and to be able to deploy Border Force officers in France."

If your relatives deny knowing that you were using their address then I guess - and it is just that 'a guess' - that it would be more trouble than it is worth for DWP to prosecute them. However - another guess - DWP will probably try to recover the overpaid amount (plus a penalty?) from your estate. My father died on 15 May and I had to repay 16 days pension from his estate.

Once again you accuse me of contradicting myself where - once again - no contradiction exists: Your conclusion is the result of flawed logic. At no point have I stated - either implicitly or explicitly - that I believe that Johnson would be a better PM than either Sunak or Starmer. In fact, I believe the exact opposite. What I said is that 'Johnson remains the best chance of a Tory victory at the next general election'. Do I believe that Johnson will lead the Tories into the next election and that he would win it? As things currently stand, 'No' and 'No'. However, many things will no doubt change over the next two years, and I'll probably change my view if the facts and the electorate's feeling change. Agreed but see below. Not really. For reasons I can't fathom, Johnson is still the most popular Tory politician according to YouGov albeit with a negative poll rating.

Very debatable. Following Truss's disastrous premiership, imo basically anyone - apart from a serial killer or convicted pedophile - would have lead to a bounce in Tory support in the short term. Whether this improvement can be maintained and whether it is enough to gain victory at the next election are two completely different matters; a 20% difference is a lot to overturn especially if - as promised - we are in for tough times. Imo - and for reasons I can't comprehend - Johnson is still the Tory's best chance of winning the next election. Hopefully, he won't get the chance to prove this one way or the other.

But Labour are more popular than the Tories.

Selective reporting by the Express (there's a surprise!). The same poll also asked 'If a general election were held tomorrow which party (a) would you vote for? (b) expect to win? In both cases, Labour polled in the low/mid 40%, the Tories in low/mid 20%.

That's very unfair. You're forgetting just how united, stable and prosperous the country has been for the past 12 years.

It's possible to feel sympathy for Truss the person but not Truss the politician. Having said that even the former is difficult, given that Truss remains defiantly arrogant and shows no sign of contrition for putting the country through 6 weeks of turmoil. As for the markets settling down; yes, they would have unless, of course, they didn't. A more likely outcome, if Truss had pursued her ill thought-out policies, would have been a run on the pound and all that that would have entailed. It seems to be a trait of right-wingers that they accept no responsibility and accountability for their actions. It's usually the MSM and/or the EU that is to blame when things go wrong, so I guess that the market being blamed is, at least, a change of villain. Always someone else's fault.

The final +/-45 seconds when she offered thanks to various people was fine. As for the rest of it .....

I am the bringer of good news: Apparently Rees-Moog has resigned from the government.

Interesting article in the BBC 6 o'clock news tonight about the effects of Brexit on the UK labour market. Imagine that it will be in the 10pm version as well. Spoiler alert: They imply the effects have been negative.

Indeed. There was a referendum where the majority voted for economic self-harm which is now being shown to be a completely irrational decision. That's how a market economy works. I haven't suggested it isn't. I agree that there should be laws to protect worker's rights, working conditions, etc. I'm not a Truss free-market ideologue. I still don't understand your point. Should some of the Labour laws in the EU (and UK) be tightened up? Probably. Wrt to the events outlined in the article, I don't know anything about French or Spanish law but, given that they are both civilised countries, I imagine most (all?) of the outlined practices are illegal? Once again, we are broadly in agreement. However, yet again, nothing you have posted negates my contention that stopping freedom of movement has damaged the UK labour market in some industries.

Not a justification for leaving the single market Debatable. At a basic level it is simply a matter of demand and supply. If they are in equilibrium, you will - in theory - get a fair market price (wage).

Unfortunately true. Let's hope that you are right. I doubt that he will be as much of an ideologue as Truss or as big a chancer as Johnson, so that's a start.

All well and good and I'd agree with most of what you say BUT whatever way you dress it up, the fact remains that EU citizens now need a visa to work in the UK and this is a barrier to labour mobility.

A serious of statements without a discernable point. The purpose of a school is to impart knowledge. Kids start at different levels and develop at different rates. Some kids need more help than others. Schools are there to teach and to aid the kids' development. What are you suggesting? Ignore those kids who can't keep up? Maybe those jobs wouldn't exist if there wasn't a Polish community. Maybe there wouldn't be a Polish community if there weren't job vacancies that needed filling.

I've not suggested that there aren't labour shortages in some sectors and some member states in the EU. However both intuitively - and empirically - the labour market operates more efficiently if any barriers to labour mobility are removed.

So your argument is now reduced to "You can't tell us what to do. I'm going to self-harm because I can"' BTW: I'm British and YOU Brexiters don't own patriotism. Which is labourious and time-consuming and would be unnecessary if freedom of movement still existed. You just can't bring yourself to admit - despite all the evidence that is presented - that Brexit has had a negative effect on the labour market in certain sectors in the UK.

Nice theory but the practical outcome is different: There are still labour shortages in certain industries such as aviation and hospitality, which suggests that either there are not enough Brits - young or otherwise - and/or that Brits are unwilling/ unable to work in these industries. There needs to be flexibility in the labour market and the withdrawal of freedom of movement for EU citizens reduces it.

There are economic and political problems in the EU just as there are in the UK. However, there is nothing to suggest that the EU is about to collapse.

Why is this a problem? (Btw the population of the UK is closer to 70 million) 500 million people were not simply going to turn up in the UK. There is no way of knowing but I suspect that the number of EU nationals in the UK would have remained between 5 -8 million given normal churn. How big a problem was this in reality? Any figures to support your argument? My kids couldn't speak French when they arrived in Belgium. They learnt. That's what schools are for. Imo individuals should speak the local language and attempt to integrate themselves into their local communities/ environment. However, what's the problem in making Polish a requirement of the job if it involves dealing with the Polish community and makes life easier for them? Anyway, I would be surprised if the overwhelming majority of immigrants from the EU did not speak and understand, at least, basic English when they arrived (although I don't have any data to support this assertion).

You stated: "if the U.K wanted to make a new legislation , we would need rest of the E.Us agreement before we could proceed , we couldn't make our own legislations." This is completely untrue. The link confirms this. Where and how am I contradicting myself?

Eastern Europe may be more prosperous but the problems in certain sectors of the UK labour market have been increased by the withdrawal of freedom of movement.

Completely untrue. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/how-much-legislation-comes-from-europe/