Politics Thread 6

[KK]

Wage increases coming in 2020:

The national living wage is to rise by 6.2% in what the government says is "the biggest cash increase ever".

The rise is more than four times the rate of inflation and takes hourly pay for people over 25 to £8.72 from April.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: "For too long, people haven't seen the pay rises they deserve."

But businesses warned that a sharp increase in wages would put pressure on companies and urged the government to reduce costs elsewhere for firms.

Hannah Essex, co-executive director of the British Chambers of Commerce, said that many companies "have struggled with increased costs in a time of great economic uncertainty".

"Raising wage floors so far above the rate of inflation will pile further pressure on cash flow and eat into training and investment budgets," she said.

"For this policy to be sustainable, government must offset these costs by reducing others."

From April 2020, the new rates are:

• The National Living Wage for ages 25 and above - up 6.2% to £8.72
• The National Minimum Wage for 21 to 24-year-olds - up 6.5% to £8.20
• For 18 to 20-year-olds - up 4.9% to £6.45
• For under-18s - up 4.6% to £4.55
• For apprentices - up 6.4% to £4.15

An independent report published this year said there has been little or no evidence of job losses as a result of rising minimum wage levels, which are currently set at £8.21 for people aged 25 and over and £7.70 for 21 to 24-year-olds.

Professor Arindrajit Dube, an academic in the US and an expert on the subject, said there was "room for exploring a more ambitious national living wage" in the UK in the coming years.

He stressed, however, that because there is relatively little evidence available, the independent Low Pay Commission should be able to review the effect on jobs as pay increased.

Business rates

But the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) said "an increase of this magnitude" means firms may recruit fewer people, cancel investment plans or consider redundancies.

"There's always a danger of being self-defeating in this space," said Craig Beaumont, FSB director of external affairs and advocacy.

"Wage increases aren't much good to workers if prices rise, jobs are lost and there's no impact on productivity because employers are forced to cut back on investing in tech, training and equipment."

He said that small firms will need support, especially as there will be a 1.7% increase in business rates in April next year.

The government also said it will press ahead with recommendations by the Low Pay Commission to allow workers over 21 to receive the national living wage by 2024 when it is set to reach £10.50 an hour.

Labour has called for a £10-an-hour minimum wage and said the government had not gone far enough to help those on the lowest pay.

"This announcement falls short on what is needed to help workers and comes against a backdrop of an economy created by Conservative governments over the past decade that has left millions of people trapped in low paid, insecure work and underpayment of the minimum wage on the rise," said shadow work and pensions secretary Margaret Greenwood.

Frances O'Grady, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, said workers needed a national living wage of more than £10 "now, not in four years' time".

"This is a long-planned raise, but it's also long overdue. Workers are still not getting a fair share of the wealth they create. And in-work poverty is soaring as millions of families struggle to make ends meet," she said.

The Resolution Foundation, a think tank which focuses on the living standards of low and middle-income people, welcomed the plan but its economic analyst, Nye Cominetti, said it was "not risk-free" in terms of inflation.

He said: "It should be matched by a renewed commitment to swiftly evaluating evidence of the impact of such large and sustained minimum wage rises and acting on that evidence if problems emerge."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50947097

[Rocsteady]

Good.

[Dual]

Wasn't it meant to be £10?

[Moggy]

Wasn't it meant to be £10?

£10.50 an hour according to page 16 of their manifesto.

https://assets-global.website-files.com ... ifesto.pdf

[Tomous]

They shouldn’t be allowed to call it the National Living Wage until it is in fact, a living wage.

[Ecno]

They shouldn’t be allowed to call it the National Living Wage until it is in fact, a living wage.

It's a living wage in Bangalore* #globalbritain

*maybe, living costs in Indian cities are quite high.

[OrangeRKN]

They shouldn’t be allowed to call it the National Living Wage until it is in fact, a living wage.

It was genius and despicable rebranding

[Lagamorph]

Is raising the "National Living Wage" actually any good though if people can still pay less than it with the National Minimum Wage? Why are there two separate ones?

[Tomous]

Is raising the "National Living Wage" actually any good though if people can still pay less than it with the National Minimum Wage? Why are there two separate ones?

They rebranded the National Minimum Wage to the National Living Wage for people over 25. It’s the same thing.

They thought this was a good way of combatting calls to raise the Minimum Wage to the actual Living Wage rather than you know, actually raising it. And unfortunately, it worked.

[Lex-Man]

It's quite a good tactic because they can chalk it up as a promise fulfilled and then kick all critism into a quagmire of vauge definitions.

[Moggy]

It's quite a good tactic because they can chalk it up as a promise fulfilled and then kick all critism into a quagmire of vauge definitions.

Except their manifesto pegged it at £10.50 an hour.

Not that they will ever be held to account for it.

[Vermilion]

[Winckle]

It's quite a good tactic because they can chalk it up as a promise fulfilled and then kick all critism into a quagmire of vauge definitions.

Except their manifesto pegged it at £10.50 an hour.

Not that they will ever be held to account for it.

By 2024 wasn't it?

[Lex-Man]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/18123 ... hOms2uBu6I

NEWLY elected Prime Minister Boris Johnson has passed an EU Withdrawal Bill through a now compliant Westminster Parliament. He claims it proves he is “getting Brexit done” with his “oven-ready” agreement. However, having stripped out key components of the agreement he reached with the EU in November (and campaigned on in the recent Westminster election), that agreement is not the one they signed up to. He has, in effect, re-opened negotiations with the EU with absolutely no guarantee they will simply wave through the changes he wants in his crusade to turn the UK into a European sweatshop.

This is going to be interesting, if true.

[Moggy]

twitter.com/ianhowes1970/status/1211969425873809409

A big well done to Corbyn and Swinson for ignoring the warnings and being brave enough to cave in to the exact thing Boris Johnson wanted. A bloody good job not working together after caving in to Johnson as well.

[Lex-Man]

twitter.com/ianhowes1970/status/1211969425873809409

A big well done to Corbyn and Swinson for ignoring the warnings and being brave enough to cave in to the exact thing Boris Johnson wanted. A bloody good job not working together after caving in to Johnson as well.

The biggest worry is that they do the same thing again.

[Hexx]

Can anyone explain to my why Lab's leader elections take so long?

I mean it's like 3 times as long as the GE period

[Winckle]

Can anyone explain to my why Lab's leader elections take so long?

I mean it's like 3 times as long as the GE period

It's a democratic process involving multiple stages, CLP meetings, and then finally the actual vote.

[Squinty]

https://www.thenational.scot/news/18123731.pm-stripped-key-parts-deal-agreed-eu/?ref=fbshr&fbclid=IwAR1NZzdYZ15Ni76LWfeyWUZRNiphL5GPo2W4H0IvsHq2h3-32hOms2uBu6I

NEWLY elected Prime Minister Boris Johnson has passed an EU Withdrawal Bill through a now compliant Westminster Parliament. He claims it proves he is “getting Brexit done” with his “oven-ready” agreement. However, having stripped out key components of the agreement he reached with the EU in November (and campaigned on in the recent Westminster election), that agreement is not the one they signed up to. He has, in effect, re-opened negotiations with the EU with absolutely no guarantee they will simply wave through the changes he wants in his crusade to turn the UK into a European sweatshop.

This is going to be interesting, if true.

What the strawberry floating hell is he doing?

[KK]

Ban on chlorine washed chicken to remain in place:

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef will be kept out of the UK under any trade deal with the US, the environment secretary has promised.

Theresa Villiers told the BBC the current European Union ban on the two foods will be carried over into UK legislation after Brexit.

Until now the UK has been wavering on the issue.

But she told BBC Countryfile: “There are legal barriers to the imports and those are going to stay in place.”

Ms Villiers has previously talked of imposing tariffs on any future imports of US chicken and beef. But she’s been under great pressure from Britain’s farmers.

In the exclusive interview with the Countryfile programme, she said: “We will defend our national interests and our values, including our high standards of animal welfare."

Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef are illegal under EU law for different reasons.

The EU says feeding cows with growth-enhancing chemicals could potentially result in harm to beef-eating humans – a suggestion the US fervently rejects.

There is, on the other hand, no human health threat from using a bleach solution to kill salmonella on chickens. In fact, it’s rather effective.

But the EU says using chlorine allows American farmers to be careless with the welfare of the chickens.

The US regards the rules against these products as a European ruse to protect its own producers, and has stated that the trade of both meat products will be central to any UK-US trade deal after Brexit.

So Ms Villiers’ promise may please British consumers unhappy with the thought of chicken sprayed with bleach.

But it may make things more difficult for Britain’s trade negotiators.

Analysis by Faisal Islam, economics editor
The environment secretary has made a strong promise that "legal barriers" to the import of chlorinated chicken and hormone-treated beef will "stay in place" and that the government will "hold the line" on this even if insisted upon by President Trump in trade talks. This makes a quick trade deal with the US rather tricky to envisage.

Leaked US-UK trade documents showed the US tried to establish how far the UK would, after Brexit, detach from the EU's hard line against US farm trade methods. US officials had made a presentation and repeatedly raised the "unscientific approach the EU maintains towards Pathogen Reduction Treatments [chlorinated chicken]". The US has been in a dispute with the EU over such methods since 1997.

If the environment secretary's rejection of such key US exports is echoed in the UK's negotiating position with the US, the US Congress might also object. When similar statements were made by Michael Gove, when he was former environment secretary, in 2017, it caused a rift in cabinet with Liam Fox, who was then trade secretary.

It is a clear example of the delicate balancing act and trade-offs involved in the UK's new post-Brexit trade freedom.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51054700