Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
On 1 February, the Prime Minister told the House of Commons that the Labour Party and Sir Keir Starmer are “bankrolled” by the protest group Just Stop Oil. We fact checked this and found no evidence that it was true.
On 8 February, we wrote to the Prime Minister and asked him to back up his claim with evidence or correct the record. He has not responded.
So far, more than 3,700 people have written to the Prime Minister to ask him to correct the record.
As of this week, more than 40,000 people have signed our petition to improve the corrections system in Parliament. Under current rules, the Prime Minister is one of the few MPs who can officially correct the record. But he has not yet chosen to do so!
FACT CHECK
Do Rishi Sunak's claims about hospital discharge funding stack up?
During Prime Minister’s Questions on 8 February, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak made a series of claims about hospital discharge funding. He said part of £14 billion in new health and social care funding will go to a new discharge fund aimed at speeding up hospital discharges in England.
He added that this money was “already making a difference” and that “we can see the numbers of people unnecessarily in hospitals are already reducing, easing the burdens in our accident and emergency departments”.
Over the past two weeks we’ve tried to fact check these claims, but this has been difficult because Number 10 has declined to explain what specific information Mr Sunak was referring to or provide any evidence to back up what he said. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has given us details of funding set aside to speed up discharge, but has not clarified what Mr Sunak’s claims were based on.
This is disappointing. Politicians making serious claims in public debate should be prepared to explain their claims and support them with evidence. Number 10 has also failed to back up two other claims from Mr Sunak in recent weeks, on A&E patient flow and Labour party funding!
FACT CHECK
Viral 'average energy cost' Europe price list is not what it seems
We’ve seen a number of tweets and Facebook posts giving figures for the “average energy costs” in different countries across Europe, which suggest the UK’s energy costs are the highest by far at £2,585 (around €2,960). This claim was also retweeted by Labour MP Karl Turner.
But these prices aren’t “average energy costs” for consumers in those countries. They are wholesale electricity costs for suppliers which were correct for a specific hour on one day back in December.
A map of Europe with the same figures was tweeted on 15 December 2022, with the caption “Comparative energy prices. What's going on?”
The map pictured was clearly taken from the day-ahead market data published on the website of Epox Spot (also known as the European Power Exchange), which is used by around 300 companies across Europe to buy and sell electricity at short notice to meet demand.
A spokesperson for Epox Spot told us that the data corresponded to day-ahead prices per megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity, for delivery on 12 December 2022, specifically for hour 19 (between 6pm and 7pm), and gave us the data that appears to back this up.
These prices are not what consumers pay for energy, or any type of average. They are how much electricity cost companies in those countries for delivery in the 19th hour on 12 December. These hourly prices vary throughout the day, and the £2,585 used for Great Britain was the peak. On average, electricity on that day cost £675 per MWh.
The Household Energy Price Index, which measures consumer energy prices in the capital cities of 33 European countries showed that in January 2023, out of the countries in the post, electricity cost the most in Germany at 54c per kilowatt hour, followed by Denmark, where it was 53c. In the UK it was 47c (42p) while the European average was 29c.
Why is there such a vast difference in average energy costs?
€650 - France
€650 - Belgium
€620 - Spain
€558 - Germany
€558 - Denmark
€546 - Holland
€545 - Austria
€543 - Norway
€476 - Finland
€174 - Poland
€2,960 - UK
— Dave Sumner Smith (@davesumnersmith) February 13, 2023
As others have noted, the list has appeared dozens of times on Twitter since December 2022, and has been retweeted by Labour MP Karl Turner.
But these prices aren’t “average energy costs” for consumers in those countries. They are wholesale electricity costs for suppliers which were correct for a specific hour on one day back in December.
https://fullfact.org/latest/
QE ie printing currency, with nothing to back it is inflationary.
With a huge national debt , the reason the FED has their permanent headache,
Sunak is an EU shill to sell out UK starting Monday with the gift of NI to Ireland.
Put in place by the Remain MPs Globalist Cabal, the useless idiot is even trying to get Charles embroiled with the Windsor Agreement whilst giving our tanks and hardware to other countries for the puppet of Ukraine.
Still we got the Eurovision so it is all OK.
The Boris supposed "Oven Ready Brexit deal"never existed and it is now very apparent, as is the complete failure of the "Brexit deal to deliver any of the supposed advantages to the UK as a whole, so Sunak is stuck between a rack and a hard place!
It has been argued that the new withdrawal agreement will create a “border down the Irish Sea” with checks taking place on goods crossing into Northern Ireland from Great Britain.
It’s correct that goods checks will have to take place. This will kick in at the end of the transition period, unless or until the UK and EU sign a trade agreement superseding it. The transition period would last until December 2020 at the earliest, or at the latest December 2022.
The problem-
Let’s say you were trying to sell Welsh lamb to Ireland and, after the end of the transition period, the EU charged a tariff on British lamb imports. Under the rules detailed above, you could (instead of shipping directly to Dublin, incurring a tariff) ship your lamb from Wales to Belfast (with no tariff) and then over land to Dublin (with no tariff). In effect you’d have got your lamb into Dublin tariff-free, making a mockery of EU tariff rules.
So the UK government and the EU have come up with a fix—the border in the Irish sea.
EU tariffs will be applied to selected goods crossing from the rest of the UK into Northern Ireland. Any good which is deemed as “at risk” of moving into the EU after crossing into Northern Ireland will be subject to the EU tariff—a definition of an “at risk” good is yet to be decided.
Experts have said it’s likely that most UK exports to Northern Ireland won’t face a tariff.
But this means there will be customs checks and controls on goods crossing from the rest of the UK into Northern Ireland, in order to ensure the correct tariffs are applied. This also applies to goods entering Northern Ireland from other non-EU countries.
If the “at risk” good crossing into Northern Ireland doesn’t end up in the EU, traders will have paid the EU tariff rate, when they should have paid the UK tariff instead. In those cases, traders will be entitled to a refund from the UK government, provided the UK tariff is lower.
This new protocol replaces the previous Irish backstop in the former withdrawal agreement negotiated by Theresa May. Under the terms of the backstop, if the UK and EU had failed to agree a free trade agreement by the end of the transition period, then the whole of the UK would have entered a “single customs territory” with the EU.
That would have meant no tariffs on goods moving between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. However Northern Ireland alone would have remained aligned to some extra EU rules (to ensure the Irish border remained open), meaning there would have been some quality checks on goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.
(So quite a mess with only one obvious solution, rejoin the EU !)
I remember when the Brexit vote was announced telling my English workmates that Brexit had the potential to cause serious problems in Northern Ireland.
It turns out I was correct.
The DUP supported Brexit but have been bleating on about the protocol when if fact they should have been sharing responsibility for the mess that they helped create. I believe that in their warped view Brexit would have put a border back on Ireland, instead of where it ended up between mainland and Northern Ireland.
I agree with tibbs - we either need to re-join the EU and remove all borders or join the single market which will result in the same.
The main thrust of the brexiteers argument was brexit would allow the UK to take back control of borders and stop illegal immigrants...this has clearly and spectacularly failed.
The second main argument was trade deals with the world....this has also failed spectacularly. The US for example will not sign a deal with UK until the mess around northern Ireland is dealt with to its satisfaction. Other trade deals leave the UK no better off than before.
Fishermen feel lied to
Farmers Feel lied to
The country feels lied to....and they are right!
@MaryBr190 I couldn’t let your comment go. You cannot “gift” Northern Ireland to Ireland anymore than you can gift Cumbria to England. Geographically, demographically and now economically Ireland is a single entity. Brexit has simply hastened Irish political reunification and it is ironic, that the son of Indian parents helps “return” rather than “gifts” the territory if you like. What this all has to do with a gold mining company in Egypt? Yes it is interesting, oh wait another former English colony…..
Hi Confluence, thank you for and interesting post, regarding your fair comment on the relevance of this conversation, It's not unusual on this forum during quiet times or during "Closed period" or even very difficult times, and there have been plenty of those, that over weekends one discussion or comment will lead into something else, it keeps the forum alive or ticking over and healthy, no doubt though that as soon as one of the members has some Centamin related news it will be posted!
There is a great deal of misunderstanding about what has taken place in Ireland
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI3nGVHxFI8
Ireland’s history is brought vividly to life as REVOLUTION IN COLOUR explores the struggle for Irish independence during the early decades of the 20th Century through restored and colourised newsreel footage, and photographs from the period.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReGXyZRiDS4
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/themes/nationalism-war-independence.htm
https://www.neversuchinnocence.com/impact-of-conflict-irish-war-of-independence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executions_during_the_Irish_Civil_War
@mrtibbles Than you for your reply and courtesy. I have absolutely no problem with open debate on any forum and would encourage it.
My concern here is with the possible conflation of ongoing events. I also have little time for the romanticism of any wars though am able on occasion to understand some wars on utilitarian grounds etc.
Regarding Northern Ireland and the gift comment.
The DUP constitutes less than 21% of the electorate vote in Northern Ireland. They supported Brexit which they knew removed the very foundation of peace and acceptance of a status quo among the majority of people on the island of Ireland. ( A status quo by the way which left NI as part of the UK). Most NI people voted not to leave the EU as most understood it and the consequences. The DUP now bring down Stormont yet this is the parliament they support . They argue that is what the “other side” did previously over another matter but the other side don’t support Stormont on a longterm existential basis. Like Turkeys the DUP voted for their Christmas and it astounds me how little the British media and public understand this. In my opinion Sunak should not be held to ransom by a minority in NI or the UK for that matter. Boris and his like bring his narcissism to this either out of ignorance or malice, but which ever it is - it is to serve his own ends.
Sunak giving Ireland over to EU regulation (as I suspect will happen) is the first step to the whole of the UK being under EU regulation. So much for taking back control.
The problem with BREXIT was that it promised different things to those who promoted it- now all we hear is that the reason why it is failing is cos the way it's being implemented- utter rubbish. We
constantly hear about "not exploiting opportunities" which is waffle as no one EVER states exactly what these are specifically eg the new trade deal with "x" will yield "y" in - all the new trade deals yield f all. And if all these opportunities do in fact exist- they still yield f all. They never state any specifics. My personal experience has been paying loads
more for parts(duty) for my motorbike racing that I have to get from Germany l, not to the mention the delays along with flipping carnet costs and time to do- thought we were supposed to have reduced paperwork not increased amount etc of goods transported for euro events- the only benefit i've seen so far is i get a stamp in my passport when i visit Spain
Petroc, UK law: What proportion is influenced by the EU?
n brief: Simply counting laws does not consider that some laws have more impact than others. Quoted figures have varied wildly from under 10% to 70%. It's possible to justify many of these, depending on which definition of 'UK law' you look at, but those at the higher end count EU rules that aren’t really laws in any meaningful sense.
Counting the uncountable
It makes little sense to treat major Acts of Parliament such as the 457-page Health and Social Care Act 2012 which reformed the whole NHS the same as, say, three pages of technical regulations on VAT fraud.
The House of Commons Library has warned that "there is no totally accurate, rational or useful way of calculating the percentage of national laws based on or influenced by the EU."
So no set of figures can give us a good measure of the influence of the EU on law in the UK.
It’s more meaningful to look at specific sectors and areas of law.
In agriculture, fisheries, external trade, and the environment, it’s fair to say that EU legislation and policy is indeed the main driver of UK law and policy, although the UK retains some freedom of action in these areas.
In other important areas—for example, welfare and social security, education, criminal law, family law and the NHS—the direct influence of the EU is far more limited.
Estimates range from 13% to 65%, although all have problems
In 2010, the House of Commons library published a comprehensive analysis of the variety of ways this percentage can be calculated. There are difficulties with all measurements, but it concluded "it is possible to justify any measure between 15% and 50% or thereabouts".
Since then, part of its analysis has been updated, and other estimates have been produced, for example by the campaign group Business for Britain.
The figures depend on which UK law is included in the calculation, and the extent of 'EU influence' are the key factors.
There’s no single definition of ‘UK law’. Rules made by judges have the force of law, for example, but counting them up is probably impossible.
Those aside, the main types of laws in the UK are Acts put in place by the UK Parliament, rules and regulations drawn up by ministers known as Statutory Instruments, and regulations produced by the EU which apply automatically.
An estimated 13% of Acts and Statutory Instruments have an EU influence, whereas that rises to 62% when EU regulations are included in addition to Acts and Statutory Instruments.
So simply counting up the variety of 'EU influenced' UK laws, which vary from Acts to protect against terrorism through to restrictions on Moldovan milk, does not provide a conclusive picture.
The other thing to bear in mind is that in areas for which the EU is responsible, EU laws override any conflicting laws of member countries. So there’s an overall influence in these areas that is harder to count.
Cont
Part 2
Calculating the 13% figure
The first method takes UK Acts and Statutory Instruments which put in place, or refer to, things the UK has to do under EU law.
This varies from ones which make only a passing reference to EU obligations to ones where the main purpose is to implement EU obligations.
The House of Commons Library found that between 1993 and 2014, 13% of these two types of law were EU-related, on average.
So 13% is likely to be too low, in reality, but 62% is much too high!
The first method doesn’t consider all legal influence that the EU has on the UK. Some EU initiatives don’t need to be made into laws at a national level as they are implemented through 'EU regulations'.
EU regulations automatically have binding legal force in every EU member country. The important ones are usually agreed by government representatives on the EU’s Council, as well as by the directly elected European Parliament.
Some of these are important: big businesses considering a merger will need to know a lot about the EU Merger Regulation, for example.
But some of these EU regulations are about things like tobacco growing in the Canary Islands or whether Danish ships can catch mackerel, which won’t directly impact on the UK!
Many others are relevant but highly technical: assigning a customs code to light-up plastic skulls, or the regular calculation of the ‘standard import value’ for fruits and vegetables. They’re made by the European Commission on its own, without going through the main lawmaking process.
These kinds of decisions are more like what a civil servant or even a local council might decide in the UK, which reflects the fact that the Commission isn’t like any one UK government body. Its output consists both of important laws and proposals for laws, as well as mundane administrative decisions.
So while leaving EU regulations out of the count of ‘UK laws’ is likely to underestimate EU influence, including them is likely to overestimate it!
Counting them all would give a figure of around 62% over the past 20 years. Business for Britain says this figure is 65%, although that analysis includes corrections to laws!
Legal experts have described this method as “comparing apples with pears”. As many of these are administrative decisions passed in the forms of laws, you could compare them to all the decisions made in government departments rather than Acts and Statutory Instruments passed by parliament.
All this goes to show the difficulties of these counting exercises in the first place!
Hi Confluence,
Thank you for your considered reply, I certainly agree about the number of politicians putting their own self interests before those of the people the are supposes to represent!
in my view the DUP acted despicably by accepting a bribe to support the Tory government , rather like Nick Clegg did when he went into partnership with Cameron and Co which certainly wasn't in the best interests of the ordinary people!
My second cousin was a tank (Saracen)commander) and did several tours of northern island and he despaired at the way the country tore itself apart and due to this experience he was active in the campaign for a peace accord.
Tibbs
Mr Tibbles, thank you for the exhaustive research on EU influence on UK law. That is the situation as it is. Brexit offered the opportunity of the freedom to CHANGE law, and move away from the control of EU regulation. UK law still being heavily influenced by EU law might indicate the difficulty of extricating the UK from that regulation, or that politicians have been slow to exploit potential advantages, or that the UK is comfortable with some degree of alignment with the EU, or that those opportunities where illusory. I see the UK rowing back from Brexit.