sluggerotoole--2020-06-17--The ethics of shopping vs buying less stuff…

In case you have missed all the subtle hints , the government wants you to open your wallet and spend some cash .
I studied Economics at A-Level and as part of my degree at Queen ’ s , but through all my learning , no one has ever summed up our economic system as well as the geniuses over at Modern Toss .
Or as the quote goes : Over the past few years , I have been buying less and less stuff .
I take quite a militant stand on this going as far as not buying birthday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still gets his Christmas and birthday presents , I am not a complete weirdo .
It was a long process getting down to zero .
Our family is quite big : at one time I was buying 21 Christmas presents for all the various brothers , sisters , nieces , nephews etc .
We then downsized to a secret Santa which worked fine for a few years .
Last year I suggested getting rid of the secret Santa and just going out for a meal or a show .
I will buy people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but I now refuse to buy people stuff .
The main problem is we all have too much stuff already – very few of us need anything .
There is a trend for minimalism and de-cluttering at the moment , where a lot of us are actively trying to get rid of the existing junk we have accumulated .
There is just too much stuff in the modern world .
More clothes than you could ever wear , more books than you could ever read , more TV shows than you could ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to keep up with it all .
I did consider getting a new car , but we don ’ t drive that much .
Our car is eight years old and still only has 40,000 miles on it , we hardly use it as it is .
During the lockdown , it was interesting how many of us seemed to get out of the habit of buying things other than groceries .
Anne Helen Petersen writes about this phenomenon over at Buzzfeed : We ’ re trained to buy often , buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And I ’ m not just talking about food , which everyone has to acquire in some capacity , or clothes .
I mean all the other small purchases of daily life : a new face lotion , a houseplant holder , a wine glass name trinket , an office supply organizer , a vegetable spiralizer , a cute set of hand towels , a pair of nicer sunglasses , a pair of sports sunglasses , a pair of throwaway sunglasses .
The stuff , in other words , that you don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it somehow finds its way to your cart at Target or T.J. Maxx .
In post–World War II America , the vast majority of things we buy are often not what we actually need .
But they ’ re indisputably things we want : manifestations of personal and collective abundance .
We buy because we ’ re bored , or because planned obsolescence forces us to replace items we can ’ t fix .
We buy to accumulate objects meant to communicate our class and what sort of person we are .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or change something , and purchasing something is the quickest way to do so .
When that doesn ’ t work , we buy “ an experience , ” whether it ’ s a night at Color Me Mine or a weekend bachelorette trip to Nashville .
We buy because , from the Great Depression onward , how we consume has become deeply intertwined with how we think of ourselves as citizens .
Apart from the desire to have less stuff in the house , my main objection to rampant consumerism is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The depressing realities of fast fashion where people wear stuff only once before discarding it is truly sad .
All the plastic junk that gets used once , then ends up in the landfill .
The poor sods who work for low pay in cramped factories to make all our stuff .
Of course the consumer economy is not just stuff ; there are also restaurants , services etc .
Before the plague , I did eat out 2 or 3 times a week .
But even restaurants are a moral minefield @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mountain of plastic waste .
Over the lockdown many of us were still on full salaries , so some of us will be in better financial shape than we were before the lockdown .
You could go out and spend money like a sailor on shore leave , but could I suggest an alternative course ?
Pay off your debts – it is boring but liberating .
Not buying stuff you don ’ t need is the ultimate form of resistance in our debt-fuelled consumer culture .
Given the massive queues this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept mine is a minority view .
But what about the shop workers ?
This is the moral dilemma in all this .
A system that relies on more and more consumption to keep the economy on track is a system that is utterly unfeasible in the long term .
As more and more things go automated or digital we will need to move to Universal Basic Income to protect low paid workers .
Then there is the ever growing threat of Amazon .
Why would you even bother risking a trip to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever you need directly to your door ?
I am conscious that many people are short of cash and don ’ t have the luxury of a well-paid job .
After climate change , inequality is the biggest issue facing society .
I have no problem paying more tax for a more equal society .
Feel free to hit the high street if you like .
But before you put the item in your trolley just pause and ask yourself , do I really need this ?
Try to shop local , eat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reopen , holiday at home , discover the satisfaction of Effective altruism , donate to local charities and Foodbanks .
Photo by Pexels is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

In case you have missed all the subtle hints, the government wants you to open your wallet and spend some cash.
I studied Economics at A-Level and as part of my degree at Queen’s, but through all my learning, no one has ever summed up our economic system as well as the geniuses over at Modern Toss.
Or as the quote goes:
We buy things we don’t need with money we don’t have to impress people we don’t like.
Over the past few years, I have been buying less and less stuff. I take quite a militant stand on this going as far as not buying birthday or Christmas presents anymore. Our son still gets his Christmas and birthday presents, I am not a complete weirdo. It was a long process getting down to zero. Our family is quite big: at one time I was buying 21 Christmas presents for all the various brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews etc. We then downsized to a secret Santa which worked fine for a few years. Last year I suggested getting rid of the secret Santa and just going out for a meal or a show. I will buy people experiences like lunch or a massage, but I now refuse to buy people stuff.
The main problem is we all have too much stuff already – very few of us need anything. There is a trend for minimalism and de-cluttering at the moment, where a lot of us are actively trying to get rid of the existing junk we have accumulated.
There is just too much stuff in the modern world. More clothes than you could ever wear, more books than you could ever read, more TV shows than you could ever watch. My head is melted, trying to keep up with it all.
I did consider getting a new car, but we don’t drive that much. Our car is eight years old and still only has 40,000 miles on it, we hardly use it as it is. During the lockdown, it was interesting how many of us seemed to get out of the habit of buying things other than groceries. Anne Helen Petersen writes about this phenomenon over at Buzzfeed:
We’re trained to buy often, buy cheap, and buy a lot. And I’m not just talking about food, which everyone has to acquire in some capacity, or clothes. I mean all the other small purchases of daily life: a new face lotion, a houseplant holder, a wine glass name trinket, an office supply organizer, a vegetable spiralizer, a cute set of hand towels, a pair of nicer sunglasses, a pair of sports sunglasses, a pair of throwaway sunglasses. The stuff, in other words, that you don’t even know that you want until it somehow finds its way to your cart at Target or T.J. Maxx. In post–World War II America, the vast majority of things we buy are often not what we actually need. But they’re indisputably things we want: manifestations of personal and collective abundance. We buy because we’re bored, or because planned obsolescence forces us to replace items we can’t fix. We buy to accumulate objects meant to communicate our class and what sort of person we are. We buy because we want to feel something or change something, and purchasing something is the quickest way to do so. When that doesn’t work, we buy “an experience,” whether it’s a night at Color Me Mine or a weekend bachelorette trip to Nashville. We buy because, from the Great Depression onward, how we consume has become deeply intertwined with how we think of ourselves as citizens.
Apart from the desire to have less stuff in the house, my main objection to rampant consumerism is the terrible environmental toll of our throw-away society. The depressing realities of fast fashion where people wear stuff only once before discarding it is truly sad. All the plastic junk that gets used once, then ends up in the landfill. The poor sods who work for low pay in cramped factories to make all our stuff.
Of course the consumer economy is not just stuff; there are also restaurants, services etc. Before the plague, I did eat out 2 or 3 times a week. But even restaurants are a moral minefield now with every takeout generating a small mountain of plastic waste.
Over the lockdown many of us were still on full salaries, so some of us will be in better financial shape than we were before the lockdown. You could go out and spend money like a sailor on shore leave, but could I suggest an alternative course? Pay off your debts – it is boring but liberating. Not buying stuff you don’t need is the ultimate form of resistance in our debt-fuelled consumer culture.
Given the massive queues this week outside places like Primark, I fully accept mine is a minority view.
Bristol is against slavery … Bristol queues outside Primark … “the duality of man”. pic.twitter.com/BJTfr6xDop — Mandy (@Kleesho) June 15, 2020
But what about the shop workers? This is the moral dilemma in all this. A system that relies on more and more consumption to keep the economy on track is a system that is utterly unfeasible in the long term. As more and more things go automated or digital we will need to move to Universal Basic Income to protect low paid workers.
Then there is the ever growing threat of Amazon. Why would you even bother risking a trip to the high street when someone can bring whatever you need directly to your door?
I am conscious that many people are short of cash and don’t have the luxury of a well-paid job. After climate change, inequality is the biggest issue facing society. I have no problem paying more tax for a more equal society.
Feel free to hit the high street if you like. But before you put the item in your trolley just pause and ask yourself, do I really need this?
Try to shop local, eat out at your local restaurant when they reopen, holiday at home, discover the satisfaction of Effective altruism, donate to local charities and Foodbanks.
Photo by Pexels is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-06-17--Greens can realise an alternative to continued neoliberalism if they reject the coalition deal

The media strategy for the Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil-Green Party coalition deal seems to rely on a positively-framed list of apparent ‘ gains ’ for the Green Party , giving the overall prejudice of a good deal .
The Greens , perhaps more than any party in the Republic ’ s system , know that the measure of this deal is its saleability to at least two-thirds of a wary party membership across the island .
The slew of pre-publication articles offering hors d ’ oeuvres of a ‘ widely-leaked ’ but withheld programme for government certainly gives the impression of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporting the agreement , with minimal time before a special conference to consider the options , ramifications , gains and disbenefits .
A strange approach indeed for the party of grassroots democracy , and presented as though ‘ there is no alternative ’ .
What could the Greens hope to achieve from a coalition deal ?
UCL economist Prof. Mariana Mazzucato recently told the Irish Times that the pandemic crisis merely underlines a fact of life in most neoliberal economies : that corporate power has supplanted state function and left governments unable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; only by a redefinition of the state ’ s role in the economy through investment and planning in the social interest can this be overcome .
The Covid-19 crisis already placed considerable strain on the never-fully-developed Irish state—the only EU member state not to provide what the WHO defines as “ universal healthcare ” —and the ensuing economic crisis will exert much more pressure on such a ‘ small state ’ than on larger neighbours .
It is not an understatement , therefore , to say that what is needed of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transformation of the economy , rather than tweaks to the existing framework .
Politically the incoming administration needs to be seen to substantively address the stern rebuke given by the electorate on housing , health and public services .
“ Our Shared Future ” appears to do neither .
In entering negotiations with two right-of-centre parties , the Greens were always going to have an uphill struggle for a ‘ good deal ’ , but this one falls well short .
Taking some of the substance : The headline Green ‘ gain ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carbon emissions and an associated increase in the Carbon Tax ( a tax paid by consumers of most common home and vehicle fuels ) to €100 per tonne , from a current level of €26 .
The measures listed to achieve this frontload the retrofitting of 500,000 homes and electrification of transport , and expansion of renewable energy .
Surprisingly , industry is envisaged to play no role in the reduction of emissions , and there is no indication that freight or air transport will either .
With a negligible amount of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rail and the electric road haulage solution not yet out of the starting blocks , it seems unlikely that the ‘ polluter pays ’ principle is being put to work here .
In the absence of a large stock of public housing in the State , the headline item of retro-fitting homes via incentive grants and loans brings its own problems of equity : whose homes will be retrofitted and at what costs to renters ?
In this context of passing virtually all the relevant costs to consumers and not the corporate polluters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ represent a ‘ just transition ’ to a low-carbon economy seems compromised at best .
What are the stakes in an ‘ unjust transition ’ ?
Ask Emmanuel Macron .
A referendum on a right to housing is a straightforward admission that there are no plans for the coalition to intervene substantially in the housing market .
Rhetorically speaking , the language of ‘ rights ’ around housing is quite separate from the hard reality of ensuring that there is enough affordable housing to meet the demand in the areas of population growth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greater Dublin Area ) .
The failure of successive governments to meet their own targets on home-building , the ineffectiveness of measures such as Rent Pressure Zones , and lack of support and protection for renters and low-waged buyers is not admitted , so it is not addressed .
Any equitable approach to housing would start with the essential fact that the Irish property market has become over-speculated and commodified .
The link between property prices and ‘ the economy ’ needs to be straightforwardly decoupled , and an extensive programme of public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Land Development Agency working in the public interest , not as a seller of public land .
The Green negotiators do seem to have secured some concessions from the two main parties of property , but the question is whether these amount to a structural solution to the biggest issue of the February election ?
The roll-out of the ‘ Sláintecare ’ plan to finally introduce universal healthcare to Ireland moves onto its third government , and is not hurried along much even in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic , during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ healthcare capitalists for rental-based temporary nationalisation of private hospitals .
Neither healthcare ( nor any other public service ) is specifically addressed in the business-oriented Stimulus plan , so a legitimate question arises about whether the funding ( €3 billion up-front ) is being committed to roll it out .
It is , I think , expected by voters that the pandemic provokes a sense of urgency about how to rapidly upgrade Ireland ’ s health capacity , which a second wave of Covid-19 will overwhelm without emergency investment .
Healthcare seems the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet the announcement sounds very much like the steady-as-she-goes reform Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil were planning to do by themselves anyway .
That Sláintecare is the “ only show in town ” is not in dispute , but does this programme for government go out of its way to expedite it ?
That the major concession on transport is in fact the Fine Gael manifesto commitment to maintain a 2:1 split on funding for public transport and roads doesn ’ t immediately seem like big win for the Green Party , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That leaves the major investment in cycling and walking infrastructure , as well as a vague commitment towards electrification of rail transport , the main Green ‘ wins ’ here .
And they are undisputed , if unimaginative .
The conspicuous absence of specific information on controversial road developments ( such as the A5-N2 ) , a car-based project undertaken by a Green minister in a previous administration , and of specific plans for greening logistics and air-travel , relegate these Green priorities to mere boosterism .
The demise of the cruel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win , as are the more holistic methodologies around women ’ s health , drugs , mental health and ageing .
Ditto on fracking .
But the simple fact these are included in this draft document , even if it is not endorsed by the supermajority required , indicates that they have been conceded by the conservative side and will occur with or without the Greens .
That said , it is hard to escape the overall ‘ low-tax ’ tenor of the broad economic ‘ plan ’ , whether on income tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latter is left to continuing the approach of the last government ) .
How a coalition government which maintains Ireland ’ s tax haven qualities above all else can really achieve much transformation must be one which rings in Green ears .
No amount of research into learning the brutal lessons of austerity , or widening and increasing the tax base to increase the role of the state in the economy seems capable of impacting a Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael programme for government crafted purely to maintain the staid Eurozone formula @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not the fault of the Green Party that neither Fine Gael nor Fianna Fáil heeded the warnings of Mariana Mazzucato , and even the IMF that hard times are coming , and that strong states are needed to weather the storm .
But the Green Party should be able to discern the political reality that a FF/FG government addicted to tax cuts and the banal technocracy of ‘ balancing the budget ’ at any cost needs a ‘ mudguard ’ .
And they are asking the Greens to fulfil that role .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the concessions substantial enough to justify sacrificial involvement ?
Will the concessions really prove robust enough to be a handbrake on a powerful government of the centre-right ?
Will any of the junior coalition partner ’ s commitments actually materialise , or will it be like every other Irish coalition of this century ?
This whole negotiation has usefully opened up what is considered politically possible by the two conservative parties , but it is disingenuous to frame it as a sound basis for entering government .
There is an alternative : having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right , can talks with Sinn Féin , Labour , the Left parties and a handful of independents achieve more ?
It is difficult to imagine that it would achieve any less .
My advice to Green members considering this deal is : Don ’ t be pushed into anything .
There is time to develop an alternative .
“ Public finances ” by The Green Party / Comhaontas Glas is licensed under CC BY-ND

The media strategy for the Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil-Green Party coalition deal seems to rely on a positively-framed list of apparent ‘gains’ for the Green Party, giving the overall prejudice of a good deal. The Greens, perhaps more than any party in the Republic’s system, know that the measure of this deal is its saleability to at least two-thirds of a wary party membership across the island.
The slew of pre-publication articles offering hors d’oeuvres of a ‘widely-leaked’ but withheld programme for government certainly gives the impression of an attempt to bounce Green members into supporting the agreement, with minimal time before a special conference to consider the options, ramifications, gains and disbenefits.
A strange approach indeed for the party of grassroots democracy, and presented as though ‘there is no alternative’.
What could the Greens hope to achieve from a coalition deal? UCL economist Prof. Mariana Mazzucato recently told the Irish Times that the pandemic crisis merely underlines a fact of life in most neoliberal economies: that corporate power has supplanted state function and left governments unable to plan for the crises that affect them; only by a redefinition of the state’s role in the economy through investment and planning in the social interest can this be overcome.
The Covid-19 crisis already placed considerable strain on the never-fully-developed Irish state—the only EU member state not to provide what the WHO defines as “universal healthcare”—and the ensuing economic crisis will exert much more pressure on such a ‘small state’ than on larger neighbours.
It is not an understatement, therefore, to say that what is needed of a programme for government is an historic 1945-style transformation of the economy, rather than tweaks to the existing framework. Politically the incoming administration needs to be seen to substantively address the stern rebuke given by the electorate on housing, health and public services.
“Our Shared Future” appears to do neither. In entering negotiations with two right-of-centre parties, the Greens were always going to have an uphill struggle for a ‘good deal’, but this one falls well short.
Taking some of the substance:
i) The Just Transition
The headline Green ‘gain’ is a 7% yearly cut in carbon emissions and an associated increase in the Carbon Tax (a tax paid by consumers of most common home and vehicle fuels) to €100 per tonne, from a current level of €26.
The measures listed to achieve this frontload the retrofitting of 500,000 homes and electrification of transport, and expansion of renewable energy. Surprisingly, industry is envisaged to play no role in the reduction of emissions, and there is no indication that freight or air transport will either.
With a negligible amount of the material flows on the island transported by rail and the electric road haulage solution not yet out of the starting blocks, it seems unlikely that the ‘polluter pays’ principle is being put to work here.
In the absence of a large stock of public housing in the State, the headline item of retro-fitting homes via incentive grants and loans brings its own problems of equity: whose homes will be retrofitted and at what costs to renters?
In this context of passing virtually all the relevant costs to consumers and not the corporate polluters, the claim of this plan to represent a ‘just transition’ to a low-carbon economy seems compromised at best. What are the stakes in an ‘unjust transition’? Ask Emmanuel Macron.
ii) Housing
A referendum on a right to housing is a straightforward admission that there are no plans for the coalition to intervene substantially in the housing market. Rhetorically speaking, the language of ‘rights’ around housing is quite separate from the hard reality of ensuring that there is enough affordable housing to meet the demand in the areas of population growth (mainly urban, especially in the Greater Dublin Area).
The failure of successive governments to meet their own targets on home-building, the ineffectiveness of measures such as Rent Pressure Zones, and lack of support and protection for renters and low-waged buyers is not admitted, so it is not addressed.
Any equitable approach to housing would start with the essential fact that the Irish property market has become over-speculated and commodified.
The link between property prices and ‘the economy’ needs to be straightforwardly decoupled, and an extensive programme of public housing needs to be rolled out by a Land Development Agency working in the public interest, not as a seller of public land.
The Green negotiators do seem to have secured some concessions from the two main parties of property, but the question is whether these amount to a structural solution to the biggest issue of the February election?
iii) Health
The roll-out of the ‘Sláintecare’ plan to finally introduce universal healthcare to Ireland moves onto its third government, and is not hurried along much even in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, during which profligate sums were paid to private healthcare capitalists for rental-based temporary nationalisation of private hospitals.
Neither healthcare (nor any other public service) is specifically addressed in the business-oriented Stimulus plan, so a legitimate question arises about whether the funding (€3 billion up-front) is being committed to roll it out. It is, I think, expected by voters that the pandemic provokes a sense of urgency about how to rapidly upgrade Ireland’s health capacity, which a second wave of Covid-19 will overwhelm without emergency investment.
Healthcare seems the most obvious priority in these times, yet the announcement sounds very much like the steady-as-she-goes reform Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil were planning to do by themselves anyway. That Sláintecare is the “only show in town” is not in dispute, but does this programme for government go out of its way to expedite it?
iv) Transport and infrastructure
That the major concession on transport is in fact the Fine Gael manifesto commitment to maintain a 2:1 split on funding for public transport and roads doesn’t immediately seem like big win for the Green Party, even if it is being portrayed as such.
That leaves the major investment in cycling and walking infrastructure, as well as a vague commitment towards electrification of rail transport, the main Green ‘wins’ here. And they are undisputed, if unimaginative.
The conspicuous absence of specific information on controversial road developments (such as the A5-N2), a car-based project undertaken by a Green minister in a previous administration, and of specific plans for greening logistics and air-travel, relegate these Green priorities to mere boosterism.
v) Social justice
The demise of the cruel system of Direct Provision is a major win, as are the more holistic methodologies around women’s health, drugs, mental health and ageing. Ditto on fracking. But the simple fact these are included in this draft document, even if it is not endorsed by the supermajority required, indicates that they have been conceded by the conservative side and will occur with or without the Greens.
That said, it is hard to escape the overall ‘low-tax’ tenor of the broad economic ‘plan’, whether on income tax or corporation tax (the controversy of the latter is left to continuing the approach of the last government). How a coalition government which maintains Ireland’s tax haven qualities above all else can really achieve much transformation must be one which rings in Green ears.
No amount of research into learning the brutal lessons of austerity, or widening and increasing the tax base to increase the role of the state in the economy seems capable of impacting a Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael programme for government crafted purely to maintain the staid Eurozone formula of ‘deficit reduction’.
It is not the fault of the Green Party that neither Fine Gael nor Fianna Fáil heeded the warnings of Mariana Mazzucato, and even the IMF that hard times are coming, and that strong states are needed to weather the storm. But the Green Party should be able to discern the political reality that a FF/FG government addicted to tax cuts and the banal technocracy of ‘balancing the budget’ at any cost needs a ‘mudguard’.
And they are asking the Greens to fulfil that role. In that context, are any of the concessions substantial enough to justify sacrificial involvement? Will the concessions really prove robust enough to be a handbrake on a powerful government of the centre-right?
Will any of the junior coalition partner’s commitments actually materialise, or will it be like every other Irish coalition of this century? This whole negotiation has usefully opened up what is considered politically possible by the two conservative parties, but it is disingenuous to frame it as a sound basis for entering government.
There is an alternative: having explored what’s possible with the Right, can talks with Sinn Féin, Labour, the Left parties and a handful of independents achieve more? It is difficult to imagine that it would achieve any less. My advice to Green members considering this deal is: Don’t be pushed into anything. There is time to develop an alternative.
“Public finances” by The Green Party / Comhaontas Glas is licensed under CC BY-ND


sluggerotoole--2020-06-17--#CargoOfBricks: After 100 years, the Civil War ends, Sinn Féin rises, Irish Greens step up to save t

#CargoOfBricks: After 100 years, the Civil War ends, Sinn Féin rises, Irish Greens step up to save the planet

In Cargo of Bricks , as the draft programme for government finally emerges nearly five months after February , Dr. Theresa Reidy and I talk through the blocks and difficulties that have had to be overcome to get a sellable deal back to their parties • The ideologically committed Greens have taken a harder line in the framing of the draft programme than either Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil , possibly making it harder for their two larger coalition partners to usurp and claim as their own .
• As Sinn Féin take on the constitutional role as leader of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to develop more solution-based challenges to the government .
And to get on top of operational matters that have drawn poor publicity in the past .
• In an era of “ two Taoisigh ” , will Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar ’ s ‘ spikey pragmatism ’ see them through ?
Nothing tests a government like ‘ events dear boy , events ’ .
And what will happen to the first of them when he steps down from the top office ?
Enjoy and see you next week .
You can subscribe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and other podcasts on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts or Spotify .
The YouTube version below has subtitles on it if you click the CC button .

Donate to keep Slugger lit!
For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.
Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger.
While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.
If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.


sluggerotoole--2020-06-17--Despite the posturing brinkmanship, a deal with the EU is on the cards

I can ’ t think of a negotiation between governments anywhere , anytime in history where the suppliant used the threat to damage themselves as a negotiating ploy if they didn ’ t get their own way .
Yet this has seemed to be Boris Johnson ’ s position as PM all along over Brexit .
First there was the about turn over the backstop to accept a harsher frontstop ( at least for Northern Ireland ) ; giving the EU all they wanted in the withdrawal agreement and then pretending he hadn ’ t ; the Northern Ireland protocol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directions with a silk hankie ; and finally that clock could go on ticking for all he cared ; he kept his own time .
There had to be some sense to all this perversity hadn ’ t there ?
The Europeans just didn ’ t get it .
The UK was actually leaving , you see .
And that meant they weren ’ t going to obey the EU rules – whatever the cost .
And anyway the Covid lockdowns would produce such a recession that the marginal costs of No Deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or two closer to reality is the belief the EU wants a deal as badly as Britain ( not everyone agrees ) and that , as usual they do an 11th hour/ 59th minute/stop the clock deal in the end .
Meanwhile the UK will extend the time not to negotiate but to implement .
Sensible people had their head in their hands when Johnson remotely met the Commission president Ursula von der Leyn on Monday .
But he came out promising more “ oomph ” , and as breezily optimistic as he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when he gave the EU all they wanted before going on to pretend he hadn ’ t .
And blow me they seem to be getting somewhere after all .
Johnson affects to believe a deal can be done by next month .
The mood in Brussels was said to be “ upbeat.
” It is not in the UK or the EU ’ s interest to admit as much but a Brext trade deal is there to be done .
Both sides continue to insist it is up to the other to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which plays well to their domestic audiences , but the groundwork is being laid for a free trade agreement to be finalised by October..The issue of whether or not the UK will ask for an extension to the transition period was put to bed on Friday .
Britain will leave transition at the end of this year , with or without a trade deal .
Forget the rhetoric and propaganda .
Neither Britain or the EU want to trade on WTO terms and with tariffs , which would be far less lucrative for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zero quota trade deal on the table .
Both the UK and the EU took up initial negotiating positions that are so maximalist , it leaves negotiators no option but to compromise.Mrs von der Leyen ’ s determination to avoid no deal is shared by her mentor Angela Merkel , the German Chancellor .
Germany takes over the rotating presidency of the EU in July , which will hand Mrs Merkel an even more influential role in Brussels as the Brexit process enters its closing , crucial months .
Mr Johnson , Mrs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the European Council and Parliament , repeated their commitment to sealing the zero tariff , zero quota trade deal Her team , while appreciating the challenge ahead , is optimistic a deal can be done if both sides are prepared to compromise over the vexed issues of the level playing field , European Court of Justice and fishing rights .
Mrs von der Leyen told Mr Johnson that there would need to be level playing field guarantees in the final trade deal otherwise it would never be agreed by the EU member states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field guarantees on tax , state aid , labour rights and the environment would also protect Britain from unfair competition from EU business .
This last bit contains the main bones of contention .
You might not have noticed the practical changes in the British position , - not exactly “ world beating ” - as explained by Jill Rutter of the Institute for Government.. Having assured Parliament in February that rather than the no deal plans , the UK would have a fully functioning border when we leave the single market and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to revert to the no deal plan for the first months of 2021 .
The new plan means that rather than be fully operational immediately , the border will be introduced in stages : from January traders will have six months to file customs declarations ; routine animal and plant health documents will not be required until April ; and the full system only applies from 1 July .
That is realistic because of Covid-19 , and a lot of businesses , which have not been able to prepare because of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK government only needs to be ready on one side of the border , UK businesses have a harder job – being ready for what will probably be a full border on the EU side .
But to sugar the pill , Michael Gove went on to say that although the short-term approach to border management would be to turn a blind eye and wave trucks through , these actions “ lay the foundations for the development of the best border in the world by 2025 ” .
It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ borders at the moment – but HMRC officials reckon that the French have done a pretty good job with the new smart border at Calais .
“ As good as France ” may not have the same resonance – but sounds a much more reasonable aim .
On the Irish Protocol Gove had told MPs on 20 May there would be “ some limited additional process on goods arriving in Northern Ireland.. .There will be no new physical customs infrastructure and we see no need to build any .
We will , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agrifood goods to provide for proportionate additional controls.
” The command paper outlines a string of pledges from the Government on the border , with ministers promising “ unfettered access ” for Northern Irish businesses “ to the whole of the UK market ” by the end of the transition period .
They are also ruling out imposing any tariffs on goods “ that move and remain with the UK customs territory ” , promising to allow businesses in Northern Ireland to benefit from lower tariffs under trade deals Britain hopes to strike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zealand and Japan .
And it says : “ Implementation of the Protocol will not involve new customs infrastructure – with any processes on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland kept to an absolute minimum so that the integrity and smooth functioning of the UK internal market is protected.
” The plans have been given a cautious welcome by Northern Ireland ’ s Democratic Unionist Party ( DUP ) , which voted against Boris Johnson ’ s Brexit deal last year amid concerns it would create a fresh divergence between NI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DUP leader Arlene Foster , who is also the First Minister of Northern Ireland said the objectives set out by the UK “ must be unmovable foundational positions for the UK Government ” .
Graham Gudgin of pro Brexit think tank Policy Exchange has written an analysis of the two negotiating positions over the Irish Protocol .
Either way , as the fourth negotiating round drew to a close last week it was clear both sides were far apart on the big issues , and even on smaller ones .
Just like in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a “ tunnel ” is now beckoning , an intense period of negotiations with no media briefings and no briefings either of member states or the British cabinet .
As is so often the case in the tortured relationship between the EU and UK , both sides want fundamentally different things .
Member states believe that a mutual promise not to lower environmental , labour , social , taxation and climate change standards is one thing .
Committing not to intervene in your economy is another .
The UK , on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lens of sovereignty and insists that international standards on a host of issues , including state aid , that both sides sign up to will be sufficiently robust .
Connolly was writing before yesterday ’ s meeting between Johnson and von der Leyn .
The atmosphere may now be a little more encouraging .

I can’t think of a negotiation between governments anywhere, anytime in history where the suppliant used the threat to damage themselves as a negotiating ploy if they didn’t get their own way. Yet this has seemed to be Boris Johnson’s position as PM all along over Brexit. First there was the about turn over the backstop to accept a harsher frontstop ( at least for Northern Ireland); giving the EU all they wanted in the withdrawal agreement and then pretending he hadn’t ; the Northern Ireland protocol would mean waving goods through in both directions with a silk hankie; and finally that clock could go on ticking for all he cared; he kept his own time.
There had to be some sense to all this perversity hadn’t there? The Europeans just didn’t get it. The UK was actually leaving, you see. And that meant they weren’t going to obey the EU rules – whatever the cost. And anyway the Covid lockdowns would produce such a recession that the marginal costs of No Deal would be inflated away. An inch or two closer to reality is the belief the EU wants a deal as badly as Britain (not everyone agrees) and that, as usual they do an 11th hour/ 59th minute/stop the clock deal in the end. Meanwhile the UK will extend the time not to negotiate but to implement.
Sensible people had their head in their hands when Johnson remotely met the Commission president Ursula von der Leyn on Monday. But he came out promising more “oomph”, and as breezily optimistic as he was over the withdrawal agreement in January when he gave the EU all they wanted before going on to pretend he hadn’t. And blow me they seem to be getting somewhere after all. Johnson affects to believe a deal can be done by next month. The mood in Brussels was said to be “upbeat.”
James Crisp in the pro-Brexit Daily Telegraph
It is not in the UK or the EU’s interest to admit as much but a Brext trade deal is there to be done. Both sides continue to insist it is up to the other to compromise on their red lines first, which plays well to their domestic audiences, but the groundwork is being laid for a free trade agreement to be finalised by October..The issue of whether or not the UK will ask for an extension to the transition period was put to bed on Friday. Britain will leave transition at the end of this year, with or without a trade deal.
Forget the rhetoric and propaganda. Neither Britain or the EU want to trade on WTO terms and with tariffs, which would be far less lucrative for both sides than the zero tariff, zero quota trade deal on the table. Both the UK and the EU took up initial negotiating positions that are so maximalist, it leaves negotiators no option but to compromise.Mrs von der Leyen’s determination to avoid no deal is shared by her mentor Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor. Germany takes over the rotating presidency of the EU in July, which will hand Mrs Merkel an even more influential role in Brussels as the Brexit process enters its closing, crucial months.
Mr Johnson, Mrs von der Leyen and the presidents of the European Council and Parliament, repeated their commitment to sealing the zero tariff, zero quota trade deal Her team, while appreciating the challenge ahead, is optimistic a deal can be done if both sides are prepared to compromise over the vexed issues of the level playing field, European Court of Justice and fishing rights.
Mrs von der Leyen told Mr Johnson that there would need to be level playing field guarantees in the final trade deal otherwise it would never be agreed by the EU member states. She said that the level playing field guarantees on tax, state aid, labour rights and the environment would also protect Britain from unfair competition from EU business.
This last bit contains the main bones of contention. You might not have noticed the practical changes in the British position,- not exactly “world beating”- as explained by Jill Rutter of the Institute for Government..
Having assured Parliament in February that rather than the no deal plans, the UK would have a fully functioning border when we leave the single market and the customs union, he has had to revert to the no deal plan for the first months of 2021. The new plan means that rather than be fully operational immediately, the border will be introduced in stages: from January traders will have six months to file customs declarations; routine animal and plant health documents will not be required until April; and the full system only applies from 1 July.
That is realistic because of Covid-19, and a lot of businesses, which have not been able to prepare because of the pandemic, are very relieved… However, although the UK government only needs to be ready on one side of the border, UK businesses have a harder job – being ready for what will probably be a full border on the EU side.
But to sugar the pill, Michael Gove went on to say that although the short-term approach to border management would be to turn a blind eye and wave trucks through, these actions “lay the foundations for the development of the best border in the world by 2025”. It’s not clear who is the South Korea of borders at the moment – but HMRC officials reckon that the French have done a pretty good job with the new smart border at Calais. “As good as France” may not have the same resonance – but sounds a much more reasonable aim.
On the Irish Protocol Gove had told MPs on 20 May there would be “some limited additional process on goods arriving in Northern Ireland.. .There will be no new physical customs infrastructure and we see no need to build any. We will, however, expand some existing entry points for agrifood goods to provide for proportionate additional controls.”
The command paper outlines a string of pledges from the Government on the border, with ministers promising “unfettered access” for Northern Irish businesses “to the whole of the UK market” by the end of the transition period.
They are also ruling out imposing any tariffs on goods “that move and remain with the UK customs territory”, promising to allow businesses in Northern Ireland to benefit from lower tariffs under trade deals Britain hopes to strike with United States, Australia, New Zealand and Japan.
And it says: “Implementation of the Protocol will not involve new customs infrastructure – with any processes on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland kept to an absolute minimum so that the integrity and smooth functioning of the UK internal market is protected.”
The plans have been given a cautious welcome by Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which voted against Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal last year amid concerns it would create a fresh divergence between NI and the rest of UK.
But DUP leader Arlene Foster, who is also the First Minister of Northern Ireland said the objectives set out by the UK “must be unmovable foundational positions for the UK Government”.
Graham Gudgin of pro Brexit think tank Policy Exchange has written an analysis of the two negotiating positions over the Irish Protocol.
RTE’s Tony Connolly wrote last week
Either way, as the fourth negotiating round drew to a close last week it was clear both sides were far apart on the big issues, and even on smaller ones. Just like in the closing stage of the divorce negotiations, a “tunnel” is now beckoning, an intense period of negotiations with no media briefings and no briefings either of member states or the British cabinet.
As is so often the case in the tortured relationship between the EU and UK, both sides want fundamentally different things.
Member states believe that a mutual promise not to lower environmental, labour, social, taxation and climate change standards is one thing. Committing not to intervene in your economy is another. The UK, on the other hand, sees everything through a lens of sovereignty and insists that international standards on a host of issues, including state aid, that both sides sign up to will be sufficiently robust.
Connolly was writing before yesterday’s meeting between Johnson and von der Leyn. The atmosphere may now be a little more encouraging.


sluggerotoole--2020-06-18--Survey evidence shows unionists and nationalists supporting power sharing at home and waiting on dev

Survey evidence shows unionists and nationalists supporting power sharing at home and waiting on developments outside

Just under 60 % of Catholics in Northern Ireland now categorise themselves as nationalist compared with 50 % two years ago .
67 % of Protestants now classified themselves as unionist compared with 55 % in 2018 .
After the past year of political trauma the big surprise in the NI Life and Times Survey for 2019 is not that there has been a hardening of political allegiances but that this has failed to polarise opinion for their finally incompatible causes .
The remarkable fact is that most opinion has grouped around support for the Assembly which has provided the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political scene dominated by continued confusion over Brexit .
And that ’ s before we get to lack of grip over managing Covid .
In their commentary on the results , a new feature , Katy Hayward and Ben Rosher have identified nuances instead of the old cut and dried opinions .
They add a health warning .
Compared to election results , the survey under represents the Alliance Party and Sinn Fein because it includes those who don ’ t support any party and presumably don ’ t vote .
That said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attitudes overall , we should note that 44 % of respondents to NILT said that they did not consider themselves likely to support any of the main political parties in an election ( and the abstention rates at the polls in 2019 ranged from 38-55 % ) … If 2019 is not a ‘ blip ’ and we are seeing a ‘ retrenchment ’ of identity positions , it is worth considering the strength of feeling in which people hold these identities .
Although we have had a rise in the proportion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems not to mean a growing intensity of that Unionist identity .
Instead , there are more saying that they ‘ don ’ t know ’ whether they would call themselves a ‘ strong Unionist ’ , and the largest proportion of Unionists would say their Unionist identity is ‘ fairly strong ’ .
In contrast , among those who are Nationalist , there has been a significant strengthening of that identity in a short period of time .
Indeed , those who are saying they are ‘ very strong ’ Nationalists is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and rose by 11 points in 2019 to 31 per cent .
Overall , NILT data across the past 20 years indicates a fairly steady rise in the proportion of those describing themselves as ‘ very strong ’ Unionists and Nationalists .
These trends are particularly interesting given that they are not reflected in any major shift in people ’ s views on the prospects for Irish unification… .
Among the overall population , only 30 % said a united Ireland was likely within the next 20 years , while 46 % said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time frame .
Among unionists , 62 % think a united Ireland is unlikely within the next 20 years .
Significantly , 37 % of nationalists also think there will not be Irish unity within the next two decades These results suggest that most people in Northern Ireland are waiting to see how events turn out .
Much depends on external events – the relationship with the EU and the future of the Union in GB , while leaving all to play for at home .
With an unprecedented grand coalition about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s premature to find a clear sight of the republican cause .
In the North the interim position of defined harmony between the DUP and Sinn Fein may come under strain when the Covid crisis subsides or morph into a more stable relationship .
Meanwhile the Newsletter has been trying to whip up enthusiasm for a unionist narrative to counter the perceived triumph of Sinn Fein spin .
We ’ re likely to hear much more of this as next year ’ s centenary of the Northern Ireland state approaches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be made that has been lost amid the political and cultural compromises of power sharing .
Only at the eleventh hour of faltering unionist government did the nationalist community mount a sustained and effective challenge to unionist structural discrimination .
For decades the old Nationalist party opted for Catholic solidarity over claiming their full share of investment in health and education from the unionist government to which Catholics were entitled as tax payers .
But whatever may be said in mitigation for the unionist government , the verdict is unlikely to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for fifty uninterrupted years , it bore the main responsibility for the slide to violence if not its depths .
During the Troubles mainstream unionists did work within the constraints to uphold law and order against rival paramilitaries ( with lapses certainly ) .
But a simple law and order defence for unionism will not suffice .
A partial backward look is less than half of today ’ s story .
Efforts to revive unionism include rejecting any constitutional implications in Northern Ireland ’ s association with the single market .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at first .
Unionist business and agriculture welcomed the single market .
They had always been natural traders south of the border , like those Fermanagh farmers , part-time members of the UDR , who were stalked and murdered on their way to market in Co Cavan .
Out of the Brexit debacle they must hope that a convincing Ulster unionism will join the Johnson government in emerging with more credit than seems likely at the moment from the Covid pandemic , claiming a UK victory for basic coordination with the devolved administrations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over timing .
Fingers are tightly crossed that by the end of the year the EU negotiations will result in only a bump or two of friction at the borders .
Unionists however would be unwise to assume that reversion to basic “ Ulster ” patriotism would strike much of an chord with the English nativism of the Conservative right , or indeed that rampant nativism will survive Johnson ’ s term .
A more contemporary appeal to ” British Values ” is likely to more successful on both sides of the water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One Nation Tory and an internationally minded cultural sophisticate .
Once bitten , they would be advised not to put all their eggs in Johnson ’ s basket .
Working the north- south ministerial council would produce far better results than relying on the illusion of a unionist veto on remaining within the single market .
The NILT survey tells us this is the sort of political behaviour most people want : for the two political poles to occupy the centre ground .
“ Stormont ” by D-Stanley is licensed under CC BY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ THIS COPY IS ON DISPLAY IN THE STORMONT ESTATE IN BELFAST ] -152773 ” by infomatique is licensed under CC BY-SA

Just under 60% of Catholics in Northern Ireland now categorise themselves as nationalist compared with 50% two years ago. 67% of Protestants now classified themselves as unionist compared with 55% in 2018.
After the past year of political trauma the big surprise in the NI Life and Times Survey for 2019 is not that there has been a hardening of political allegiances but that this has failed to polarise opinion for their finally incompatible causes. The remarkable fact is that most opinion has grouped around support for the Assembly which has provided the one glimmer of light in a darkening political scene dominated by continued confusion over Brexit. And that’s before we get to lack of grip over managing Covid.
In their commentary on the results, a new feature, Katy Hayward and Ben Rosher have identified nuances instead of the old cut and dried opinions. They add a health warning. Compared to election results, the survey over represents the Alliance Party and under represents Sinn Fein, (correction here) And it includes those who don’t support any party and presumably don’t vote. This explains how it appears to diverge from more frequent opinion polls which emphasise voting choices at a particular point in time.
That said, given that we are considering political attitudes overall, we should note that 44% of respondents to NILT said that they did not consider themselves likely to support any of the main political parties in an election (and the abstention rates at the polls in 2019 ranged from 38-55%)…
If 2019 is not a ‘blip’ and we are seeing a ‘retrenchment’ of identity positions, it is worth considering the strength of feeling in which people hold these identities. Although we have had a rise in the proportion of those identifying as Unionist, this increase seems not to mean a growing intensity of that Unionist identity. Instead, there are more saying that they ‘don’t know’ whether they would call themselves a ‘strong Unionist’, and the largest proportion of Unionists would say their Unionist identity is ‘fairly strong’. In contrast, among those who are Nationalist, there has been a significant strengthening of that identity in a short period of time. Indeed, those who are saying they are ‘very strong’ Nationalists is higher than it has ever been, and rose by 11 points in 2019 to 31 per cent.
Overall, NILT data across the past 20 years indicates a fairly steady rise in the proportion of those describing themselves as ‘very strong’ Unionists and Nationalists. These trends are particularly interesting given that they are not reflected in any major shift in people’s views on the prospects for Irish unification….
Among the overall population, only 30% said a united Ireland was likely within the next 20 years, while 46% said Irish unity was unlikely in the same time frame. Among unionists, 62% think a united Ireland is unlikely within the next 20 years. Significantly, 37% of nationalists also think there will not be Irish unity within the next two decades
These results suggest that most people in Northern Ireland are waiting to see how events turn out. Much depends on external events – the relationship with the EU and the future of the Union in GB , while leaving all to play for at home. With an unprecedented grand coalition about to be formed in Dublin excluding Sinn Fein , it’s premature to find a clear sight of the republican cause. In the North the interim position of defined harmony between the DUP and Sinn Fein may come under strain when the Covid crisis subsides or morph into a more stable relationship.
Meanwhile the Newsletter has been trying to whip up enthusiasm for a unionist narrative to counter the perceived triumph of Sinn Fein spin. We’re likely to hear much more of this as next year’s centenary of the Northern Ireland state approaches. There is certainly a unionist case to be made that has been lost amid the political and cultural compromises of power sharing.
Only at the eleventh hour of faltering unionist government did the nationalist community mount a sustained and effective challenge to unionist structural discrimination. For decades the old Nationalist party opted for Catholic solidarity over claiming their full share of investment in health and education from the unionist government to which Catholics were entitled as tax payers. But whatever may be said in mitigation for the unionist government, the verdict is unlikely to be reversed, that because it was charge for fifty uninterrupted years, it bore the main responsibility for the slide to violence if not its depths. During the Troubles mainstream unionists did work within the constraints to uphold law and order against rival paramilitaries (with lapses certainly). But a simple law and order defence for unionism will not suffice. A partial backward look is less than half of today’s story.
Efforts to revive unionism include rejecting any constitutional implications in Northern Ireland’s association with the single market. This is not as implausible at it might seem at first. Unionist business and agriculture welcomed the single market. They had always been natural traders south of the border, like those Fermanagh farmers, part-time members of the UDR, who were stalked and murdered on their way to market in Co Cavan.
Out of the Brexit debacle they must hope that a convincing Ulster unionism will join the Johnson government in emerging with more credit than seems likely at the moment from the Covid pandemic, claiming a UK victory for basic coordination with the devolved administrations, give or take the odd variation over timing . Fingers are tightly crossed that by the end of the year the EU negotiations will result in only a bump or two of friction at the borders. Unionists however would be unwise to assume that reversion to basic “Ulster” patriotism would strike much of an chord with the English nativism of the Conservative right , or indeed that rampant nativism will survive Johnson’s term. A more contemporary appeal to ” British Values” is likely to more successful on both sides of the water. Johnson still prides himself as a One Nation Tory and an internationally minded cultural sophisticate.
Once bitten, they would be advised not to put all their eggs in Johnson’s basket. Working the north- south ministerial council would produce far better results than relying on the illusion of a unionist veto on remaining within the single market.
The NILT survey tells us this is the sort of political behaviour most people want: for the two political poles to occupy the centre ground.
“Stormont” by D-Stanley is licensed under CC BY
“RECONCILIATION BY JOSEFINA DE VASCONCELLOS [ THIS COPY IS ON DISPLAY IN THE STORMONT ESTATE IN BELFAST]-152773” by infomatique is licensed under CC BY-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-06-18--Northern Ireland and The Skills Gap Carousel…

As we begin to emerge from the clutches of the Covid 19 Pandemic , the business community in Northern Ireland face a plethora of challenges if they want to remain above water , let alone experience growth .
Not least of which is the imminent recession predicted to be the sharpest economic downturn on record .
However the talent shortage faced by many of our most prominent industries , such as ICT , agri-food and digital media , continues to glare at employers as it did before the crisis .
While a surge in unemployment and many more employees in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem to suggest that the talent acquisition tables have somewhat turned , reviewing these figures as a whole will be largely misleading .
Although sectors such as hospitality and retail , going forward , may find themselves spoilt for choice when it comes to recruiting in certain roles For companies engaging in areas such as software development , food production or digital marketing ( and of course , this list is not exhaustive ) the gaping hole in the talent market will leave them yearning more than it ever has .
At a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pursue their growth objectives , they may just lack the manpower to fully implement an impactful strategy and fulfil client demands .
Alongside the business community , education is experiencing a transformation of its own .
The landscape of the learning environment for school-aged children has advanced much during recent years ( and more quickly in recent months ) in some respects , such as the potential to use Virtual Reality devices to broaden their horizons and even video conferencing .
However , the way in which we address the skills gap within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While schools and colleges grapple to increase provisions for students to study in subjects like Computer Science and Software engineering , and drive women into STEM careers , the business community is left with talent who are ten years their senior , having been encouraged to become lawyers and accountants .
A career path so oversubscribed , that in global organisations is largely reserved for those of an Oxbridge background .
While our educators and young people continue to look to the present rather than to the future to shape their decisions around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the very real possibility that school leavers ( and indeed graduates ) of the future will emerge from the education system ill-equipped for the industry they intend to enter .
Or , at least the one which has enough open roles !
As a result our economy may be faced with a similar situation to the one it faces today .
High unemployment in certain areas and a vast talent shortage in others .
As we prepare Computer Scientists , Software Developers and Engineers of the future , where they will actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy .
Photo by geralt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

As we begin to emerge from the clutches of the Covid 19 Pandemic, the business community in Northern Ireland face a plethora of challenges if they want to remain above water, let alone experience growth. Not least of which is the imminent recession predicted to be the sharpest economic downturn on record.
However the talent shortage faced by many of our most prominent industries, such as ICT, agri-food and digital media, continues to glare at employers as it did before the crisis. While a surge in unemployment and many more employees in the limbo land of the CJRS may seem to suggest that the talent acquisition tables have somewhat turned, reviewing these figures as a whole will be largely misleading.
Although sectors such as hospitality and retail, going forward, may find themselves spoilt for choice when it comes to recruiting in certain roles For companies engaging in areas such as software development, food production or digital marketing (and of course, this list is not exhaustive) the gaping hole in the talent market will leave them yearning more than it ever has. At a time when they are wanting to aggressively pursue their growth objectives, they may just lack the manpower to fully implement an impactful strategy and fulfil client demands.
Alongside the business community, education is experiencing a transformation of its own. The landscape of the learning environment for school-aged children has advanced much during recent years (and more quickly in recent months) in some respects, such as the potential to use Virtual Reality devices to broaden their horizons and even video conferencing.
However, the way in which we address the skills gap within the classroom is far from progressive. While schools and colleges grapple to increase provisions for students to study in subjects like Computer Science and Software engineering, and drive women into STEM careers, the business community is left with talent who are ten years their senior, having been encouraged to become lawyers and accountants. A career path so oversubscribed, that in global organisations is largely reserved for those of an Oxbridge background.
While our educators and young people continue to look to the present rather than to the future to shape their decisions around learning and upskilling. We are faced with the very real possibility that school leavers (and indeed graduates) of the future will emerge from the education system ill-equipped for the industry they intend to enter. Or, at least the one which has enough open roles! As a result our economy may be faced with a similar situation to the one it faces today. High unemployment in certain areas and a vast talent shortage in others.
As we prepare Computer Scientists, Software Developers and Engineers of the future, where they will actually be needed when they graduate into our economy.
Photo by geralt is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-06-19--Testing is our most effective Covid-19 intervention not dexamethasone…

Great news indeed that good old dexamethasone has proved so effective in reducing deaths in seriously ill Covid-19 patients .
The drug was almost dismissed as a candidate for the Recovery trail since it proved relatively ineffective in treating SARS and MERS but it seems to effectively manage the ” cytokine storm ” associated with Covid-19 severe respiratory syndrome .
We await the peer-reviewed paper but the numbers need to treat to save one life is 8 for ventilated patients and 25 for patients on oxygen .
Where this is indeed an effective intervention , prevention should remain our focus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we only have ; handwashing , social distancing and testing .
My views on the importance of widespread testing have changed over the last three months .
In April I was strangely annoyed when a postal worker told me he and his friend went for “ key-worker ” Covid-19 tests “ just for a laugh ” and wasn ’ t surprised when his result , e-mailed at 4.00 a.m. the next morning , was negative .
He didn ’ t have symptoms , was not in contact with anyone who had and had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I thought , was he wasting valuable resources .
Matt Ridley writing in the Spectator identifies wide-scale testing as the thing that differentiates those countries with low Covid-19 deaths from those with high Covid-19 deaths .
Testing also seems to explain regional differences in deaths within countries as happened in Holland .
Ridley goes on to say that a failure in the UK to ramp up testing in Mid-march , and to only test those with those already in hospital with symptoms , is Government ’ s “ biggest mistake , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sooner ” .
When that mistake was appreciated there was a scramble to ramp up the number of tests .
Success was identified as the number of tests offered with little focus on the quality of tests and test results .
Yet it is the latter that will impact most on controlling the virus as we step out of lockdown .
Testing does not cure Covid-19 or stop the infection so why does wide-spread testing for the virus from as early as possible make such an apparent difference to the final number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provides the intelligence necessary to seek out and control the virus .
This is test , track and trace .
A test to confirm if someone is infected with SARS-CoV-2 uses Real-Time ( RT ) Polymerase Chain Reaction ( PCR ) an enzyme to multiply the small amount of RNA from the SARS Cov2 viruses .
The amount obtained from a swab , even one taken by a trained healthcare professional , is minute and the RT PCR cycle might need to be run 20-30 times to get enough to register a positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is registered from the day of infection is a relatively small number of days .
A True-Positive result is where the test is positive and the patient has the infection or a True-Negative is where the patient does not have the disease and the test is negative .
The test must be “ specific ” for SARS Cov2 virus as it may pick up other coronaviruses that have similar RNA and give a False-Positive result – the patient has a positive result but does not have the infection .
More worrying is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ negative but the patient has the infection .
Testing an individual too early or too late in the infection may not harvest any virus yet they are present , or the skills of those performing the test may not be sufficient to collect proper swab samples .
According to an editorial in the Spectator , of 2.7 million tests done across the UK 8 % were considered void because they were incorrectly performed .
It is suggested that 33 % of people given the “ all clear ” may have had the infection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role for serological ( antibody ) tests .
Human immune systems , when exposed to a virus , produces a very specific immune response ; designer antibodies .
Identifying these antibodies allows individuals to be designated as “ immune ” and therefore at less risk of contracting ( or by default spreading ) the virus .
This might be very important but as yet it is unknown what the clinical implications of being “ immune ” are .
Little information exists on the level of immunity to the virus on reinfection or how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tests being used across the UK including here in N. Ireland , the Roche test and the Abbott test , are specific for a viral core protein .
Ideally antibodies for “ Spike ” proteins on the outside of the virus – the proteins that “ key ” into cell receptors allowing the virus to infect – would be a better assurance of “ neutralising ” immunity .
As yet we don ’ t have this .
We need to strategically apply both types of tests with three main aims : ( 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; ( 2 ) identifying those who have developed some form of immunity ; and ( 3 ) gaining intelligence on the evolution of the epidemic , including when “ herd immunity ” has been reached .
There are suggestions that herd immunity might be much lower than the conventional 60 % which , if true , would be great news indeed .
I was wrong about my postal friends .
They were right to have the tests done but a better understanding of what “ positive ” and “ negative ” means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing procedures , and of tests themselves , will allow the intelligence necessary to give us protection until the arrival of a safe and effective vaccine .
It would be best not to have to depend on dexamethasone .
Photo by PublicDomainPictures is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

Great news indeed that good old dexamethasone has proved so effective in reducing deaths in seriously ill Covid-19 patients. The drug was almost dismissed as a candidate for the Recovery trail since it proved relatively ineffective in treating SARS and MERS but it seems to effectively manage the ”cytokine storm” associated with Covid-19 severe respiratory syndrome. We await the peer-reviewed paper but the numbers need to treat to save one life is 8 for ventilated patients and 25 for patients on oxygen. Where this is indeed an effective intervention, prevention should remain our focus and in the absence of a vaccine we only have; handwashing, social distancing and testing.
My views on the importance of widespread testing have changed over the last three months. In April I was strangely annoyed when a postal worker told me he and his friend went for “key-worker” Covid-19 tests “just for a laugh” and wasn’t surprised when his result, e-mailed at 4.00 a.m. the next morning, was negative. He didn’t have symptoms, was not in contact with anyone who had and had not been travelling abroad, so why, I thought, was he wasting valuable resources.
Matt Ridley writing in the Spectator identifies wide-scale testing as the thing that differentiates those countries with low Covid-19 deaths from those with high Covid-19 deaths. Testing also seems to explain regional differences in deaths within countries as happened in Holland. Ridley goes on to say that a failure in the UK to ramp up testing in Mid-march, and to only test those with those already in hospital with symptoms, is Government’s “biggest mistake, not its failure to lock down the economy sooner”.
When that mistake was appreciated there was a scramble to ramp up the number of tests. Success was identified as the number of tests offered with little focus on the quality of tests and test results. Yet it is the latter that will impact most on controlling the virus as we step out of lockdown.
Testing does not cure Covid-19 or stop the infection so why does wide-spread testing for the virus from as early as possible make such an apparent difference to the final number of deaths? The simple answer is it provides the intelligence necessary to seek out and control the virus. This is test, track and trace.
A test to confirm if someone is infected with SARS-CoV-2 uses Real-Time (RT) Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) an enzyme to multiply the small amount of RNA from the SARS Cov2 viruses. The amount obtained from a swab, even one taken by a trained healthcare professional, is minute and the RT PCR cycle might need to be run 20-30 times to get enough to register a positive. The window in which a positive is registered from the day of infection is a relatively small number of days. A True-Positive result is where the test is positive and the patient has the infection or a True-Negative is where the patient does not have the disease and the test is negative. The test must be “specific” for SARS Cov2 virus as it may pick up other coronaviruses that have similar RNA and give a False-Positive result – the patient has a positive result but does not have the infection. More worrying is a False-Negative result where the test result is negative but the patient has the infection. Testing an individual too early or too late in the infection may not harvest any virus yet they are present, or the skills of those performing the test may not be sufficient to collect proper swab samples. According to an editorial in the Spectator, of 2.7 million tests done across the UK 8% were considered void because they were incorrectly performed. It is suggested that 33% of people given the “all clear” may have had the infection.
So, there is an important role for serological (antibody) tests. Human immune systems, when exposed to a virus, produces a very specific immune response; designer antibodies. Identifying these antibodies allows individuals to be designated as “immune” and therefore at less risk of contracting (or by default spreading) the virus. This might be very important but as yet it is unknown what the clinical implications of being “immune” are. Little information exists on the level of immunity to the virus on reinfection or how long such immunity might last. Two tests being used across the UK including here in N. Ireland, the Roche test and the Abbott test, are specific for a viral core protein. Ideally antibodies for “Spike” proteins on the outside of the virus – the proteins that “key” into cell receptors allowing the virus to infect – would be a better assurance of “neutralising” immunity. As yet we don’t have this.
We need to strategically apply both types of tests with three main aims: (1) suppressing the resurgence of local outbreaks; (2) identifying those who have developed some form of immunity; and (3) gaining intelligence on the evolution of the epidemic, including when “herd immunity” has been reached. There are suggestions that herd immunity might be much lower than the conventional 60% which, if true, would be great news indeed.
I was wrong about my postal friends. They were right to have the tests done but a better understanding of what “positive” and “negative” means and a ramping up of quality in testing procedures, and of tests themselves, will allow the intelligence necessary to give us protection until the arrival of a safe and effective vaccine. It would be best not to have to depend on dexamethasone.
Photo by PublicDomainPictures is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-06-19--“No need for the talks to drag on to the autumn”.. but still the British are busking it

To return to the game of chicken with the EU.. Michael Gove .
The argument we ’ re making to the EU as well is , if you insist on significant new infrastructure and a significant new presence , what you will do is actually make the protocol less acceptable to the majority community in Northern Ireland and therefore you run the risk of the protocol being voted down in a future election , ” Michael Gove told the House of Commons Northern Ireland affairs committee .
EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier repeated earlier this month that the protocol demands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rest of the UK must be accompanied by an exit declaration .
Last month , the UK government published its plan for implementing the Northern Ireland part of the Brexit deal and said these declarations would not be required .
However , Mr Barnier said the UK pledge not to require the declaration was “ incompatible ” with legal commitments made in the Brexit deal .
Gove ’ s argument contains a cheeky hint of blackmail that ’ s almost certainly bluff .
Assuming he ’ s talking about Unionists as Leavers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a majority in a future Assembly when it comes to a vote against remaining in association with the single market .
However it ’ s just possible that a few extra worms would turn if costs went up as a result of the final Protocol arrangements .
But most people will be hoping that it will be defused as a political issue and will become at worst a matter of mind numbing bureaucracy kept to a minimum .
This however is by no means guaranteed .
Gove is making an each way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no deal a unique arrangement for Northern Ireland kicks in , with EU tariffs payable on goods circulating within the region but rebates on all goods that do not cross into the Republic of Ireland .
Secondary legislation would be required for the tariff arrangements but this would be put in place before January .
Business leaders described the move as “ significant ” but expressed concern about the lack of detail .
“ What paperwork would be needed ?
How long would it be for reimbursement as that is a huge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the director of the Northern Ireland retail consortium .
He also said the EU state-aid rules would make the scheme problematic for big companies .
Importers of cars , for example , would face a 10 % additional levy on purchases from Nissan in Great Britain without any knowledge of when they could get a rebate .
Further , the state aid rules would prevent them from receiving anything more than €200,000 over three years , limiting the number of cars they could buy in from Great Britain Gove was unable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hilary Benn about whether entry summary declaration forms would be needed for Great British businesses selling into Northern Ireland .
These are currently needed for goods brought into the UK from outside the EU .
He conceded that new safety and security information would be needed but the operational detail would not be revealed until later in the summer .
Businesses , unions and farmers at an earlier Labour webinar expressed their frustration with the government ’ s failure to provide greater detail.Victor Chestnutt , the deputy president of the Ulster Farmers ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ like walking out into the mist , into the fog ” .The committee chairman , Simon Hoare , said the apparent “ open skies ” thinking was risky .
“ Six months out , [ it ] seems to be playing with fire , ” said the Conservative MP for North Dorset .
He added that trying to get firm information out of Gove and the Northern Ireland secretary , Brandon Lewis , made him feel like “ Alice through the looking glass [ trying to divine ] what words mean ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James Forsyth thinks he spots a swift deal which is not dependent on line by line negotiation .
The UK would say close to EU rules voluntarily and on the basis of no tariffs .
But if the EU were to spot a British breach , it could impose tariffs .
Isn ’ t this where we came in ?
The two sides ’ decision to commit to an intensified set of negotiations between now and August , some of which will involve face-to-face meetings , suggests both the UK and the EU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be broken .
The question now is , how can that be done ?
Well , the biggest obstacle to a deal is the EU ’ s demands on the level playing field .
The UK has repeatedly said that it simply can not accept them .
Michael Gove has already emphasised that the UK would be prepared to accept tariffs rather than agree to what the EU wants in this area .
The EU has dismissed this offer , saying there isn ’ t time to go through the tariff schedule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have what tariff on it .
But the UK offer does open up a potential compromise .
A deal could declare that the UK has the sovereign right to move away from the EU ’ s level playing field should it so choose .
But if it did , the EU would have the right to impose tariffs on UK goods .
This would allow both sides to claim satisfaction .
Johnson could say that the UK has the right to chart its own course without being bound by EU rules , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tools to respond to any UK attempt to undercut it .
There is something of a precedent for this in the Northern Ireland protocol .
It says that if the UK does not bring in a new EU act that falls within the scope of the protocol then the EU is entitled ‘ to take appropriate remedial measures ’ .
If a deal is going to happen , it ’ ll have to be something that both sides can accept .
That means both the UK and the EU are going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their original negotiating positions and make some compromises .
The one outlined above might just be an agreement that both sides could sell to their domestic audiences .
With all that to do , Boris Johnson remains eerily optimistic .
Boris Johnson has told Emmanuel Macron he sees no need for the post-Brexit trade talks to drag on until the Autumn as he attempts to break the deadlock in the negotiations over an EU trade deal .

To return to the game of chicken with the EU..
Michael Gove. The argument we’re making to the EU as well is, if you insist on significant new infrastructure and a significant new presence, what you will do is actually make the protocol less acceptable to the majority community in Northern Ireland and therefore you run the risk of the protocol being voted down in a future election,” Michael Gove told the House of Commons Northern Ireland affairs committee.
EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier repeated earlier this month that the protocol demands that goods moving from Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK must be accompanied by an exit declaration.
Last month, the UK government published its plan for implementing the Northern Ireland part of the Brexit deal and said these declarations would not be required.
However, Mr Barnier said the UK pledge not to require the declaration was “incompatible” with legal commitments made in the Brexit deal.
Gove’s argument contains a cheeky hint of blackmail that’s almost certainly bluff. Assuming he’s talking about Unionists as Leavers, they’re unlikely to turn into a majority in a future Assembly when it comes to a vote against remaining in association with the single market. However it’s just possible that a few extra worms would turn if costs went up as a result of the final Protocol arrangements. But most people will be hoping that it will be defused as a political issue and will become at worst a matter of mind numbing bureaucracy kept to a minimum. This however is by no means guaranteed. Gove is making an each way bet by offering compensation.
If there is no deal a unique arrangement for Northern Ireland kicks in, with EU tariffs payable on goods circulating within the region but rebates on all goods that do not cross into the Republic of Ireland. Secondary legislation would be required for the tariff arrangements but this would be put in place before January.
Business leaders described the move as “significant” but expressed concern about the lack of detail.
“What paperwork would be needed? How long would it be for reimbursement as that is a huge cashflow problem?” said Aodhán Connolly, the director of the Northern Ireland retail consortium. He also said the EU state-aid rules would make the scheme problematic for big companies. Importers of cars, for example, would face a 10% additional levy on purchases from Nissan in Great Britain without any knowledge of when they could get a rebate. Further, the state aid rules would prevent them from receiving anything more than €200,000 over three years, limiting the number of cars they could buy in from Great Britain
Gove was unable to answer repeated questions by the Labour MP Hilary Benn about whether entry summary declaration forms would be needed for Great British businesses selling into Northern Ireland. These are currently needed for goods brought into the UK from outside the EU. He conceded that new safety and security information would be needed but the operational detail would not be revealed until later in the summer.
Businesses, unions and farmers at an earlier Labour webinar expressed their frustration with the government’s failure to provide greater detail.Victor Chestnutt, the deputy president of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, said planning for January was “like walking out into the mist, into the fog”.The committee chairman, Simon Hoare, said the apparent “open skies” thinking was risky. “Six months out, [it] seems to be playing with fire,” said the Conservative MP for North Dorset.
He added that trying to get firm information out of Gove and the Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis, made him feel like “Alice through the looking glass [trying to divine] what words mean”.
The Spectator’s political correspondent James Forsyth thinks he spots a swift deal which is not dependent on line by line negotiation. The UK would say close to EU rules voluntarily and on the basis of no tariffs. But if the EU were to spot a British breach, it could impose tariffs. Isn’t this where we came in?
The two sides’ decision to commit to an intensified set of negotiations between now and August, some of which will involve face-to-face meetings, suggests both the UK and the EU are serious about seeing if the deadlock can be broken.
The question now is, how can that be done? Well, the biggest obstacle to a deal is the EU’s demands on the level playing field. The UK has repeatedly said that it simply cannot accept them. Michael Gove has already emphasised that the UK would be prepared to accept tariffs rather than agree to what the EU wants in this area. The EU has dismissed this offer, saying there isn’t time to go through the tariff schedule line by line working out what should have what tariff on it.
But the UK offer does open up a potential compromise. A deal could declare that the UK has the sovereign right to move away from the EU’s level playing field should it so choose. But if it did, the EU would have the right to impose tariffs on UK goods. This would allow both sides to claim satisfaction. Johnson could say that the UK has the right to chart its own course without being bound by EU rules, while Brussels can point out that it has the tools to respond to any UK attempt to undercut it.
There is something of a precedent for this in the Northern Ireland protocol. It says that if the UK does not bring in a new EU act that falls within the scope of the protocol then the EU is entitled ‘to take appropriate remedial measures’.
If a deal is going to happen, it’ll have to be something that both sides can accept. That means both the UK and the EU are going to have to be prepared to move off their original negotiating positions and make some compromises. The one outlined above might just be an agreement that both sides could sell to their domestic audiences.
With all that to do, Boris Johnson remains eerily optimistic.
Boris Johnson has told Emmanuel Macron he sees no need for the post-Brexit trade talks to drag on until the Autumn as he attempts to break the deadlock in the negotiations over an EU trade deal.


sluggerotoole--2020-06-19--Slugger TV – easing lockdown into what sort of economy + whether Cummings’ trip to Durham has damage

Slugger TV – easing lockdown into what sort of economy + whether Cummings’ trip to Durham has damaged Johnson’s political currency

Tune into NvTv this evening at 20:11 – or watch it below from 20:15 – to catch Episode 39 of @ @ @ @ @ is joined by commentators Julie-Anne Corr Johnston and Tim Cairns to discuss how Northern Ireland @ @ @ @ @ and what sort of economy we will emerge into , as well as the fallout @ @ @ @ @ to Durham on Boris Johnson ’ s political currency .
Edited by Alan Meban .


sluggerotoole--2020-06-19--#InConversation Podcast – I talk with Ellie Francis about the skills shortage in Northern Ireland an

#InConversation Podcast – I talk with Ellie Francis about the skills shortage in Northern Ireland and the latest employment trends…

Before Covid-19 many sectors in Northern Ireland were facing a skills shortage .
In this podcast , I chat with Ellie Francis about how this will affect the economy .
Ellie started a company called Nepturnal , where she advises clients on how to attract and retain staff .
Ellie has also started writing for Slugger and you can read her first post here .
The skills shortage is an interesting phenomenon for those of us who grew up in the bad old days of 20 % unemployment in the eighties .
Before Covid-19 many believed that Northern Ireland was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demand for IT workers , for example , that good staff can now attract 50-60k a year and above .
But it is not just in the fast-growing areas of IT , pretty much in all sectors , there are skills shortages .
In hospitality , there is a shortage of Chefs , there is a shortage of GP ’ s , there is a shortage of factory workers etc We also discuss how Covid-19 is likely to affect future job prospects .
You can subscribe to Slugger Podcasts on Apple Podcasts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ version below has subtitles , just click the CC button .

Before Covid-19 many sectors in Northern Ireland were facing a skills shortage. In this podcast, I chat with Ellie Francis about how this will affect the economy. Ellie started a company called Nepturnal, where she advises clients on how to attract and retain staff. Ellie has also started writing for Slugger and you can read her first post here.
The skills shortage is an interesting phenomenon for those of us who grew up in the bad old days of 20% unemployment in the eighties. Before Covid-19 many believed that Northern Ireland was effectively at full employment.
Such is the demand for IT workers, for example, that good staff can now attract 50-60k a year and above. But it is not just in the fast-growing areas of IT, pretty much in all sectors, there are skills shortages. In hospitality, there is a shortage of Chefs, there is a shortage of GP’s, there is a shortage of factory workers etc
We also discuss how Covid-19 is likely to affect future job prospects.
You can subscribe to Slugger Podcasts on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts or Spotify
The YouTube version below has subtitles, just click the CC button.