#damaging in its own way against people who live in Wales or Ireland or who speak Welsh or Irish | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

oumaheroes · 3 years

Text

Reset Ch10:The Truth Comes Out

Whole story found on AO3 and FFnet (It’s a long boi, I warn you)

'Please, take a seat.'

England and France looked at each other, before back at the gun in Jean's hand. His hand was still and focused, pointed directly at England.

Jean gave a small smile. In any other situation, it would have been kind.

'Please. Don't make me ask again.'

He motioned his head towards the chairs again and England cautiously lowered himself into one, seeing France out of the corner or his eye do the same.

Jean nodded. 'Thank you. This will be so much easier if you comply.' He looked over their shoulders and nodded. Suddenly, England felt his hands being grabbed and forced behind him, rough cable ties being forced over them and tying them together. Then, pushed down further; they were attached to a pole in the back of his chair. Deciding not to put up a fight he allowed it, as he did when the same was done to each of his legs, and as the footsteps of whomever was behind him backed away again, he gently tested their give. They were tight, each slight movement dug into his skin. He could break out of them, but not without damage to his wrists or doing it inconspicuously.

He maintained eye contact with Jean and sat straight with shoulders back watching him slowly settle more comfortably on the bed. Behind him, an electrical generator, hooked up to the lamps, whirred gently.

Jean nodded to whomever was behind them and they stepped out of the room, shutting the door as they left. He then clapped his hands together and beamed at the both of them.

‘Well. I expected something but certainly not this.’

Neither France nor England replied. Jean didn’t seem too put out by this however, he nodded his head and gestured to the restraints. ‘I’m sure you can understand why this has to happen.’ The gun in his hand was fixed between the both of them. It glinted with each slight movement. England resisted the urge to glance at it.

‘Please believe me, I am not a violent man. Far from it in fact.’

France must have made some sort of face because Jean gave a small laugh. ‘Ah yes, well. I am not intentionally a violent man. When pushed, I do what is needed and things sometimes go out of my control. This will hopefully not be one such time.’

He looked at England.

‘Arthur, how nice to see you again.’

England said nothing.

Jean continued to smile.

‘I’m aware that this isn’t a situation either of you would like to be in. And I’m also aware that you’re not willing to tell me anything. So, let’s get this over with as quickly as possible.’ He leant forward in an impression of ease and geniality.

‘I know what you are.’

Neither France nor England said anything, neither moved.

Jean’s eyes flicked from one to the other, reading for movement, acknowledgement. ‘Well, rather, I know you’re not human. I have proof you’re not human. I also know that this information is not something you’re going to want to be made public.

Still, neither spoke. Jean frowned. ‘You’re both making this incredibly difficult.’

Quickly, without warning, he stood and swung the butt of the gun, cracking it against France’s temple. He gave a muffled cry of surprise and pain as white light dances across his eyes and agony erupted in his head. He slumped downwards, weight pulling at his restraints.

Jean sat back, regarding England’s unmoving expression, eyes still fixed on him. England didn’t glance at France, but out of his periphery saw him straighten back up.

‘You’re not new to these sorts of things, I take it.’ Jean gave a short bark of laughter. ‘Makes sense’.

Still silence, broken only by France’s breathing as he fought to get in control of the pain. Already, it was subsiding.

‘How long would it take you to heal, I wonder? If I did worse, I mean.’ Jean regarded France. ‘Arthur here was shot only the other day, in the chest, I believe.’

He glanced back to England, at his chest. ‘But it seems you’re already fine. That’s been recorded, you know.’

England fought to not let the cold chill of dread show as it flooded his body. Modern technology was nothing but a curse.

‘Tell you what. Let’s do an exchange.’ Jean opened his arms, gun flashing in the light as it moved. ‘I tell you something I know, and you nod yes or no. In return, you can ask a question.’

Still silence.

Jean sighed. ‘I am being incredibly generous; you’re not really in a position to argue.’ He got up and crossed the room, out of the pool of light and into a corner. He retrieved something, before making his way back.

It was England’s case.

This time, England couldn’t help the flash of emotion at seeing it. He knew he’d slipped by the way Jean’s mouth curled into something nasty.

‘Yes, this. I have this. But you knew that, didn’t you? It’s what you came back for.’ He sat back on the bed, case in his lap, and stroked the lip. ‘I know that you both can’t die. Or, rather, can’t truly die. I know you can heal extraordinarily fast, and recover from injuries no regular human can. You can live for years, centuries, without change. And this,’ he bobbed the case on his knee, ‘has something to do with it.’

He raised the gun and stroked the barrel along it. ‘I wonder what will happen, if I were to destroy it. Would you die? Or would you turn mortal? I thi-‘

‘Burn it.’

England’s voice cut across him. Jean paused. ‘I’m sorry?’

‘Burn it. Destroy it. Shoot it. I neither take kindly to blackmail, nor am intimidated by it.’

France coughed, twice. Short and sharp. ‘Now Arthur, wait a minute. Let’s not be too- ah, hasty, here. Do forgive him, Jean, I’m sure you’re more than aware of how difficult he can be.’

England fought to keep the incredulity from his face before France almost imperceptivity tapped his foot against the floor, again twice.

Ah. Okay then. He recognised the signal for what it was. Go along with it.

‘What? How can you say that?’ He shot back to France without hesitation, pulling at his restraints. ‘He’s only going to get the information from us and then kill us, keeping the case anyway.’

‘Ah, you would like to think so,’ Jean cut in swiftly, ‘I’m aware that killing you will only lead to you being born again.’ He snorted, a half laugh. ‘I’m not foolish enough to let you ‘go’ like that.’

England gave an incredulous laugh, ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about.’

‘Don’t mock me Arthur. Don’t sit there and lie.’ The last part was said in a drawled sneer. ‘I know that this man here,’ he threw a hand in the direction of France, ‘I know this man was the same Francis from the home. I know that he died, and was reborn, somehow, as a younger man. I know that you, too, are able to do this.’

Bingo thought France. Jean knows too much, but not the whole story.

‘He’s recorded you, Arthur.’ France said, softly, hoping for more. ‘This isn’t like other times.’

‘That could easily have been doctored.’ England shot back, ignoring Jean who watching their exchange silently, ‘Children do that all the time these days. That isn’t proof.’

‘Maybe not on its own.’ Jean let the comment hang for a second, letting it settle. ‘But I have photos, a birth certificate; other things. More importantly, however,’ He paused, glancing at them both, ‘I have medical records.’

A silence, thick and strained, filled the room.

Jean grinned, sensing his advantage. ‘Caught on, have you? A small benefit to my old employment.’

England’s mind began racing, thinking over his own medical history, stored under lock and key in the British government buildings. Does Nation DNA change when they reset? He had no idea, never thought about it; when he’d last been human these sorts of things weren’t even dreamt of. Had anyone else considered this? If this was as bad it had the potential to be, then this could be a worldwide security breach. Either that, or he was more of a fool than he’d thought.

France’s thoughts were running down a similar vein and was desperately trying to recall instances where Francis could have left records, growing increasingly more horrified. Dentist records, blood tests, chests scans, x-rays; all would have a file somewhere, especially stored at the home.

This wasn’t something they could easily explain away and he cursed himself for his stupidity, for listening to England, for running into this so soon. He was without government support. Sure, England’s government could step in, refute it, cover it all up. Even if it hit the internet, the fact was that none of England’s records were lost or held by someone without clearance.

France, meanwhile, had no such support. No government. This could hit the internet and would prompt an investigation from the president’s people as well as the general population, who would think and believed what they will. The process of introducing himself and proving the accusations were worth covering up would take weeks. Other nations would need to be pulled in for verification and that was even if France was even able to get out of here. Which, being tied to a chair, was currently highly unlikely.

He couldn’t believe it. A human had him. Had them both.

‘I have the feeling that you’re both willing to be a bit more cooperative.’ Jean crossed one leg over the other drummed his gun free hand on the case lid. A familiar madness gleamed behind his eyes and France suddenly understood.

.............................................................................................

After the call from Wales, Scotland had excused himself and Northern Ireland from the UN sessions citing some business issues and had flown them to France on the first flight he could get. North had found, through England’s bank records, that a credit card was last used in Luçon earlier that morning. With today’s technology of contactless payments, there was no way to say whether England himself had made the purchase, but it was a lead.

This sense of accomplishment, however, was short lived, broken by what North had found online whilst waiting to board their plane. There, in wonderfully readable black and white in a prominent French newspaper, was a photo of his brother under the headline ‘Care Home Kidnap’.

What a cunt.

England was a fucking idiot. A fucking inconsiderate prick who had stormed back off into a shit storm of his own making, leaving the rest of them to pick up the bloodied pieces and clean up the damage. He was such a selfish fucking arsehole; Scotland immediately lost of any sense of previous concern he had briefly had for his brother’s wellbeing as it was swiftly buried underneath cold fury and hurried planning of how he, Scotland, was going to have to dig England out of the fucking shit pit and prevent this from becoming an international scandal.

Aside from that clusterfuck, he was also furious at Wales, which was an odd enough occurrence that he didn’t really know how to process it. Normally Wales was the one cross with someone else, if anyone was angry at all. Wales himself was sensible, logical, quiet, and caring- all traits Scotland silently admired. Reliable to a fault, Wales was not, usually, the fuck up of the family; England handled that title quite well without any help.

When North found that article, however, and had pushed the phone under his nose in panic, Scotland’s controlled hold on his concern and serenity had imploded. Causing such a public scene and scandal as a nation was bad enough, but then to go back to the scene of the incident, when the public had access to all the wonderfully accurate modern technology that they had? And Wales had known and let him.

After an apoplectically furious phone call to Wales in an airport terminal, who had recently found similar information and was already in contact with the Prime Minister, Scotland had remained stony faced and white knuckled as they flew back to Europe, North sat as far away as he could get to avoid becoming the outlet for Scotland’s anger.

Now in France, he was calm enough again to focus.

Wales had caught him up via email that during their flight that the PM was already in contact with the French government to let them know that a British ‘agent’ had become embroiled in French news. It wasn’t the UK’s business or right to reveal France for who he was, so instead they were going to play the politics card. Ban more printing of stories, reverse any warrants out for England’s arrest, prevent news channels from mentioning it and readying a story from Britain’s perspective, should anything break out back home.

That was the messy, admin part under control. Likely due to his mortifying part in this nonsense, Wales was working incredibly efficiently from the sound of things and Scotland trusted that his brother would be doing all he could to rectify the problem.

Panic and rage under control, Scotland could focus on the task at hand.

He’d hired a car upon arrival and bundled North, who had refused to fly back home and insisted on coming with him, inside to drive to Luçon. North was going to continue his online searching and fend off questions from other Nations whilst Scotland drove, which, grudgingly, he had to admit to himself was helpful. Being so accustomed to the internet did have its advantages, although he wasn’t ever going to tell North that.

If all went well, in around 4 to 5 hours they’d find England safe and sound and Scotland could happily beat the spit out of him.

.............................................................................................

Jean rebalanced England’s old case on his lap, eyes cold and hard despite his smile. There was a void behind his eyes, an emptiness. That note of something dangerous and sharp, something lacking a soul. The sense of a man who had nothing to lose in battle and was winning.

‘If you know as much as you do,’ Began France slowly, working through what he knew in his head, turning over each piece of information carefully, ‘then why on earth do you need us? What’s the point of all of this? Go to the authorities and be done with it, tell the public, sell what you know; what more can we tell you?’

‘I need to know why, know how. I am no fool, I know how crazy this is, how insane this will seem to people. I need proof, total, irrefutable proof. I need to know how this works, why it works, and all the ins and outs of things.’

‘And that’s because of Julien Durand, isn’t it? Your grandfather.’

Instantly, Jean’s lips pulled back, contorting his face. England looked shocked as the sight of it, so different from the co-worker he was used to, despite recent events. France pressed on, cultural knowledge tumbling through his mind, ‘His daughter was your mother. He killed me and they thought him mad. He lost all credibility and was deemed mentally unwell, not worth even thinking about.’

‘He was trying to do what was right!’ Jean stood, case falling to the ground with a muffled thump. England stared at it. ‘He believed-no, knew that he’d found something! He didn’t know enough, but he did what was right!’

France gave a dry laugh. ‘Yes, killing me was right?’ He looked Jean in the eye, ‘He was a fool. A fool who was getting involved in far more than he could ever have known and it backfired. Is that what this is for? To avenge him?’

‘You don’t know what you’re talking about.’ Jean was furious now, with the same roiling fury that sparked remembrance in France in the first place, a memory of Julien Durand’s similar switch in mood; one storm to another.

‘My family was ruined. His wife left him and my mother and uncle were raised to think of him as just that, as crazy, as something to be ashamed of, someone who couldn’t even hold down a job for long enough to save any money. No credit, no credence, no future.’ Jean breathed heavily, gulping breaths, ‘He’d tell us stories of that case, of what he found, of what he tried to do but our whole family were disgusted by him, thought so little of him. Blamed him.’

As the volume of the conversation increased England worked on his restraints, all the while listening for the door. He was surprised that whoever was working with Jean hadn’t come in to check on them when the shouting begun, although perhaps this was usual behaviour. A concerning thought in itself. Had he attempted this before?

As Jean begun to speak again, England felt the one binding his wrists dig further into the skin. He needed to work on weakening the cable tie enough that one sharp snap of movement would do something.

‘Myself, Amélie and Charles all knew about that fucking thing growing up, all heard his goddamn stories about it, about you’. This last word was dripping in venom and directed solely at France. ‘Knew them as grandfather’s silly stories but also knew how much he desperately believed them, was desperate to be taken seriously. It bled through our childhoods, infected everything and everyone like a poison.’

Jean’s fists were clenched and shaking.

‘But I had a decent life, a decent job. I was happy with my lot. And then you moved into the home.’ A hateful look at France. ‘With that same name and an odd piece of fucking personal possession that I recognised immediately.’

Suddenly, he laughed, head tipped back. ‘I couldn’t believe it. Surely not, I thought, surely not. That would be too farfetched, too impossible. All that time growing up, hearing about this man called Francis Bonnefoy and a case? Someone my grandfather considered worth killing, worth throwing away his life and the lives of his family for? A potentially immortal man? But there you were.’

Jean shook his head, almost as if he were in disbelief still. ‘That’s fine, I thought, perfect. I would try to open it, find out what was in it. Try to make sense of what drove Grandfather to do something so desperate for it. But it was locked, of course. And you,‘ he looked France hard in the eyes, ‘didn’t know anything about it, or you weren’t going to tell me.’

He gave another short laugh, ‘Again, that was fine. All I had to do was wait for you to die, and then I could grab it up and take it away. But then,’ he swivelled round to England, who just in time stopped his efforts on his restraints, ‘You showed up. Out of nowhere, and with that name. That same name. Then I knew, I knew it wasn’t a coincidence, knew it wasn’t something made up; a story. Whatever it was, it was real. It was real, and there you both were.’ There was a hungry quality to him, the way he moved and spoke, that sickened France to look at.

Jean stepped closer to England, back fully to France now, who had begun to work on his own restraints, pulling his legs away from the chair and rubbing the cord of the cable tie up and down the pole of the chair back.

‘I realised then that it must not be the case that was important, it was you. Both of you. The case had something to do with it, oh yes, but that wasn’t the real deal here. Grandfather was so close but he was looking in the wrong direction, focusing on the wrong thing.’

Jean whirled round and grabbed the case again from the floor, brandishing it before England. ‘That’s what I still don’t know. What I need to know. Which is why I was serious about talking to the both of you.’

Suddenly, he was calm again. He shook himself, a small movement on the head and shoulders and a deep breath. ‘Tell me what you are. Tell me how you work. I go to the government, and you help me clear my grandfather’s and my family’s name. That’s all.’

That was never all. England knew that, knew mortals and knew this type of one too. You gave an inch and eventually the mile started to look obtainable too. Expected, even. There was no bargaining, no reasoning. His stance on this was always the same, one did not negotiate with criminals. No matter what they offered, no matter how promising it looked; the main thing you were negotiating was your respect, your pride and as soon as you struck a deal, you’d lost. You were malleable.

And this mortal in front of him, knowing what he knew, was dangerous enough without giving him more. There could be no second day of this, there could be no deals struck or agreements promised. No, there would be nothing. All they needed was a chance.

England had the beginnings of an idea and hoped that France would catch on.

England appraised him, eyes flicking to the case and back to his eyes and his too calm expression. ‘Ask.’

Jean raised an eyebrow. ‘Ask? Is that all? I must admit I’m surprise at your quick turn around.’

England shrugged nonchalantly as best as he could whilst tied to a chair. ‘As you’ve said, there’s not much we can do, is there? If that’s the inevitable end I’d rather not make things more difficult for myself in getting there.’

Jean hesitated, suspicious.

‘Obviously you’re going to have to trust what answers I give,’ England offered, ‘But like you said. You have proof, and proof that modern science cannot deny. The main reason you want us is to fill in the blanks and go with you when you present it. I’m willing to do that if, as you say, that will be all.’

‘So, it seems we’re both in the same position,’ England continued drily, watching Jean process this information, ‘We have to trust your word, as you’ll have to trust ours.’

‘What’s in here?’ Jean asked quickly, mind seemingly made up for now.

‘Arthur-‘ France, a note of caution in his voice.

‘Items precious to the nation of England.’ Ignoring him, England bumped his bound hands against the pole they were tied to, three quick jolts. He hoped France would read it correctly. Get out.

‘Such as?’

‘My turn.’ England quickly considered the things he needed to know, prioritising them and filtering away ones that he could live without. ‘Who else knows what you do?’

‘Amélie and Charles. Although, I know you’re both aware of what happened to them now.’

‘Not the men outside?’

A small shrug, uncaring. ‘They’re hired. They didn’t ask questions and telling them wouldn’t have them respecting me enough to do what I wanted without question. They’re well paid.’

How on earth do you have the money to hire them? England thought, but that was a question he could ask France later.

‘Why are the cases important to what you are?’ Jean asked next.

England considered his words. ‘They help bring us back to ourselves, once we’re reborn. We have a lot to remember; looking through old objects we’ve owned or are important to our lives in some way help us to remember faster. Come back to ourselves quicker.’

Jean seemed pleased with this, making a noise of interest. ‘So, I was right; the case has nothing to do with your immortality.’

England shook his head. ‘No, nothing.’

‘When my grandfather killed Francis back then, he had caught you searching through French archives, had seen you exchange a case.’

‘I was looking for things to jog Francis’ memory, and he had done the same for me. Things lose their impact if they are used too often.’

Jean regarded the case again in his hands, its old cracked leather. ‘Then, the one Francis had in the home was for when he died. You were there to take him away, hide him from medical authorities and show it to him.’

‘Correct.’

‘Sadly, I made that more difficult?’ Jean chuckled. It was strange, what they were discussing. Something so private, so unhuman, and Jean was suddenly acting like how both England and France remembered him in the home. Warm and unassuming and made all the strange that they were sitting in Francis’ old bedroom. They could have been discussing anything.

‘It sped up the process.’ England acknowledged.

Cable tie dug into France’s skin.

‘Why work together with Amélie and Charles just to kill them? They’re your cousins, I assume.’

Jean nodded. ‘They were, yes. I needed them as scapegoats, I suppose you could say. I offered Charles a job in the gardens and once a job opened up for staff inside, I mentioned it to him. I knew Amélie was unemployed and knew Charles would tell his sister.’

‘So, you couldn’t even be blamed for bringing them there.’

Jean smiled, seemingly impressed. ‘Exactly. They’d grown up with the same stories as myself, I knew they’d put two and two together in the same way. Once you arrived,’ a hand casually flicked towards England, ‘and I understood more of what I had found myself involved in, I knew I needed to step back if I was ever going to be able to get a chance of getting close. I knew you’d be on guard for anything or anyone getting involved and so I knew I needed a cover, a distraction.’

‘I’d become interested in them, which would take my attention away from anything you were doing.’

‘Exactly,’ Jean nodded, happily, ‘And it worked. As soon as Amélie arrived and found the case in Francis’ room, she and Charles started thinking of ways to look inside it as much as I did. Became suspicious too. Even Francis knew something was going on, which lead to him becoming more paranoid and thus more medicated. All I needed to do was wait and watch.’

A quick glance towards France, who was looking slightly sick.

‘You were staying with Amélie?’

‘Yes. We weren’t close, growing up.’ Jean looked somewhat sad to admit this, ‘Our family truly never recovered from what our grandfather did. We knew each other, but not enough for her or her brother to involve me in whatever they were planning. Which is how I wanted it. I just needed to know that they were doing something. So, when things started getting more intense, I made up an excuse to stay with her. See if I could find out what they were up to and take advantage of it.’

England clamped his mouth shut, next question hot on his tongue. Don’t push him too far, not yet.

Jean’s next question came quick. ‘Can I do this?’ he gestured to both nations, ‘What you do? Come back again?’

France and England looked at each other, wary. England, wanting to continue to divert attention away from France, sighed, making himself look torn and paused.

‘Well?’ Jean sounded almost, desperate, England would say. Pleading, hungry. ‘Yes,’ he admitted, eventually, ‘It is difficult-painful. Extremely painful but yes, it is possible. You may die in the process, but it is possible.’

‘Well, that’d be convenient, wouldn’t it? Don’t worry, I’m not too interested in trying, especially not before talking to the authorities.’

The unspoken ‘yet’ fell heavy between them.

Greed would get to him before too long, either that or the fear of death; it always did. It was one of the main reasons why very few humans knew of the nations.

England next asked a question that had been bothering him for a while. ‘Did you have something to do with the staff becoming sick?’

‘I did,’ Jean still looked completely calm, no guilt for anyone else other than himself, it seemed. ‘I wanted to give Charles and Amélie an opportunity, make it easier for them to find out or do something. With so many people about, you especially, I knew that’d be hard. And it worked, when I stayed at Amélie’s I found out that they were planning on doing something on that night. I just had to be there, waiting.’

‘How…?’

‘The tea. Coffee. Whatever. A little bit of laxatives mixed with some strong over the counter medicines that would put someone down for a few days at least.’

England thought back through his memories to the many times Jean had offered to make drinks for staff members, himself included. The cups of coffee he kept trying to make him drink. England had thought him kind, friendly. A concerned co-worker. He mentally kicked himself, he had believed his ability to read people was better than this.

‘You,’ Jean continued, a pointed look at England, ‘were difficult. I didn’t know about your healing abilities then but had a suspicion that whatever you were was preventing you from getting affected. But then, you become unwell anyway.’

Kent. A rotten coincidence; terrible, perfect timing.

‘I checked Amélie’s phone; I knew what they were planning. I took advantage of it and went there that night myself. Unfortunately, you arrived back in time to prevent Charles from fully killing Francis.’

Jean sighed. ‘I was planning on cleaning up the pieces, offering my help to them and escaping with the body and the case. I’d hired a van and everything, should it be needed. Instead,’ he glared at Arthur, ‘You arrived back. Killed Charles instead. With the lack of staff and the panic, at least me and Amélie were able to smuggle his body out and to the family home in Luçon.’

‘As a message for us?’

‘Not entirely. It’s out of the way and far away from the home enough to prevent police from searching there until they discovered that the gardener was missing and deemed it worth their time to investigate. But,’ he inclined his head, ‘you’re right, also for you. If you went there following the same trail.’

‘Why kill her? Why not use her to help you, after all wasn’t it to help restore your family?’

‘First,’ Jean stopped him, holding up a hand. ‘Why were you ill? If you can heal so well and not die, shouldn’t you be immune to things like that?’

England thought quickly. ‘We are still…human. We still age, and die. We just return. We can heal well, yes, but we still get hurt. In the same vein, we can still become ill, but we recover faster.’

Jean accepted his explanation with a small incline of his head and a noise of consideration. ‘But it wasn’t the drugs?’

‘It may have been. They may have affected me, disrupted my body in some way.’

Jean seemed satisfied with this. ‘For your question, I needed someone to take the fall for what happened. Amélie had all the text messages on her phone, both of their fingerprints were on the case, hers on Charles’ body. Our last names are different, and on the surface I don’t appear involved at all. But she might speak, so I needed her to die. I hired men and continued alone. We managed to track your movements t-‘

Suddenly there was a loud snap and a burst of movement from France. Despite his legs still bound to the chair, his arms were free and he propelled himself towards Jean, hands outstretched.

Jean gave a yelp of surprise, dropping England’s case back to the floor. France managed to reach his shirt and he grabbed hold, momentum propelling him downwards and dragging Jean with him. There was a fierce struggle, during which England gave a huge tug and broke the tie around his own hands, ignoring the sharp burning sensation in his wrists. He had reached down to tug his legs free when there was an almighty crack of a gun as the doors behind them burst open. Hands seized his shoulders, pulling him back flush against the chair.

‘Stop!’ Jean roared, ‘Stop! Don’t shoot him!’

England looked down to see Jean under France’s prone body by the foot of the bed, a gunshot wound blooming red from between the nation’s shoulders.

The room was silent again, punctured only by Jean’s heavy breathing as he struggled underneath France’s now dead weight. His face was stricken, thunderous. The hands on England’s shoulders tightened, but he heard a gun being holstered behind him.

Jean pushed France off with a grunt and stood, checking himself for injuries. Then, in a sudden burst of fury, he kicked France’s side.

‘FUCK!’ he screamed, ‘FUCK, FUCK, FUCK!’ Each shout was accentuated with a kick, causing France’s body to jolt. With one last kick, Jean looked up back to England, furious.

‘You planned this! You planned this all along, you areshole. We had a deal; we were going to do this like men!’

England couldn’t help himself, he grinned. ‘I’m afraid, Jean, that we are not men.’ He looked down at France. ‘You may as well chuck him outside. He’ll decompose soon and will be born again where his case is. Which, I’m sure you’ve guessed, is hidden.’

Jean crossed the room in quick strides and punched England hard on the cheek. His head whipped back, stars popping in front of him. Leaning forward, he spat blood and a tooth at the ground. Jean punched him again, once more across the face and then hard in the stomach. England gasped as the air was knocked out of him, wheezing for oxygen.

‘You bastard.’

England looked up, made himself ignore his gasping need for oxygen to look this human, this pitiful man in the eye. He grinned, ‘Nice to finally make your acquaintance.’

.............................................................................................

AN:

Well.

If the You-Know-What that’s causing worldwide havoc and mayhem is good for anything, it’s good for getting me to write again. Only took three national lockdowns to prod me into activity…

If anyone is still about to read this, thank you. Thank you to new readers, who are still out there and have stumbled across this dinosaur and a bigger thank you to anyone who came back for this, who got a notification in their inbox and clicked it. I hope it made you happy to see.

There have been many points where I wanted to abandon this thing, leave it to rot in the dust. But I’ve always said I will finish this story and finish it I will. Every year that passes I grow more determined and I improve enough at writing that I want to keep going, to keep pushing myself to get it done.

No matter what, this story will get an end and BOY are we close now.

As always, please do let me know that you’re there by leaving a comment letting me know what you thought. I hope the build-up and suspense was worth it!

Much love and thanks, as always <3

Heroes

#fruk #aph #aph france #aph england #aph wales #aph scotland #aph northern ireland #reset #allheroeswearhats #ahwh #fic #hetalia #dear god what am i doing #why am i still doing this #Feels like shouting into a long dead void #I WILL FINISH THIS FIC EVEN IF IT KILLS ME #au #my writing

3 notes · View notes

calacuspr · 3 years

Text

Calacus Weekly Hit & Miss – Arsenal's racism stance & Dulux

Every Monday we look at the best and worst communicators in the sports world from the previous week.

HIT – ARSENAL

A lot has been said about sportspeople taking the knee before matches to highlight racial inequality and fight discrimination.

Back in June, we wrote about the importance of sports stars and brands doing more in the fight against social injustice, but the value of taking the knee continues to divide opinion.

The Professional Footballers’ Association, the trade union for players in England and Wales, said in December that players were “overwhelmingly in support” of continuing to take a knee after its members were consulted.

However, a number of leading players including Crystal Palace’s Wilfried Zaha have stopped taking a knee because they feel the protest is no longer enough.

Zaha commented that he believes the act is “degrading”, while Brentford striker Ivan Toney said: “We are being used as puppets.”

Last month, Rangers midfielder Glen Kamara was racially abused by Slavia Prague’s Ondrej Kudela in the Europa League, with the Czech defender later handed a 10-game ban by UEFA.

Czech minister Vratislav Mynar then criticised UEFA and wrote an open letter to UEFA's control, ethics and disciplinary body, he wrote: “You have decided on a completely unprecedented punishment for a player who did not harm anyone and only verbally - according to his statement - offended his opponent. You condemn a decent person without a single piece of evidence.

“In your submission, the fight against racism has become the fight of the unsuccessful against the successful, the pinnacle of hypocrisy, positive discrimination, and embarrassing pandering to stupid trends.

“We will not kneel before you and no threats apply to the Czech football fan.”

While the football world deplored the actions of Kudela, the Czech champions made the decision not to kneel before both legs of their quarter-final tie against Arsenal, a club where Kamara spent five years between 2012-2017.

Arsenal’s response was a powerful one led by their captain Alexandre Lacazette, who took a knee directly in front of the watching Slavia Prague players.

Poetically, all four goals scored by the visitors in their convincing 4-0 win were netted by black players, with Nicolas Pepe and Bukayo Saka adding to Lacazette’s brace.

Mikel Arteta revealed that a group of senior players asked him whether they could take a knee prior to the game, with the club and Uefa giving the green light to make the gesture that held added significance on the night.

“They asked me and the club that they wanted to take that initiative,” Arteta said. “They had the right reasons for it, so the club was very supportive. I think it was a good gesture.

“We spoke with the club to make sure we could follow the rules of Uefa and we can do it in the right way. We decided to take that approach, which I really like from the players, and I must say Uefa was very supportive as well. The captains came to me and asked me to do that, and I just supported them like the club did.”

The Arsenal players deserve a great deal of credit for reacting in the way that they did while at the same time letting their football do the talking on the pitch.

Footballers are often accused of lacking self-awareness but coming together to discuss the issue prior to the game showed an understanding of the gravity of the situation and the players were rightly lauded for their efforts.

MISS – DULUX SOCIAL MEDIA GOES ROGUE

Sports sponsorship is big business with Premier League clubs providing profile and potentially a return on the investment made by their partners.

Football clubs are now getting smart to the opportunities to diversify.

Gone are the days when a shirt sponsor was the only commercial partner.

Clubs now have commercial partners for every conceivable category and even multiple partners aligned to different specific target territories.

While it may have seemed random in years gone by, Tottenham Hotspur announcing a partnership with Dulux, the global paint brand, would appear in the face of it to be just another sports sponsorship agreement.

Tottenham made an announcement on their website about the deal and the simple PR stunt of using “the world-famous Dulux dog” by giving him a tour of the stadium and training centre.

Nuno Pena, AkzoNobel Marketing Director for UK & Ireland, said: “Our relationship with Tottenham Hotspur is a perfect synergy of two iconic British brands.

“Together, we are joined by a shared passion for colour. Spurs fans will know only too well the powerful impact putting on their white and blue scarves and shirts has on a matchday, and as a business we’re committed to using colour to transform lives.

“We know it’s the small details that make the difference and give you the competitive edge – in sport and in decorating – and we’re looking forward to expanding on our firm foundations to explore this power of colour together, in both the stadium and in people’s homes, in the years to come.”

So far, so good.

But when it came to social media (yes that ongoing hive of scum and villainy (if you know, you know)) it was an entirely different matter.

One Twitter user responded: “Can the dog play centre back?”

Perhaps trying to create a humorous tone, the official Dulux response was: “He might do a better job Chris 😆.”

Another reply by Dulux showed an empty trophy cabinet, referring to Tottenham’s lack of silverware, having only won one trophy since 1991.

When another pointed out that Tottenham can keep any paint supplies in the cabinet because they “don't seem to put anything else in there,” Dulux replied by saying: “Don't be silly, surfaces should be dust free before painting.”

It appeared as if the Tottenham manager Jose Mourinho had not been briefed about the new partnership with one of the biggest brands in the country.

When asked about the Dulux dog at his pre-Everton press conference, Mourinho replied: “What’s that?”

The tweets caused embarrassment for both the Tottenham and Dulux and underlined the importance of getting the right tone and context when making online jokes.

The Dulux social media team had clearly not been briefed clearly on what would or would not be appropriate content following the announcement with the posts quickly deleted.

The damage had already been done, though, and Dulux were forced into making a hasty statement on Twiitter: “We’re deeply sorry for the posts from Dulux this morning in response to the announcement of our relationship with @SpursOfficial.

“These do not reflect how proud we are to be the Official Paint Supplier of the Club. We’re investigating what happened and apologise to all Spurs fans.”

To their credit, Tottenham responded with a paint-related joke of their own: “We’ll gloss over it this time...”

In the end, the story may be nothing more than a footnote in the grand scheme of Tottenham’s affairs this season, particularly with increased focus on their progress under Mourinho.

But it’s further evidence of the necessity for thorough preparation, robust safeguards and processes

#racism in football #Alexandre Lacazette #Arsenal #Europa League #UEFA #Glasgow Rangers #Slavia Prague #Colin Kaepernick #Dulux #Tottenham Hotspur #Jose Mourinho #Ondrej Kudela #Glen Kamara #Wilfried Zaha #taking the knee

1 note · View note

corkcitylibraries · 5 years

Text

It Seems Like Nothing Changes

Paul Cussen

March 1919

The ‘German Plot’ internees are released.

Terence MacSwiney is released on humanitarian grounds to support Muriel through a severe attack of influenza.

Ireland’s first diplomatic mission is set up at the Grand Hotel in Paris where Sean T Ó Ceallaigh and George Gavan Duffy try to get recognition for the Irish Republic before the Paris peace conference. Their mission is expensive and frustrating as the cost of living and working in Paris mounts and the press turn a deaf ear to the Irish. Ó Ceallaigh, exasperated, writes to Cathal Brugha looking for:

a few thousand pounds—don’t be too greatly shocked by the light way I speak of it for the purpose of smoothing a passage to the presence of great men here and of securing the ear of the press. You can get nothing whatsoever done otherwise.

Admiral Sims returns to the United States on board the Mauretania and Rear-Admiral H.S. Knapp succeeds him in command of Naval Forces in Europe.

The ‘Battle of Bow Street’ breaks out when around two thousand foreign soldiers and sailors clash with local police in London. Thirty servicemen are arrested and seven American soldiers and sailors are handed over to Military Police and Shore Patrol as well as four Canadian servicemen later charged with incitement to riot. Six other injured servicemen are kept under guard in hospital before a later appearance in court.

The Journal of a Disappointed Man by Bruce Frederick Cummings, writing as W.N.P. Barbellion, is published. It is a personal account of multiple sclerosis, unique philosophy and personal resignation, described by its author as "a study in the nude". It is published by Chatto & Windus though it was originally optioned by Collins who eventually rejected the book because they feared its "lack of morals" would damage their reputation. The preface to the first edition is written by H.G. Wells.

The Thrill Book, a pulp magazine tending towards speculative fiction, is published by Street & Smith with a plan to publish twice a month.

In the Division II final Knockavilla lose 0-0 to Millstreet 0-2. Kinsale win Division III of the county hurling championship, beating Doneraile by 4-1 to 2-1.

1 March

The Cork Examiner reports on the findings at a conference held at the Institute of Hygiene in London the previous day at which nose and throat specialist Sir St. Clair Thomson said that “influenza was undoubtedly “Splashed!” upon us by coughing and sneezing – even by laughing”. In the Irish Times report on the conference, Thomson advised that “a person who coughed without putting up his hand or sneezed without using a handkerchief should be prosecuted for indecency”. All speakers at the conference “emphasised the importance of good food and fresh air”.

The beginning of the Samil Movement when 33 racial representatives meeting at Taehwagwan, Seoul announce that Korea will no longer be under Japanese rule.

2 March

Sergeant Leslie Glynn dies at North Fever Hospital (B.1892, USA)

First congress of Communist International opens at the Kremlin.

4 March

Gunner Tom Barry arrives home from Egypt

4-5 March

The Kinmel Park mutiny takes place in Wales. 15,000 Canadian troops are stationed there awaiting repatriation after the Great War.

The mutineers were our own men, stuck in the mud of North Wales, waiting impatiently to get back to Canada – four months after the end of the war. The 15,000 Canadian troops that concentrated at Kinmel didn't know about the strikes that held up the fuelling ships and which had caused food shortages. The men were on half rations, there was no coal for the stove in the cold grey huts, and they hadn't been paid for over a month. Forty-two had slept in a hut meant for thirty, so they each took turns sleeping on the floor, with one blanket each. - Noel Barbour Gallant Protestors, 1975

6 March

Pierce McCan, member of the First Dáil representing Tipperary East dies in Gloucester Jail having been arrested under the ‘German Plot’ and held for ten months without charge or trial (b. 1882, Ballyanne Desmesne, Wexford)

7 March

Acting CSM Arthur Vincent dies at the Central Military Hospital (b. 1887, Northumberland)

10 March

Matthew Hogan, a fifteen year old from Tipperary, is kidnapped by police and moved to an unknown destination.

11 March

Sergeant Michael O’Riordan dies of influenza (b. 1888, Douglas)

12 March

Private William Smith dies of an accidental gunshot wound to the head at Ballyvonaire Military Camp (b. 1892, Sunderland)

13 March

Stoker 1st class William Whitmill dies of TB (b. 1892, London)

Private Laurence O’Sullivan dies of influenza at Cork Central Military Hospital (b. 1887)

16 March

Robert Barton, Sinn Féin TD for West Wicklow, escapes from his cell in Mountjoy Gaol, leaving behind a note:

I am about to make an escape from your hospitality. If I escape, well and good, if not I am prepared to suffer the consequences... I hope that we may shortly turn your prison to a useful national purpose.

17 March

Nat King Cole is born in Montgomery, Alabama (d. 1965)

Dutch steel workers strike for an eight hour day and minimum wages.

Commander Petr A. Solodukhin's brigade overwhelm the French and White Russian troops garrisoned at Bolshie Ozerki.

18 March

The analytic philosopher Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Anscombe is born in Limerick (d. 2001)

Seán Moylan is arrested for a seditious speech in Cullen.

19 March

Alfred Person (46) is shot dead at his home 146 Richmond Road, Dublin. The father of a British Army staff sergeant he is thought to have been shot while attempting to prevent raiders from taking guns from his collection.

20 March

IRA volunteers raid Collinstown airfield outside Dublin. They capture 75 rifles and approximately 5,000 rounds of ammunition.

22 March

The Cork Branch of the Irish Women’s Association (founded by the Countess Bandon in December 1915) closes its depot, 37 Grand Parade, at its final meeting.

23 March

The 6th Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment and troops from the American 339th Infantry Regiment attack Bolshie Ozerki losing 75 men.

Mussolini founds the Fascist Party (Partito Nazionale Fascista) in Milan.

People march in Brisbane in the second demonstration against the War Precautions Act (legislation based on the British Defence of the Realm Act). Contrary to assurances made to the police red flags of various sizes are unfurled by the marchers and their numbers swell to over 1,000.

24 March

Lawrence Ferlinghetti, poet and co-founder of City Lights Booksellers & Publishers, is born in Yonkers, New York.

A crowd of up to 8,000 march in Brisbane protesting against the Red Flag marchers. Fighting lasts for two hours and 100 men receive bayonet wounds while between 14 and 19 police officers are injured. Sadly 3 police horses are shot, one of which later dies, while 19 of the injured protestors (ex-servicemen) are evacuated by ambulance.

28 March

Two paintings by E.E. Cummings appear in a show of the New York Society of Independent Artists.

29 March

Piaras Beaslaí, Pat Fleming and eighteen other republican prisoners escape over the wall of Mountjoy using a rope ladder.

Resident Magistrate, John Milling is shot dead in Westport, County Mayo reportedly because he sent volunteers to prison for unlawful assembly and drilling. The retired RIC District Inspector is 46.

30 March

Two RIC constables, Constable Hayes and Constable Creed, while patrolling at the Cork and Muskerry Terminus on the Western Road, bid good morning to a man walking along the middle of the road. When the man does not reply, they proceed to stop and question him. The man produces a revolver and Constable Hayes is shot through the hip (an injury from which he makes a full recovery). The man escapes in the direction of Hanover Street.

31 March

The Red Army launch attacks against the Allied and White Russian forces in the Battle of Bolshie Ozerki. Both sides suffer heavily from exposure despite sunny days. Nighttime temperatures fall to -20°C.

#History to Blame #Irish History #World History #Cork City Libraries

1 note · View note

socialists4pr · 3 years

Text

Socialists in the Labour Party should back PR

Support for proportional representation is not the preserve of any one party. But given the opposition of the Tory party to any change, the view of the Labour Party will be key to any reform.

For the purposes of providing a greater understanding of the debates within Labour, it is worth considering the views of those Labour members who are strongly opposed to the party backing electoral reform at its upcoming conference.

CLPD PLAYED POSITIVE ROLE IN THE PAST

The Campaign for Labour Party Democracy (CLPD) is one such group. It has prepared two motions for this year's Labour conference in September which oppose any change to the current First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) voting system.

The CLPD was founded in 1973 in response to the Labour leadership’s refusal to adopt conference decisions as party policy. It also acted in the context of members of British political parties having no say over who became their party’s leader.

Labour was the first party to allow ordinary members to choose their leader in parliament, followed by the LibDems and Tories. That this occurred in British politics was down, in no small part, to the work of CLPD.

In recent years, the organisation has supported efforts to introduce open selection for all Labour parliamentary candidates, a measure which would have led to party members having a choice of candidates in all seats, “safe” or not.

But curiously for an organisation dedicated to improving democratic participation in politics, the CLPD is opposed to the party adopting proportional representation as its policy.

In doing so, the CLPD is choosing to ignore all the evidence against the current system: FPTP has an inbuilt bias towards conservative parties.

Let’s examine what CLPD argues more closely.

GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS

The first motion, titled “First Past The Post Delivers Majority Labour Governments”, claims that proportional representation would make it “well-nigh impossible to ever achieve” a parliamentary majority.

New Zealand currently has a Labour government. It won a majority last October under a proportional system. In Finland and Portugal, parties much like Labour lead coalitions of left parties which control their own governments.

Until this May, Labour governed in coalition in Wales. After the May 2021 election, the party now governs alone. Yet the Welsh Assembly also has a system of proportional representation.

In fact, there are “75 countries (across the globe) that have directly elected parliaments use some form of proportional voting system; 22 others use a semi-PR system.” Embarrassingly, Labour is the sole social democratic party in the developed world that still endorses FPTP.

So, the first claim of CLPD, that Labour cannot win under PR, is simply not true. (Mind you, abandoning FPTP does not mean abandoning the aim of getting as big a win as possible!)

But sadly, this claim of impossibility is repeated in another motion on electoral reform, “Now is Not the Time to Change the Voting System”. That is a title which makes it sound as if there is an immediate prospect of parliament implementing PR.

If now is not the time (and it isn’t, there is not a parliamentary majority for change) what about after the next general election?

The motion argues that Labour should focus on coming up with “an appealing platform that aims to solve the problems that are being inflicted on the population by the Tory government.”

And while it is true that electoral reform doesn’t keep many people awake at night with worry, it isn’t a matter of having either an appealing platform or a commitment to electoral reform.

Why not both?

Moreover, it should never be forgotten what a June 2020 review by Labour Together concluded: for Labour to win in the next election would require a greater swing than Labour got in the 1945 and 1997 elections.

LABOUR HAS WON WHEN IT PROMISED PR

Given that electoral reform has been promised by the party in the past, when it last went from opposition to government in 1997, PR could be an important element of a next winning manifesto. PR gives voters more power over the political system and power is what many people are lacking.

Of course, the challenge for Labour is to win under the current system. But why would a Labour government want to keep the current system, given it has a bias towards conservatives?

The fact is that FPTP makes it harder for Labour to participate in government. It is why our sister parties do not advocate returning to it and one reason why referendums in Ireland and New Zealand to return their countries to FPTP voting have both failed.

As members of a party which has been able in the past to elect and re-elect majority governments without reforming the voting system, it can seem to some Labour Party members as though the concern of Liberal Democrats, Greens, and others, with getting PR done is just a matter of narrow self-interest.

Socialists in the Labour party need to consider if attitudes to electoral reform are based on evidence. Does the political strategy for a transformative Labour government require a defence of the electoral system? Aren’t socialists in favour of electoral fairness?

SOCIALISM & PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

In an article for CLPD, “First Past The Post for Democratic Socialism”, Luton South MP Rachel Hopkins argues that across Europe, Labour’s sister parties have “been marginalised and electoral systems have been a major factor in that process”.

But would their position have become so weakened if they had not signed up to austerity in the wake of the global financial crisis and experienced “Pasokification” - a severe backlash from their voters - as a result?

Hopkins' argument has no place for a Labour government that wants to implement not only economic but also constitutional changes to advance the interests of the majority.

Would it be better for a Labour government to lose power to a Conservative Party elected by a minority than to change the voting system and potentially share power if another outright majority could not be won? In these circumstances, having to reach agreement with other parties to continue implementing progressive policies is surely preferable to the damage of minority Tory rule?

In their arguments in defence of the existing system, Hopkins and the CLPD do not appear to have considered these questions.

PR REDISTRIBUTES POWER

Our party made a mistake two decades ago. Having been elected in 1997 promising to set up a commission on electoral reform (a promise which was kept) and to hold a referendum on its recommended voting system (which was AV+) Labour abandoned this pledge to voters that, in future, their votes would really count.

It should be seen as a real problem for socialists in the Labour Party that some voters matter more than others; it reduces Labour’s influence in parliament and gives a rational electoral basis for the party concentrating on voters in key marginals. This can make it seem like support is taken for granted in our party’s strongholds.

The last time Labour won a general election was in 2005 and at the time, the SNP were not the governing party in the Scottish parliament and the Greens had no MPs. So, there wasn’t as much competition from other parties that voters could see had gained parliamentary representation elsewhere and so could potentially win in their constituency.

It is going to be necessary, if Labour is to take office after the next general election, that voters minded to back other parties have a strong reason to vote tactically.

A commitment to redistributing the power of voters by implementing electoral reform could provide this, as part of a platform for transformative change.

THERE’S GROWING MOMENTUM FOR PR

Thankfully, the CLPD’s conservative position on electoral reform is not the prevailing opinion of socialists in the Labour Party.

For example, it has been the position of Open Labour for a number of years that there needs to be PR.

And this year, members of Momentum have voted to back PR in the organisation’s first policy primary, recognising that “to protect the gains we make when in power, to avoid losing future decades to Tory minority rule, and to give everyone a real voice in a 21st century democracy, we must change the voting system.”

This is a motion which was initiated by Labour For A New Democracy and it is a call which has so far been taken up by a third of the party’s constituency groups. And there is growing interest in trade unions affiliated to Labour: this year the train drivers’ union ASLEF has joined the campaign for PR.

Yes, the aim should be to elect a transformative Labour government under the existing voting system. And to that end, we should try to democratise the party so that it can then democratise both state and economic institutions when in government.

But there is no reason to suppose that a Labour Party committed to transformative policies could not be re-elected for a second term under a fair voting system.

And it could be that the only way to secure the election of a Labour government is to commit to redistributing wealth and power, including the power of voters, from the few to the many.

Let’s Get PR done!

++++++++++++++++

James Doran lives in the North East of England and is a longstanding member of the Labour Party.

++++++++++++++++++

IN PROPORTION is the blog of the cross-party/no-party campaign group GET PR DONE! We are campaigning to bring in a much fairer proportional representation voting system. Unless otherwise stated, each blog reflects the personal opinion of its author.

We welcome contributed blogs. Send a brief outline (maximum 75 words) to [email protected]

0 notes

georgewagner · 3 years

Text

A guide to setting up your own trades business

If you’ve spent time perfecting your trade whilst working for someone else, maybe you’re ready to move on and start your own company. Plenty of benefits come with running your own trades business – but there are many responsibilities, too.

Get off to a good start by ticking off these 8 tasks for new small businesses, below.

Contents

Create a business plan

Sort out your finances

Get the required certifications

Secure your supplies

Promote your trades business

Get reviews and ratings

Stay on top of admin

1. Create a business plan

The first step in starting your own trades business is to create a business plan. Your business plan will describe your business, its goals, and outlines how you’ll achieve them. You can find business plan templates on Gov.uk. Plus, you can get specific advice on writing your business plan online or over the phone, depending on where you live in the UK:

England.

Scotland.

Wales.

Northern Ireland.

Many banks will ask you to provide a business plan in order to apply for a loan or investment.

2. Register your business

If you earn more than £1,000 in a year through self-employment, then you’ll need to register as a sole trader with HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC – the UK government department responsible for collecting taxes such as VAT).

As a sole trader, you can keep all of your business’s profits after tax, but you’ll also be personally responsible for any losses your business makes. On the other hand, you can set up as a limited company, which is legally separate from its directors but requires more admin. This includes registering with the UK’s registrar of companies, called Companies House.

Find out which registration option is best for your trades business in our blog post: Becoming a sole trader or limited company.

3. Sort out your finances

It can be tempting to buy lots of exciting new tools and other equipment when you’re setting up your business. However, you should make sure to invest some time and money into the financial essentials, such as:

Insurance

Protect yourself from financial loss by taking out insurance. Types of insurance to consider getting include:

Tool insurance, in case yours get stolen or damaged.

Public liability insurance, to cover you against any claims made by a member of the public.

Van insurance, in order to drive your van on the roads legally.

For a more in-depth look at your insurance options, read our advice on tradesman insurance.

Get investment or a loan

Starting up a business can be expensive. So, many small trades business owners choose to take out a loan to get cash flow into their businesses. If you’re considering applying for a loan, it’s very important to carefully consider your options. Speak to an accountant for specific advice.

Many leading UK banks offer business loans for small businesses, including Barclays, Santander and HSBC. Plus, there are also government-backed, unsecured personal loans of between £500 to £25,000 available through the Start Up Loan scheme.

If you’re currently on benefits, you may be able to get a weekly cash allowance to start your own business through the New Enterprise Allowance. If you have a disability or health condition, then you could get an Access to Work grant to help you start your business.

Create a financial plan

A financial plan gives you control over your business finances, so your business doesn’t crash and burn. It also shows you areas where you can save money, allows you to estimate future expenses and gives you a budget to work within.

There are lots of free financial planning templates available online, including:

The British Business Bank’s Cash Flow Forecast template, to record how much money is likely to come in and out of your business.

The Prince’s Trust’s Business plan financial tables Excel spreadsheet, which automatically calculates your cashflow, costs and more.

Track your spending

In order to be compliant with HMRC’s Making Tax Digital for VAT (value added tax), you need to keep digital records of your expenditure and income using digital software. Apps such as QuickBooks and Sage One can help you with this. Read more about useful apps for your business in our blog post: The best tech for your trades business.

Talk to an accountant for specialist and expert advice for your trades business.

4. Get the required certifications

Certain types of tradespeople must be registered with industry bodies. These include:

Gas Safe Register: Gas/heating engineers and any tradespeople working with gas must be registered with the Gas Safe Register, in order to work legally. New applications cost £347 plus VAT (price correct as of 1st April 2021).

Part P: Electrical installers must follow the Part P requirement of the government’s Building Regulations when working in domestic homes. Read more on the Planning Portal website.

TrustMark: TrustMark is the government endorsed quality scheme that covers work done in consumer homes. If you register with TrustMark, you’ll need to meet specific requirements. 49 different trades, including builders, carpenters, electricians, can join TrustMark – read the full list on the TrustMark website.

SafeContractor: SafeContractor is a health and safety accreditation that shows your competency to your clients. Find out more on the SafeContractor website.

You can show potential customers all of your certifications in one place, through the ‘Certifications’ section of your Rated People profile. Read more in our blog post: Update your Rated People profile.

5. Secure your supplies

Buying your building supplies in bulk is a cost-effective way to make sure you’ve got a steady supply of the materials you need. This was particularly relevant early on in the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, when lots of builders’ merchants and other suppliers closed completely and demand for home improvement work increased.

Find out which building merchants are open during the coronavirus (or COVID-19) pandemic in our blog post: Coronavirus: Which building merchants are open to tradespeople?

Make sure that you don’t tie up all of your cash in excess inventory though, as this could take up too much of your monthly budget. To make sure you’re not buying stock when it’s not needed, create a simple inventory spreadsheet that shows how much you’ve got of each product. Then, set up a phone reminder to check the stock level again in a couple of weeks or months – how often depends on how much stock you have. That way, you’ll know when you need a top up. Then, you can find discounts at the UK’s leading trade counters by using Rated People’s Member Benefits Premium.

If you choose to buy your supplies from a wholesaler, make sure to pay your invoice(s) on time. If you don’t, this could harm your reputation and future relationships within your industry.

6. Promote your trades business

Reaching new customers has never been easier, thanks to online tools such as social media and trades recommendation platforms like Rated People.

Social media

Thousands of homeowners are heading online to find a tradesperson to complete work in their homes. You can boost your online presence by using social media. There’s plenty of platforms to choose from, including Instagram, Facebook and Twitter.

Not using social media could even mean you’ll lose out on potential customers too. 1 in 4 millennials (who spend more than the national average on hiring tradespeople annually) say they won’t hire a tradesperson without social media accounts!

Flooring specialist IdealFlooring has earned 1.1 million TikTok followers just by filming short videos of their day-to-day work. They’ve had some jobs come through the platform too. Read more about tradespeople going viral on TikTok.

Find out more about your social media options in our blog post: Which social media is right for your business?

Create an online portfolio

Potential customers want to see photos of your previous work when they’re looking at your online profiles. A simple online photo album works, as you can upload pictures straight from your phone’s camera roll.

You can create your photo album quickly and easily on your social media pages. If you’re a member of Rated People, tag us in your photos @RatedPeople and we’ll post them on our social media profiles to help you get your name out there.

Find out more about how to take great photos of your work.

7. Get reviews and ratings

Once you’ve completed a job, the work doesn’t stop there! Ask your clients to leave you a review. Around 7 in 10 people will leave a review for a business they’ve used if they’re asked to, so don’t be shy.

Getting reviews is easy on Rated People. Once you’ve completed a job, we’ll send the homeowner an email asking them to leave you a rating. Once you’ve got the review, you’ll get an email to let you know that your review is on your profile and is ready to share using our social sharing feature.

Read more about how great reviews maximise your opportunities to quote in our blog post: Tips for collecting reviews and building your online reputation.

8. Stay on top of admin

From sending invoices to organising your leads, there’s lots of admin that’s involved when you’re running your trades business. Cut down on the time that you spend doing paperwork by using online automation tools including:

E-invoicing: Online invoicing systems that allows you to track the payment status and have a secure audit trail. Read our 5 simple tips for speedier invoicing.

Lead organisation tools: View all of your leads at a glance and see how much value they’re are bringing in with Rated People’s Lead Tracker feature. You can add leads from outside of Rated People, too. Read more about managing your leads using the Trades app.

Cloud storage apps: Store your documents in a secure online data centre. You can share and work on your documents easily with your colleagues through apps such as Google Drive. Read more about cloud storage in our blog post: Data backup: A guide for small and medium-sized businesses.

For more advice for your business, visit our Trade Advice Centre:

Tipped for success: 5 learning for one-person businesses.

8 money saving tips for tradespeople.

Coronavirus: 6 lockdown lessons about running a business.

The post A guide to setting up your own trades business appeared first on Rated People Blog.

A guide to setting up your own trades business published first on https://fanseeaus.tumblr.com/

0 notes

thatsonemorbidcorvid · 3 years

Text

A Labour MP has been fiercely criticised for proposing legislation which would criminalise buying sex as campaigners warn the bill would put prostitutes lives in danger.

Dame Diana Johnson, Labour MP for Kingston upon Hull, introduced a ten-minute rule to parliament on Wednesday which aims to criminalise purchasing sex and decriminalise selling sex.

The legislation, which passed its first reading in the Commons, also seeks to criminalise online sites which sex workers use to advertise their work.

Ms Johnson warned sex trafficking was occurring on an “industrial scale” across the UK as she argued current laws mean the “minority of men in England and Wales who pay for sex do so with impunity, fuelling a brutal sex trafficking trade and causing untold harm to victims”.

“Vulnerable women are moved around networks of brothels and hotel rooms to be raped and abused by men who pay for sex,” she told the Commons.

But Niki Adams, a spokesperson for the English Collective of Prostitutes, a leading campaign group which supports the decriminalisation of prostitution, told The Independent she had grave concerns about Ms Johnson’s bill.

She said: “The bill criminalises clients of sex workers. Clients are already criminalised from kerb-crawling on the street and paying for sex with a prostitute who has been forced or coerced.

“The newly proposed bill would make it much more dangerous for women to work. It says it is going to decriminalise selling sex but where this legislation has been introduced in other countries, such as in Sweden, Norway, France and Ireland, sex workers are still routinely arrested and violent attacks against sex workers have increased. This is because women have been pushed into more isolated areas and forced to work alone in greater danger.

“The idea that feminist politicians are choosing to interfere with one of the ways women - particularly mothers - have found to survive, at this moment of crisis when destitution and poverty is increasing, is outrageous.”

Ms Adams said there was massive opposition to the bill from women’s organisations, human rights charities, trade unions and sex workers themselves, as she warned the legislation would endanger lives.

She noted the legislation, which is known as the Nordic model after it was first introduced in Sweden, means sex workers are unable to screen clients like you presently can because clients are worried about being arrested and won’t give their details.

The English Collective of Prostitutes, whose warnings are backed by Amnesty International, said research published by The Lancet and others shows there is no causal relationship between the criminalisation of sex work and curbing trafficking.

Laura Watson, another member of the campaign group, said: “This week, like every week since the coronavirus pandemic lockdown, the English Collective of Prostitutes and other organisations have been giving out emergency payments and food vouchers to sex workers worried how they are going to make ends meet and get through Christmas.

“If women MPs want to help women exit prostitution they should be supporting this lifesaving work, targeting benefit sanctions and demanding money for mothers, not proposing legislation that further criminalises sex work which will inevitably drive it further underground, making it harder and more dangerous for women.”

Statistics from UglyMugs – an app where sex workers can confidentially report incidents of abuse and crime – state the number of such incidents being reported has greatly increased since Ireland banned the purchase of sexual services. They say crime against sex workers has increased 90 per cent, while violent crime specifically has increased 92 per cent.

While a two-year evaluation of equivalent legislation in France discovered 42 per cent of sex workers were more exposed to violence and 38 per cent have found it increasingly difficult to make sure men use condoms.

A sex worker, who works in East London, said: “I wish that people who know zero of our industry would stop making damaging decisions. I am wholeheartedly against the criminalisation of our customers.

“We will be forced back onto the backstreet alleys and made as vulnerable overnight as women were in Victorian days. We won’t be able to feed our kids, we will lose our places of safety, our incomes and any peace of mind. At best we will be forced into poverty. Then debt. Then maybe living on the streets. What fool came up with this idea.”

It is not illegal for individuals to buy or sell sex from each other in the UK but soliciting and sex workers banding together as a group are illegal.

Lyn Brown, the Labour MP for West Ham, hit back at Ms Johnson’s legislation in the Commons, saying it was “counterproductive” and would put sex workers at greater risk. Evidence shows murders of sex workers has substantially risen since similar legislation was introduced in France, she said.

“Sex work will be around for as long as there is poverty and inequality and frankly we know poverty and inequality is rife in our communities today,” Ms Brown added.

It comes after The Independent previously reported sex workers are being left penniless and face being made homeless as they struggle for income during the coronavirus crisis.

The most wide-ranging study ever into British sex work, published by the Home Office in Autumn 2018, found austerity was pushing women into prostitution and the criminalisation of the industry is putting them in danger. Female sex workers directly linked experiences of physical and sexual violence to laws which criminalise the practice in the UK.”

An interesting standpoint on the Nordic model. I’m disappointed though that the article itself didn’t include any counter arguments, so readers can make up their own minds.

#nordic model #terfs please interact #radfems please interact #radfem #radfems do interact #terfs do interact #terf safe #radical feminism #terfs please touch #radfems please touch

1 note · View note

theprguru777-blog · 6 years

Text

MEDIA ZOO CAN’T TAME THE WILD, UNCAGED BOSS OF INEOS, JIM RATCLIFFE, AS HE BUYS SAFARI PARK

PR agency Media Zoo have a virtually impossible job taming the wild, uncaged and out of control boss of INEOS, Jim Ratcliffe, 65-years-old.

INEOS, built with junk bonds and an epicentre in the tax haven of the Isle of Man, is now like a rabid dog eating up bizarre and totally unrelated assets on Jim’s childhood wish list.

Jim’s latest grocery grab is a £7.5 million safari park in Tanzania. As the Daily Mail reports: “Chemicals billionaire Jim Ratcliffe is splashing out on yet more wild investments”.

According to the Financial Times, of late, Jim Ratcliffe has wrestled INEOS into diversifying into a “string of unusual ventures”.

The decision in November to buy Swiss Footballl Club, FC Lausanne-Sport, is another bizarre move, because INEOS have absolutely no intention to “make a profit from the club or run it as a business proposition” according to their press release. So, another Jim play-thing.

Another “eye-opening acquisition” according to the FT, was the decision by Jim to buy fashion brand Belstaff, famous for its motorcycle jackets. Obviously another boys-toy asset for Jim.

Then the FT report how Jim has bought the rights to bring back The Land Rover Defender, because he’s a “fan of it”.

The Guardian referred to Jim’s Generation-game grab, as “the latest spree of … [buying up] unconnected acquisitions”.

The BBC called it “his collection of esoteric buys”.

The Telegraph called it a “series of unorthodox moves”.

Jim Ratcliffe is fast becoming the laughing stock of mainstream media.

Media Zoo, who specialise in crisis PR including industrial disputes, fatal accidents and child labour, wouldn’t have seen the Jim Ratcliffe late midlife crisis coming.

Either that or Jim’s mentally ill.

Media Zoo are the PR agency that Unite the Union accused of cooking up a ‘campaign of fear’ against Grangemouth refinery employees in Scotland in 2013. Unite said: “A climate of fear has been created to try to force working men and women into signing away their rights and the pensions for which they have saved all their working lives”.

But now they’re having to deal with the enemy within: Jim.

Bond Villain Jim has beaten down planners for six years with five planning submissions – because ‘he always wins’ to get permission to build his remote £4 million Portsmouth villa overlooking unrivalled views of the Isle of Wight.

The plan was to put the house on hydraulic stilts so it could be elevated with the rising sea-levels, created by the Climate Change caused by his own polluting petrochemicals company. This aspect got thwarted by planners – for now.

Jim’s rampant agenda to Frack The UK, has just seen him pay to Injunct Article 10 (Freedom of Expression) and 11 (Right to Protest and Freedom of Association) under the 70-year-old UN Declaration of Human Rights via a High Court in London.

Also, rather than allow local democracy to follow its course in Yorkshire where he holds illegal fracking licences, Jim has got INEOS to queue-jump and get central government to grant INEOS speedy boarding passes to frack. The end of democracy in this country.

Fracking, which has been proven to be far worse than coal in terms of being a pollutant, has just been totally banned by France. Its been banned by Scotland. Wales and Northern Ireland have moratoriums. The Republic of Ireland has banned it.

INEOS and its fracking vision for England is totally out of step with the times.

But Jim Ratcliffe, who has piled in £670million to realize his ‘fracking dream’ of being the ‘biggest name in shale’ is going to force it through at all costs propped up by Theresa May holding together illegal PEDL licenses created during the Cameron-era. Jim knows he has to move fast because Labour will ban fracking when elected, according to their manifesto.

With just 16% of Brits now approving of fracking, according to the government’s own Energy and Climate Change Public Attitudes Tracker: Wave 22, conducted by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy in August 2017, fracking is fast becoming the Tories poll tax, fuelled by the ‘rule-bending’ Jim Ratcliffe.

Deep inside, Jim is in there. The Stockport-born, son of a joiner father and office worker mother, lived in a council house until the age of 10. But he’s seriously lost his way in a hungry, conquest-driven Mission Impossible.

Like a lot of people who’ve come from nothing, Jim’s had his Sliding Doors moment, but unfortunately, he went through the wrong door. Rather than the extreme deprivation making him an agent for social justice, he’s instead become a social menace.

The word INEOS, it has just been discovered, doesn’t mean ‘dawning of innovation’ as Jim’s marketing puff would have it. The Latin definition, and the only real true meaning of INEOS, is ‘AGAINST THEM’.

INEOS is against Scotland for banning fracking and now want to sue them. They are against the National Trust for not letting them frack Sherwood Forest and now want to sue them. They’re against the people of Woodsetts in South Yorkshire because they don’t want INEOS to frack 500 yards from a local school and people’s homes, killing their children.

It really is Jim versus the world.

Ironically, he’s just been trying to buy up swathes of unspoilt Iceland through purchases of farms around Strengir because it is ‘untouched and unspoilt by humans’. He’s even had the gall to install himself on the River Association to protect the salmon.

Jim recently told Iceland Visitor Magazine: “Man has damaged a lot of the environment around the world, in one way or the other, and there is a sort of uniqueness about places which are untouched by humans, and I think that inherently there will be a value because people like to go to places where the landscape is untouched”.

Jim beggars belief.

#INEOS #Jim Ratcliffe #fracking #Human Rights #INEOSvTHEPEOPLE #Right to Protest #Tories #Fracking the UK #Belstaff

1 note · View note

gadgetsrevv · 5 years

Text

Meath Chronicle – Divergence, for its own sake, is what the UK wants

clannad.jpg

I would like to start by saying a few words about the man in whose honour tonight’s lecture is being held, Brendan Halligan . Brendan is the founder of the Institute.

He could see, back in 1980, when he and a few friends came together to found this Institute, that the European Union was developing fast and that Ireland needed to be an informed participant in European debates, including on issues of no apparent direct interest to our island, on the western edge of the continent. As he saw it, it was only by understanding the problems of others and contributing intelligently to solving them, that Ireland itself could make sure it got a good hearing in Europe when it needed it. Prior to founding the IIEA, Brendan had been from 1967 a very effective General Secretary of the Labour Party, attracting many bright people of his generation into that party. He became a member of the European Parliament in 1983, and in 1984 was one of the MEPs who voted for the Spinelli Report which called for Federal Union in Europe. This stance earned him severe reproofs from some more cautious elements in his own party but he held his ground. Brendan is much influenced be Altiero Spinelli, like him a man of the Left , and colleague in the European Parliament, and I understand from one of the co founders of the IIEA, Tony Brown, that Brendan modelled the IIEA on the equivalent Italian Institute that Spinelli had founded. In addition to all this, Brendan has been a successful businessman, chairing Bord na Mona for ten years, and he continues to work actively for the development of renewable energy, a matter of ever increasing urgency.

THE THEME OF THIS LECTURE

The EU is a treaty based organisation. States are entitled to withdraw from treaties. But they are not entitled to so in a way that nullifies the value of other treaties that still bind them. They are obliged to take account of the effect of their withdrawal on neighbouring states. The UK is still bound by the Belfast Agreement of 1998, and the Anglo Irish Treaty that underpins it. Brexit, in the extreme form contemplated by the current UK government (no customs union and no single market), poses an existential threat to the Belfast Agreement. Mrs May tried to face up to that contradiction. Her successor, Boris Johnson so far refuses to do so. The Brexit saga will eventually come to an end, somehow or other, and the EU, with or without Britain, will have to face other challenges. Later on in this address, I will say a few words about these challenges. Notwithstanding its preoccupation with Brexit, Ireland must adopt a proactive approach to all these issues, in its own interests, and in those of the EU.

BREXIT……THE KEY PARAGRAPH IN PRIME MINISTER JOHNSON’S RECENT LETTER TO EU HEADS OF GOVERNMENT

Mr Johnson told his fellow Presidents and Prime Ministers

“When the UK leaves the EU and after any transition period, we will leave the single market and the customs union. Although we will remain committed to world-class environment, product and labour standards, the laws and regulations to deliver them will potentially diverge from those of the EU. That is the point of our exit and our ability to enable this is central to our future democracy.”

DIVERGENCE FOR ITS OWN SAKE

This is the most revealing paragraph of HIS entire letter to his fellow leaders The point of Brexit, according to Mr Johnson, is to “diverge” from EU standards on environment, product and labour standards. This would mean, in the absence of the Irish backstop, that Northern Ireland’s environment, product, and labour standards will continuously, and progressively over time, diverge further and further away from those of Ireland (as a continuing member of the EU) and of the rest of Europe. Significantly, although it has been promoting Brexit for years now, the UK government has yet to say which EU standards it wants to diverge from, and why it wishes to do so. Most Brexit supporters would have difficulty naming one EU based law that has had an adverse effect on their lives. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude from Mr Johnson’s letter, that divergence, for its own sake, is what the UK wants. That was not the approach of the May government. It is important to tease this out. Prime Minister Johnson has said he is committed to the” letter and the spirit” of the Belfast Agreement. Given that the Good Friday Agreement is all about convergence (not divergence) between the two parts of Ireland, and between Britain and Ireland, there is a head on contradiction between Mr Johnson’s proclaimed commitment to the Belfast Agreement , and his commitment that the UK will progressively and intentionally diverge from EU standards. The more regulatory divergence there is between the two parts of Ireland, the more border controls or other barriers there will have to be. On day one, relatively few border controls may be necessary. But, by day one thousand and one, after the deliberate divergence had been done by the UK, far more border controls will be necessary. By day two thousand and one, in about six years from now, the UK rules and tariffs will have diverged even further from EU ones, and even greater barriers and controls will then be needed between North and South in Ireland, and between Ireland and Britain. Nobody knows for sure which present rules or tariffs a future UK, government might change and in what direction. It is because of this complete uncertainty about the future direction of UK policy that the issue of North/South relations in Ireland, and the compatibility of Brexit with the Belfast Agreement, HAD to be settled upfront, in the Withdrawal Treaty. Hence the backstop. Leaving all this over until the wider trade negotiation with the UK, if one is ever concluded and ratified, might have meant that the UK government would never have faced up to the issue. The incompatibility, between the form of Brexit it has chosen and the Belfast Agreement , might have continued to be ignored by UK negotiators. They would probably have tried to agree everything else, and to leave the inconvenient “Irish problem” off to the very end of the negotiation, in the hope of isolating Ireland. The issue had to be faced, sooner or later. It is hard ,and not without risk, to put it to the test now, but it is much less risky than leaving it over until everything else is settled..

THE UK NEGOTIATING STYLE A backstop to cover the whole UK is what is contained in the existing Withdrawal Agreement. This was requested by the UK but it is the best outcome for Ireland, because East/West trade supports even more jobs in Ireland, than does North/South trade, although both are very important. For the EU, at this very late stage, to contemplate reverting to a Northern Ireland only backstop would be a significant concession, and potentially a costly one for Irish exporters to Britain. But does the UK see that ? I do not think so. When concessions to the UK in EU negotiations are often not recognised by the UK as concessions, and are often just pocketed without a word, and becoming a platform for another demand. Look at how the UK negotiated on Justice and Home Affairs in the Lisbon Treaty. Look at the way the” renegotiation” concessions to David Cameron in 2016 were ignored in the subsequent UK Referendum debate. In fact some of those concessions would have been damaging to the EU and it is good that they are gone.. Exempting the UK from the commitment to ever closer union of the peoples of Europe would have been used as a precedent by populists in other states, and the suggested “Red Card” would have gummed up the EU legislative process, making the completion of the Single Market impossible.

HOW BREXIT WAS DECIDED….THE MEANING OF DEMOCRACY

Brexit arose from a referendum in the UK in 2016, in which the larger populations in England and Wales were able to outvote the smaller populations in Scotland and Northern Ireland, who favoured remain. There are two democratic principles at play here, consent, and respect for minorities. Mr Johnson’s own letter refers to “respect for minority rights” and to “consent” The majority of people in Northern Ireland voted against Brexit, but their wishes are to ignored because a majority in the wider UK voted for Brexit.. One of the fundaments of democracy is that governance should have the consent of the governed. The people of Northern Ireland have not “consented” to Brexit, or to the new barriers, controls, and costly bureaucracy that flow from it. And one of the fundaments of a successful union between different nations is a decision making process that shows respect for minorities and smaller nations. The process by which Brexit was decided in the UK did not pass these tests. As any football fan knows , the UK encompassed four nations, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Brexit had the consent of the voters of England and Wales, but it did not have the consent of the voters of Northern Ireland, nor of Scotland. The purely majoritarian Referendum allowed two of the UK’s nations to overrule the other two. That would not happen in our European Union. Brexit, no matter what way it may now be implemented, will change the status of Northern Ireland, and will do so without the consent of the people living in Northern Ireland.

WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF SOVEREIGNTY? In his recent letter to his fellow EU Heads of Government, Prime Minister Johnson claimed that the Irish backstop is inconsistent with the “sovereignty” of the UK as a state. All international agreements impinge on sovereignty. But the sovereignty of a state primarily consists in its having a monopoly on the use of force within its territory. The backstop does not diminish UK sovereignty in that way. By joining the EU in 1973, the UK agreed to pool aspects of its sovereign rule making authority with other EU member states. It entered into a succession of EU Treaties on that basis. While it was always possible in international law for the UK to renounce these Treaty commitments, as it is now doing, the UK was, and is, obliged to take proper account of the effect this has on other parties to the Treaty. After all, these other EU states, including Ireland, acted in good faith on the basis that these shared EU Treaty commitments would continue to be adhered to by the UK. Ireland acted on that assumption when it changed its constitution to facilitate the Belfast Agreement it made with the UK in 1998. It is the UK that is now taking the initiative to renounce the EU Treaties, so it is for the UK to take the primary responsibility for finding a way to reconcile that renunciation with the other Treaty commitments it has made, notably its legal Agreement made in Belfast in 1998. That is how international relations work, and why renouncing Treaty commitments is a rare occurrence. Unfortunately, the UK never faced up to that responsibility. That was a failure of statecraft on the part of the UK, and of the UK alone.

THE IMPORTANCE OF RULES IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE

Adhering to Treaty commitments is usually in a state’s self interest. This is because, in international commerce, rules are important. That is a commercial and political reality. Without shared rules or understandings, commerce would be impossible. The EU is an engine for + making rules democratically, + enforcing them consistently and + interpreting them uniformly. I do not think these realities of international commerce were explained to the UK electorate by their leaders over the last 40 years, which is why the English and Welsh electorate fell for the Brexit delusion.. Mr Johnson claimed in his letter “The Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement neither depends upon, nor requires, a particular customs or regulatory regime.“ That is true, but disingenous. At the time the Agreement was negotiated, both the UK and Ireland were in the same customs and regulatory regime….that of the EU. That was taken for granted, and did not have to be made explicit in the Agreement. In any event in 1998, if there was in fact a possibility of the UK leaving the EU, it would have been the responsibility of the UK to have brought that up in the Good Friday negotiations. It did not do so, and, to the best of my knowledge, the Conservative official opposition, did not bring it up either. If they had done so, it would have been a very different negotiation. Prime Minister Johnson goes on “The broader commitments in the Agreement, including to parity of esteem, partnership, democracy and to peaceful means of resolving differences, can be met if we explore solutions other than the backstop.” This is a strangely vague statement to make, barely a month away from the 31 October deadline. No solid proposal, just “possibilities” and “explorations”. Not good enough, I now need to pose the following question.

DOES MR JOHNSON WANT TO CREATE NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMUGGLING AND THE ACTIVITIES FINANCED BY IT?

Mr Johnson’s letter says

“This Government will not put in place infrastructure, checks, or controls at the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. We would be happy to accept a legally binding commitment to this effect and hope that the EU would do likewise.” This reads to me like a straightforward attempt by a UK Prime Minister to destroy the EU Single Market. He seems to want the EU to legally bind itself not to enforce its own rules at its own borders. If neither side enforce their rules, this will create want a “no man’s land” in the vicinity of the Irish border, where no controls or checks would apply. This is an open invitation to criminal and subversive organisations, who have financed themselves in the past by smuggling. Brexit will create a whole new set of opportunities for smuggling and consequently for the financing of subversive organisations Given that one such, smuggling financed , criminal organisation attempted to murder one of his predecessors as Conservative leader, one would be forgiven for thinking that Boris Johnson has not studied the history of his party closely enough. At the moment, the only products where there are big price differences on either side of the border are fuel ,alcohol and tobacco. And there are huge revenue losses to legitimate traders and to the state on both sides of the border because of highly organised smuggling by criminal organisations. I reckon the losses are as much as £200 million, without Brexit. Imagine what it will be like after a hard Brexit, in the absence of a backstop. There will be hundreds of new products where there will be progressively ever greater price differences on either side of the Irish border, due to different rates of tariff and different standards. A whole new set of opportunities for smugglers will thus be created, on top of the opportunities they are already exploiting. The opportunities for smugglers will probably be trebled, thanks to a UK policy of deliberate divergence from the EU, in the event a hard Brexit without a backstop. It would be downright irresponsible, in last weeks before this fateful decision may be made, to fail to highlight these foreseeable consequences of a hard Brexit. Of course the smugglers are criminals, and they must be treated as such. But to counter them, the burden placed on policing services on either side of the border will increase exponentially, and scare police resources will have to be diverted from dealing with conventional crime. For a UK government to go out of its way to create new opportunities for smugglers by insisting, on the basis of some high principle of not having an Irish backstop, is irresponsible. This is a truth that must be stated..

WHY CHECKS ARE NEEDED TO PROTECT THE SINGLE MARKET To sum up, in the event of Brexit without a backstop,controls and checks on the goods and services that may cross EU borders will be essential . This is because + the UK has said it will to make trade deals, with different rates of tariffs, and/or different quality standards for goods and services to the ones applied by EU, and + the UK has decided it will increasingly diverge from EU environmental , product, and labour standards. If it fails to protect its Single Market, the EU will not be able to continue to lead the world in setting higher standards to protect the climate, and to protect the privacy of the data of its citizens. That is why the EU cannot allow its nearest neighbour, and recently departed member, to undercut its standards with impunity. The requirements to be fulfilled by Ireland, as part of the EU Customs territory, at its borders and its ports, are set out clearly and in immense detail in the EU Customs Code. The Code was adopted in October 1992 by Council Regulation 2913/92, with full UK participation. It requires the uniform application of the Code across the entire customs territory of the EU. The UK knows full well what Ireland will be legally obliged to do as a continuing member of the Single Market and Customs Union. The fact that Mr Johnson has invited the EU not to enforce its own rules, raises the suspicion that he would like to the EU to dissolve itself altogether !

THE SINGLE MARKET We must defend the integrity of the EU Single Market, at the borders of the European Union and throughout its territory. Ireland must be seen to be, fully compliant with EU Single Market rules. Otherwise Ireland’s geographic position will be used against it by competitors for the investment. The EU Single Market is not complete. There is much more to do. An April 2019 Study “Mapping the Cost of non Europe” estimated that + completing the classic single market would add 713 billion euros to the EU economy. + completing Economic and Monetary Union would add a further 322 billion, and + completing a digital single market a further 178 billion euros. A more integrated energy market would save a further 231 billion and a more integrated EU approach to fighting organised crime would be worth 82 billion. Cross border VAT fraud is costing 40 billion. These are some of the reasons why we must complete the Single Market. Services account for three quarters of EU GDP. But we have been very slow in creating a single EU market for services. In the field of Services, only one legislative proposal had been adopted during the term of the outgoing Commission, a proportionality test for new regulations on professions. All other proposals are blocked. I think that a major obstacle is vested interests in national or regional governments, who do not want to give up power. By completing the Single Market, the EU can show that it has much more to offer to the world than a post Brexit Britain. The European “Single Market on the Liffey” can will deliver more consumer benefits than “Singapore on the Thames” . To help complete the Single Market, Ireland should be open to qualified majority voting on energy and climate matters. We should also be open to carefully defined individual amendments to the EU Treaties if they can be shown to the public to deliver real benefits.

A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD The existing Withdrawal Agreement protects UK environmental, product and labour standards, in a way that a mere Trade Agreement will never do. In any trade negotiation with a post Brexit Britain, maintaining a level competitive playing field will be vital. No subsidies, no cartels, and no undercutting of EU standards must be insisted upon.

A CLIMATE TARIFF? President Elect Von der Leyen has suggested a border Adjustment tax to penalise imports that have been produced at the cost of excessive carbon emissions. The intellectual argument for such a tax is a good one, but it will be provocative in the present fraught international trade atmosphere. Perhaps an adjustment of the VAT rate to take account of the emissions intensity of various products could be designed. It could be applied to domestic as well as imported products and services of all kinds. It would be more comprehensive than a Carbon Tax and would put the EU in the lead in the battle against climate change.

THE RISE OF CHINA China is returning to the dominant position it held in the world economy in the two millennia up to 1800. It is doing this on the strength of its human capital, not its physical capital. It is educating more engineers that the US and the EU combined. It is doing it through its competitive and innovative firms, not through its monopolistic state enterprises. It is ahead of everyone in 5G communications, at the time the world economy is becoming ever more digital. If the US thinks it can use trade policy to arrest Chinese development, it is probably making a mistake. But the US is right to insist on fair competition. China must be treated in the WTO as a developed country, and not get concessions intended for much poorer countries. In its response to the Chinese challenge, the EU should maintain its robust competition policy and should not try to pick industrial winners from Brussels. Europe would be much better placed to defend its own interests, and to act as a balancing power in the world, if the euro functioned as a global reserve currency. To achieve that, we need to create a Capital Markets Union and complete the Banking Union. The Eurozone must have a capacity to cope with localized shocks and to prevent contagion. We need viable proposals for a eurozone wide reinsurance of bank deposits, and eurozone wide reinsurance of the unemployment benefit systems of member states..

CYBERSECURITY Global trade disputes are becoming increasing entangled with arguments about security. The EU is not a military power. But it does have interests to defend, notably in the field of cybersecurity. Ireland’s island status may have inured it against conventional military threats, but it offers no protection against cyber attacks. The European Network for Information Security should have active Irish participation. The EU must develop joint capabilities to counter cyber attacks.

THE RULE OF LAW There is an erosion of the basic tenets of the rule of law in some EU member states. This takes two forms…a weakening of the separation between the judiciary and the executive, and a weakening in the effective administration of justice. We cannot contemplate taking in new member states until we are satisfied we can have full confidence in the rule of law in all existing members. The Commission must be non partisan and objective in pursuing member states that are falling below acceptable standards in respect of the rule of law. The European Court of Justice is the place where the rule of law can best be vindicated. The Commissioner for Justice should show neither fear nor favour in making proposals for remedial action. He should have the sole right to make such proposals, should do so publicly, and while the College should be free not to accept his proposal, it should have to publish its reasons.

EU WIDE DEMOCRACY It is over 40 years since the first European Parliament election. While the EP elections are hotly contested, the contests are often really about national issues. A genuine EU wide debate does not take place, because the elections are confined within in national constituencies. An EU “polis” or public opinion has not been created. In her political guidelines for the 2019-2024 Commission, President elect Von der Leyen commits to strengthening EU democracy. She says she wants to strengthen the Spitzenkandidat system, and to address the issue of transnational lists in European Elections. I hope she is true to her word. My own view is that the President of the Commission should be elected separately from the Parliament using a system of proportional representation (PR). The Spitdenkandidat system failed for many reasons, not least the fact that it was to be a winner take all contest without any proportional element to reflect the preferences of the whole electorate. It will be difficult to introduce transnational list without reducing the number of MEPs elected on a national basis. But it should be done.

CONCLUSION As you can see, we have a very busy few years in front of us in the EU. As Greece was for many years, Ireland may soon be cut off from the rest of the EU by the territory of a non member. We will be a frontier state, never a comfortable position in international relations. We will need to work harder than ever before to overcome the barriers that may be placed in our way. We will need our network of friends around the world more than ever before, and that is why the Brussels branch of the IIEA will be more important than ever before! We will also need to be assertive in protecting our interests, but to do so in the context of a strong pro European philosophy. Thank you!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "http://connect.facebook.net/en_GB/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.4&appId=170963932977833"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); Source link . More news

via wordpress https://ift.tt/2nMPZfq

#Articles #Brexit #bruton #Co. Meath #jobs #Kells #Navan #News #Trim Meath Chronicle – Divergence #fo

0 notes

vjlive · 8 years

Text

Brexit

"We are asking the nations of Europe between whom rivers of blood have flowed to forget the feuds of a thousand years." Winston Churchill

Until it came to pass, Brexit - the referendum - attracted curious little attention elsewhere, at least beyond Europe, which perhaps is fair, but the consequences and the lessons from it would be far reaching, profound, and thus, hard to ignore. At the very least, it throws open questions everyone chose to ignore... until now.

Xenophobia

A large part of the 'Leave' vote was fuelled by xenophobia. Primary culprits being the openly xenophobic UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party) led by Nigel Farage and Britain's largest selling newspapers - The Sun, Daily Mail, and other tabloids - every single day with anti-immigrant front pages, or rather plain lies; Eastern Europeans and Muslims, their favourite targets - variants of 'the Polish were taking your jobs', 'the Muslims are a threat to our way of life' were commonplace. It was, as it would be found out later, a profound, however false, message that would resonate with a large number of people in hinterland Britain. (London, Manchester, Liverpool decisively voted to Remain.)

Economy

Yet it would be misleading to cast the motives behind the 'Leave' vote as xenophobic and the 'leave' voters as racist. To understand the Leave vote one has to understand Britain. Britain, of today, remains a deeply divided nation - divided on class lines - between the haves and the havenots - between the winners and losers of globalisation; in a way, one can trace this back to Thatcher's time and the decline of the industrial cities of England.

Post the 2008 economic crisis and the election of a Conservative government in 2010, Britain has followed an anti-Keynesian austerity regime - read, cost cutting for the nation. The costs however were predominantly cut were from the spending for the lower middle class and the poor already reeling from the economic crisis - the social security benefits and the NHS (Britain's iconic national healthcare system that provides free healthcare to all its citizens funded by taxpayer money). The NHS was hit with massive budget cuts and plans to privatise it - leaving a body blow to Britain's weak, in both sense of the term.

It was much easier to tell people that the Polish were taking their jobs rather than explain the adverse consequences of austerity. Also, given the heavily Tory leaning press, the latter message was rarely, if ever, told.

The Revolt

After the 2015 election, after Ed Miliband, the Labour Party leader, lost to the incumbent Prime Minister David Cameron, resigned, the Labour Party elected - to the party elites' surprise and considerable chagrin - a leftfield candidate, a rebel of the party itself, though a man well respected for his personality and character, but never really considered a contender for party leadership, but there he was - Jeremy Corbyn, the great red hope of the blue collar workforce that forms a major chunk of Labour's vote base. Tony Blair and his New Labour were old memory now. This was the first revolt.

In the same election, even though it didn't win may seats, the UKIP, UK's far-right nationalist party won huge number of votes, gaining its support from the economically disenfranchised. This was a phenomenon largely similar to what is happening in the U.S. now, the similarity in the demographics of the votebase of Donald Trump, a vanitious rambling xenophobic bigot, and Bernie Sanders, a conscientious grass roots liberal. This was perhaps the precursor.

The elections also pointed out - again - the immense power Britain's media held in swaying voters' decision: Ed Miliband who looked set for a comfortable win over Cameron was thwarted by the Tory press - with varying levels of journalistic morals and standards - from The Times to The Sun, with The Telegraph and Daily Mail, in between.

Buoyed by his victory and perhaps also by the victory of the Scotland Independence referendum, Cameron announced a referendum on whether to stay in the EU, to satisfy the hardliners in his party. Much foolishly, as he would later find out: June 23, as the sun set on the British Empire - all of Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England - the UK disconnected itself from the continent, and on the morning of the 24th Cameron stepped out of his residence and announced the end of his tenure.

The Lessons

1. Liberal values such as openness, secularism, multiculturalism fail to hold when the means of survival are in question. A populace that isn't well read, well travelled, well fed - or rather the havenots - holds close what it has - culture, race, nationalism. To transcend these sectarian divides requires a broader outlook and a life without survival for the basics. (This doesn't imply that all poor people are bigoted racists. Merely, xenophobia thrives in misery.)

2. Propaganda by mass media in democracies holds tremendous political power as they do in dictatorships. In other words, it is as easy to manufacture consent in a democracy as it is to thwart dissent in a dictatorship. The relentless anti-immigrant message percolated and believed, even though a large part of the misery was thanks to Cameron's austerity regime. Yet, those who suffered due to his policies shall elect a regime, that will be even further to the right - say hello to Britain's Trump, Boris Johnson - that would compound their misery. Causality isn't a strong suit in loud, uncivil democratic debates.

3. The polity is not just divided left and right, rather decentral and central. The Anti-EU vote is also a vote against a Centralised Superpower and an yearning to the old nostalgia of smaller communes and tribes. And it is not necessarily right or left, it can be both; just as centralised liberalism and centralised conservatism.

Way ahead

Scotland

Scotland is a left leaning liberal country unlike Conservative England. Scotland overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU as well being a pro-European nation. This could lead to a second Scottish Independence referendum, and this time Scotland could secede. The Scottish First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has already sounded out the beagle, if not sent a fax to the British Parliament.

Northern Ireland

The border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is the only land border between the UK and the EU. The present borders are soft borders: what this means is unless the border is sealed there will be unchecked immigration. (Remember, members of the 27 EU nations can freely move in the Republic of Ireland.) The sealing of which however will have adverse trade impacts and also the sustainability of the peace treaty between the UK and Ireland.

The Economy

As is, Britain has three unsavoury options to save its bacon a. Britain chooses to remain in the EEA (European Economic Area - Area that falls under the European free trade regime; EU members are part of EEA, as well as members of EFTA (European Free Trade Association) like Norway). The conditions for which, however, would be free movement of people - something Britons voted against - as well contributions to the EU, without right to legislation - that should go down well!

b. The referendum is not mandatorily enforceable. The British establishment - Tory and Labour - can choose to ignore it, but that would only mean strengthening Farage's hands in the next general election, as well starting a civil war in their own parties.

c. Britain goes the Swiss route - negotiating its own bilateral agreements. Not so easy! Firstly, Britain is a markedly different economy than Switzerland's. Secondly, EU has a lot of incentives to make an example out of Britain to thwart similar exits from the Union. This is important, given the rise of the far right across Europe - from France to Italy to Austria to Poland.

So what this could mean however is Britain expanding its trade ties with the larger world - US, China, India and other Emerging Economies. That is the good news. Yet, there is the threat that UK could end up being US' pygmy state (how the mighty have fallen, etc) without the company of its European brothers.

The GBP has already fallen. The British banks have taken a err... pounding. This should mean a bulk of foreign property buys, esp. in London and also potentially investments. Also a weak pound should benefit British exporters. Yet, that is scarce consolation for them after losing a free trade region with a combined population of 500 million people - effectively, the world's third largest nation, only with better living standards. To add misery to the mishap, the financial powerhouses could shift their shops to Dublin!

Yet, given the potential consequences and dawning of reality, with a pro-EU Prime Minister in Downing Street till October, one suspects UK would choose to remain in the EEA, though it is by no means certain. Brussels could want to really inflict some damage now, for reasons mentioned earlier.

The European Project

The Eurozone crisis - to put it in one small sentence - was due to a monetary union without a fiscal union. In other words, to avert another crisis of such sorts, there needs to be more integration of legislation and expansion in its scope, in the EU. Yet, it is EU's overreach that scared the 'Leave' voters, as well gave the stick to far right leaders like Farage and Marine Le Pen, in France, to beat the EU with.

For its many faults, the EU is an extraordinary project in Internationalism - its genesis after all a reaction to the discontents and disasters of nationalistic wars over centuries in the blood thirsty continent. It was also a project that furthered the causes of liberalism, free trade and the welfare state. A chance to live, work, love in 27 different countries is after all a wonderful thing to look forward to. Yet, as Brexit has reminded us, only if you have the means to do so.

The EU's great failure is globalisation's great failure - to adequately assuage and take care of those who have been affected by sudden, dynamic movement of capital, goods and people. Brexit should also remind EU of the limits of a superstate and its overreach. Unless, EU reforms to be a more equitable, ears-to-the-ground Union, as well one that appreciates diversity and decentralisation, more exits could follow. The Greek episode was particularly unedifying for its image. EU is a worthy project - "to forget the feuds of a thousand years" - to remain, yet it has to be made and perceived worthy to stop the leavers.

#Brexit #UK #EU #London

0 notes