This particular story warrants further examination. Firstly, the Home Office wouldn't have done an Impact Assessment but for the pressure put on them by one of the select committees.
The impact assessment contains the sentence: "'The Home Office believes that despite these points the changes are justified for a number of policy reasons including reducing net migration and ending reliance on overseas recruitment. '
Of course the lease price is largely related to depreciation over the lease period and the differential between the sticker price and resale value, and not directly to the value of the car, so simply banning certain marques is a question of optics (if the manufacturers had the stones they could probably sue the government under Competition Law).
Depreciation is not unrelated to the purchase price, though. Cars tend to depreciate by percentages...
Politicians are certainly not 'all the same' to me - the SNP, the Scottish Greens, the English and Welsh Greens, Plaid Cymru and even the Lib Dems are not cut from this cloth.
Past evidence is that lib dems will happily cheer on welfare cuts if it gets them a ministerial car. They might not be quite so eager with the racism but I wouldn't count on it. We already know what kind of party they are, it's just a matter of haggling over their price.
The FT link is paywalled - not that I necessarily disagree with the point you’re making. The same issue is covered by The Economic Times though I’ve no idea of the quality of that source.
The FT link is paywalled - not that I necessarily disagree with the point you’re making. The same issue is covered by The Economic Times though I’ve no idea of the quality of that source.
The figures are available on page 60 of the report (table at the bottom of the page). Their best case is buoyed up by a number of dubious assumptions - e.g that the decrease in workforce available to the care sector will lead to an increase in productivity.
The FT link is paywalled - not that I necessarily disagree with the point you’re making. The same issue is covered by The Economic Times though I’ve no idea of the quality of that source.
The figures are available on page 60 of the report (table at the bottom of the page). Their best case is buoyed up by a number of dubious assumptions - e.g that the decrease in workforce available to the care sector will lead to an increase in productivity.
Are they under the impression that care workers are slacking or are they expecting mass robot deployment?
Comments
This particular story warrants further examination. Firstly, the Home Office wouldn't have done an Impact Assessment but for the pressure put on them by one of the select committees.
The impact assessment contains the sentence: "'The Home Office believes that despite these points the changes are justified for a number of policy reasons including reducing net migration and ending reliance on overseas recruitment. '
The points are contained in Annex B here:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6937e67eb612700b2cb73679/Spring_2025_Immigration_Rules_Impact_Assessment__Skilled_Worker_and_Care_Worker___003_.pdf
And amount to 'It costs more and is bad for disabled and old people who require care'.
Meanwhile Mike Tapp - the Home Office Minister - was out stirring the pot on 'grooming gangs'
https://x.com/MikeTappTweets/status/1998464759855792218
And to avoid 'what Starmer really said' style arguments, here is the accompanying piece to which he put his name:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/dec/09/protect-borders-defend-democracies-echr-keir-starmer-mette-frederiksen
And an accompanying article about the Justice Secretary pushing to weaken the provisions on torture:
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/dec/08/rights-groups-warn-uk-weaken-torture-protections-echr
Along with the reduction of jury trials, a wonderful set of precedents for Farage should Reform win next time around.
Depreciation is not unrelated to the purchase price, though. Cars tend to depreciate by percentages...
Past evidence is that lib dems will happily cheer on welfare cuts if it gets them a ministerial car. They might not be quite so eager with the racism but I wouldn't count on it. We already know what kind of party they are, it's just a matter of haggling over their price.
The figures are available on page 60 of the report (table at the bottom of the page). Their best case is buoyed up by a number of dubious assumptions - e.g that the decrease in workforce available to the care sector will lead to an increase in productivity.
Are they under the impression that care workers are slacking or are they expecting mass robot deployment?