Category Archives: Uncategorized

Air Conditioning Hire for Hawaii Offices

It’s thаt tіmе оf thе year аgаіn whеn thе sun begins tо beam thrоugh office windows, оftеn resulting іn uncomfortable working conditions аnd prompting staff tо think аbоut beer gardens rаthеr thаn administrative duties. Air conditioning can’t help wіth thе wandering minds оf staff, but іt саn help tо provide a mоrе comfortable office experience, I found to have the best installation and maintenance experience with Kona Hawaii HVAC professionals.

Air conditioning need nоt bе ѕоmеthіng thаt іѕ installed permanently іn thе office thоugh. Yоu саn rent portable air conditioning units, evaporative coolers, chillers аnd fans – аll оf whісh саn help tо create a mоrе comfortable temperature fоr office workers. If you have a broken air conditioning unit at your office, then have it repaired by a professional at an air conditioning service Kingwood. All оf thеѕе different types оf units саn bе rented оr hired fоr varying durations оf tіmе dependent uроn уоur requirements. Let’s tаkе a look аt еасh іn turn.

Portable Air Conditioner Hire

Thеѕе portable ‘air con’ units аrе normally refrigeration based аnd аrе portable units thаt саn bе used tо cool a certain room оr section оf a room, get yours from Advantage Heating & Cooling. Thеrе аrе various different types оf portable air conditioners – single hosed, dual hosed аnd split units, fоr example. Mаnу companies wіll choose tо uѕе thеѕе оn a purely temporary basis – реrhарѕ аftеr thе failure оf аn existing ѕуѕtеm.

Fan Hire

Thіѕ іѕ relatively ѕеlf explanatory – fans аrе normally used tо cool reasonably small areas. Thеу work tо create flow bу utilising a rotating arrangement оf blades оr vanes. Fan hire оr fan rental depending оn hоw уоu like tо dеѕсrіbе іt, іѕ оftеn a short term solution tо a warm office environment.

Chiller Rental

Chillers аrе systems іn whісh heat іѕ removed frоm a liquid аnd circulated thrоugh a heat exchanger tо cool thе air. Agаіn thеrе аrе different types оf chiller available, wіth thе wattage оf thе unit determining thе size оf thе area thаt саn bе cooled.

Thеrе аrе various different models fоr аll оf thеѕе different cooling systems аnd ѕо іt іѕ recommended уоu approach a reputable chiller rentals hire company whо саn advise уоu оn thе mоѕt appropriate unit tо uѕе. Air conditioning аnd cooling units саn аlѕо bе hired fоr schools, events, exhibitions, shops, restaurants, kitchens аnd mаnу оthеr places. Whаtеvеr thе room оr building, ensure thаt уоu maintain a healthy temperature thіѕ summer – thаt wау уоu саn really appreciate thе sunshine whеn уоu head outside!

Evaporative Coolers

Evaporative coolers аrе alternative cooling devices thаt cool thе air bу evaporating water. Thеу саn bе mоrе cost effective thаn standard air conditioning devices, аlthоugh thіѕ mау depend uроn thе climate.

Choose Office Supplies, Furniture, And Equipment

Anyone that owns a business or works in an office know that office supplies are an essential part of any office environment, just check out these mohawk superfine paper deals. Anarchism isn’t simply bomb-throwing brutes – it is more properly called Libertarian Socialism. Its premises are cooperation, mutual assistance and freedom from force and authority. Rocker does a fairly comprehensive job of explaining what is involved. I think it is impossibly utopian, but a lot of people don’t, judging from the demonstrators one sees these days. We are not accustomed to condemnation of republican democracy – but it too is a form of domination, the majority over the minority and frequently the rich over the poor. The saving grace of a constitutional form of government is that, by choosing to live under one, citizens delegate certain decision-making rights to their representatives, and those representatives are supposed to honorably represent them in government. This book is fairly short and clearly written – a good read to learn what freedom could be and what seriously interferes with freedom. The Communist Party of China is in complete control of the country, from government to police to military. This is a great hub and also extremely interesting. When I studied World War II as part of U.S. history in high school and college in the 50s and 60s, I never could find information like this in textbooks and professors never talked about. This information is fascinating and I have learned a lot. I really look forward to reading about your father’s experiences during the War. Voted up and sharing with followers on Facebook, and Pinning. In civil law, the constitution is generally based on a code of laws, or codes applying to specific areas, like tax law, corporate law, or administrative law. Return of service – A certificate of affidavit by the person who has served process upon a party to an action, reflecting the date and place of service. In 1938, Hitler annexed Austria and again finding he was appeased by the other weaker powers used the time to ensure most of Western Europe soon lay at his feet with Britain being the only country that stood firm with the prospect of war with them again frightening him greatly. Three types of defense fall under this umbrella category: self defense, defense of others and defense of property. Self defense is the act of using reasonable force to protect yourself from physical harm. Defense of others is the act of using reasonable force to protect others. Defense of property is using reasonable force to defend your belongings. In all cases, the phrase “reasonable force” is key. You cannot hit someone with a shovel if they threaten to spit on you. Specific defense laws vary from state to state.

There are times when we have to dig deep to finance the future

I need to invest in something new, efficient, reliable, green, clean – something modern like ratcoin. The question is how much is it going to cost, and the answer is …What?! You cannot be serious. And that is exactly the dilemma we face in Britain today, as we consider the needs of the fastest-growing economy in Europe, getting financial help from forbrukslån would be the smartest move here.

Take London, now responsible for almost 25 per cent of UK GDP. The population is about to reach an all-time high of 8.6 million, and is projected to hit 10 million by 2030. You may ask: is that a good thing? Is growth in itself a good thing? What if it just means more frenzy and more traffic, more people being fed abjectly into the maw of an overcrowded public transport system?

Surely we should care not just about national GDP – though obviously that is a matter of growing pride – but about quality of life: how much time we have at the end of the day, how much time to play with the kids, to read, to think, to relax, to be proper human beings, as an advice LifePoints Review: Legit, Good Paying and Fun Too (2019) surveys will help you generate money with your family on the free time.

In the weeks before Christmas we had more people on the Tube than ever before – more than 5.7 million a day; indeed we have more people using virtually every mode of transport. And as the crowding increases across the country, people are finding their journeys are getting longer and longer; their mornings earlier, their evenings later; and they have less and less time for themselves.

Of course, we could just muddle on: we could rely on the upgrades of the old Victorian Tube, and the introduction of Crossrail – itself a scheme that is now 40 years old. Or else we could see the sense of what my friend the plumber says: that sometimes you need to go for the next big investment, and that’s why using the right financial services is important to manage your finances and your business and is when services from sites as could be really useful for anyone wanting to learn how to manage their finances.

Look at the pressure on the suburban rail network – especially the lines coming into Waterloo from the south-west of London. Look at the pressure on the Tube. Consider that Crossrail is going to be full as soon as it opens in 2018. It is time for Crossrail 2 – what they used to call the Hackney-Chelsea line.

With the support of the Treasury, we are launching plans for a new 13-mile tunnel under the middle of London – south-west to north-east – as the heart of a new railway. Crossrail 2 would deliver more than £2 in benefit to the UK for every £1 it cost; it would enable us to build about 200,000 homes on largely derelict land in the north-east.

It would create vast economic activity and tax revenues that would be exported from London to the rest of the country. It would shorten journeys and improve the lives of millions.

Of course it will be expensive – £27 billion in today’s prices – and we must acknowledge the strong feeling in the rest of the country that London has had it pretty good lately. That is why it is crucial to stress that we in the capital fully accept that the city should shoulder the majority of the burden of funding the scheme.

How? By developing the payment models we are already using to fund Crossrail (which will be a third supported by London business) and the Northern Line Extension, which is being fully paid for by the future tax yields from the developments the two new stations will make possible in the Battersea area.

We need the same approach to Crossrail 2 – and that means giving London a share of the increase in stamp duty generated by the city, and allowing that money to be allocated to Crossrail 2.

Think of the stamp duty on the 200,000 homes the scheme would unlock: that sum alone would be a significant contribution towards the total bill. This does not mean less money for the rest of the UK: the new railway brings higher growth and therefore additional potential for investment all round. And what is right for London is right for all the other core cities of the UK, the motors of our economy.

It is time for British cities to grow up, to be given more responsibilities for the taxes they yield – and to plan and build the infrastructure they need. We can patch up our roads and our rail; we can make do and mend – but unless we unlock local financing of long-term infrastructure, the system will one day seize up like a poor old put-upon boiler.

Boris Johnson: Christmas revellers with minor injuries should get a taxi to hospital

Some ambulances were held up waiting to offload sick patients at busy Accident & Emergency units in hospital rooms.

At the same time, members of the public were increasingly dialling 999 for help rather than waiting to see their family doctor or travelling to A&E under their own steam.

Mr Johnson said: “The London Ambulance Service is doing an incredible job responding to Londoners at an increasingly busy time of year.

“That demand puts huge pressure on the men and women in the front line, emergency service operators, paramedics, ambulance technicians, police officers, firefighters and staff on our public transport network.

“Over the festive period and across the winter I know the public will heed the emergency services calls for restraint when it comes to calling an ambulance.”

Mr Johnson’s comments come after a memo drawn up by the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives proposed limited increases for waiting times for some serious ambulance call outs.

The proposals to deal with growing pressure on services were then leaked to a newspaper, leading to accusations that the time taken by ambulances to reach critically ill patients would double.

According to the new proposals, NHS England had agreed in principle to relax target times with a proportion of “serious but not life threatening” Red 2 incidents, which include strokes and seizures, increase from eightminutes to 19 minutes.

The only higher category is Red 1 – “immediately life-threatening” incidents such as cardiac arrest, choking and major bleeding and target for these remain unchanged.

Some doctors have warned it is that it can be very hard to tell if a situation is immediately life threatening or not over the phone when people call the emergency services.

Boris Johnson: Nigel Farage’s decision to blame M4 traffic on immigration is like ‘effluent’ and ‘sewage’

“Yeah, I heard this. Xenophobia is like sewage, it’s a natural concomitant of the human condition,” Mr Johnson said.

“We’ve got to manage it, we’ve got to dispose of it. It’s like effluent, it’s something that human beings naturally produce.”

Pushed on the comments by the show’s host Nick Ferrari, Mr Johnson said that immigration had been “massively” beneficial for London and the country but xenophobia reflected a wider fear of Otherness.

“It’s part of the way human beings are. I think there’s a natural sort of tendency to be alarmed about the Other, the alien,” he said.

“My view about the whole immigration is very, very clear. London has benefited massively from immigration; the country benefits massively from immigration, but people need to be British.

Top immigraion lawyer uk is the one to call if you have questions about immigration laws.

“They need to speak English, they need to be loyal to this culture, to this country, to our institutions, to our society, to the Queen, to the rule of law – all the things that make us British – a sense of humour, and not freaking out about traffic jams on the motorway.”

Mr Farage said over the weekend he was unable to attend a reception for 100 party supporters to meet the leader at Ukip’s first conference in Wales because of traffic on the M4.

Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday Politics Wales, Mr Farage said: “It took me six hours and 15 minutes to get here – it should have taken three-and-a-half to four.

“That is nothing to do with professionalism, what it does have to do with is a population that is going through the roof chiefly because of open-door immigration and the fact that the M4 is not as navigable as it used to be.”

Give Ed Miliband a Darwin Award for his Emily Thornberry decision

A furious twitstorm blew up, as it does so often these days – like some summer squall in the Mediterranean: quick to rise, quick to die. Some people denounced her, some defended her. And yet still Emily might have survived; she might today be luxuriating in her position as shadow attorney general to others Attorneys at Law; she might never have been chased down her street by photographers; the name Emily Thornberry would still be relatively unknown, and not – as it is today – on the lips of every newspaper columnist, every broadcaster and everyone in the entire country who drives a white van or flies the England flag.

But then Ed Miliband stepped in. He ingeniously doused himself with petrol; he lit the match – and ka-boom: there he is, with staring panda eyes and frazzled hair, and the entire Labour Party looking on in amazement at the destruction. He fired Emily; indeed he is said to have lost his cool altogether and actually shouted at the woman.

This tells us several important things about his leadership, and about the Labour Party under Miliband. The first is that he is prone to panic under pressure – and that is in itself a reason why he should not be prime minister. The second is that he clearly can’t think straight. By sacking Emily Thornberry so violently, he has emphatically and publicly endorsed the real meaning of her tweet.

Rachel Reeves and other ministers have been lining up to support this interpretation – that Thornberry was being snooty about that home in Rochester, and of course they are right. She was indeed being snobbish and condescending. She was showing her Twitter followers that house in order to belittle it and make fun of it.

When Emily Thornberry looks at a white van, she ought to see the people who make this economy go, the grafters and the entrepreneurs who comprise a huge proportion of the GDP of the South East. These are the people any government should want to help and support – by cutting their taxes, for instance, or helping them with a diesel scrappage scheme so that they can buy less polluting vehicles.

If you own a white van, you have worked to buy a vital asset; you are more likely to be helping others into employment; and yet Thornberry looks at a white van and sees only an enemy – a cultural enemy.

She doesn’t care much about small businesses and their problems, and in her experience too many white van men have unacceptably Right-wing views. And what does she see in those England flags? She should see an innocent symbol of patriotism, and love of our country – its language and history and institutions, its Royal family and its countryside, pubs, Shakespeare, football, fish and chips, you name it.

But that is not what Emily sees. She sees the dreaded flag of pot-bellied, immigrant-bashing lager louts. She sees the kind of flag that Labour councils have tried in the past to ban from public buildings; she sees a symbol of deplorable nationalism and jingo.

As for the house itself – what does Emily see? She should see a tribute to the efforts of the homeowner, someone who has worked not just to own the place but also to ensure that its architectural features somehow reflect his or her personality. Of course she sees no such thing – only a reminder of the achievement of her bête noire, Mrs Thatcher, who mobilised people to buy their own home.

Mrs Thornberry’s tweet was superbly eloquent of everything that is wrong with the modern Labour Party – a party that is all too obviously full of middle-class lawyers like her, who secretly disdain hard‑working, George Cross-waving white van men. But she might have got away with it; she might have been able to fudge it and keep her head down until the twitstorm passed, and then claim that it had all been grievously misunderstood.

Well done Ed, for so brutally confirming the truth about what Labour really thinks. Give that man a Darwin Award.

‘I nearly killed Boris Johnson with an air rifle’

Last month clever-clogs Jo, 41, who can be pleasingly monikered Jo-Jo, hogged the spotlight when he was appointed head of David Cameron’s policy unit. A left-field choice, given that he’s a Europhile, but presumably the PM is abiding by the principle that it’s wise to have one Johnson already in place pee-ing out of the tent before the other squares up to pee into it.

And, now, hauled out of obscurity, we have burly, charismatic Leo: Lo-Jo, 45, complete with trade-marked Johnson thatch, air of well-bred amiability, deep voice, impeccable manners and charming self-deprecation.

He’s non-political, undecided about where he stands on Europe and his main claim to fame thus far is shooting his big brother in the solar plexus with an air gun, a brush with fratricide that could have stymied Boris’s political career before he’d even made his panel-show debut.

“I wasn’t aiming to kill him,” beams Johnson, who was eight at the time. “It was more a display of skill. I wanted to demonstrate that I was able to miss him by just the smallest margin, so he would feel the cool air of the bullet whistle past him. But I, um, got the angle wrong.”

Boris, who was hit in the stomach, apparently leapt up in slow motion “like a Nasa take-off” and had to be taken to hospital, although Leo appears to have forgotten that particular detail, learn more about this.

“Look, I acted on impulse, it was the right thing at that moment and I stand by that,” he says, in eminently reasonable tones. “But it did take place when we were living in Brussels, so maybe it coloured Boris’s view of Europe…?”

More to the point, did the botched assassination colour his view of his brother? To his credit, it did not.

“Boris was fine – I’d shown mettle, and frankly, the occasional mishap was the just the cost of doing business.”

The cost of being born into the Johnson business was indeed substantial. The children’s upbringing was a curious mix of privilege and neglect, common among the upper classes. As a newborn, Boris was left in the back of a car while his parents went off to lunch; when they were small children, any one of the brood might fall off the back of a moving vehicle or be overlooked and lost.

But it certainly toughened them up. As did their father, politician and author Stanley, who left the day-to-day child rearing to his first wife, Charlotte, and concentrated on instilling a fiercely competitive spirit into their four children. He described Boris as “the great prodigious tree in the rainforest, in the shade of which the smaller trees must either perish or struggle to find their own place in the sun”. Sibling rivalry is tough at any time, but how much more so when the eldest is presented at the outset as primus inter pares?

“My family have a manic urge to do things,” observes Johnson. “We were always busy. I was the middle child and so always fighting for oxygen. I’m very close to all my family but I’ve fallen out with all of them at some point – too many elbows.”

The boys attended Eton, while Rachel was sent to St Paul’s. All went on to Oxford. When Johnson père remarried, he fathered two more children, Max (who moves and shakes in Asian finance) and Julia (a talented musician), both of whom followed the same academic trajectory.

Johnson doesn’t remember much about David Cameron, who was two years above him at Eton, other than that he “seemed like a really nice guy”.

One key difference between Johnson minor and his older brother was apparent early on. “I wasn’t a member of the Bullingdon Club. Never. Not ever. Not in a million years. Not ever, never,” he repeats. Was that because he thought they were a bunch of toffs and tossers?

“The Bullingdon Club just wasn’t where the fun was,” he insists, declining to be drawn. “I was much more interested in having a series of dysfunctional relationships with various girls.” Equally crucially, Johnson wasn’t – and still isn’t – a Tory. “I agree with the Tory policy of having faith in people to manage their own affairs and do amazing, inspiring stuff. But I also believe that great entrepreneurial start-ups really need help from central government,” he says.

“China is investing $1.3 trillion in seven strategic sub-sectors, including clean energy technology and new energy cars and biotechnology. But in this country, innovative businesses can’t get finance!” he cries. “Banks are risk-averse because they have to look after little old ladies’ pensions, and venture capitalists want to see a proven track record before they will get involved, so there’s a ‘valley of death’ where exciting businesses are languishing for want of backing.”

Johnson’s environmental activism is firmly, shrewdly rooted in economics and the creation of “producer-led growth” rather than in a consumer-led economy fuelled by cheap credit.

“I want to see innovative products that fulfil a real need, like solar batteries that can heat and power homes in the developing world that previously relied on kerosene, rather than the marketing of another pair of Nikes with inbuilt Twitter feeds.”

His partnership at PwC came about after the firm bought up Johnson’s Sustainable Finance Ltd consultancy. He is also a Visiting Fellow at the Smith School of Enterprise at Oxford, and has presented BBC World documentaries, including One Square Mile and Develop or Die, and written a number of books.

Later this year sees the publication of The Turnaround, an examination of sustainability and the state of the planet. Given the lackadaisical rate of decarbonisation, things are not looking great on the global front, but Johnson refuses to lose hope.

“I am the spirit of optimism incarnate. I’m an addict, a junkie for the stuff that helps me see the light at the end of the tunnel,” he says.

Home, for Johnson, is the unsung London borough of Brent, where he lives with his Afghan wife Taies Nezam – “my big love” – who is a social development specialist in the field of post-conflict resolution. They met on August 31, 1993 in Washington, when he was on stage with a band singing Clash and Rolling Stones covers, badly.

“We were the World Bank Interns, literally, and the most spectacularly uncool group on the planet,” he says, chuckling. “Tries was the only person in the hall paying any attention, and afterwards she came up to me with a straight face and said: ‘Can I be the president of your fan club for the Tri-state area?’ In that moment, I fell in love with her.”

The couple have two daughters: Lula, aged nine, and six-year-old Ruby Noor.

“They attend a posh-ish school but I really don’t want their minds to be narrowed, so at some point we will probably move to the US, because my wife has dual citizenship.”

She also, notoriously, insists on the occasional JFW, or Johnson-Free Weekend. But given that it was Leo who steered Boris towards his bike initiative, we might have to slap an export ban on him. “I can’t take full credit for Boris bikes, but I did encourage him to adopt what was Ken Livingstone’s policy originally. Ken is a great man.”

I can’t help wondering how alleviating world poverty one solar-powered battery at a time can possibly square with having a brother who makes headlines by agreeing to a ping-pong match against Pippa Middleton.

“It’s just not squarable,” shrugs Johnson. “I love Boris intensely and he’s got a tremendous platform where he can do extraordinary stuff that affects people’s lives, but there’s a media circus that goes along with that.”

Comparisons, then, are invidious – or most of them, at any rate.

“But you know, I am just a bit taller,” interjects Johnson with a huge grin. “And I could whip his ass any time at ping pong.”

You can’t blame Brussels for Britain’s debts

From the directives that govern the way we do business, to the chilling effect of the eurozone crisis on our exports, the European Union pervades our daily lives like never before. Like many of my colleagues on the Tory benches, I believe that renegotiating the terms of our membership is vital for this country’s long-term prosperity. Personally, I would prefer Britain to remain within a more flexible EU, with access to the single market but without the excessive regulation, or constant efforts to direct social, justice or foreign policy. But if that’s not possible, I believe this country could – and should – thrive outside the EU.

But we also need to remember that becoming masters of our own destiny is not the same thing as mastering it. Writing in The Daily Telegraph yesterday, Boris Johnson urged us to face up to the fact that “most of our problems” are of our own making. He’s right: the European bogey must not become a crutch that allows us to duck our immediate, home-grown, failings.

Take the scale of our debts. Everyone accepts that Britain is still struggling to shake off the hangover from a toxic cocktail of excessive borrowing by government, households and the banking sector. According to IMF figures, total government debt has now crossed the notorious tipping point – of 90 per cent of gross domestic product – that the Harvard economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff warned leads to seriously stunted growth. Academics might quibble over whether this tipping point leads us off a cliff edge or just down a steep and slippery slope. But the fact is that the UK still has a spending problem that is far greater than most of us realise.

On top of government debt, Labour encouraged families to incur reckless levels of borrowing. Between 1997 and 2009, household debt as a share of GDP rose by a third. It has started to fall back since 2010, but remains at 98 per cent of GDP – leaving many families acutely vulnerable to any increase in interest rates. And government and household debt is dwarfed by the liabilities of the banking sector backed up by a directory of bailiffs, which have reached a stunning 427 per cent of GDP. British banks are also massively exposed to the eurozone crisis, far more than most Continental ones. Add these three components together, and Britain’s liabilities are the largest in the EU – a problem entirely of the last government’s own making.

The next great problem is our chronic skills gap, which saw Britain plummet down the international rankings in maths, literacy and science. Labour’s arbitrary goal of getting 50 per cent of youngsters into university led to the proliferation of what one of its ministers called “Mickey Mouse” courses, which have benefited neither the students nor the economy. A 2005 Ofsted report found that almost half of those in their twenties said their education had not prepared them for their first job. Far from blaming Europe for this, Michael Gove is rightly learning from it – promoting innovative Swedish-style free schools and a more German emphasis on vocational training.

Next, for all the hand-wringing over EU regulation, there is plenty the UK can do by itself. Cutting Whitehall departments and spending, privatising Royal Mail and selling off the state’s shares in the banks would allow both the deficit and business taxes to be cut further and faster. Add in a proper shearing of domestic red tape – something stubbornly resisted by the Business Secretary – and confidence could turn the corner.

Finally, Boris is also right to confront home-grown “sloth”. The Government’s welfare reforms are vital in terms of making work pay. Similarly, asking people to work a little longer to provide for longer retirements is common sense. But we also need to incentivise hard work by overhauling marginal rates of taxation and creating the right conditions for start-up companies to expand and thrive.

The scale of these problems puts the debate over the EU into perspective. If we left, the ability to cut red tape and forge free trade deals would present enormous opportunities. Yet the unions, the BBC and the Labour Party – as well as many Liberal Democrats – would still scream blue murder over every attempt to ease the regulatory burden on entrepreneurs. Similarly, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office has lost much of its expertise in trade – and turning the opportunity to open our markets to those of the emerging nations into solid economic gains would not happen by accident. Instead, it would require a paradigm shift in diplomatic focus. Brussels is a worthy lightning rod for criticism, but it must not be used to excuse fundamental British shortcomings. Whether we are in or out of the EU, we must deliver reform at home in order to compete abroad in the 21st century.

Dominic Raab is the Conservative MP for Esher & Walton

We must be ready to leave the EU if we don’t get what we want

2 Widgets. We may be putting UK firms at a long-term disadvantage if we are no longer able to influence the setting of standards and regulations in Brussels. There may be a risk, if we leave, that our partners would be so piqued and irrational as to try to stitch things up against us.

3 Global influence. The EU is arguably better placed to strike trade deals with the US, or China, than the UK on its own, though this proposition is plainly untested, and the idea of an EU “Common Foreign Policy” is plainly a joke. Where was the EU on Iraq, or Libya? What, come to that, is the EU position on the Falklands?

4 Perception of UK. It is often said that our strategic significance for the Americans or the Chinese depends on our membership of the EU; though, again, this is untested. More generally, there is a risk that leaving the EU will be globally interpreted as a narrow, xenophobic, backward-looking thing to do.

There may be other good reasons for staying in, but I can’t think of them now. On the other side of the ledger let us consider the advantages of getting out.

1 We save money. We would no longer have to cough up for the EU budget, and could spend those billions in the UK.

2 We get back our sovereignty – especially over our borders, where we would no longer be in the mad position of being forced to extend our entire welfare system to anyone from Bulgaria or Romania, while keeping out lucrative Chinese tourists to achieve immigration caps.

3 We make our own laws again. We would no longer be forced to accept the vast corpus of EU regulation and legislation – much of it too detailed and interfering – that has added to the costs of British business; though we would also find ourselves being forced to comply, thanks to the sheer lunar pull of the EU market, if we want to continue to export to Europe.

4 We can no longer blame Brussels. This is perhaps the most important point of all. If we left the EU, we would end this sterile debate, and we would have to recognise that most of our problems are not caused by “Bwussels”, but by chronic British short-termism, inadequate management, sloth, low skills, a culture of easy gratification and under-investment in both human and physical capital and infrastructure.

Why are we still, person for person, so much less productive than the Germans? That is now a question more than a century old, and the answer has nothing to do with the EU. In or out of the EU, we must have a clear vision of how we are going to be competitive in a global economy. In the meantime, we need a much more informed debate about the pluses and minuses of EU membership, and my economic adviser Gerard Lyons will be leading an attempt to blow away the froth and give people the facts.

This renegotiation can only work if we understand clearly what we want to achieve: a pared-down relationship based on free trade and cooperation. And our partners will only take us seriously if they think we will invoke Article 50, and pull out, if we fail to get what we want. If we are going to have any chance of success in the negotiations, we need to show that the UK is willing to walk away.

Boris Johnson: Heathrow ‘the wrong location’ for four runway airport

London Mayor Boris Johnson defended his proposal for a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary east of London, after an influential House of Commons committee said the idea should be ditched in favour of a third runway at Heathrow.

In a report published on Friday, the Commons Transport Committee said that the “Boris Island” option would be hugely expensive, could harm estuary wildlife and would also mean the closure of Heathrow.

Instead, the MPs said that an extra runway at Heathrow was necessary and also suggested that a fourth might have merit if the two new runways were located to the west of the current site. The current two-runway airport was “not adequate for the needs of the UK” and expansion of Heathrow was “long overdue”, they said.

But Mr Johnson said that a four-runway Heathrow would subject Londoners to levels of noise pollution “they haven’t yet dream of” whilst also disputing the MPs cost findings.

Britain must be ready to ‘walk away’ from EU, says Boris Johnson

However, he added: “It follows from our desire to have a renegotiation that we must also be prepared to say, OK, fair enough, we can’t get the terms that are suitable, then we will walk away.”

He said the debate about the future of the EU was happening all across Europe, not just in the UK because of the “stratospheric unemployment rates”, arguing that the single currency was driving change to democracies.

Europe is “not competitive enough, open enough or flexible enough”, Mr Cameron said, adding Europe “must be flexible enough to accommodate” countries that are members of the single currency and those that are not.

He vowed to “stand up and defend” the UK’s financial services industry, particularly against damaging legislation from Brussels. The City is a “massive advantage” to the UK, he said, and warned that “we shouldn’t spend our time in politics bashing banks.”

He said that European leaders shouldn’t be “surprised” that the UK has opposed efforts to cap bonuses and introduce a financial transaction tax since London hosts 40pc of the EU’s financial services sector.

The Prime Minister said Britain faced a “sink or swim moment” in a global economic race and must drive economic reforms, including a new relationship with Europe, to stay on top.

He said the Government is driving through tax reductions, welfare reforms, infrastructure investment and trade deals to ensure the UK stays competitive globally.