Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by RingoMcCartney » Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:35 pm

keith1879 wrote:Good point ...and to be honest I don't normally read his posts because I just skate past them ..... but this isn't just RM it's a widely reported argument and I just got extra fed-up with it. Of course one could respond by pointing out that possibly the second greatest expression of democracy in the history of the known universe (or whatever he calls it) was a vote for the exact opposite .....and that the margin was somewhat narrow....but the internet really isn't the place for such niceties is it?

I've mostly given up on this thread ..... endless name-calling, lying, back-biting, vitriol throwing and deliberate misinformation is always entertaining but there's so much more in the House of Commons and the White House that Up The Clarets has become a bit tame by comparison.
It's a widely reported fact.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:49 pm

CombatClaret wrote:Why are you singling out the EU for a claim that could be made against almost any western, democratic, developed nation? Including the UK which you could claim serves corporate interests to a greater extent by refusing to punish any rule breaking.
You just dismiss this saying, oh we can just elect a different government who will take companies to talk. We could elect EU MEPs use the UK veto to strive toward the same things in the EU.

That a company suffered a large scandal and is still standing, nay even seeing large growth is nothing new, these companies are so big they can absorb these hits.
Boeing; a US company has caused two fatal crashes due to faulty software and sensors including a possible cover up; the stock price took short term hit but continues to grow without any kind of fines or punishment. So the environment you claim the EU causes is no different from one happening the world over.

EDIT:
Here's a summery by an EU institution on it's response to dieselgate and how it plans to ensure greater corporate scrutiny and increase consumer protections/compensation.
https://www.eca.europa.eu/lists/ecadocu ... ons_en.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Again showing how the EU is trying to do the right thing while individual countries drag their feet or the UK's case do nothing positive at all.
This must be on purpose. I'll try again. In the case of VW, the example aggi supplied in defence of the EU.

EU: Right VW, we've set everything up perfectly for you to make lots of cash. You can move your factories to wherever labour is cheapest, or import cheap labour to you factories, whichever is best for you. And you can sell your cars anywhere in the EU. We've got laws preventing any state interfering with your business, including rules that prevent governments supporting any of your rivals, or becoming a direct rival themselves. We've only insisted on the absolute minimum of workers' rights, and we've not insisted on a minimum wage or anything like that. If workers in one country object to you moving your operations to another country by going on strike, the ECJ will declare that strike to be illegal. We don't insist on a minimum level of corporation tax, so you can book profits wherever corporation tax is lowest.

(VW rig their engines causing the deaths of a lot of people)

EU: Right, we're fining you about 1% of your market capitalisation. Don't do it again.

It's the first bit I object to. The first bit. The second part was merely disputing aggi's claim that the EU will at least act to prevent corporate excess having already made use of the favourable arena in which they operate, which they don't. So just to say again, I want to leave the EU because of the first bit (and several other reasons that are nothing to do with what's being discussed here). Not because of how an independent UK might react when they break the law.

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:48 pm

No deal looking a bit less likely with a substantial victory in House of Commons for stopping Johnson from closing down Parliament - majority of 41.

I never thought it would come to that but the other issue is the fairly hefty majority of 41 suggests it would be difficult to get No-Deal through parliament (although undoubtedly some of those who abstained would vote in this and I imagine it would be closer).

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3952 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by nil_desperandum » Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:03 pm

aggi wrote:
I never thought it would come to that but the other issue is the fairly hefty majority of 41 suggests it would be difficult to get No-Deal through parliament (although undoubtedly some of those who abstained would vote in this and I imagine it would be closer).
Although, once out of cabinet, (as they soon will be) Gauke, Hammond, Clarke, Duncan and Stewart would almost certainly vote against "no deal", so that's at least 5 more.

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:09 pm

If it be your will wrote:I would suggest that if the EU are going to provide a perfect arena for companies like VW to become enormously profitable - which they have - then the least we should expect is for the EU to be exceptionally robust with their punishments when they break the rules. It seems to me VW benefited from the former, and the response to the latter was truly pathetic. Their shareholders gained from favourable EU rules, so their shareholders should have suffered enormously when they broke the law. (I'd have locked up those responsible, too, but accept that really isn't the EU's job.) As it is, VW escaped with barely a scratch (except in the US).

Like I say. The EU primarily serves corporate interests.
Your position is a bit clearer now following your other response above.

I guess I don't really agree that the EU provides a perfect arena for companies like VW (I'm not sure whether you ignored my other examples of tech companies as you don't think the EU is set up for them or for another reason) to become enormously profitable.

There are certainly benefits to being in the EU for businesses. The free movement of goods speeds up supply chains hugely, free movement of labour can result in a cheaper workforce, the strikes cases (which I disagree with) make it more difficult to strike (although they haven't been tested in the UK yet), etc.

However, it's not as plain sailing as you make out.

You complain about the state aid rules as if VW wouldn't benefit from them but other companies would. In reality you just need to look at the US to see what happens without those rules, the rich companies being offered ever bigger subsidies to move their headquarters to a certain state. Look at Apple or the mooted Amazon deal in NJ.

You're disparaging about EU workers' rights but for a large number of territories they are still better than what was in place. There is also a lot more in the way of health and safety, equality, etc legislation than there was. Things like GDPR are very much pro-individual rights at the expense of companies, and the increased legislation around money laundering is pretty onerous for companies.

In terms of tax rates, the EU does try and do some enforcement there (using those state aid rules that you don't like). Apple were fined €20bn for instance. You can't book profits wherever you want, that's just not true.

I agree there are distinct benefits (although not as many as you suggest) to corporations being based in the EU and that the EU is broadly pro-business. However, there are also disadvantages and some of those are substantial compared to what a single nation can do (e.g. the Apple tax dodge).

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Spijed » Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:29 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:Surprise, surprise.
Either Boris Johnson was totally wrong about his kippers, or he was lying.
You decide.
[There's no EU directive or law that applies to Boris's kipper. The regulations he was referring to when he waved the kipper above his head are entirely of the UK's making. But why would this shock anyone?]
As it's now being abundantly clear, three words describe Boris Johnson:

Lies, Lies, lies

And with Trump in the White House, we are slowly creeping back to the dark days of 1930's Germany.

Fearful times!
This user liked this post: longsidepies

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:44 pm

If it be your will wrote:Oh, it doesn't matter.

Okay. There doesn't seem to be any dispute that the power of corporations has increased since we joined the EU, and the power of labour has declined. So I could reasonably theorise that being a member of the EU certainly hasn't prevented this. So the question becomes did it actively cause it? Not a single person anywhere can answer this with complete certainty because we can't repeat the experiment with us being outside the EU since 1975.

First, I'd say that in the 80s, we'd have followed a similar trajectory (under Thatcher) whether or not we were members. Being a member didn't obviously hold Thatcher back, mind. Then we entered the 'end of history' period: the USSR collapsed and it was widely assumed the markets always knew best, and provided they were allowed to function without too much government interference, we would all be better off.

It was in this period members ratified Maastricht.

Then there was the expansion of the EU in 2004. For the first time the EU was a balanced mix of very wealthy countries and very poor countries, rather than a group of fairly equally developed countries. Now, locked into Maastricht, the markets ran amok. The result was mass labour arbitrage - cheap labour moving West, with communities and families in the East torn to pieces. Capital moved East to seek cheap labour. It was a capitalist's dream. The bargaining power of labour collapsed in the West, and manufacturing moved East.

It was at this point Lisbon was ratified, which basically rendered the EU unreformable.

Then came the crash of 2008. The neoliberal model we'd assumed unassailable when we cemented it in with Maastricht, suddenly looked completely flawed. Living standards fell. Tensions rose. Wealthy asset-owners were bailed out by QE, and escaped largely intact. The Greeks were thrown under a bus as their bondholders were bailed out in order to save the banks from collapse. Turned out the markets didn't have all the answers after all.

It was at this moment we desperately needed to completely restructure the economy. We needed massive state intervention, and a complete reorganising of the rules in favour of people over corporate interests. Unfortunately EU members couldn't do this because Maastricht locked them in with its neoliberal model, and Lisbon meant the EU couldn't be reformed. And now we're staring down the barrel of far-right extremists telling us they have the solution instead.

So my answer is: up to 2004, it mattered little whether we were members or not. Between 2004-2008, being members laid bare the power we had handed to the markets, and the corporations that ran them. Post 2008 our hands were tied, and had we not been members I think things might have been different. Had Corbyn won in 2017, or if he were to win now, it would matter enormously if we are members. That's because Corbyn wants a dramatic break from the neoliberal consensus, but the EU rules prevent this.

That's how I believe being members of the EU has contributed to the imbalance of power between corporations and people.

Now obviously, there are a lot of debating points there, and assumptions that might be incorrect. But as a short analysis, it does carry a degree of logic. And that's why I don't think I've made a 'meaningless comparison', as you put it.
I've got to say that I don't really agree with the second half of your analysis.

I don't really buy that post 2008, if we'd not been in the EU, we'd have seen a massive economic restructuring. New Labour at that time weren't that much into big interventions into the market and were pretty light touch in terms of regulation; they hadn't reversed a huge amount of Thatcher's actions. They'd gone big on PFI, started more private tendering in the NHS, etc. I just can't see that they would have then moved to significant restructuring of the economy.

On top of that they probably wouldn't have had time to complete it before the next election came round and I doubt it would have paid dividends so quickly that they'd have got another term so we'd have been back with the conservatives.

I see your issues around if Corbyn wins (although he's up against a shambles of a government and still polling badly so I'd be surprised if that ever happened). However, I think that the UK is (or at least was) a powerful enough party in the EU that we could have gone ahead with a lot of what we wanted, made a few token compromises and dared the EU to stop us.

Where I also disagree with you is that, to me, you almost view the EU as a separate entity in some ways rather than a collection of 28 countries. You say that the Lisbon treaty means the EU can't be reformed and that it's tied to its current trajectory in perpetuity.

In reality though, a majority of the EU Council can instigate a change in direction. That's a lot, and it would be be a huge process, but if the views of the countries (or more accurately the electorate of those countries) of the EU changes their view on what the EU should be then the EU would have to follow them.

I understand why you want out. It's much easier to persuade one country to change direction than most of Europe and, correct me if I'm wrong, I think that's what your argument boils down to. Personally I don't think the UK will be that country. I reckon it's more likely the UK will go right than left, and more to the right than it would under the EU.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 5:18 pm

If it be your will wrote:This must be on purpose. I'll try again. In the case of VW, the example aggi supplied in defence of the EU.

EU: Right VW, we've set everything up perfectly for you to make lots of cash. You can move your factories to wherever labour is cheapest, or import cheap labour to you factories, whichever is best for you. And you can sell your cars anywhere in the EU. We've got laws preventing any state interfering with your business, including rules that prevent governments supporting any of your rivals, or becoming a direct rival themselves. We've only insisted on the absolute minimum of workers' rights, and we've not insisted on a minimum wage or anything like that. If workers in one country object to you moving your operations to another country by going on strike, the ECJ will declare that strike to be illegal. We don't insist on a minimum level of corporation tax, so you can book profits wherever corporation tax is lowest.

(VW rig their engines causing the deaths of a lot of people)

EU: Right, we're fining you about 1% of your market capitalisation. Don't do it again.

It's the first bit I object to. The first bit. The second part was merely disputing aggi's claim that the EU will at least act to prevent corporate excess having already made use of the favourable arena in which they operate, which they don't. So just to say again, I want to leave the EU because of the first bit (and several other reasons that are nothing to do with what's being discussed here). Not because of how an independent UK might react when they break the law.
Aggi’s addressed the rest of your post pretty well. I’d just like some clarity on the highlighted section above, please.

What does “the absolute minimum of workers’ rights” mean to you? To me, it means no rights at all, but that doesn’t seem to be how you’re using it.

My understanding is the EU insists on more workers rights than, for example, the US, who you previously used as an example of a state being better at reining in corporations than the EU (re VW). Stuff like the working time directive or paternal leave regulations, for example.

Again, your point seems to boil down to “the EU isn’t perfect so let’s leave”, even though the alternative is far far less perfect.

South West Claret.
Posts: 5642
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 pm
Been Liked: 766 times
Has Liked: 499 times
Location: Devon

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by South West Claret. » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:02 pm

Serial lying by Johnson.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49030873" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:05 pm

Greenmile wrote:Aggi’s addressed the rest of your post pretty well. I’d just like some clarity on the highlighted section above, please.

What does “the absolute minimum of workers’ rights” mean to you? To me, it means no rights at all, but that doesn’t seem to be how you’re using it.

My understanding is the EU insists on more workers rights than, for example, the US, who you previously used as an example of a state being better at reining in corporations than the EU (re VW). Stuff like the working time directive or paternal leave regulations, for example.

Again, your point seems to boil down to “the EU isn’t perfect so let’s leave”, even though the alternative is far far less perfect.
Are you able to provide a list of EU workers' rights? Just a straightforward list? I wouldn't be too daunted, they're very limited compared to our own standards, or even those of the US. They mostly relate to outlawing discrimination, something the UK attained on its own yonks ago.

If, having left the EU, we collectively choose to vote for a government that undercuts even these limited rights (and fail to vote them out again at the following election!) then my word - I'd be amazed. But even then, all I could reasonably do in response would be sigh and conclude: "Well, if that's really what the UK electorate actually wants, to vote away most of the rights we've collectively amassed over the last 100 years, then so be it. I guess that's democracy."

Having provided that list, if you honestly think there is a good chance we'll actively vote to breach even EU minimum standards, then of course, you would want to remain. I could fully understand that. I'd say the chances of that, to the nearest percent, are 0%.

Seriously, the UK would have to be deep into 'free-market wasteland' territory if we managed to breach the minimum rights the EU demands.

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by CombatClaret » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:19 pm

South West Claret. wrote:Serial lying by Johnson.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49030873" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Annoys me that an articles like this is titled
"Is Boris Johnson right about the rules on kippers?"
When the first sentence of the verdict is "This is not true"

Press need to step up "Boris Johnson lies about kippers"
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:23 pm

aggi wrote:I understand why you want out. It's much easier to persuade one country to change direction than most of Europe and, correct me if I'm wrong, I think that's what your argument boils down to. Personally I don't think the UK will be that country. I reckon it's more likely the UK will go right than left, and more to the right than it would under the EU.
I'll let the rest go, in the sense we've both had our respective says on the matter, and leave it at that.

It's those parts where you keep telling me what my argument is, then producing a different one, that riles. I can't tell if you doing this sincerely because you genuinely think that is my argument, or whether you're doing it deliberately to annoy me.

Yes. It's much easier for a single country to change direction than a continent. A good reason to be independent of the EU.

It's also much easier to change direction if you haven't signed an everlasting treaty with yourself that prevents you from changing direction. If someone puts forward a concrete, plausible, step-by-step plan to revoke Maastricht (particularly) and Lisbon, so it is even possible to enact genuine change, I'd be much more inclined to stick with the EU. I've yet to see one.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:36 pm

If it be your will wrote:Are you able to provide a list of EU workers' rights? Just a straightforward list? I wouldn't be too daunted, they're very limited compared to our own standards, or even those of the US. They mostly relate to outlawing discrimination, something the UK attained on its own yonks ago.
Here are 10 for starters - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 31366.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - and of course they're limited by our (current) standards - we're still part of the EU so they are the minimum we are (currently) obliged to maintain.

I'm going to need some evidence that they're limited by US standards, because that doesn't sound right to me - certainly in terms of parental rights, annual leave, union rights etc. Perhaps the "workers' rights" you're talking about are different sorts of things.
If it be your will wrote:If, having left the EU, we collectively choose to vote for a government that undercuts even these limited rights (and fail to vote them out again at the following election!) then my word - I'd be amazed.
We consistently vote in the Tories in this country and in times of economic hardship, which Brexit is likely to bring about / exacerbate, folk tend to swing more right-wing not less, because it's so easy to blame immigrants / scroungers / whoever for being poor, and it tends to be the right that promise to crack down on the already marginalised.
If it be your will wrote: But even then, all I could reasonably do in response would be sigh and conclude: "Well, if that's really what the UK electorate actually wants, to vote away most of the rights we've collectively amassed over the last 100 years, then so be it. I guess that's democracy."
Fair enough. Not a chance I'd like to take, though.
If it be your will wrote:Having provided that list, if you honestly think there is a good chance we'll actively vote to breach even EU minimum standards, then of course, you would want to remain. I could fully understand that. I'd say the chances of that, to the nearest percent, are 0%.
Seriously, the UK would have to be deep into 'free-market wasteland' territory if we managed to breach the minimum rights the EU demands.
Of course we wouldn't actively vote for it. "We" may well vote for a party that would bring this sort of thing in by stealth, and the corporatations that would benefit will happily help them pull the wool over folks' eyes.

How often already do we hear talk of "Singapore on Thames" or "cutting unnecessary red tape" as one of the desired outcomes of Brexit? Throw in a bit of "tightening our belts" and "Blitz spirit" if the economic shock of Brexit is as bad as some are predicting, and I could easily see the govt slowly stripping away workers' rights without there being mass riots - or even necessarily much of an electoral backlash - in protest.

To be clear, I'm not saying this will definitely happen, but I reckon the possibility is nearer 50% than the 0% you have suggested.
This user liked this post: longsidepies

levraiclaret
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:40 am
Been Liked: 428 times
Has Liked: 1460 times
Location: Leicestershire
Contact:

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by levraiclaret » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:37 pm

If it be your will wrote:Are you able to provide a list of EU workers' rights? Just a straightforward list? I wouldn't be too daunted, they're very limited compared to our own standards, or even those of the US. They mostly relate to outlawing discrimination, something the UK attained on its own yonks ago.
Two off the top of my head;

TUPE - Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment Regulations which stops new owners arbitrarily adversely changing employment conditions on acquiring a company or business.

Working Time Directive which stops employees working more than 55 hours per week.

Hope this helps.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:40 pm

If it be your will wrote:It's those parts where you keep telling me what my argument is, then producing a different one, that riles. I can't tell if you doing this sincerely because you genuinely think that is my argument, or whether you're doing it deliberately to annoy me.
Your argument is essentially :-

Brexit
????
Socialist paradise

(NB - I'm not doing this sincerely and hope my joke doesn't annoy you)

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:40 pm

Greenmile wrote:Aggi’s addressed the rest of your post pretty well. I’d just like some clarity on the highlighted section above, please.

What does “the absolute minimum of workers’ rights” mean to you? To me, it means no rights at all, but that doesn’t seem to be how you’re using it.

My understanding is the EU insists on more workers rights than, for example, the US, who you previously used as an example of a state being better at reining in corporations than the EU (re VW). Stuff like the working time directive or paternal leave regulations, for example.

Again, your point seems to boil down to “the EU isn’t perfect so let’s leave”, even though the alternative is far far less perfect.
Actually I should add:

There is of course one area where the EU has seriously undercut UK workers' rights: the right to strike. The Viking and Laval cases have dramatically curtailed this right. The widespread interpretation of these cases is that any strike that interferes with the 'four freedoms' is illegal. This has far-reaching consequences and is, to be frank, astonishing.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:43 pm

If it be your will wrote:Actually I should add:

There is of course one area where the EU has seriously undercut UK workers' rights: the right to strike. The Viking and Laval cases have dramatically curtailed this right. The widespread interpretation of these cases is that any strike that interferes with the 'four freedoms' is illegal. This has far-reaching consequences and is, to be frank, astonishing.
Why didn’t our govt veto the legislation that led to this, and why weren’t they voted out by the furious British public when they didn’t?
Last edited by Greenmile on Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:43 pm

levraiclaret wrote:Two off the top of my head;

TUPE - Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment Regulations which stops new owners arbitrarily adversely changing employment conditions on acquiring a company or business.

Working Time Directive which stops employees working more than 55 hours per week.

Hope this helps.
Well it's not a list, but okay. Is the first one not protected by contract law anyway? I thought it was.
The WTD is a significant one, yes. But we must remember nobody was compelled to work long hours before it was brought in.

I'd still quite like a list, though.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:47 pm

Greenmile wrote:Why didn’t our govt veto the legislation that led to this, and he weren’t they voted out by the furious British public when they didn’t?
I was under the impression these ECJ rulings were based on the principles of Maastricht, not a particular piece of legislation that could have been vetoed (I'll check). Hence why it went to court for a decision. Why did we ever sign Maastricht? **** knows. But we're stuck with it.

Are you working on that list?

levraiclaret
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:40 am
Been Liked: 428 times
Has Liked: 1460 times
Location: Leicestershire
Contact:

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by levraiclaret » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:59 pm

If it be your will wrote:Well it's not a list, but okay. Is the first one not protected by contract law anyway? I thought it was.
The WTD is a significant one, yes. But we must remember nobody was compelled to work long hours before it was brought in.
I'd still quite like a list, though.
The first was not effectively covered by contract law there were may loopholes and get arounds, that is why the EU brought TUPE in to protect workers.

For the WTD, how many hours do you want your bus driver or doctor to have worked before driving you or operating on you. Also workers were browbeaten into working longer hours until it became illegal.

Is is not also an EU regulation that prevents workers from other EU countries being having Ts & Cs that are inferior to local workers?

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:19 pm

Greenmile wrote:Why didn’t our govt veto the legislation that led to this, and why weren’t they voted out by the furious British public when they didn’t?
You can't veto everything, by the way. If the Commission proposes legislation, Parliament approves it, and the Council (via their QMV rules) approve it - it's law. You can't just go around vetoing every piece of EU legislation you don't like.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:29 pm

levraiclaret wrote:For the WTD, how many hours do you want your bus driver or doctor to have worked before driving you or operating on you. Also workers were browbeaten into working longer hours until it became illegal.
That's a complete red herring. Are you suggesting that bus drivers used to work 55+ hours per week before the WTD? Nonsense. There were already rules about that sort of thing.

It's rather like the casual labour / zero hours contracts stuff. Some workers are undoubtedly badly treated by zero hours contracts, just as some workers were disadvantaged by the absence of a WTD. But for other workers, zero hours contracts (aka casual labour) are a good thing, as is the ability to work more than 55 hours per week. And so some workers suffer while others get a benefit.

If someone wants to work 12 hours a day for 7 days and then get the next week off, who are we to say he shouldn't?

dermotdermot
Posts: 3479
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 660 times
Has Liked: 205 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dermotdermot » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:41 pm

Testing

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:51 pm

dsr wrote:That's a complete red herring. Are you suggesting that bus drivers used to work 55+ hours per week before the WTD? Nonsense. There were already rules about that sort of thing.

It's rather like the casual labour / zero hours contracts stuff. Some workers are undoubtedly badly treated by zero hours contracts, just as some workers were disadvantaged by the absence of a WTD. But for other workers, zero hours contracts (aka casual labour) are a good thing, as is the ability to work more than 55 hours per week. And so some workers suffer while others get a benefit.

If someone wants to work 12 hours a day for 7 days and then get the next week off, who are we to say he shouldn't?
If that someone wants to work 12 hours every day he can opt out of the WTD. The legislation just prevents his employers from punishing him for refusing to opt out.

Your suggestion that the WTD prevents workers from working as many hours as they like is typically disingenuous. All it does is stop employers from forcing their employees to work excessive hours.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:03 pm

I wasn't actually aware of that. Is that definitely correct? Well in that case it's a much weaker piece of legislation than I'd realised.

(List?)

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:05 pm

If it be your will wrote:I wasn't actually aware of that. Is that definitely correct? Well in that case it's a much weaker piece of legislation than I'd realised.

(List?)
I’ve linked an article which gives you a list of 10, but you seem to have ignored that post in favour of picking me up on some of my more flippant comments.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:08 pm

Looks like you could work as dsr suggests anyway (it's normally averaged over 17 weeks). In which case, I can only conclude the bus driver is also allowed to work 60 hours a week under the terms of the WTD, too, so long as it isn't every week. And yes, you can opt out.

What a woolly piece of non-legislation the WTD actually is!

https://www.gov.uk/maximum-weekly-working-hours" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:24 pm

If it be your will wrote:Looks like you could work as dsr suggests anyway (it's normally averaged over 17 weeks). In which case, I can only conclude the bus driver is also allowed to work 60 hours a week under the terms of the WTD, too, so long as it isn't every week. And yes, you can opt out.

What a woolly piece of non-legislation the WTD actually is!

https://www.gov.uk/maximum-weekly-working-hours" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
It does exactly what it sets out to do, which is to prevent an employer from threatening their employees with disciplinary action if they refuse to work excessive hours. Being able to opt out doesn’t make it “woolly” it just ensures individual employees who want to work more hours aren’t prevented from doing so.

How does it work in the US? How about annual leave? Or paid lunch breaks? Or mandatory pension / healthcare schemes? Or TUPE? Bearing in mind your claim that EU workers’ rights are “very limited” compared to US workers.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:39 pm

Greenmile wrote:I’ve linked an article which gives you a list of 10, but you seem to have ignored that post in favour of picking me up on some of my more flippant comments.
Okay, hold my hands up. No idea how, but I completely missed that entire post. My sincere apologies. (I was only being a bit sarky in a friendly sort of way anyway, I hope you know.)

Right, the list. First, in all honesty, were you not shocked by how limited it actually is? And how vastly superior UK rights are? Or the complete absence of a minimum wage, say? Those maternity rights are absolutely shocking. And try as I might I can't find where the EU grants the absolute right to be a member of a union. And all this is after Thatcher had already ripped a lot of rights to shreds. I always find it amusing when avowed remain outlets try their best to make the most of what little there is (another desperate attempt here https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/fi ... e%20EU.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ). Looked at with a clinical, objective eye, there really isn't much to go on is there?

Aggi and I have already compared and contrasted US rights with those in the EU previously. I think it would be reasonable to say that in some areas US ones are just superior, in others the EU just wins. On balance they're fairly closely matched.

The only one I can seriously imagine the UK electorate voting to remove (via their chosen party) entirely is the WTD. And as we've just established, that's not particularly onerous or tight anyway. As for all the others, the UK electorate would have to make a concerted attempt to get our rights down to anything vaguely resembling EU minimum requirements, let alone reducing them below.

It's one of those areas where everyone, left or right, automatically thinks the EU is really good at (or bad for, if you're a free-market fundamentalist), but on closer examination, is actually really weak at.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:56 pm

I can't find aggi's and my comparison between the EU and US. There's an account here, though: https://www.dol.gov/general/aboutdol/majorlaws" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whether you'd chose the US or EU rights would really depend on which rights you valued most, really. The US has an absolute right to free association and collective bargaining, indeed their laws surrounding unions are actually quite strong. It also has a (somewhat paltry) minimum wage. It loses out the the EU on paid annual leave entitlements (still only 20 days in the EU, however). Equality rights are basically the same. Maternity rights are equally dreadful.

In my view I'd choose the US ones, largely because I believe union rights are absolutely critical. I could imagine others might go for the EU ones, though.

(To answer your other question, the UK only guarantees 20 min paid break (edit - I'm wrong, this should actually read unpaid) for every 6h worked, so on paid lunch breaks the EU rules can't possibly be that good. And the EU has no automatic right to free healthcare. Indeed, a lot of EU members don't offer free healthcare. But we're straying off the subject of 'workers' rights' if we start talking about health.)
Last edited by If it be your will on Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by dsr » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:01 pm

If it be your will wrote:Looks like you could work as dsr suggests anyway (it's normally averaged over 17 weeks). In which case, I can only conclude the bus driver is also allowed to work 60 hours a week under the terms of the WTD, too, so long as it isn't every week. And yes, you can opt out.

What a woolly piece of non-legislation the WTD actually is!

https://www.gov.uk/maximum-weekly-working-hours" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Bus drivers may be allowed to work 60 hours, but they aren't allowed to drive buses for 60 hours. Bus driving hours, like lorry driving hours, are subject to UK laws that have been in for far longer than the WTD.

I didn't realise that individuals could opt out of the rules. As they were first mooted, they would have been compulsory on everyone, even people like one-man band businesses where it would have been totally unenforceable.

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 19, 2019 11:37 am

If it be your will wrote:I'll let the rest go, in the sense we've both had our respective says on the matter, and leave it at that.

It's those parts where you keep telling me what my argument is, then producing a different one, that riles. I can't tell if you doing this sincerely because you genuinely think that is my argument, or whether you're doing it deliberately to annoy me.

Yes. It's much easier for a single country to change direction than a continent. A good reason to be independent of the EU.

It's also much easier to change direction if you haven't signed an everlasting treaty with yourself that prevents you from changing direction. If someone puts forward a concrete, plausible, step-by-step plan to revoke Maastricht (particularly) and Lisbon, so it is even possible to enact genuine change, I'd be much more inclined to stick with the EU. I've yet to see one.
Well I did say correct me if I'm wrong but that's the impression I had. Your viewpoint is obviously a lot different to most of the pro-Brexit voters on here so it is more difficult to get my head around what your position is. Whereas most of the pro-Brexit views are "we want our sovereignty back, let's get out" yours are clearly more nuanced with a possible willingness to stay in the EU if it was reformed.

I still disagree about the everlasting treaty with yourself that prevents you from changing direction., that just isn't the case. It prevents a minority changing the direction but if enough countries want the direction to change it will.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 11:49 am

aggi wrote:Well I did say correct me if I'm wrong but that's the impression I had. Your viewpoint is obviously a lot different to most of the pro-Brexit voters on here so it is more difficult to get my head around what your position is. Whereas most of the pro-Brexit views are "we want our sovereignty back, let's get out" yours are clearly more nuanced with a possible willingness to stay in the EU if it was reformed.

I still disagree about the everlasting treaty with yourself that prevents you from changing direction., that just isn't the case. It prevents a minority changing the direction but if enough countries want the direction to change it will.
When you say enough, that's strictly correct. But only all of them is enough. Revoking, altering or superseding Maastricht requires unanimity, and until that happens we, The Commission, Parliament, The Council, and the ECJ are all strangulated by Maastricht. The only realistic way to escape Maastricht is to leave the EU. Maastricht was from another era - it's absurd.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/ ... imity-trap" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 19, 2019 12:04 pm

If it be your will wrote:I can't find aggi's and my comparison between the EU and US. There's an account here, though: https://www.dol.gov/general/aboutdol/majorlaws" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whether you'd chose the US or EU rights would really depend on which rights you valued most, really. The US has an absolute right to free association and collective bargaining, indeed their laws surrounding unions are actually quite strong. It also has a (somewhat paltry) minimum wage. It loses out the the EU on paid annual leave entitlements (still only 20 days in the EU, however). Equality rights are basically the same. Maternity rights are equally dreadful.

In my view I'd choose the US ones, largely because I believe union rights are absolutely critical. I could imagine others might go for the EU ones, though.

(To answer your other question, the UK only guarantees 20 min paid break (edit - I'm wrong, this should actually read unpaid) for every 6h worked, so on paid lunch breaks the EU rules can't possibly be that good. And the EU has no automatic right to free healthcare. Indeed, a lot of EU members don't offer free healthcare. But we're straying off the subject of 'workers' rights' if we start talking about health.)
I do remember that discussion and I thought the EU came out quite a bit better than the US. I'll see if I can find it.

The EU also has a right to free association and collective bargaining (it's in the Charter of Fundamental Rights).

Equality rights in the US are much weaker in the US than the EU. There are still a number of states where you can be fired for being LGBTQ for instance. The Vice-President's wife works at a school that bans LGBTQ employees.

The EU is trying to increase the maternity rights, the last proposal they had was voted down by a number of countries including the UK but I believe there's another one due. However to suggest that it is equally dreadful is just plain wrong. Only about half of the women working in the US qualify for any sort of maternity leave (if your company location within a certain radius (not the actual company) has fewer than 50 employees they don't have to grant it).
This user liked this post: Greenmile

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:07 pm

If it be your will wrote:When you say enough, that's strictly correct. But only all of them is enough. Revoking, altering or superseding Maastricht requires unanimity, and until that happens we, The Commission, Parliament, The Council, and the ECJ are all strangulated by Maastricht. The only realistic way to escape Maastricht is to leave the EU. Maastricht was from another era - it's absurd.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/ ... imity-trap" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You’ve gone from “the Maastricht Treaty prevents the EU from changing direction” to it making it very difficult.

You’ve also gone from the EU only insists on the absolute minimum of workers’ rights to it insisting on some workers’ rights but not as many as you’d like.

Finally you’ve gone from EU workers’ rights being “very limited” compared to the US, to “Whether you'd chose the US or EU rights would really depend on which rights you valued most, really” and “In my view I'd choose the US ones, largely because I believe union rights are absolutely critical. I could imagine others might go for the EU ones, though.”

We’ll make a remainer out of you yet :)

(FWIW, I agree with your revised position on each of the above three points)

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:06 pm

aggi wrote:I do remember that discussion and I thought the EU came out quite a bit better than the US. I'll see if I can find it.

The EU also has a right to free association and collective bargaining (it's in the Charter of Fundamental Rights).

Equality rights in the US are much weaker in the US than the EU. There are still a number of states where you can be fired for being LGBTQ for instance. The Vice-President's wife works at a school that bans LGBTQ employees.

The EU is trying to increase the maternity rights, the last proposal they had was voted down by a number of countries including the UK but I believe there's another one due. However to suggest that it is equally dreadful is just plain wrong. Only about half of the women working in the US qualify for any sort of maternity leave (if your company location within a certain radius (not the actual company) has fewer than 50 employees they don't have to grant it).
Not convinced that counts as 'quite a bit better'. The LGBT thing is a worry, I'll give you that. I've just learnt this is being addressed with the upcoming equalities act, though (can't believe I'm sticking up for US labor rights - they are pretty terrible).

If the US pass the $15/h minimum wage that's planned (along with the equalities act), it would put the US back firmly in the lead, I'd say. Whether pro-EU or not, the EU's rights aren't a million miles from US ones (LGBT, for the moment at least, being the glaring exception).

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:18 pm

Greenmile wrote:You’ve gone from “the Maastricht Treaty prevents the EU from changing direction” to it making it very difficult.

You’ve also gone from the EU only insists on the absolute minimum of workers’ rights to it insisting on some workers’ rights but not as many as you’d like.

Finally you’ve gone from EU workers’ rights being “very limited” compared to the US, to “Whether you'd chose the US or EU rights would really depend on which rights you valued most, really” and “In my view I'd choose the US ones, largely because I believe union rights are absolutely critical. I could imagine others might go for the EU ones, though.”

We’ll make a remainer out of you yet :)

(FWIW, I agree with your revised position on each of the above three points)
Another one speaking (incorrectly) on my behalf!

"Only realistic chance of escaping Maastricht is to leave" is not equated to "very difficult to change"

I would still declare the EU workers' rights are absolutely awful, miles away from the UK's, and comparable to the US ones (LGBT rights at work excepted - that really is a shocker, they need to fix that one quickly).

I still think the chances of the UK electorate consenting to push our rights below those demanded by the EU are closer to 0% than 1%. And that in that completely mad circumstance, the electorate should get what it wants, rather than being denied that opportunity(! - 'opportunity' seems wrong, somehow). I'll grant the choice of words 'very limited, even when compared to US ones' is stretching it. I should have put 'About as limited as US ones, and both are shockingly bad'.

But as you say, we are slowly arriving at a consensus.

(ps. I do actually want to be a remainer. The idea of a united Europe coming out of the ashes of WW2 seems the obvious, desirable and wonderful thing to happen. It's a terrible shame that the rules were made so restrictive, so market-orientated, and so sclerotic to change, that I simply can't be in favour of the EU.)
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:28 pm

If it be your will wrote:Another one speaking (incorrectly) on my behalf!

"Only realistic chance of escaping Maastricht is to leave" is not equated to "very difficult to change"

I would still declare the EU workers' rights are absolutely awful, miles away from the UK's, and comparable to the US ones (LGBT rights at work excepted - that really is a shocker, they need to fix that one quickly).

I still think the chances of the UK electorate consenting to push our rights below those demanded by the EU are closer to 0% than 1%. And that in that completely mad circumstance, the electorate should get what it wants, rather than being denied that opportunity(! - 'opportunity' seems wrong, somehow). I'll grant the choice of words 'very limited, even when compared to US ones' is stretching it. I should have put 'About as limited as US ones, and both are shockingly bad'.
On Maastricht, you’ve accepted it’s possible to change if every member state agrees. Now that’s very difficult, but not impossible. I’m not sure I’ve misinterpreted you at all there, unless you’re reverting to your previous stance that it is actually impossible.

On US workers’ rights, you initially said that they are “very limited” in the EU, compared to in the US. Now you’re saying they are comparable. I see we are now in agreement that your initial statement on that point was a little hyperbolic.

Your third paragraph remains entirely faith-based. I’ve explained why I think you’re wrong (“Singapore on Thames” / “slashing red tape” etc) but I can’t see your arguments against this, beyond just saying it will never happen.

My last post was kind of light-heartedly pointing out that your general position on this specific workers’ rights argument has, shall we say, “evolved” a little over the last 24 hours or so. If it continues to evolve in the same direction you’ll be calling for an informed referendum before we know it. (NB - this is also a joke. I appreciate there are more things to consider than workers’ rights but on this one point, you seem to be on pretty shaky ground).

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:32 pm

On shaky ground with EU workers' rights! What??

They're absolutely diabolically bad, as any non-partisan reader of your list would surely agree, however they're dressed up!

That's the problem with this messageboard, it always seems to be about winning, using whatever annoying tactic comes to hand. What did you have to put "you're on shaky ground" for, other than to annoy me?? It compels me to retort things like "Come off it Greenmile, when you produced that list of EU workers' rights, you were as shocked as I was by how limited they actually are, weren't you? You've been taken in by the remainer newspapers and the BBC creating this illusion of the EU being a bastion of workers' rights, despite any fair analysis suggesting they are hopelessly limited, and miles worse than those the UK electorate acquired all by itself. You gullible fool."

And then everyone ends up in a really bad temper.
Last edited by If it be your will on Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:36 pm

If it be your will wrote:On shaky ground with EU workers' rights! What??

They're absolutely diabolically bad, as any non-partisan reader of your list would surely agree, however they're dressed up!
Agreed, but they are better in the EU than they would be (for us) outside of it.

The “shaky ground” comment refers simply to the fact that you have been revising your initial statements little by little as folk point out new information to you. You should take this as a compliment - it’s how people should react to learning new info (a couple of examples in this case include the paucity of US workers’ rights and the fact that workers can opt out of the WTD).

Edit - just to add, I too have learned new info. Namely, that the workers’ rights conferred on us by the EU are not as extensive as I had thought they were.
Last edited by Greenmile on Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:39 pm

If it be your will wrote:Not convinced that counts as 'quite a bit better'. The LGBT thing is a worry, I'll give you that. I've just learnt this is being addressed with the upcoming equalities act, though (can't believe I'm sticking up for US labor rights - they are pretty terrible).

If the US pass the $15/h minimum wage that's planned (along with the equalities act), it would put the US back firmly in the lead, I'd say. Whether pro-EU or not, the EU's rights aren't a million miles from US ones (LGBT, for the moment at least, being the glaring exception).
You don't think half of female employees having no right to maternity leave (and similar for paternity) is an issue? There were other areas too when we discussed it last time.

What employment rights does the US have that the EU doesn't? There's no chance the $15 minimum wage will come in (and given the state of the US at the moment I'd still be a little concerned about the equalities act getting through).

In terms of employment rights being taken away, there have already been plenty of noises around this. Liam Fox has gone on record saying that it needs to be easier to fire people. The conservative party were very much against guaranteeing that future employment rights in the UK would at least match the EU's, etc.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:43 pm

aggi wrote:In terms of employment rights being taken away, there have already been plenty of noises around this. Liam Fox has gone on record saying that it needs to be easier to fire people. The conservative party were very much against guaranteeing that future employment rights in the UK would at least match the EU's, etc.
This is the bit that iibyw hasn’t really addressed yet. To claim the chances are close to 0%, there must be a pretty solid argument behind the belief, but I don’t think it’s been made yet.

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:50 pm

Greenmile wrote:This is the bit that iibyw hasn’t really addressed yet. To claim the chances are close to 0%, there must be a pretty solid argument behind the belief, but I don’t think it’s been made yet.
I have! Our workers' rights might go down if we leave the EU. Our rights might go down if we remain in the EU - there's certainly plenty of space. But the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero. And even then, that would be our (rather idiotic in my view) choice. It's as if you think UK democracy will be suspended the second we leave the EU or something, and the ultra right-wing will be in power for ever.

If you really have that little faith in the UK electorate to stand up for itself, I can see why you would want to remain in the EU. I don't. All these rights we attained, those that are vastly superior to those the EU demands, we attained all by ourselves. Why would I have reason to believe we'll all suddenly take leave of our senses and vote them all away again?

If it be your will
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 10:12 am
Been Liked: 500 times
Has Liked: 509 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by If it be your will » Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:53 pm

I give up!

aggi
Posts: 8763
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by aggi » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:00 pm

If it be your will wrote:When you say enough, that's strictly correct. But only all of them is enough. Revoking, altering or superseding Maastricht requires unanimity, and until that happens we, The Commission, Parliament, The Council, and the ECJ are all strangulated by Maastricht. The only realistic way to escape Maastricht is to leave the EU. Maastricht was from another era - it's absurd.

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/ ... imity-trap" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Agreed, it won't be easy. Realistically though, once you've got a majority of nations, and particularly the larger ones, pushing for it then it would end up being a bit of horse-trading to get the other nations to agree.

It is an interesting point, there are plenty complaining that individual countries don't have enough power in the EU whereas things like this show a possible consequence of individual countries having too much power.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by martin_p » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:03 pm

If it be your will wrote:I have! Our workers' rights might go down if we leave the EU. Our rights might go down if we remain in the EU - there's certainly plenty of space. But the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero. And even then, that would be our (rather idiotic in my view) choice. It's as if you think UK democracy will be suspended the second we leave the EU or something, and the ultra right-wing will be in power for ever.

If you really have that little faith in the UK electorate to stand up for itself, I can see why you would want to remain in the EU. I don't. All these rights we attained, those that are vastly superior to those the EU demands, we attained all by ourselves. Why would I have reason to believe we'll all suddenly take leave of our senses and vote them all away again?
Ten years ago (maybe even five) I'd have agreed with you about the UK electorate, but when you see polls about how much damage people are prepared to accept to get Brexit through I start to worry about what we'd accept. All reason with politics seems to have disappeared and many are abandoning critical thinking in favour of proper tribalism, very much on leave v remain lines which are being pushed more and more to anti-establishment v establishment lines. I do worry under those conditions what the UK electorate may unwittingly 'accept'.

Greenmile
Posts: 3164
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:50 pm
Been Liked: 1081 times
Has Liked: 4242 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Greenmile » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:04 pm

If it be your will wrote:I have! Our workers' rights might go down if we leave the EU. Our rights might go down if we remain in the EU - there's certainly plenty of space. But the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero. And even then, that would be our (rather idiotic in my view) choice. It's as if you think UK democracy will be suspended the second we leave the EU or something, and the ultra right-wing will be in power for ever.

If you really have that little faith in the UK electorate to stand up for itself, I can see why you would want to remain in the EU. I don't. All these rights we attained, those that are vastly superior to those the EU demands, we attained all by ourselves. Why would I have reason to believe we'll all suddenly take leave of our senses and vote them all away again?
Saying that the chance of something happening is close to zero (again) isn’t an argument for why the chance of something happening is close to zero.

My faith in the UK electorate is based on experience. When was the last time we elected a left wing party to govt? In the mid-70s? If Scotland gains independence as an indirect result of Brexit, the perpetual right-wing govt you sarcastically refer to could well become a reality.

Finally, we the electorate won’t be asked to vote to remove our rights - the govt we elect will (or rather might) just do it without our say so.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndrewJB » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:11 pm

When I worked for a US company in the U.K. I saw a standard contract of employment for US colleagues and it was pretty shocking. Twelve days paid holiday, one month maternity leave, but only if you’d been with the company for seven years, but the worse thing was the degree to which your personal rights were given over to the company - so anything you created or produced during your time with the company became the intellectual property of the company. And you could be fired for any reason at all, such as political activity deemed contrary to the company’s interests. The person who showed me the contract told me the company was popular to work for because they had a good health scheme. Under US law there is no requirement for paid leave. It’s all down to the marketplace, so if your skill is in high demand you can get very favourable conditions, but if not then you take what you get. Also changes from state to state, but for the most part I’d say the EU is further ahead. If we consider environmental regulations I’d imagine the EU also comes up higher with that.

Imploding Turtle
Posts: 19799
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:12 am
Been Liked: 5483 times
Has Liked: 2540 times
Location: Burnley, Lancs

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by Imploding Turtle » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:14 pm

If it be your will wrote:I have! Our workers' rights might go down if we leave the EU. Our rights might go down if we remain in the EU - there's certainly plenty of space. But the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero. ...
This is pure fantasy.

People have been voting against their interests in this country and others for decades, and the way to get them to do that is pretty easy. Make them afraid. Why do you think Corbyn was so quickly smeared by Cameron as "a threat to national security" and by the Tory press as a terrorist sympathising Jew-hater? Because if the discussion is about his economic ideas and how right-wing economic ideas are failing, then people won't vote against their interests. But if they're frightened then they'll gladly vote for the party that sees workers rights as a bargaining chip when it comes to attracting new business when we shoot our economy in the face.

It's like you've not been paying any attention. The crown jewel of this country is the NHS and the Tories promised no more privatisation. The went back on that promise and then in 2015 they ******* gained MPs. How? By making people more afraid of Ed Miliband than they were afraid of losing their cheap or free healthcare.

Frankly you're delusional if you think people aren't going to vote away their own rights.
These 2 users liked this post: Greenmile keith1879

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Brexit: The Naked Truth

Post by AndrewJB » Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:40 pm

If it be your will wrote:I have! Our workers' rights might go down if we leave the EU. Our rights might go down if we remain in the EU - there's certainly plenty of space. But the chances of us electorally consenting to rights even worse than the EU's pitifully low benchmark are close to zero. And even then, that would be our (rather idiotic in my view) choice. It's as if you think UK democracy will be suspended the second we leave the EU or something, and the ultra right-wing will be in power for ever.

If you really have that little faith in the UK electorate to stand up for itself, I can see why you would want to remain in the EU. I don't. All these rights we attained, those that are vastly superior to those the EU demands, we attained all by ourselves. Why would I have reason to believe we'll all suddenly take leave of our senses and vote them all away again?
U.K. employment rights and legal rights were eroded by the Cameron government (specifically the right to terminate employment for any reason extended from one to two years, and the cuts to legal aid rights), and the electorate rewarded him with a majority. Older conservative minded people I know support fracking, while denigrating wind farms as “polluting the scenery. I thought that after the financial crash the pendulum would begin to swing the other way, but it hasn’t.

Locked