Employment at a record high 2000 extra jobs secured every day UK I voted leave and my gut feeling was Osbourne Clegg and other remainers were simply just lying and are still at it ...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... endum.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, Brexit must be going swimmingly then, eh?

How many are on zero hour contracts and still getting benefits? They will be counted as employed.

ClaretAndJew wrote:How many are on zero hour contracts and still getting benefits? They will be counted as employed.

Probably not many. 3-4% of the working population maybe?

ClaretAndJew wrote:How many are on zero hour contracts and still getting benefits? They will be counted as employed.

Don't bring information into this. Knowing something makes you an expert in Brexiteers' eyes. And we both know what they think of experts.

Best thing to do is just let them walk off a cliff. They won't believe you when you say it'll hurt. But if you're quick enough you can get down to the bottom safely in time to laugh in their battered, dying face.

I wouldn't be boasting that I voted for this embarrassing circus, but each to their own.

It would be going swimmingly if it wasn't for the same bunch of anti democratic liars doing everything in their power to reverse it ...

ClaretMoffitt wrote:Probably not many. 3-4% of the working population maybe?

You think 3-4% isn't significant enough to matter?
Tell me again, what was the percentage difference in the referendum result?

SmudgetheClaret wrote:It would be going swimmingly if it wasn't for the same bunch of anti democratic liars doing everything in their power to reverse it ...

Dry your eyes, mate.

1.8 million. 6% of total workforce are on zero hours according to the ONS. https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlab ... /april2018" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

17.4 million voted for it more than didn't and I ain't spoke a single leave voter who has changed their mind but plenty of remainers have ...

I'll brace myself for the insults...the lefts favourite pastime!

Just a point on zero hours contracts.

I know they can be misused but personally i employ 8 on these, out of a workforce of 70. All are students. All cant commit to any kind of regular hours and frequently want extended periods away back home or off to 'study'. Our staff requirements are quite variable. It works both ways. Our staff retention is fantastic.

Would we be typical of many of the zero hour enployers? I actually don't know.

For me they shouldn't be discounted when accessing employment. Maybe employment figures should only include people who work more than a certain amount of hours a week on average?

Imploding Turtle wrote:Don't bring information into this. Knowing something makes you an expert in Brexiteers' eyes. And we both know what they think of experts.

Best thing to do is just let them walk off a cliff. They won't believe you when you say it'll hurt. But if you're quick enough you can get down to the bottom safely in time to laugh in their battered, dying face.

"Liberal"

Indecisive wrote:Just a point on zero hours contracts.

I know they can be misused but personally i employ 8 on these, out of a workforce of 70. All are students. All cant commit to any kind of regular hours and frequently want extended periods away back home or off to 'study'. Our staff requirements are quite variable. It works both ways. Our staff retention is fantastic.

Would we be typical of many of the zero hour enployers? I actually don't know.

For me they shouldn't be discounted when accessing employment. Maybe employment figures should only include people who work more than a certain amount of hours a week on average?

If, for example, the employment figures only included those working full time it wouldn't look as impressive. If you also took that percentage off who are full time but temporary it would drop even more.

There are very prominent leavers shouting about this, and none of them say anything at all about the actual Brexit negotiations anymore.

There is a very good reason for this, and I'm sure the OP knows why.

But hey, its all going swimmingly remember, and its not the fault of anyone but remoaners, lefty judges, journalists and anybody else who points out how well its not actually going.

ClaretAndJew wrote:If, for example, the employment figures only included those working full time it wouldn't look as impressive. If you also took that percentage off who are full time but temporary it would drop even more.

Figures are manipulated by those in charge, whatever the party. Do we know if the measure was changed as you describe, it would mean previous governements figures would have been better?

I don't think it needs to be full time. Maybe a minimum of 10.hours per week (averaged over a 6 month period) would remove the dodgy zero hour contractors.

Not going well = remain blocks and friction nothing more!

Damo wrote:"Liberal"

Humour.

I've got to agree with Indecisive here, not all zero hour contracts are a bad idea, and a lot of the stuff coming out suggests that its more of a benefit than a hindrance.

But there is a massive caveat (as there always is!), there are people for whom it clearly doesn't suit, and for that, we do need a bit of reform of it.

SmudgetheClaret wrote:Not going well = remain blocks and friction nothing more!

Yep. Can't ever take personal responsibility you lot, can you?

Imploding Turtle wrote:Don't bring information into this. Knowing something makes you an expert in Brexiteers' eyes. And we both know what they think of experts.

Best thing to do is just let them walk off a cliff. They won't believe you when you say it'll hurt. But if you're quick enough you can get down to the bottom safely in time to laugh in their battered, dying face.

Be careful not to show your true colour. Suggesting you would laugh at a dying person rather than help them because they made an unwise choice or went against your advice speaks of having no friends

So which issues haven’t got remain fingerprints all over them ? Ireland maybe ? CU maybe ? SM maybe?

I realised some time ago that these debates on here are pretty pointless, but just a couple of questions for the OP.
Given that negotiations are in such a mess at present:
What would you do now if you were Theresa May and the next round of talks is just a few weeks away?
And - specifically how would you resolve Irish border question which just about everyone agrees has to be hard if we leave the Customs Union?
(Oh and just to mention, we haven't left yet, and we don't know what the final deal will be. In terms of trade, flights, security, scientific research and many other issues, it's virtually impossible that we will enjoy the same benefits that we have today without paying significantly for them.)

The bit I underestimated was the degree to which the establishment would fail to respect the vote, using trick after trick to persuade the public that the vote meant something different to what it did. Ireland being a classic example where it shouldn’t be the big issue they make it. They point to polls with a 1-2% swing to Remain, ignoring that status quo always prevails in polls when a tricky negotiation is underway, but that it reverts back later when hyperbole dies down.

I expcted the EU to do that, they have previous, but not a majority of our own MPs and media.

Of course, this has fired up every Brexit voter even more, and 17m fired up people isn’t going to end well. I have a suspicion that the animosity will last decades. Memories will be very, very long.

That of course is the reason why the negotiations are stuck in treacle. May was never the correct leader to deliver it but again, that was a stitch up by the MPs, ensuring she ran against Leadsom who the members would never vote for.

Now, we have the “fab three”, Morgan, Milliband and Clegg, virtue signalling to us from a basmati rice factory. Quite oblivious to the fact that the EU has forced Indian farmers to reduce pesticides by 99% in 3 years which will send most of them out of business and force up UK rice prices. A Commonwealth country. The three of them are breathtaking in their ignorance. They just don’t get that the British public have said “enough” and aren’t for turning.

Oh, by the way, regarding nildesp’s point about the Irish border. Just because the EU and Anna Soubry (the same thing) say something doesn’t make it so.

We say we are leaving the CU full stop. We say we are not erecting infrastructure at the border, full stop. The GFA is more important than a few unregulated goods smuggled through. Were Ireland (who, despite all impressions, are still a sovereign country, well, a republic, but you know what I mean), to insist on border infrastructure on their side, let them. If these get targeted, their problem, not ours. If bullets start flying, let them. Seriously, when they know we aren’t for moving, a solution would be found pretty darn fast, probably one involving large fines for companies found to be breaking product standards rules.

We’ve been letting the tail (Ireland, a far smaller country) wag the dog. Time to show that the dog has some balls, so to speak.

The fact remains that just 38 percent of the electorate voted for Brexit and 62 percent didn't.

Wasn't part of Project fear employed by the Leave campaign and Boris Johnson that Turkey was on the verge of Joining the EU and that Britain would be facing a new wave of unwanted immigration.

Somewhat ironic then that Theresa May is seen courting Erdogan trying to tie up lucrative Trade Deals post Brexit. In return Turkey will demand extra visas for it's citizens as will any new trading partners such as India.

Lancasterclaret wrote:I've got to agree with Indecisive here, not all zero hour contracts are a bad idea, and a lot of the stuff coming out suggests that its more of a benefit than a hindrance.

But there is a massive caveat (as there always is!), there are people for whom it clearly doesn't suit, and for that, we do need a bit of reform of it.

Reform, yes absolutely. At the moment the term is constantly used negatively and usually part of a political argument. To the extent where in a recent study a high number of students stated they would never take a 'zero hour' contract. Why! Used properly its ideal for them. Its indicative of people increasingly blindly following a political standpoint, resulting in the lack of informed and reasoned arguments.

Politics generally is widely depressing and increasingly polarising now.

SmudgetheClaret wrote:It would be going swimmingly if it wasn't for the same bunch of anti democratic liars doing everything in their power to reverse it ...

Rubbish. Democracy is about expressing an opinion. Parties which lose an election still campaign for the next opportunity. Remainers have every right to make their case and every right to campaign for the opportunity to reverse the Democratic decision made 2 years ago, largely with no idea of how Brexit would actually work.

The fact is that the more people realise we are going to by f***ed the more likley they are to change their minds. And changing minds is the essence of politics.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Dry your eyes, mate.

Dry yours. You lost. You massive idiot.

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Oh, by the way, regarding nildesp’s point about the Irish border. Just because the EU and Anna Soubry (the same thing) say something doesn’t make it so.

We say we are leaving the CU full stop. We say we are not erecting infrastructure at the border, full stop. The GFA is more important than a few unregulated goods smuggled through. Were Ireland (who, despite all impressions, are still a sovereign country, well, a republic, but you know what I mean), to insist on border infrastructure on their side, let them. If these get targeted, their problem, not ours. If bullets start flying, let them. Seriously, when they know we aren’t for moving, a solution would be found pretty darn fast, probably one involving large fines for companies found to be breaking product standards rules.

We’ve been letting the tail (Ireland, a far smaller country) wag the dog. Time to show that the dog has some balls, so to speak.

Deary me, Crosspool.

You post some decent stuff on here at times, but that is just drivel.

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Oh, by the way, regarding nildesp’s point about the Irish border. Just because the EU and Anna Soubry (the same thing) say something doesn’t make it so.

We say we are leaving the CU full stop. We say we are not erecting infrastructure at the border, full stop.

So who do we trade with, and how?
We can't operate under WTO rules without a border, so if we've no agreement with the EU and we can't operate under WTO rules, it's going to need some solution that no one's thought of before in order for us to trade freely.
If it's simple - as you imply - then why has no one in the government, or particularly the DUP, come up with a solution? (You might think that the DUP as leavers would have all the answers.)

Crosspool's one of the most deluded brexiteers on here.

Just because he sounds intelligent, it doesn't mean he is.

KeighleyClaret wrote:Rubbish. Democracy is about expressing an opinion. Parties which lose an election still campaign for the next opportunity. Remainers have every right to make their case and every right to campaign for the opportunity to reverse the Democratic decision made 2 years ago, largely with no idea of how Brexit would actually work.

The fact is that the more people realise we are going to by f***ed the more likley they are to change their minds. And changing minds is the essence of politics.

Following a General election, the winning parties manifesto is put into law and legislation. Where as the losing parties are binned.

Remain lost.

As for changing minds. Most opinon polls show people remain as entrenched in their view. In fact the vast majority just want the government to get on with leaving.

It's just a few hard core anti democracy ceaseless Remoaners who just don't accept losing with some dignity.

UpTheBeehole wrote:Crosspool's one of the most deluded brexiteers on here.

Just because he sounds intelligent, it doesn't mean he is.

Where as you never sound intelligent. However, you're not actually as stupid as you sound.

You couldn't be!

Crosspool has gone all in with a full Ringo.

RingoMcCartney wrote:Following a General election, the winning parties manifesto is put into law and legislation. Where as the losing parties are binned.
.

Not correct at all. Losing parties often - frequently - resurrect the same policy in their next manifesto. If it's the cornerstone of your beliefs you don't just ditch it.
Why do you think we had the referendum?, it was because certain elements of the Tory party stuck by their beliefs. (I don't have a problem with that by the way, except I happen to believe that they were wrong).

ClaretAndJew wrote:How many are on zero hour contracts and still getting benefits? They will be counted as employed.

Exactly. How many 'employed' people in this country don't have 'proper' jobs? The Tories have always been masters at disguising unemployment figures by removing those who, for whatever reason, are not in real full-time employment. Some years ago they did it by 'encouraging' people to sign on sick as they are then not unemployed officially.

And I am a Brexiteer so no agenda.

kentonclaret wrote:The fact remains that just 38 percent of the electorate voted for Brexit and 62 percent didn't.

Wasn't part of Project fear employed by the Leave campaign and Boris Johnson that Turkey was on the verge of Joining the EU and that Britain would be facing a new wave of unwanted immigration.

Somewhat ironic then that Theresa May is seen courting Erdogan trying to tie up lucrative Trade Deals post Brexit. In return Turkey will demand extra visas for it's citizens as will any new trading partners such as India.

48,589,258 people in this country didn't vote to remain so by your logic, it was a landslide

it was such a landslide that the election less than a year later fought on a the hardest of hard Brexits resulted in the complete chaos we have now.

nil_desperandum wrote:Not correct at all. Losing parties often - frequently - resurrect the same policy in their next manifesto. If it's the cornerstone of your beliefs you don't just ditch it.
Why do you think we had the referendum?, it was because certain elements of the Tory party stuck by their beliefs. (I don't have a problem with that by the way, except I happen to believe that they were wrong).

Who said policies can't be resurrected at the next election? (Some quality goalpost shifting there!) I said only the winning parties manifesto is enacted.

So which elements of the losing parties manifestos are enacted into law and legislation? ( unless some were the same as the winning parties manifesto)

"Next manifesto!?"

There won't be an opportunity for Remain to try again. A manifesto that had a single issue , - remaining in the EU lost. Trying to Remain while Leaving is like trying to be half pregnant.

"There will be no 2nd referendums. No second chances. This is it. Final. There will only be one referendum" Prime minister David Cameron, June 2016.

We're leaving. You lost. Do try and accept defeat gracefully.

RingoMcCartney wrote:Who said policies can't be resurrected at the next election? (Some quality goalpost shifting there!) I said only the winning parties manifesto is enacted.
.

To be precise, Ringo, you said that after a General Election the policies of the losing side were "binned". By definition if you've binned something you can't then resurrect it. (Only one person shifting the ground here).

nil_desperandum wrote:So who do we trade with, and how?
We can't operate under WTO rules without a border, so if we've no agreement with the EU and we can't operate under WTO rules, it's going to need some solution that no one's thought of before in order for us to trade freely.
If it's simple - as you imply - then why has no one in the government, or particularly the DUP, come up with a solution? (You might think that the DUP as leavers would have all the answers.)

There is a border. There may be an administrative problem with how we stop smuggling from the Republic of Ireland to Northern Ireland; that's our problem. There may be an administrative problem with smuggling from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland; that's the EU's problem. If we can do it without a hard border, and they can't, it's still their problem.

One thing is certain - we don't need to be in the customs union to have an easy border. Switzerland isn't in a customs union, and they don't have a problem.

nil_desperandum wrote:To be precise, Ringo, you said that after a General Election the policies of the losing side were "binned". By definition if you've binned something you can't then resurrect it. (Only one person shifting the ground here).

You really really are so predictable. Out he comes, once again. Scalpel in hand. Forensically analysing my every word. Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Ok ok. Just for your pedantic majesty. I'll clarify.

Following a General election, only the winning parties manifesto is enacted into law and legislation. The losing parties manifestos are binned (TILL NEXT GENERAL ELECTION. WHEREBY , THEY REALISE SOME OF THE ELEMENTS WERE SO UNPOPULAR THEY BINNED PERMANENTLY. OR SOME ARE RESURRECTED)

Given there won't be another referendum, this was the basis of the one in June 2016 was fought. Your sides single element manifesto is now binned.

I've got a living to make so I'm off now.

Huff n puff all you like. Crawl, ant-like, over my posts as much as you need to. Fill yer boots. But at some point, for your own self respect. Stop attemptimg to rerun the referendum campaign. Accept you lost.

But they have a hard border (by the standards that both us and the EU have agreed won't be seen on the Irish one)

Look, we've been through all this before, but if you keep telling people stuff that isn't true, then i'll keep telling people that you are doing that.

Don't you see that is why we are in so much s**t over this is because people won't tell the truth?

The quicker the Brexiteers tell people the reality, the quicker this will be sorted. Continuing to pretend that what was promised is deliverable is doing no one any favours.

dsr wrote:There is a border. There may be an administrative problem with how we stop smuggling from the Republic of Ireland to Northern Ireland; that's our problem. There may be an administrative problem with smuggling from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland; that's the EU's problem. If we can do it without a hard border, and they can't, it's still their problem.

One thing is certain - we don't need to be in the customs union to have an easy border. Switzerland isn't in a customs union, and they don't have a problem.

" Switzerland is part of the EU’s Schengen area, so there are no passport checks required for entry. For food and almost all tradeable industrial and agricultural goods, Switzerland’s regulations are also fully aligned with those of the EU. Both sides accept the others’ regulations. In reality, the Swiss copy and paste Brussels regulations into their domestic laws, allowing the landlocked state effectively to be a member of the EU single market for goods.

Border infrastructure and customs declarations are necessary, however, because Switzerland is not part of the EU’s customs union or value added tax regime, which are separate from the single market. This difference requires both sides to build and staff a hard border with sometimes significant delays."

https://www.ft.com/content/2d30482c-da7 ... 4b1c09b482

kentonclaret wrote:The fact remains that just 38 percent of the electorate voted for Brexit and 62 percent didn't.

I agree. That is a fact.

It is just as good a fact as the other fact that just 35% of the electorate voted to remain in the EU and 65% didn’t.

The answer of course, to the border, is not an easy answer. It is a hard answer. But we pay these people to deliver hard answers. David Lidington won University Challenge twice. He is meant to be a clever bloke. I fail to believe that a hard answer but one which delivers a Brexit is not possible.

Which leads us to “why”.

That can only be Parliamentary arithmetic. May’s bungled election and the Lords acting like they want to be abolished has given us a heavily pro-Remain Cabinet, let alone government or HoC. The obfuscation which results is behind all of these issues.

This shouldn’t be overly hard. I fly into the EU dozens of times a year, and trade with the EU. Nobody I speak to says it should be hard to get a deal. The only people saying that are politicians or others who listen too much to politicians. The only times at hear it is when I’m sat on my arse at home like today, browsing the net or listening to the BBC. Yes, smuggling is an issue, but there is plenty of smuggling going on within the EU now, drugs and other banned items. It shouldn’t affect a major political decision for a £1 trillion economy.

Just imagine for a moment we had a heavily pro-Brexit Government. Talking tough. I would predict that what the EU and Ire suggest would be massively different to now. A solution would be found. Hence why I favour talking tough.

RingoMcCartney wrote:You really really are so predictable. Out he comes, once again. Scalpel in hand. Forensically analysing my every word. Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. Ok ok. Just for your pedantic majesty. I'll clarify.
.

It really didn't need a scalpel or forensic analysis.
You stated - without any qualification - that the losing side after a General Election "binned" its manifesto policies.
I explained how you were wrong and that they didn't (UKip for the past couple of decades being an obvious example).
You won't let it go.

1Simpleton wrote:Be careful not to show your true colour. Suggesting you would laugh at a dying person rather than help them because they made an unwise choice or went against your advice speaks of having no friends

Or it speaks to just having a dark sense of humour. Anyone who took that seriously is genuinely challenged.