Regarding the so-called benefits of EU membership.
UK maternity leave = 52 weeks (of which 40 can be shared with partner)
EU maternity leave = 14 weeks
The UK also had workplace equality laws long before we joined the EEC/EU, it's a common lie that we are reliant on the EU for these rights.
The EU law is a protection, it is a minimum. In the 80s maternity leave was based per company and based on length of service.
In 1988 a European Commission report demonstrated the extent to which Britain lagged behind its contemporaries in employment law. The only state not to provide full statutory maternity leave, Britain had blocked the adoption of a draft directive setting out minimum standards on parental leave.
Yes, there were rights before the EU but what the EU directives do is set a minimum. Any country can go further if they wish but have to follow the directive as a minimum standard. Tell me how that is a bad thing?
Surely the withdraw from E.U. is more important than someones maternity leave.Still say we won't leave the E,U,And the odds are or were
4.15387486828e34 - 1 which I stand to be corrected is 32to the power of 32 or no chance
We must sack all the politicians who have overruled or are voting against the referendum vote of the people.
"Surely the withdraw from E.U. is more important than someones maternity leave."
First, that was one example picked out by burneside from a very small list of benefits of being in the EU that responded to. It isn't a case of one or the other. You committed both the strawman and false dichotomy logical fallacies in one!
Second, we were told nothing would change but now you are happy for people to lose certain rights? (not that I believe anyone would lose that particular right)
If you sack the politicians who want a peoples vote or want to remain then surely all those that lied and colluded with cambridge analytica and their satellite companies and overspent by more than 1/2 million and blatantly lied should be sacked, tried for fraud and the referendum deemed undemocratic.
Therefore the only fair and democratic thing to do is re-run the referendum as a binding vote and therefore falls under rules that didn't apply to the unbinding referendum. We can then see if this time the leave campaign could stick to the rules. That is democracy, not this clusterf**k shambles that we have been left with.
Just to give a bit of substance to an earlier comment which for me is a real concern regarding being in the EU and not on a level playing field. The funding received in the UK for joint projects with other EU members does not end up with everyone getting an equal share of the pie. For example you have a french citizen and a british citizen both working on the same project both spending a day out on the field doing whatever the project was for, they both have the local supermarket sandwich deal for lunch at say £3 the french local authority worker does their claim and claims £16(euro equivalent) because their local authority allows them to claim to a maximum of £16 even if they haven't spent that much, the british local authority worker claims £3 as they can only claim what they spent. Fundamentally this seems very wrong to me, less of the grant ends up being spent on it's purpose and other countries get more. It would be simple really that the french local authority should have subsidised it if that was their rules not a case of getting more of the pie. Just a small example of the type of issue that grates with many, just got greedy and didn't take the hint, of course they want us to stay in! Who wouldn't want someone in who pays in more and takes out less than everyone else! (not picking on my french colleagues, there are many other countries involved just giving an example)
I love how the Remoaners accuse the Leave campaign of overspending and all other kinds of skullduggery, but conveniently forget the £9 million that Cameron spent on sending a leaflet to every home in the country imploring us to vote remain, and by some shenanigans he managed to avoid the spending limits imposed on the Remain campaign. Don't lecture me about fair rules, Remoaners make me vomit.
To be honest the Leave campaign didn't overspend by that much and I don't believe that overspend had anything to do with the way the referendum went. £9 million on a leaflet that was a pretty awful promotion for remaining was a waste of money. Both amounts are a pittance compared with how much the Brexit process has cost so far!
What did make a difference because it came up in discussions several times before the referendum was the £350 million to spend on the NHS on the side of a bus. That was far the biggest Iie that made a difference I believe. If people weren't entirely on board with the immigration lies then the NHS lie tipped them over. The lies should be sanctioned not the small overspend.
@Dil the EU funding has to be agreed by ALL member states after being discussed by the EU council and EU parliament. Some countries pay in more and receive less in funding based on a number of factors. The UK is the 4th biggest contributor to the EU budget. Do you know why? Because we have 4th biggest GNI of the EU countries. Germany pays almost double what we do, France 2nd pay over 7% more than us and Italy just over 3% more than us.
This is before the UK's rebate is calculated.
You can't have a system where everyone pays in and takes out more. That isn't possible.
The EU will lose around 8-10% of its budget if the UK leaves. A fair chunk but it will easily cope and will probably make that up by competing with the UK on various deals.
@S read it again, it's how it's distributed I am refering to and the various nuances that certain countries have which should not be able to be applied when splitting funding. I assume the area you work in doesn't come across the same issues as my place of work does on a daily basis!
For those remainers who say the spin on leaving was a total lie. well when Sir Edward Heath who told an even bigger sell
out that our involvement into the Common Market would be a market place no-more etc etc.
The whole project was built on sand and lies by a liar.Should be stripped of his Knighthood. Should stop now for the sake
of those of a very sensitive PC disposition.
Another beauty from Big Brother EU.
What I'd like to see them do, is crash test a car off the white cliffs of Dover with Juncker, Tusk and the rest of the dummies on board.
The EU parliament yesterday also passed the Copyright Directive, which has widely been described as “ending the Internet as we know it”. As this article explains, it will create two Internets; a heavily censored one in the EU and a free Internet in the rest of the world.
Did the people who voted Remain almost three years ago believe they were only voting for the EU as it stood in 2016? As we have seen from just this week, the EU never stands still. We know an EU army is just around the corner, if we end up not leaving, I wonder if all the young people who voted Remain will be quite so happy if they get conscripted into the new army.
Why do you think it is ok for someone to share copyright material? It is illegal now. All the EU directive says is that services like YouTube have to be active in ensuring the copyright is upheld and permission granted for its use.
If I upload a video with Ed Sheeran's music as background music then YouTube will be liable if they remove the video or seek permission. This is making services providers responsible.
Copyrights are there for a reason.
And for that reason the UK already has its own copyright laws, as do other EU member states. The EU just cannot help itself interfering, it's like the "right to be forgotten" directive which means we in Europe now see censored versions of Internet search results, all because a Spanish bankrupt didn't want people knowing his history.
Oh no, boo hoo... I won't be allowed to speed and put innocent lives at risk!! Damn you EU!!
You just beat me to it Scapegoat!!
I was just coming on here to ask the following with regard to these new motoring regulations.
To those of you who object to them is it because;
a) they have come from the EU?
b) that you don't see why driving should be made safer?
c) both of the above ?
Burnside, please do vote UKIP. The party seems to be made for you
So let's get this straight, you are against the EU but happy for private companies to hold data about you forever?
Private companies will hold data on people, whether they (or the EU) like it or not. The Internet search results are only censored in EU member states, use a VPN service and you get the full uncensored results. Though, true to form, the EU would like the right to be forgotten extended worldwide, it thinks its jurisdiction should apply globally. Brussels is off its rocker.
You should be PM, burnside. You have the same ability to never answer a direct question.
I imagine every adult in the country has data held on them by a great many organisations. It doesn't bother me one jot, why does it bother you?
It's like a carry on film, the Remainiac MPs could've even get their fake voting right.
A new level of sad attained.
Just to point out that whilst none of the alternative Brexit motions were carried in the indicative vote, the motion that did garner the most Ayes was the one for a confirmatory referendum.
Not so long ago that idea was totally dismissed by many MPs.
OK, so there are 295 MPs willing to stand up for democracy.
Surely the only MPs that didn't stand up for democracy are those that abstained. They should have voted how they believed their constituents would like them to vote.
Remoaners have spent the last three years trying to overturn the democratic decision made to leave the EU, and yet they claim to be democratic. Forum rules prevent me from saying exactly what I think about these people.
I'm only ever polite in my posts (as I am on all social media) and stick to facts (remember what those are?) even though the childish use of "Remoaners" constantly really gets on my nerves. Once you have to start with the ad hominem attacks then you have failed.
The facts are that Remoaners inside and outside of parliament have pulled every trick in the book to overturn the referendum result. How many court actions have there been to stop Brexit? There's been so many that I have lost count. Some people even went to the Irish courts to try to get the Irish government to intervene to stop Brexit. We've also had the nauseating spectacle of British politicans going to Brussels to plead with the EU to be tough and uncompromising, in order to thwart any deal in the hope we would then remain in the EU. Those people are absolute traitors to this country.
Remoaners might eventually get their way and be successful in stopping Brexit, but the resulting shitstorm will tear the country apart for years to come.
Well this is the whole problem, people who can't accept the democratic will of the people.
3 years wasted by democracy deniers.
I thought the Soviet Union was gone, but communism is still holding us back.
"How many court actions have there been to stop Brexit? There's been so many that I have lost count." How many? I don't remember one.
Will the shitstorm being the same as the walk to leave?
Here are a just few I found instantly on Google. Whilst some of these actions are cloaked as procedural challenges, the real reason for the action is abundantly clear; stop Brexit at all costs.
I knew the Gina Miller would be one you bought up :-D
First 2 are about the same thing, the Gina Miller case which was "submitted that the government could not trigger Article 50 and begin the withdrawal process without first giving parliament a free vote on the issue". That was the case not to stop Brexit although she was hoping parliament would but that wasn't what the court case was about.
3rd link is from 2016 of Jolyon Maugham attempt to raise funds to take the case to court the same as the Gina Miller case but nothing came of it, nothing went to court.
4th link is about Gina Miller's case again from 2016.
5th is a hearing by a judge ought by ex-pats saying the referendum wasn't valid because the leave campaigns had been found guilty of overspending. I'll give up this one is to stop Brexit.
So that is 1, as I'm feeling generous I'll give you the Miller one too so 2.
We have had a three year war of attrition to try to overturn Brexit. Why don't you just admit that Remoaners had no intention of accepting the referendum result from the moment it was announced? Do you think if Remain had won that we would have argued for three years to try to accommodate the losing side? Like hell we would. Future elections are going to be an eye-opener for the political establishment.
According to Farage leavers would have fought it.
"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."
So because of something Farage said you are using that as an excuse for trying to overturn the result? Campaign all you like to re-enter the EU, but if democracy is to be served the referendum result has to be enacted.
No, I was answering your question "Do you think if Remain had won that we would have argued for three years to try to accommodate the losing side?" and providing evidence why I think there would have been a fight from the leavers.
If Remain had won that would have been it, we would stay in the EU. Leavers would have no doubt continued arguing the case to quit the EU, but parliament certainly would not have spent three years trying to accommodate the losing side. Do you seriously think we would have only half-remained because it was a close result?
You are right we would have remained but the pressure to have another referendum because the vote was 52-48 and non-binding would have been on the PM and government constantly.
Here we go, we've all been looking forward to this for ages.
Who's got a street party celebrating our FREEDOM from communism?
Oh, hang on a minute. I forgot, the remainiacs have ruinned it for us all.
Then there are those who, conversely, believe the EU to be a bastion of neo-liberalism.
Rather be a Remaniac than a Brexidiot lol I have my flag ready for tomorrows National Feck Brexit Day
@Lynne to be fair, the closest vote was "Customs Union" - 8, compared to 27 in the confirmatory vote. One should look at the whole picture, and not cherry pick a la Anna Soubry. By the way, interesting to see that she is against a General Election bearing in mind that her constituency voted Leave, and would then most likely lose her seat.
@Vicks - agree about the closest vote. It wasn't deliberate cherry picking on my part rather that because of the antagonism towards a 2nd referendum/confirmatory vote it was that issue that was to the forefront of my mind and was notable because of the number of votes (the most) the idea received when put to MPs.
So........how about a confirmatory vote on there being a UK wide customs union with the EU?
Indicative Vote result (top two outcomes)
Confirmatory Referendum - 268 votes for: 295 votes against. Defeated by 27
Customs Union - 264 votes for: 272 votes against. Defeated by 8
Re: General Election - if we can have (another) a General Election when the last one was less than two years ago, why can't we have another referendum given that the last one was held nearly three years ago?
There are 650 MPs. That means only 563 and 536 voted, I think that's disgraceful. When they keep going on about democracy and they can't even be bothered to vote. Have I missed something? Did that many MPs really not vote?
I forgot about Sinn Fein and the speaker and his deputies who don't vote, that means there should 639 voting MPs
I see the breakaway group of TIGs have this morning become an official political party called Change UK. I wonder in which constituency Soubry thinks she has any chance at all of winning a seat in parliament.
@Lynne I take your point, however I do not think that you should make that comparison with a General Election. A GE is something that happens at least every 5 years, the EU Referendum was supposed to be a "one-off" (or so we were promised!!).
I'm hoping May is defeated again but I think she will somehow scrape this through.
@Vicks - well I'd bet my last Euro that had the result been the otherway around that Leave supporters would be pushing for another referendum.
And we'd likely to be told to eff off, wait 40 years like we had to after 1975, but because Remain lost the government is bending over backwards to try to bend the result to placate them. But we do have a Remain government and a Remain parliament so it's no wonder the decision made by the people is being trashed.
On a 48/52 outcome I doubt very much that the 48ers would have been ignored for too long.*
(Be interesting to see which hard line Brexit MPs suddenly lose their oh so principled objections to supporting May's deal when it comes to the vote in the HoC this afternoon).
*The 1975 referendum outcome was 67.23% yes; 32. 77% No
Quite a bit different from the much closer 48/52 outcome of June 2016.
I would remind you that the '75 referendum occured when we had been in the EEC for only two years, nothing much had happened by then, I don't think people thought membership had affected them much at all. Of course the EEC then morphed into the EU with myriad game-changing treaties, such as Maastricht and Lisbon, being introduced. Not once were we given a chance to vote on these treaties, Gordon Brown famously signed the Lisbon treaty almost in secret, like it was something to be ashamed of. The huge drop in the Yes vote since 1975 reflects public awareness of how much sovereignty politicians have given away without so much as a by your leave.
So if the 1975 referendum was so completely different in oh so many ways then claims by Leavers that the 2016 referendum was the second referendum are invalid. Two entirely different sets of circumstances.
The 2016 referendum was the first one concerning our membership of the EU. The outcome was a close run thing. So close that arch Brexiter, N. Farage, anticipated that a 48/52 outcome would result in pressure for a second referendum.
Was the man wrong? Nope.
I can't speak for Farage, but I know I had to wait 40 years to vote again on the issue. Let's enact the Leave result and then after a suitable period (40 years?), we can evaluate if it has been a success.
"Not once were we given a chance to vote on these treaties" correct but you voted for representation in the parliaments in the form of MEPs and MPs.
This should never have been given to the public to decide on. Too big an issue and far too nuanced for the majority of the public. If you wanted to leave then put a leave party in Government, that's how it should have worked.
French and Dutch voters were given a say on the Lisbon Constitution, but after both electorates rejected the proposed constitution it was rewritten as treaty, and in a way that bypassed any legal requirement for referendums in member states.
You say us plebs are way too thick to have a vote on such complex issues, but after witnessing the shitshow in parliament for the last three years I would say MPs are no better than the general public. In 2017 both main parties were elected on a manifesto of enacting the result of the referendum, so we did put a government in office to do just that, and both the government and opposition have failed to live up to their manifesto. I look forward to the next general election to see huge swathes of establishment MPs thrown onto the dole queue.
I didn't call anyone thick. People don't want to spend or have the time to learn. Much easy to be fed the "information" by their biased resources.
The 2 main party's hands were tied by the idiot Cameron at the last GE.
Order, order. Calm yourselves.
Leave on the 12th, with no deal.
It's not a prediction.
It's just the way it's going to be.
The EU is now saying a WTO Brexit on April 12th is likely. Job done.
This thread is as fascinating as the clowns in parliament. If,if,if. I think that the 27 are more worried now than they have ever been even though things have not yet come to a conclusion. Would any of you contributing to this site vote ever again for some idiot to run your life. Don'task me because I have never voted in my life, and you can see why.
What is sickening me today is MPs from across parliament coming out to defend Grieve after he lost his local party's confidence vote. This man went against the manifesto he was elected on and colluded with Speaker Bercow to do his best to wreck Brexit. He is a traitor to the electorate, and I sincerely hope there are many more MPs today who are feeling somewhat worried about their political future.
@Lynne, we can argue about this for ever, but another referendum would simply cause so much more division and conflict, whichever way it goes. I believe that we have played our cards, rolled the dice and have to make the most of the result, however appalling you may feel it is.
@Vicks as far as I am concerned it is Leave supporters and Leave MPs who will have to make the most of the result. They wanted it. They can sort it out. That is of course that now having sown this havoc they don't then disappear from active service (anyone seen Dominic Cummings recently?).
And I doubt very much if the likes of Farage would have stopped arguing for a second referendum if the result had been 52/48 to Remain even if it would cause more division and conflict.
Hate crime is up in the last 3 years. That's not all down to Brexit but it is worrying. MPs (and others) stirred hate of people coming here for a better life from war-torn countries. A situation where most of the people spouting their rubbish would be the first to run from if they had the money and could. These are not terrorists, these are normal people, most had very well paid jobs and were lucky enough to be able to flee. They are now working jobs that the majority in this country won't do.
This comedy on Channel4 https://www.channel4.com/programmes/home is so well written and episode 4 has some very poignant moments. I suspect this will be dismissed by the usual suspects on here as "leftist" or something about "it's channel 4"
I f***ing hate racism and discrimination of any kind. If we need another GE and another referendum then we should have it and not be afraid that it will divide the country. We are already divided. We have forgotten we aren't "just a little island". We should be inclusive. We are separating ourselves from the rest of Europe. We should be working closely with everyone to make this world a little less shitty. Yes, this could happen out of Europe but less likely we would have an influence out as in.
We need to stop looking to career politicians for guidance, elect better politicians, seek out the facts, look at our own biases, look at the biases of the people we do listen to, look at the biases of resources we are reading, be sceptical, think more critically. Unfortunately, that won't happen but I can't only hope.
I don't believe a new referendum is going to happen, unfortunately. Instead, we will continue to bury our head in the sand shouting Brexit means Brexit!
I will skip any programme made by Channel 4, it is a bastion of the left. Why, only on Friday we had its senior news anchor being rather racist about white people.
Channel 4’s new anchor Jon Snow has been heavily criticised after he claimed he’d “never seen so many white people” as he reported from the Brexit march. The 71-year-old broadcaster was reporting for Channel 4 News live from Parliament Square on Friday evening about the demonstration. Speaking to camera, he said: “We’ve just got these pictures in which were taken nearby. “Police are now wearing riot gear. Police dogs are patrolling. The mood has changed. We cannot confirm whether any arrests have been made.
“It has been the most extraordinary day. A day which has seen… I’ve never seen so many white people in one place.
"I will skip any programme made by Channel 4, it is a bastion of the left." I called it right
"senior news anchor being rather racist about white people" You can't be racist as a white to a white person. You have to be prejudiced based on the belief your race is superior.
His observation wasn't entirely wrong, his underlying reason for saying that may have been?
In June 2017 Snow allegedly yelled "F*ck the Tories" while attending the almost all-white Glastonbury festival, something he later said "he has no recollection of saying". And this man is a newsreader for a supposedly impartial news programme on Channel 4.
@Lynne I really do not give a fig about what Nigel Farage might have done, it is the electorate's decision that matters.
To nobody's surprise at all Bercow would only allow four Remain amendments to be voted on in parliament tonight, happily they were all defeated and another so-called Tory has thrown his dummy out of the pram and resigned from the party. Brexit really is clearing out all the phonies.
I still don't understand why not all MPs voted in these important votes. 572 is the most that voted. There are 650 MPs (?). I understand the 7 Sinn Fein MPs and 4 others don't (speaker 3 assistants) but where are the others? Someone tell me if I am missing something!
This has now turned out to be a political game as if it wasn't recognised before. The party that is causing the most turmoil over brexit are the tories. There are too many who have other vested interests and they will do there utmost to protect it.
My prophecy of not leaving the E.U. is to my dismay coming true. As much I have little time for Jeremy Corbin even he must know
Teresa Mays offer to Share talks is a trap to blame Labour for her governments total cock up.
As Oliver Cromwell did Disolve this Parliament. Now!
The Tories are done for now, in the three years since the Brexit vote I have never witnessed social media in such a meltdown as it is tonight, and it's mostly Tories turning on May. She will go down in history as the leader who destroyed the Conservative party.
If the tories are dead, who would you vote for at another general election? There does not appear to be alot of choice. If people would really think about it, the deal that T May has placed on the table is the best she could get. It was never going to be a one-sided affair, the choices she had to make doesn't fit all and it never would. It has never been done before.
I think Tory will either not vote in the next GE or will vote Change UK. Brexit party if still around will get votes (as they are new UKIP) but no MPs. The number of independents will increase too.
Most likely would be a hung parliament.
Cameron destroyed the Tories by promising they would follow through on the referendum result. They should have used the result to improve the EU or improve the deal we get or continue discussions on the future relationship including leaving.
I will probably go back to voting Liberal rather than Labour as we need to get Ann Marie Morris out and Liberals probably have the best chance.
Why would Brexit supporting Tories vote for Change UK? That particular group would like to halt Brexit completely. It's the Brexit Party or similar for me. The result of the Newport parliamentary by-election on Thursday will be interesting, as will be the local elections next month.
Not all Tories are Brexit supporters and those who aren't will be disillusioned by the current Tory government and the mess they have made.
Less than a week to go until next week’s emergency EU Council summit - when Theresa May must, must, must present a new Brexit plan if she wants to avoid no-deal - and we still appear no closer to knowing what on Earth is going to happen.
Government and Labour negotiators will take part in a day of “intensive” talks later as they try to agree a joint-position which can then be presented to MPs for a vote, most likely to be next Monday. But the signs are not good that a breakthrough is imminent.
Speaking after two hours of initial talks with the PM yesterday, Jeremy Corbyn said “there hasn’t been as much change as expected” in her stance. Where have we heard that before?
The Labour leader is under massive pressure himself, of course. Instinctively opposed to backing a second referendum in all circumstances, many of his Shadow Cabinet, the majority of his party’s members and now Unison all insist it’s the only way forward. But as we reveal this morning, Labour chairman Ian Lavery has warned Corbyn that the party “could be finished” if he ends up jumping that way.
Meanwhile, the DUP - who once upon a time were close allies of the Prime Minister - are now showing more than a bit of leg to the customs union crowd. Cabinet big-hitters Philip Hammond and Geoffrey Cox have also admitted it may be the only way to break the impasse. The only snag for the PM is that doing so would most likely cause a historic split in the Tory Party.
If all that wasn’t bad enough, MPs last night passed an emergency law by the slimmest of margins to force May to seek an Article 50 extension if the UK is heading for a no-deal Brexit. What. A. Mess.
The law passed last night by one vote was gerrymandered through parliament by a partisan Speaker who has defied parliamentary convention numerous times in his quest to wreck Brexit. It was also aided by an ex-jailbird MP who was released on licence in February and wears a curfew tag. This is the appalling state of democracy in the UK today.
It's still a majority even if a slim one.
The referendum majority was very much larger, though apparently that doesn't count because it wasn't big enough. Remoaners are a bunch of hypocrites.
Burneside I was being deliberately obtuse. I think this shows Brexiteers being hypocrites.
Well done for resorting to using a racist term.
lol It's no more racist than Remoaner. It's an insult yes but racist, no
You can only apply the term "gammon" to white people, ergo it is racist.
It is not because it applies to a series of beliefs, very much the same as "Remoaners". So if you agree that remoaners is racist and stop using it I will do likewise
Are you even aware how the racist term originated? It would appear not.
Don't patronise me, you obviously have no idea! If you are black, brown or any other "tinge" with the ideology of a Gammon, then I will call you a Gammon! So stop projecting your hateful crap onto me and take a long hard look in a mirror!!
As I thought, you don't have a clue.
Tell me how Remoaner is different from Gammon?
Aspartame has no link to cancer by the way. That claim hasn't been proven. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/aspartame.html
Gammon is not racist. It is an insult but not racist!
Gammon is an insult aimed at white people, of course it is racist.