[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by jaxie

You should try to be more optimistic TS.

If you don't like the Tory government let Labour back into Scotland. They don't have much hope without any kind of Scottish vote.

Quite frankly Scotland is fine with the SNP,they would never support a Conservative led govt.

England now,particularly the far South,dictates the government of the UK and down there support for the Cons and all their rotten hardline policies gets the strongest support.
Boundary changes coming in will in effect remove more than twice as many seats from Labour,than it will Conservative ones.

What the UK needs is PR for general elections otherwise the prospect is Conservative led govt for the foreseeable future now.
However the one and only party that will never look at PR seriously is the Conservative party.
That may be good for the far South of England only but a bleak outlook for all the rest of the UK.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Quite frankly Scotland is fine with the SNP,they would never support a Conservative led govt.

England now,particularly the far South,dictates the government of the UK and down there support for the Cons and all their rotten hardline policies gets the strongest support.
Boundary changes coming in will in effect remove more than twice as many seats from Labour,than it will Conservative ones.

What the UK needs is PR for general elections otherwise the prospect is Conservative led govt for the foreseeable future now.
However the one and only party that will never look at PR seriously is the Conservative party.
That may be good for the far South of England only but a bleak outlook for all the rest of the UK.

I'm sure if Labour could get their act together and find a decent leader it would help. New Labour managed to win seats from the Tories down south.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I'm sure if Labour could get their act together and find a decent leader it would help. New Labour managed to win seats from the Tories down south.

Times have changed,2 sets of boundary changes since the 2005 election that cut Labour seats more than others.

Hard to see from me now.
Lib Dems coming back in the far South could help remove the Cons overall majority but then any breakthrough for UKIP too elsewhere would balance that out.
UKIP in the end would likely only prop up a Conservative led govt.

I see no prospect for anything other than near one party govt by the Conservatives with a Labour opposition for ages without PR now.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Times have changed,2 sets of boundary changes since the 2005 election that cut Labour seats more than others.

Hard to see from me now.
Lib Dems coming back in the far South could help remove the Cons overall majority but then any breakthrough for UKIP too elsewhere would balance that out.
UKIP in the end would likely only prop up a Conservative led govt.

I see no prospect for anything other than near one party govt by the Conservatives with a Labour opposition for ages without PR now.

I think that UKIP have had their day now. I see them falling back into relative obscurity.

[joeysteele]

For the whole of the UK,I hope you are right jaxie.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

It's already been stated in Parliament that workers rights won't be affected.

And that laws aren't going to change.

Wrong, they filibustered the decision out of the order of business last week.

And laws will have to change as the current protections are EU laws not UK, if they were so determined to put to rest the worries that workers rights and protections are safe why not enshrine them now?

Ms Onn blasted the Tories who apparently talked-out her bill, saying they had shown "their true colours" in refusing to sign-up to protections in the workplace.

"My bill would go no further than what Theresa May and David Davis promised last year – to ensure that the rights currently afforded to British workers are maintained after Brexit," said the Labour MP.

"By talking out the bill, the Tories have shown their true colours. They say that maternity pay, parental leave, and paid leave are all safe in their hands.

"But when given the opportunity to put their money where their mouths are, they instead blocked the protection of those rights in UK law, and have let down working people."


Read more at http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/bi...rzEclXMzhjo.99

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I saw the ballot paper the same as everyone else. It said leave or remain. It didn't say leave a bit, or leave but keep the single market or leave and only pay tarrifs on non cheddar cheese. Business may be 'reeling' but I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person in the UK who can read.

Right, well then you got what you wanted clearly.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Isn't that rather the point of Parliament to hold the government accountable if they break their word. Isn't that what everyone keeps saying when they want Parliament to micro manage Brexit.

The fact is this country has a good record on workers rights and we usually go further than the basic guidelines laid out by the EU. Apart from scare mongering and conspiracy theories what do you base your scepticism on?

Do you have any proof of this?

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Do you have any proof of this?

It was mentioned in parliament yesterday but I'm sure you can look it up.

I'll help you though, because I'm kind and giving. I'm sure you'll pick out anything negative in the article and ignore the rest. https://www.theguardian.com/careers/...loyment-rights

"There are many areas of UK employment law that do not derive from Europe, and therefore would not be affected by a Brexit. These include unfair dismissal protection, the national minimum wage, and unlawful deductions of pay. Furthermore, laws promoting equal pay and banning race discrimination both pre-date the UK’s membership of the EU. In some cases, the UK has even enhanced the rights given to workers which goes beyond what was required by European directives. For example, the right to shared parental leave, and to request flexible working, are domestic in origin.

Finally, the UK courts and tribunals are already bound by rulings from the European court of justice on applicable EU law. This court’s decisions will continue to be binding unless a judge has good reason to depart from them following a Brexit, or they are overridden by an act of parliament."

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Right, well then you got what you wanted clearly.

Without any regret.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Wrong, they filibustered the decision out of the order of business last week.

And laws will have to change as the current protections are EU laws not UK, if they were so determined to put to rest the worries that workers rights and protections are safe why not enshrine them now?

Ms Onn blasted the Tories who apparently talked-out her bill, saying they had shown "their true colours" in refusing to sign-up to protections in the workplace.

"My bill would go no further than what Theresa May and David Davis promised last year – to ensure that the rights currently afforded to British workers are maintained after Brexit," said the Labour MP.

"By talking out the bill, the Tories have shown their true colours. They say that maternity pay, parental leave, and paid leave are all safe in their hands.

"But when given the opportunity to put their money where their mouths are, they instead blocked the protection of those rights in UK law, and have let down working people."


Read more at http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/bi...rzEclXMzhjo.99

Not wrong. It was in David Davis speech to parliament yesterday, read the transcript. He said workers rights won't change.

I don't know where you get the idea from that all rights laws will vanish once we leave the EU. FYI the first workers rights laws followed the Black Death in this country there was a Statute of Labourers in 1351!

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

It was mentioned in parliament yesterday but I'm sure you can look it up.

I'll help you though, because I'm kind and giving. I'm sure you'll pick out anything negative in the article and ignore the rest. https://www.theguardian.com/careers/...loyment-rights

"There are many areas of UK employment law that do not derive from Europe, and therefore would not be affected by a Brexit. These include unfair dismissal protection, the national minimum wage, and unlawful deductions of pay. Furthermore, laws promoting equal pay and banning race discrimination both pre-date the UK’s membership of the EU. In some cases, the UK has even enhanced the rights given to workers which goes beyond what was required by European directives. For example, the right to shared parental leave, and to request flexible working, are domestic in origin.

Finally, the UK courts and tribunals are already bound by rulings from the European court of justice on applicable EU law. This court’s decisions will continue to be binding unless a judge has good reason to depart from them following a Brexit, or they are overridden by an act of parliament."

How about working times directives?...

Brexit means brexit remember? there will be no EU law, everything will be rewritten.

Let's look at Reece Mogg for how he envisages working conditions in the future,....

'Jacob Rees-Mogg said regulations that were “good enough for India” could be good enough for the UK – arguing that the UK could go “a very long way” to rolling back high EU standards.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7459336.html

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Not wrong. It was in David Davis speech to parliament yesterday, read the transcript. He said workers rights won't change.

I don't know where you get the idea from that all rights laws will vanish once we leave the EU. FYI the first workers rights laws followed the Black Death in this country there was a Statute of Labourers in 1351!

'Ministers have declined to back a Labour bill that would enshrine workers' rights in to EU law, though Theresa May has said the rules protecting workers will be safe'

I know what they have said...But what they say and what they follow through with are two very different things.

I am aware that there were laws prior to the EU protections for the rights of workers, that is not being disputed at all, needless to say those laws did not go far enough and were repealed.

What evidence do we have that the govt will protect jobs?.....None.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7459336.html

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

'Ministers have declined to back a Labour bill that would enshrine workers' rights in to EU law, though Theresa May has said the rules protecting workers will be safe'

I know what they have said...But what they say and what they follow through with are two very different things.

I am aware that there were laws prior to the EU protections for the rights of workers, that is not being disputed at all, needless to say those laws did not go far enough and were repealed.

What evidence do we have that the govt will protect jobs?.....None.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7459336.html

So what? Maybe there will be another bill, maybe a bill isn't necessary. They put bills through parliament often that don't make it. It's actually not relevant to the conversation.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

So what? Maybe there will be another bill, maybe a bill isn't necessary. They put bills through parliament often that don't make it. It's actually not relevant to the conversation.

A bill will be necessary :/ I don't think you understand the relevance Jaxie. Not sure how you don't consider it relevant?
If you want out out then we need assurances that civil protections are retained surely.... Is this too forward thinking?

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How about working times directives?...

Brexit means brexit remember? there will be no EU law, everything will be rewritten.

Let's look at Reece Mogg for how he envisages working conditions in the future,....

'Jacob Rees-Mogg said regulations that were “good enough for India” could be good enough for the UK – arguing that the UK could go “a very long way” to rolling back high EU standards.'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7459336.html

The government have already said that most law will go into UK law and remain. Anything else we'll just have to wait and see. You are just speculating. Reece Mogg isn't the government or Brexit.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

The government have already said that most law will go into UK law and remain. Anything else we'll just have to wait and see. You are just speculating. Reece Mogg isn't the government or Brexit.

Again they had the chance to act on that last friday and they chose not to, the link you posted from may last year before the referendum would appear to be a load of tosh wouldn't it?

So because rees moggs comments directly relate to my fears and those of millions of workers across the UK they are not to be relied upon?
:/

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Again they had the chance to act on that last friday and they chose not to, the link you posted from may last year before the referendum would appear to be a load of tosh wouldn't it?

So because rees moggs comments directly relate to my fears and those of millions of workers across the UK they are not to be relied upon?
:/

Perhaps it wasn't the appropriate time for that bill. You'd have to ask them their reasons, I can't speak for them.

Boris Johnson comments often, do all of his comments affect our laws? Politicians do give personal views, that doesn't make them government policy.

Rights laws from prior to the EU weren't all repealed.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Perhaps it wasn't the appropriate time for that bill. You'd have to ask them their reasons, I can't speak for them.

Boris Johnson comments often, do all of his comments affect our laws? Politicians do give personal views, that doesn't make them government policy.

Rights laws from prior to the EU weren't all repealed.

Wasn't the appropriate time?.... it was 3rd in the order of business and yet it was talked out of time as a discussion on digital radio and the impact of the archers was filibustered into 4hrs.

Can you give me one instance of something that is of benefit to the environmental or civil protections that predated EU law?

Instead of constantly shrugging provide me with something to substantiate what you claim perhaps?

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Wasn't the appropriate time?.... it was 3rd in the order of business and yet it was talked out of time as a discussion on digital radio and the impact of the archers was filibustered into 4hrs.

Can you give me one instance of something that is of benefit to the environmental or civil protections that predated EU law?

Instead of constantly shrugging provide me with something to substantiate what you claim perhaps?

Why yes I already quoted you an article which told you about protecting and laws that predated the EU.

I like the shrug emoticon, it amuses me and I shall use it whenever I choose. I give you information all the time that you ignore because it doesn't fit your anti UK agenda.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Why yes I already quoted you an article which told you about protecting and laws that predated the EU.

I like the shrug emoticon, it amuses me and I shall use it whenever I choose. I give you information all the time that you ignore because it doesn't fit your anti UK agenda.

I saw the article you posted, it does suggest there were some provisions however we can't say that the protections we had will come back in force, nothing will just click back as it was prior to joining the EU.

There is no point discussing this with you further your rude comment that I am 'anti UK' for daring to question areas of brexit I am concerned about is unnecessary.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I saw the article you posted, it does suggest there were some provisions however we can't say that the protections we had will come back in force, nothing will just click back as it was prior to joining the EU.

There is no point discussing this with you further your rude comment that I am 'anti UK' for daring to question areas of brexit I am concerned about is unnecessary.

Tbh maybe you now have some understanding of how offensive many find it being accused of being a 'racist' or a 'bigot' for daring to question mass immigration.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Tbh maybe you now have some understanding of how offensive many find it being accused of being a 'racist' or a 'bigot' for daring to question mass immigration.

exactly it's vile slander

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I saw the article you posted, it does suggest there were some provisions however we can't say that the protections we had will come back in force, nothing will just click back as it was prior to joining the EU.

There is no point discussing this with you further your rude comment that I am 'anti UK' for daring to question areas of brexit I am concerned about is unnecessary.

You can take what I said as being rude if you like. But you are misquoting me slightly.

Were we discussing? I thought you were dismissing the information I passed on and calling me wrong for passing it on as if it were an opinion or something I made up.

As to the article those protections have been in force all the time, before the EU, during etc, they didn't go anywhere. The article also stated this country went further on more recent EU directives on workers rights than was required. You seem to believe all the laws and rights we had before the EU were repealed or went up on a puff of smoke during the time we have been a member and that we have had no part in encouraging or supporting any of the laws on this subject while in the EU. Instead you cling to one bill that didn't get its time in Parliament as absolute proof that the government plans to do workers wrong. The people of this country aren't stupid and do have a voice. The government are not a dictatorship.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by jaxie

You can take what I said as being rude if you like. But you are misquoting me slightly.

Were we discussing? I thought you were dismissing the information I passed on and calling me wrong for passing it on as if it were an opinion or something I made up.

As to the article those protections have been in force all the time, before the EU, during etc, they didn't go anywhere. The article also stated this country went further on more recent EU directives on workers rights than was required. You seem to believe all the laws and rights we had before the EU were repealed or went up on a puff of smoke during the time we have been a member and that we have had no part in encouraging or supporting any of the laws on this subject while in the EU. Instead you cling to one bill that didn't get its time in Parliament as absolute proof that the government plans to do workers wrong. The people of this country aren't stupid and do have a voice. The government are not a dictatorship.

I agree. Workers' rights are important to most as most are workers. People would not vote for something en mass if they believed they would lose their rights.

Britain is not and never will be a dictatorship as long as we stand up for ourselves and defend our corner.