Bercow going..............

[said]

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that when the EU concludes trade negotiations with non-EU countries, it has to be passed by all EU member country's individual parliaments.

The Canada-EU agreement (CETA) was held up for quite some time because Wallonia wouldn't approve it. For a while it was thought that Wallonia's decision would kill the deal, a deal that was 7 years in the making!

Right! But there is now a problem with this idea! World wide there are a number of Trade Blocs which have been introduced. Each serving its own bloc of countries. When one bloc wishes to trade with one of those countries - each of the countries in individual blocs must consort with one another and agree before a trade deal can be reached. Even when this has been established, which is after many years - World Trade has moved on and costs for any item may have changed or natural disasters may have occurred which would act to increase prices etc., that act to prevent a deal being agreed and the issue goes back to the table. Not only does the deal take far to long to come to fruition - but each of the trading blocs is out to protect their own interests. It will become nigh on impossible for blocs to be able to agree to to ever decreasing costs by which to attract deals. Then there will be a further move for various blocs to want to encourage certain beneficial countries to join their own bloc? Power moves. More and more blocs will wish to concentrate trade within their member countries as opposed to outside trade. Costs are and will be kept artificially high for within each bloc there will be producers who produce far less than others, but who will take advantage of and be protected under the CAP System. Far from World trade becoming seamless and convenient - it will lead to massive trade arguments as those that have occurred within the EU, there will be huge dissent between blocs. Trade blocs are also expensive. The EU will cost £969 billion over six years, the costs will continue to increase and peoples taxes will increase accordingly. If people are not allowed to work longer hours, then pay must increase leading to increased prices. In Britain - there is this ridiculous situation where Scottish salmon is shipped from Scotland to Poland for processing, then shipped back to the UK for sale. Imagine if we had our own processing plants to deal with our own fish - there would be more jobs and the fish would be fresher. The idea of World Trading blocs will implode.

Then each bloc issues its own legislation that is passed to their members. This legislation can act negatively. For instance the employment laws issued by the EU and free movement of people. What if some of the immigrants want to work longer hours to pay for some luxury item or a necessary bill? They will not be allowed to - under the protection of The Working time directive. There are many other legislative orders which act to prevent personal freedom in many respects. Not just stupid vacuum cleaners and light bulbs - but many 'protective' orders which lead to completely undemocratic action. Did you know that women;s rights to maternity leave and pay has now led to far fewer women aged less than forty being employed in smaller companies? There is a lot that the EU claims, but there is a far greater volume of information which it hides.

[seivad]

I actually voted to join the Common Market and I expected the result of that to be followed.

I don't remember those who voted not to enter the Common Market using their 'creativity' to produce a different result. We joined and that was that. Yes,many opposed and it has been a festering sore for years but they didn't overturn the result.

I meant to ask you about this. In a couple of posts you've mentioned voting to join the Common Market. We joined in 1973 and didn't get to vote on join/not join. At the time I would probably have voted against it, despite the dire straits the country was in. I emigrated instead in 1974! Wilson's 1975 referendum was after we had joined.

[seivad]

Right! But there is now a problem with this idea! World wide there are a number of Trade Blocs which have been introduced. Each serving its own bloc of countries. When one bloc wishes to trade with one of those countries - each of the countries in individual blocs must consort with one another and agree before a trade deal can be reached. Even when this has been established, which is after many years - World Trade has moved on and costs for any item may have changed or natural disasters may have occurred which would act to increase prices etc., that act to prevent a deal being agreed and the issue goes back to the table. Not only does the deal take far to long to come to fruition - but each of the trading blocs is out to protect their own interests. It will become nigh on impossible for blocs to be able to agree to to ever decreasing costs by which to attract deals. Then there will be a further move for various blocs to want to encourage certain beneficial countries to join their own bloc? Power moves. More and more blocs will wish to concentrate trade within their member countries as opposed to outside trade. Costs are and will be kept artificially high for within each bloc there will be producers who produce far less than others, but who will take advantage of and be protected under the CAP System. Far from World trade becoming seamless and convenient - it will lead to massive trade arguments as those that have occurred within the EU, there will be huge dissent between blocs. Trade blocs are also expensive. The EU will cost £969 billion over six years, the costs will continue to increase and peoples taxes will increase accordingly. If people are not allowed to work longer hours, then pay must increase leading to increased prices. In Britain - there is this ridiculous situation where Scottish salmon is shipped from Scotland to Poland for processing, then shipped back to the UK for sale. Imagine if we had our own processing plants to deal with our own fish - there would be more jobs and the fish would be fresher. The idea of World Trading blocs will implode.

Then each bloc issues its own legislation that is passed to their members. This legislation can act negatively. For instance the employment laws issued by the EU and free movement of people. What if some of the immigrants want to work longer hours to pay for some luxury item or a necessary bill? They will not be allowed to - under the protection of The Working time directive. There are many other legislative orders which act to prevent personal freedom in many respects. Not just stupid vacuum cleaners and light bulbs - but many 'protective' orders which lead to completely undemocratic action. Did you know that women;s rights to maternity leave and pay has now led to far fewer women aged less than forty being employed in smaller companies? There is a lot that the EU claims, but there is a far greater volume of information which it hides.

Too much information, too difficult to read with too few paragraphs, and probably very little to do with what I was talking about. I'm just telling you the ratification process for EU trade deals... just the facts ma'am

[Toodles McGinty]

In Britain - there is this ridiculous situation where Scottish salmon is shipped from Scotland to Poland for processing, then shipped back to the UK for sale. Imagine if we had our own processing plants to deal with our own fish - there would be more jobs and the fish would be fresher. The idea of World Trading blocs will implode.

Scottish cod gets sent to China for processing. Scottish whiskey is sent to Australia for bottling. Alaskan salmon gets sent to Scotland for smoking. Nothing to do with the EU, it's the cheapest way of doing it, unfortunately. If someone in Thailand is processing prawns for less than a quid a day, do you really think they'll set up a processing plant in Britain? Sure, ideally it should be processed here, but it comes down to the bottom line.

Oddly enough, Norway sends fish to Scotland to be processed, as for them, it is cheaper to have it done inside the EU. So they'll have to find another company to do that after Brexit. More jobs lost.

If we leave the EU, do you think we'll suddenly start processing our fish here, or do you think they'll still get sent to China? You think Primark is going to start selling £15 t-shirts made here rather than £2 tees made in some sweat shop in the far East?

What if some of the immigrants want to work longer hours to pay for some luxury item or a necessary bill? They will not be allowed to - under the protection of The Working time directive.

Yes they can. Anyone can opt out if they want to work overtime. The WTD is there to protect employees from being forced to work for more than 48 hours a week. And ensuring they get rest breaks after working for so many hours. It also ensures that the worker isn't going to suffer if they either opt out or don't. They can't be forced to opt out, for example. Not unreasonable.

Why on earth would you want to reduce worker's rights? People have literally died for the right to have a trade union, to have a voice in their working conditions. Why would you want a deregulated Britain where people can be treated like slaves?

Did you know that women;s rights to maternity leave and pay has now led to far fewer women aged less than forty being employed in smaller companies? There is a lot that the EU claims, but there is a far greater volume of information which it hides.

Firstly, have you any proof of this? A link to a government website? Secondly, what do you suggest, stop maternity leave and pay?

This goes back to certain age groups being more likely to want Brexit. Older people or retired people really aren't affected by Working Time Directives or maternity leave, so couldn't give a Johnson's Spaff if worker's rights are taken away.

Forget the EU's rules, people have been fighting for worker's rights since long before the heroes of Tolpuddle stood up to be counted. Left in the hands of the likes of Mogg and the far-right 'Tory Brexit Death Cult', deregulation would destroy centuries of hard won employment laws.

[seivad]

Firstly, have you any proof of this? A link to a government website? Secondly, what do you suggest, stop maternity leave and pay?

Perhaps Said would prefer to go back to my era, or even better, back to my mum's era. In her era, a large number of women were stay at home mums. Employer's general expectation was that young married women would get pregnant and leave after giving birth. For that reason many young women were disadvantaged in the job market.

When I entered the work force many more women returned to work after having a child. However this still didn't stop the perception that you were a bad bet as a long term employee. Even as a single woman at some interviews I was asked if my future plans included getting married and having a family. After I was married, I was always asked if I was planning on having a family.

There was no long maternity leave back then, or paid leave, so the reason was not economic. Interesting to see that some employers still have the same mindset, and I don't think it's for economic reasons now either. Many of today's employers don't want the PITA of hiring a temp/training them to replace an employee while they're on mat. leave. It's an age old problem for all of us that have a womb!

[joan ofarc]

I meant to ask you about this. In a couple of posts you've mentioned voting to join the Common Market. We joined in 1973 and didn't get to vote on join/not join. At the time I would probably have voted against it, despite the dire straits the country was in. I emigrated instead in 1974! Wilson's 1975 referendum was after we had joined.

No, you are correct. I expressed myself poorly. The 1975 referendum asked whether or not we should stay in after we had only just joined. I suppose I remember it as whether or not we join as we were barely in. It was my first big voting opportunity.
I would have emigrated to Canada too and having lived there for a year would do now even more so but I don't think they would have me!

[silver fox]

Not sure what you're trying to say,



I was responding to a poster who doubted what Project fear said.

Nice to see you are so far into your tribal loyalty that you want something bad to happen so you can crow.

Who said I wanted anything bad to happen? what I said it would be good to let leavers have their Brexit, but unfortunately everyone else will suffer as well, so it won't happen that way.

In any event my comments come from more than a little Peed off with the constant derisory comments from "restrained civilised" leavers, you know the stuff, treacherous, traitors, undemocratic, unpatriotic etc, etc,etc;.

You speak of tribal loyalty?????? Let's just recap quickly, Cameron put forward the referendum in an attempt to see off Farage and preserve his own neck, lost the vote, did a runner, May then does sweet FA for three years and only presents a deal to Parliament when forced to do so.

We all know that the deal was not flavour of the month, however here we have a government proposal from a government with a majority in Parliament, should have passed easily in theory, what actually happened was somewhat different, now opposition MPs will, no make that, it is their duty to oppose government legislation which they don't agree with, but the fly in the ointment the ERG and supporters also voted against the deal.

Now I could be wrong of course, but I don't recall any opposition MPs associated with the ERG and no-one could possibly brand the ERG as remainers, on that calculation the ERG, ardent Brexiteers helped to stop Brexit, not remainers at all.

Wonder why that was? is it possible that the ERG wanted a Brexit only on their own selfish, self centred, self serving terms? This group estimated at around 70 MPs don't care about this country, it's population or well being, their only concern is in fact to ensure they contribute as little as possible.

As far as attitude is concerned let's not forget JRM referring to state school educated students as " potted plants ", says it all really.

[Toodles McGinty]

Perhaps Said would prefer to go back to my era, or even better, back to my mum's era. In her era, a large number of women were stay at home mums. Employer's general expectation was that young married women would get pregnant and leave after giving birth. For that reason many young women were disadvantaged in the job market.

When I entered the work force many more women returned to work after having a child. However this still didn't stop the perception that you were a bad bet as a long term employee. Even as a single woman at some interviews I was asked if my future plans included getting married and having a family. After I was married, I was always asked if I was planning on having a family.

There was no long maternity leave back then, or paid leave, so the reason was not economic. Interesting to see that some employers still have the same mindset, and I don't think it's for economic reasons now either. Many of today's employers don't want the PITA of hiring a temp/training them to replace an employee while they're on mat. leave. It's an age old problem for all of us that have a womb!

I think the whole bunch of them seem to want to go back to some rose tinted pre-war version of Britain that didn't actually exist. Or pre-war Germany. A 'Global Britain', reclaiming the colonies, paying much more for food that travels much further and is lower quality. Begging for scraps off Trump's table, even though they've said if we screw up the GFA, all deals are off. And don't they take years and years to get trade deals through, anyway?

When there were fewer employment laws, no human rights laws, no NHS. Well, they'll get that bit, alright. No immigrants, apart from those grateful few from the colonies that we can chuck back out 50 odd years later. Then I think the pattern goes: war, crap economy, even crapper economy, then we go so far down the *****ter we beg to join the EU...


Taking back control of something we never lost to lose what we currently have.

Genius.

[joan ofarc]

Who said I wanted anything bad to happen? what I said it would be good to let leavers have their Brexit, but unfortunately everyone else will suffer as well, so it won't happen that way.

In any event my comments come from more than a little Peed off with the constant derisory comments from "restrained civilised" leavers, you know the stuff, treacherous, traitors, undemocratic, unpatriotic etc, etc,etc;.

You speak of tribal loyalty?????? Let's just recap quickly, Cameron put forward the referendum in an attempt to see off Farage and preserve his own neck, lost the vote, did a runner, May then does sweet FA for three years and only presents a deal to Parliament when forced to do so.

We all know that the deal was not flavour of the month, however here we have a government proposal from a government with a majority in Parliament, should have passed easily in theory, what actually happened was somewhat different, now opposition MPs will, no make that, it is their duty to oppose government legislation which they don't agree with, but the fly in the ointment the ERG and supporters also voted against the deal.

Now I could be wrong of course, but I don't recall any opposition MPs associated with the ERG and no-one could possibly brand the ERG as remainers, on that calculation the ERG, ardent Brexiteers helped to stop Brexit, not remainers at all.

Wonder why that was? is it possible that the ERG wanted a Brexit only on their own selfish, self centred, self serving terms? This group estimated at around 70 MPs don't care about this country, it's population or well being, their only concern is in fact to ensure they contribute as little as possible.

As far as attitude is concerned let's not forget JRM referring to state school educated students as " potted plants ", says it all really.

You can twist your interpretation any way you like but it doesn't alter the fact that a vote result should be honoured.
I blame all of whatever party who have fudged up this unholy mess and now use the mantle of democracy's defenders to justify their own self-serving aims.
Whenever the next election is I will be hard-pressed to know who to vote for and have even considered not voting at all after a lifetime of using my vote diligently. I even voted in those stupid police commissioner elections so I am a committed voter. I can't abide any of the numpties in charge of any party at the moment but I have particular animus towards those who cannot or will not see the constitutional ramifications of blocking brexit, which is what all this no-deal cr*p is really about.

[said]

Too much information, too difficult to read with too few paragraphs, and probably very little to do with what I was talking about. I'm just telling you the ratification process for EU trade deals... just the facts ma'am

Had to fix my face and grab my handbag - sorry about the delay in responding - yes the EU has trade deals and I was attempting to elaborate on what these trading partners will eventually lead to. They will be unworkable! Ooops! My eyelash has just fallen into my tea!

[said]

You can twist your interpretation any way you like but it doesn't alter the fact that a vote result should be honoured.
I blame all of whatever party who have fudged up this unholy mess and now use the mantle of democracy's defenders to justify their own self-serving aims.
Whenever the next election is I will be hard-pressed to know who to vote for and have even considered not voting at all after a lifetime of using my vote diligently. I even voted in those stupid police commissioner elections so I am a committed voter. I can't abide any of the numpties in charge of any party at the moment but I have particular animus towards those who cannot or will not see the constitutional ramifications of blocking brexit, which is what all this no-deal cr*p is really about.

The Brexit Party and the Conservatives have formed an alliance in Hartlepool today. Having now 13 councillors, it is the largest group in Hartlepool where 7 out of every ten people voted to Leave the EU. The Leave supporters are kicking back!

[seivad]

The Brexit Party and the Conservatives have formed an alliance in Hartlepool today. Having now 13 councillors, it is the largest group in Hartlepool where 7 out of every ten people voted to Leave the EU. The Leave supporters are kicking back!

Councillors... pretend politicians! If the Tories make a pact with the Brexit Party at the national level, I will eat the eyelash you dropped in your tea.

EDIT: Almost forgot... did you go to see Nige tonight?

[said]

Councillors... pretend politicians! If the Tories make a pact with the Brexit Party at the national level, I will eat the eyelash you dropped in your tea.

EDIT: Almost forgot... did you go to see Nige tonight?

Of course! Tried to get an autograph, but couldn't get near him. Bless!

[Toodles McGinty]

Of course! Tried to get an autograph, but couldn't get near him. Bless!

You couldn't elbow your way past the cast of 'Last of the Summer Wine'?

You should lift something a bit heavier than a handbag, lad.

[said]

Scottish cod gets sent to China for processing. Scottish whiskey is sent to Australia for bottling. Alaskan salmon gets sent to Scotland for smoking. Nothing to do with the EU, it's the cheapest way of doing it, unfortunately. If someone in Thailand is processing prawns for less than a quid a day, do you really think they'll set up a processing plant in Britain? Sure, ideally it should be processed here, but it comes down to the bottom line.

Oddly enough, Norway sends fish to Scotland to be processed, as for them, it is cheaper to have it done inside the EU. So they'll have to find another company to do that after Brexit. More jobs lost.

If we leave the EU, do you think we'll suddenly start processing our fish here, or do you think they'll still get sent to China? You think Primark is going to start selling £15 t-shirts made here rather than £2 tees made in some sweat shop in the far East?



Yes they can. Anyone can opt out if they want to work overtime. The WTD is there to protect employees from being forced to work for more than 48 hours a week. And ensuring they get rest breaks after working for so many hours. It also ensures that the worker isn't going to suffer if they either opt out or don't. They can't be forced to opt out, for example. Not unreasonable.

Why on earth would you want to reduce worker's rights? People have literally died for the right to have a trade union, to have a voice in their working conditions. Why would you want a deregulated Britain where people can be treated like slaves?



Firstly, have you any proof of this? A link to a government website? Secondly, what do you suggest, stop maternity leave and pay?

This goes back to certain age groups being more likely to want Brexit. Older people or retired people really aren't affected by Working Time Directives or maternity leave, so couldn't give a Johnson's Spaff if worker's rights are taken away.

Forget the EU's rules, people have been fighting for worker's rights since long before the heroes of Tolpuddle stood up to be counted. Left in the hands of the likes of Mogg and the far-right 'Tory Brexit Death Cult', deregulation would destroy centuries of hard won employment laws.

You have confused the existing arrangement to that which will occur if we remain in the EU. As for workers rights the system has inadvertently worked against them. Employer's feel it is necessary to tick the boxes so many far higher qualified potential employees are rejected for minority groups. I am among those who work - I have seen so much unfairness in the work place as opposed to the times when there was no Disciplinary Actions, when there was no discrimination against normal white people, when one was allowed a decent lunch period. No, employees rights have become reduced.

The point really is - where would the UK be in the future if we stayed in the EU? It is not a nice place! The EU is showing cracks at the seams already - if it cannot accept a change now, imagine what a real crisis would do to it.

Obviously you were not present at the Brexit Party meeting tonight? The Floral hall was packed! Not just with the elderly - there were several races of people, many graduates and many professionals. They are all angry - but very restrained, over those who really do not understand.

In Hartlepool, Labour must be very disappointed -
"Hardworking local councillors have organised and put country before party so they can defend democracy.."