Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I am sorry but I totally disagree, they are utterly corrupt and they do not provide any benefit to our country either.

They do not bring anything to this country and don't start to go on about investments, as that is our money, we give them, minus their cut, as we are a NET contributor.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

So the working time directive isn't a benefit?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Not to me it's not, I work in the health care sector, so I am not protected as such, I would not call this a major benefit and we don't need to remain a member of the EU to keep it in UK Law.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It's not just about you Mick, is it, it's about all of us. It's a huge benefit to millions of people across the UK. If we weren't part of the EU, we might have never had it to begin with.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

The washing is necessary for US chicken as it is a cost saver. Their inhumane system of chicken rearing is the problem that chlorine washing is trying to solve (not always successfully).

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Ridiculous question, Mythica. We are just as capable of enacting laws that are good for us. More capable, in fact, because UK laws are written more succinctly and do not require the degree of interpretation as EU laws.

EU law is needlessly complex and over the top, requiring companies to have an army of lawyers to interpret them, increasing costs. Which inevitably leads to increased prices.

---------- Post added at 07:46 ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 ----------

If there is a problem with hygiene in the US chicken industry, then any trade deal with the US can address this and require appropriate standards to be applied. As long as they were reasonable, there is no reason for the US to object as this would be opening up a whole new market for US farmers.

We could send out our inspectors to check on those standards, just as we do to prevent child labour in the clothing industry.

And for those who do not wish to eat chlorinated chicken for whatever reason, look for the labels and buy alternatives.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Except, obviously, a second Referendum... :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

If we are just as capable then why wasn't it already a law?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It’s brilliant isn’t it.

I didn’t realise that when when strip through the layers of the argument what Brexit main issue boils down to is ............Chicken.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It is NOT automatically necessary. Even if it was, it is the end result that matters. If the end result is LESS bugs to multiply, then that is better, isn't it?


The rest of the world doesn't seem to have much of an issue with US chicken, as the US is a major exporter.


In the past the UK has had stricter rules on products. Eg We had stricter rules on UHT milk, and banned UHT milk from France. The EU said we had to accept what to us was sub-standard produce. The EU is about being a cartel, not about raising standards.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Tbf it's chicken that comes from Trump's America ,if it was from Obama's America it would be fine.

---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 ----------

Another once in a lifetime referendum before the first one is honoured what kind of message does that send out to the people ?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

You do realise that profit is king in the US. They would nail down everything that could prejudice sales of their chicken.

The problem is that chlorine washing is not effective enough at reducing contamination. The bugs can hide under folds of skin, only to start breeding again when conditions permit. This is why ensuring chickens are as salmonella free as possible in the first place is better. US bred chickens live in conditions that spread salmonella, campylobacter & streptococcus.

Washing chicken at home is not recommended as this spreads any contamination further with hidden spray from the washing process.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Indeed as one should never wash chicken at home as the best way to kill any bugs , etc is by cooking it properly.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I think many bods will have their calculators out on May 24th. To do some sums such as:

% that turned out to vote

% that vote Brexit

% that vote LibDem, Green, Change and to some degree SNP

Then they have to make an assumption of how many Leave supporters would vote Labour and Tory regardless.

Then try and extrapolate that into a referendum result.

It will be interesting to see if the appetite for a 2nd Ref is still so great after the elections, because lose a 2nd Ref and that’s it there’s no debate left or wiggle room to try and engineer a way to stay in.

Therefore why would you campaign for a 2nd Ref if you’re likely to lose it? Or if it’s too close to call? Better to try and thwart Brexit another way.

That said if Remain looks strong enough then a 2nd Ref is most likely a certainty as the spineless parliamentarians will see it as their way out of this.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Ditto Remainers. With Labour you'll find both sides spinning it as either an endorsement of Remain or Leave such is the ambiguity of Labour's policy. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

The safest thing, for our health and the planet, is probably not to eat any meat. But that's probably for another thread ;)

---------- Post added at 10:03 ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 ----------

Any % for the Brexit/UKIP parties that is less than 50% is a vote to Remain imho. ;)

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

If the EU rules are so good, ie washing with water and air, then why is the advice not to wash chicken at home? The study had difficulty find bugs on US chlorinated chicken.


If you sell a dangerous product, you will soon run out of customers. It doesn't make any profit in the longer term.

UK Food Standards Agency.

US CDC

EU Food Standards Agency

Quote:

Campylobacter is a bacterium that can cause an illness called campylobacteriosis in humans. With over 190,000 human cases annually, this disease is the most frequently reported food-borne illness in the European Union (EU). However, the actual number of cases is believed to be around nine million each year. The cost of campylobacteriosis to public health systems and to lost productivity in the EU is estimated by EFSA to be around EUR 2.4 billion a year.

So the majority comes from other meats and produce.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Good luck with that.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Remainers look set to vote Lib Dem and leavers for Farages party.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I don't think it's that simple.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Simple solution for anyone who does not want to be stuck with US chicken, is to stick to Organically reared chicken. Organic cannot be chlorine washed or reared in cramped stinking cages.

Still don't want their cheap inhumanely produced fowls. Would rather actively support British Farmers, rather than throw them to the wolves of a US trade deal.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Then buy British. Problem solved.

The cheaper US chicken would be greatly appreciated by those who find it difficult to get by.

So everyone should be happy.

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------

Are you seriously telling us that the UK is not able to pass legislation? Leaving the EU does not in itself remove it, nor does it mean we can't change it in the future.

We can do what is best for this country after Brexit, basically.

---------- Post added at 17:06 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------

More nonsense. I feel so sorry for all those sick Americans.

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:06 ----------

Not biting on your vegan menu, Mr K. Meat all the way for me. Always.

---------- Post added at 17:12 ---------- Previous post was at 17:08 ----------

That is simplistic in the extreme! There will still be many leavers who vote for the Conservatives or Labour. Both are mandated to leave the EU.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

You know fine well what I mean you just don't want to answer it properly. The working time directive is a positive to come from the EU. Nothing to do with us being able to pass legislation or not.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Glad that clears that up then as your post was ambiguous.

If the GB wants to have legislation like this, Parliament is capable of passing it. Nothing magical about the EU.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Unless, of course, you’re Farage...

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics...endum-36306681

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

No it wasn't :confused:

Mick said -

"they do not provide any benefit to our country either."

I said -

"So the working time directive isn't a benefit?"

Mick said -

"we don't need to remain a member of the EU to keep"

I said -

"If we weren't part of the EU, we might have never had it to begin with."

You said -

"Ridiculous question, Mythica. We are just as capable of enacting laws that are good for us."

I said -

"If we are just as capable then why wasn't it already a law?"

You said -

"Are you seriously telling us that the UK is not able to pass legislation? Leaving the EU does not in itself remove it, nor does it mean we can't change it in the future."

I said -

"The working time directive is a positive to come from the EU. Nothing to do with us being able to pass legislation or not."

There is nothing ambiguous about that.

I never said parliament couldn't pass such a law. I said the working time directive was a benefit to come from the EU as Mick said the EU had no benefits. I asked a question that if we were capable then why wasn't it already a law which in itself is a good question as something like the working time directive is a valuable piece of law for workers. Something which we MIGHT not have if it wasn't for the EU.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Truly we have plumbed new depths of pedantry.

It’s pretty obvious - to me at least - what Mick’s point was. If we are capable of making our own laws, and prioritising which pieces of legislation are more important, and electing governments on manifestos designed to test what the public thinks is most important, then an organisation is not offering us a benefit by seeking to replicate that capability, least of all when that organisation is trying to write legislation that simultaneously fits the social and legal situations of 28 different countries.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I disagree. Mick said "
they do not provide any benefit to our country either."

Whether or not we can make our own laws or not doesn't take away the working time directive which came from EU laws and is a benefit to millions of people in the UK.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Some people see things as black and white. All good or all bad, it isn't that simple. To say the EU don't provide any benefit is ludicrous. Farmers subsidiies, structure funds for deprived regions, workers rights, the list is long. As with many things people will realise until it's gone. Any saving you can bet won't be as fairly distributed. I predict the rich will get richer and everyone else poorer, hence the millionaires and affluent politicians desperate for Brexit.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

:bigcry:

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

As I said: pedantry.

It is as much benefit as me owning two iPads.. No matter how much intrinsic value there is in the thing, its value to me is severely curtailed by the fact that I have one already.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Vegetarian OB, now Vegans are irritating I must admit ;)

p.s. I really would vary your diet a bit !

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

How is it pedantry when someone says the EU provides no benefits to then point out a benefit that the EU brought to the UK?

Your analogy would work if the working time directive already existed as it does now before the EU law was brought in, but it didn't so it doesn't work.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

'Pedantry' a valid point, which I wish to ignore. ©Oxford English Dictionary.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It’s the legislative process I’m talking about. We have a functioning one already. I’m not surprised the EU Parliament is more valued elsewhere; every other country in the EU, with only a very few exceptions, has been ruled by dictatorship within living memory.

The point about the WTD is a logical extension of that point. No matter how much intrinsic value it has, it is nothing we couldn’t have done ourselves. Neither does the fact we didn’t do it prove anything; in many cases these things are discussed for years in Brussels before finally being agreed and there is therefore no incentive for the British government to press ahead with its own domestic legislation.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I would like to know what the benefit of the working time directive actually was. It was certainly not of any benefit to me.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I’ve voted (postal) - out of the country next Thursday.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

The Working Time Directive was NOT brought in by the EU in order to be a benefit. It was to burden the whole of the EU with the same rules that already applied in Germany.


If employers were really meant to monitor health and safety, then they would have to be allowed to monitor what people did outside of their jobs. Bit pointless having limits on workinghours, if people are doing other jobs, have active hobbies, or going out to the early hours taking all sorts of drinks and drugs.


Something to look forward to.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Why not? - you could have opted out.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It was benefit to people who could have been made to work longer hours and had no legal come back. Those that want to work longer hours can also opt out of the working time directive.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Yet again, I am having to correct you.

They are not EU funds or subsidies.

I am going to say this really clear, so you understand it.

We are currently a NET Contributor to the EU and have been for a long time, in other words, in really simple terms, we put far more in than we get out.

So those subsidies and funding from the EU that you mention above, that I have bolded, is not their money, they are not some charitable cause, giving freely to us out of the goodness of their heart, that is our money we have given them, that they are giving back, minus their cut!!!

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Was it not? I think you're twisting something to suit your own agenda. I can see nothing but positives about the working time directive.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Certain jobs like train drivers etc you can't drink alcohol the night before work and you'd be found out on random tests. The UK suffers from poor productivity so anything that addresses this issue is a positive in my book.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

But the Working Time Directive doesn't only apply to certain jobs. Still leaves what people get up to outside of work. Which is worse? Working 60 hours/wk and staying awake for 16 hours/day, or working 40hrs/wk but staying awake for 20 hours/day.
Eg Many years ago I worked in central London, but lived up here in Northampton. I had to get up each day at 5am and not get back home until 8pm. Not good for my health, but even with any limits on working hours, it wouldn't have changed anything.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

You can't catch every criminal but if you can catch some then it's worth doing. I think Damien pointed that analogy out before and it applies here too.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Drug testing is absolutely nothing to do with the Working Time Directive. Still plenty of jobs where booze and/or drugs would be a health and safety issue, but mysteriously it's not in the Working Time Directive. If the WTD was truly about H&S, then it would be.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

You guys need to make your Continental conspiracies consistent before posting them here. :D

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

It was some foreign johnny's what did it gov.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

How would opting out make it beneficial?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Re: Brexit
 

We specifically opted out in the Maastricht Treaty but it made little difference.

Re: Brexit
 

The Latest European Elections Voting Intention with the main parties vote in full collapse mode.

Via @YouGov, 12-16 May.
Changes w/ 8-9 May.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

You can only opt out of certain provisions of the Working Time Directive.. It is far too restrictive, in my opinion and fails those who want to work hard and earn more money. It's a typical socialist law which sounds so noble for those promoting it, but carries unacceptable downsides for ordinary people and businesses..

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Which ones?

The only ones I can find who can’t opt out are in transportation (lorry, train, and bus drivers, air transport staff) - I don’t know about you, but I don’t want exhausted HGV or bus/train drivers on the road.

Working long hours consistently can lead to ill-health, mentally and physically, and to an increase in work-place accidents due to fatigue.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Limits on working hours for those jobs were in place BEFORE the EU rules. Still leaves the underlying problem of what they do outside work. If they're awake for 20hrs/day, any work based limits are meaningless. If they're driving to/from work, those hours are not included.

Re: Brexit
 

Looks like Farage has been living it up at Banks's expense. But we still don't know who is funding Banks. The National Crime Agency are still investigating.
https://www.channel4.com/news/nigel-...crets-revealed

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

What parts can you not opt out of?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Since we don't know your circumstances, it is impossible for anyone (but you) on this forum to answer that.

Can you explain how it has adversely impacted you?

Re: Brexit
 

£450k is a bit of pocket money for Nigel. Seems to spend a lot on security, doesn't he think he's popular?

His neighbours will be Russian on that street, probably the same source of money that's funding Nigel's rental. However the shower curtain is a unecessary luxury, he should be ashamed the of himself !

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

People have some personal responsibility - the employer is liable, and has a duty of care, for actions in the workplace, you seem to be stating that they should monitor/be liable for actions outside the workplace.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Where did I say I was adversely impacted?

I said it was in no way beneficial.

Re: Brexit
 

Non-story.

If Farage was an MP, he could legitimately claim all of that from the Taxpayer via his expenses.

That fact he was being funded by a wealthy individual, is the wealthy individuals business

Re: Brexit
 

Not if they're seeking political office because then the question is what do they expect in return? It's legitimate to ask those questions.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

My point is that legal limits are totally meaningless. Why should an employer be held accountable if an employee eg stays up all night?

Re: Brexit
 

One of many chickens that are coming home to roost for MP's that are not representing the wishes of their constituents.

Re: Brexit
 

It is but ALL Parties should be being asked.

As usual it’s one sided rubbish that us Brexiteers see right through and just ignore it. It’s just desperate Remainer noise, trying to smear and it’s not working.

Re: Brexit
 

If Corbyn's personal life was getting independently funded by someone else in this fashion it would certainly be a story. Corbyn himself has constantly (and rightly) been challenged for his statements about the IRA, NATO and antisemitism but when a Brexit Party Candidate is challenged for supporting the Warrington then it's seen as one-sided bias and irrelevant.

As with the defenders of Corbyn there is a cult of personality around these people where it's seen as illegitimate to challenge them. Politicians are the powerful, not us, and people acting as their protectors is weird.

Re: Brexit
 

What to Tory donors expect in return, what to the trade unions expect in return?

it's no different.

---------- Post added at 10:15 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------

Is that a washed chicken or a chlorinated chicken?

---------- Post added at 10:16 ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 ----------

it is, by us.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

80% of chickens from Marks & Spencer and Sainsbury’s carry deadly superbug
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/hea...-superbug.html

Re: Brexit
 

We buy ours from the local market.;)

Re: Brexit
 

You’re forgetting Corbyn has rubbed shoulders with the IRA, and even has a Shadow Home Secretary, that’s Diane Abbott, who previously was championing British Defeat during that bloody era and Farage is getting hammered for what?

Receiving handouts, from shock horror, someone else who is rich and wants Brexit so badly, we suppose to be concerned about this or the current dodgy leadership of her Majesty’s official opposition???

I reaffirm that the questioning of funding is one sided, where are the questions on who is funding the Remain Parties...???

Nigel gets chased by the Media pundits daily with these questions. Meanwhile, Anna Soubry from Change UK or the Barcode redacted Party, was asked this morning on talk radio, who their big donors where, silence. But Farage is the bad guy here?

Gimme a break. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Yes but these donations are declared as a result because they've gone to a registered party. If a politician was receiving undeclared 'donations' for personal living expenses then that would be a news story.

That's a salary and, again, anything else is declared.

---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 ----------

I don't forget. I have also criticised Corbyn for this stuff multiple times on here.

Farage isn't getting so hammed in this case but Claire Fox who supported them too.

You can see who is funding them here: https://www.electoralcommission.org....ions-and-loans

So it isn't just Farage getting questioned on these things then is it? The main difference here is some people think he shouldn't be.

Re: Brexit
 

I never said he should not be, questioning should be across the board but because we have biased media against Brexit, it’s all about getting at Farage.

BREAKING: Labour pull out of Cross-party talks on Brexit negotiations with the Conservative Party.

https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-co...-over-11722003

Re: Brexit
 

Because we know whose funding the other parties other than Change UK who have also been questioned when they first appeared and were again questioned today as you have said. The structure of these parties and their recent appearance means people are going into an election without a clear idea of this and therefore it's legitimately in the public interest for the media to try and find out.

Re: Brexit
 

Quelle surprise as l think we all knew that was pretty inevitable.

Re: Brexit
 

You wish it was a non-story but what are Banks and his unknown funders getting in return?

---------- Post added at 11:10 ---------- Previous post was at 11:10 ----------

Surprised they lasted this long.

Re: Brexit
 

So which party was Farage a member of while his personal lifestyle was funded by Banks? He had stood down from UKIP and The Brexit party didn't exist.

Re: Brexit
 

Exactly!

Re: Brexit
 

What could they get in return? Heaven forbid they are financing something they believe in.

So who funded the foreigner Gina Miller?


It's when £650,000 in ILLEGAL 3rd party donations occur that are designed to obscure where the money really came from. or over £1m is donated in order to get a particular law passed, or an £1m donation is made in expectation of getting an exemption on a proposed new law.

Re: Brexit
 

Gina Miller is British.

Re: Brexit
 

Correct, by virtue of being born in British Guiana.

Re: Brexit
 

IE not in the UK. Still leaves who funded her campaign.

Re: Brexit
 

No it’s not just exactly at all, far from it.

We are in pathetic biased territory and I will not agree with the bullshit smearing campaign going on here with Farage. I will vote for the Brexit Party to get what I voted for in 2016. To leave a disgusting and corrupted EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Say what you will about Farage, there are enough disenchanted, annoyed, frustrated, *insert similar words here* people that are listening to him because they (rightly or wrongly) believe in what he's saying and trying to do.

Compare that with the belief people have in May & Corbyn and it's probably no contest

Re: Brexit
 

Brexit.

Re: Brexit
 

:Yes: :tu: :LOL:

Re: Brexit
 

His sales skills are not in doubt and the PR agency that runs the Brexit Party is doing a superb job.

---------- Post added at 13:55 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------

She's not a foreigner and she self-funded.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Again, I have no idea what your circumstances are, so couldn’t comment on how it was personally beneficial to you.

Perhaps it wasn’t legislated with you in mind?

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 15:55 ----------

My son was born in a British Military Hospital overseas whilst I was serving - does that make him a foreigner?

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

Different rules apply to Military bases. I would have thought you knew about this.

Re: Brexit (New Poll Added)
 

I do know that...

My son is of Irish descent - he’s still, like Gina, not a foreigner (she was born in British Guiana when it was still a British Colony)

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Incorrect, the backstop for N.I. was the EU’s idea, the backstop encompassing the U.K. was May’s solution to ensuring it didn’t isolate N.I.

It’s impressive after all this time you still don’t know what you’re talking about.

Re: Brexit
 

Quote:

The “backstop” provision of the draft agreement which was rejected by the UK parliament this week was always a political measure designed to protect the interests of the British and Irish citizens of Northern Ireland. It was a UK proposal, not one tabled by Ireland or the EU, and reflected a belated recognition that Northern Ireland remains part of the UK, and that the welfare of its citizens should be a concern for the UK government

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/...61566?mode=amp

Surprised you quoting the Biased Brussels Corporation, as we know they just make things up !

---------- Post added at 21:34 ---------- Previous post was at 21:23 ----------

So what's changed ? ;)

Re: Brexit
 

The Brexit party appeared which has mixed things up a bit, also I like to police the BS merchants.

---------- Post added at 08:49 ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 ----------

Surprised you quote a piece from an Irish journalist that offers nothing to support his statement.

Here’s a more thorough piece of work.

Before the term “backstop” was coined, the bullet point in the negotiations over the Irish issue that came from the EU was this:

That wording is what gave birth to the backstop and it was an EU position.

Have a read and enlighten yourself

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/...tony-connelly/

Re: Brexit
 

One thing May got absolutely right, was a controlled and measured exit from 40+ years in the EU would be the least damaging to the economy.

Sadly, the whole Brexit issue has been taken over by the "instant gratification" of a crash out exit. The winners will be the disaster capitalists, the losers will be anyone on a restricted income.

Re: Brexit
 

If we do leave without a deal, there will be a lot of pain. Then the recriminations will start, Brexiters had better start of thinking about someone else to blame, as those that supported them will want answers. The tragedy is that the main protagonists Farrage, Bozza, JRM et al will be some of the few to be ok/benefit, quelle surprise ! The masses however will come after them with burning torches - they'll probably emigrate to France like that other keen Brexiter Nigel Lawson....