The Brexit thread

[irie]

The Commission is selected by the Council which is made up of elected Heads of State. Just the same really as we elect a party with a leader, they select the ministers. Nobody elects someone to the post of eg Home Secretary. What they then do is scrutinised by the elected Parliament in several ways.

Non- democratic? Only if you want to believe it.

Bit like the House of Lords but even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation.

That would be the democratically elected House of Lords introducing new legislation would it? Those people that we voted for?

Glass houses/stones etc.

The fact that you removed this from your above quote speaks for itself.

True, scrutinise but absolutely nothing else. The Parliament can only take it or leave it - it can not introduce any legislation of its own. Bit like the House of Lords but even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation.

[Count Steer]

Bit like the House of Lords but even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation.

That would be the democratically elected House of Lords introducing new legislation would it? Those people that we voted for?

Glass houses/stones etc.

The fact that you removed this from your above quote speaks for itself.

True, scrutinise but absolutely nothing else. The Parliament can only take it or leave it - it can not introduce any legislation of its own. Bit like the House of Lords but even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation.

The fact that you used the House of Lords as an example of democracy was funnier

(Nice fast edit btw ).

[irie]

That would be the democratically elected House of Lords introducing new legislation would it? Those people that we voted for?

Glass houses/stones etc.

The fact that you removed this from your above quote speaks for itself.

True, scrutinise but absolutely nothing else. The Parliament can only take it or leave it - it can not introduce any legislation of its own. Bit like the House of Lords but even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation.

The fact that you used the House of Lords as an example of democracy was funnier

(Nice fast edit btw ).

The sole purpose of mentioning the House of Lords was to illustrate the absolute legislative impotency of the European Parliament, nowhere was the House of Lords presented as a democratic institution.

Even the House of Lords can introduce new legislation (which of course is subject to scrutiny and voting in the elected House of Commons) whereas the European Parliament can not.

But you know all this of course.

[Hot_Air]

No-one could really predict what would happen. But they neither side really tried.

Some people with in-depth expertise in their industry were able to predict what would happen to it.

[Cousin Jack]

No-one could really predict what would happen. But they neither side really tried.

Some people with in-depth expertise in their industry were able to predict what would happen to it.

Quite a few people outside the moaning industries could predict it too, but the industries concerned prefer to moan and lobby for more visas rather than address the issues themselves. When was the last time you met a young person who got a job as an apprentice HGV driver?

[Felix]

When was the last time you met a young person who got a job as an apprentice HGV driver?

Two years ago if you count 29 as young

[Pirahna]

When was the last time you met a young person who got a job as an apprentice HGV driver?

Has such a thing ever existed? It's not something that's ever struck me as needing an apprenticeship.

[Asian Boss]

I don't think they've been called HGVs for some time. From memory they're LGVs now.

[Pirahna]

I don't think they've been called HGVs for some time. From memory they're LGVs now.

LGV - Light Goods Vehicle. This is up to 3.5t maximum laden weight. This is the license everyone has regardless of when you passed your test.

HGV - Heavy Goods Vehicle. A bit more complicated.

[Felix]

I can drive up to 7.5t.

[Asian Boss]

I don't think they've been called HGVs for some time. From memory they're LGVs now.

LGV - Light Goods Vehicle. This is up to 3.5t maximum laden weight. This is the license everyone has regardless of when you passed your test.

HGV - Heavy Goods Vehicle. A bit more complicated.

I thought lorries over 3.5 tonnes were now Large Goods Vehicles (LGVs) and were formerly known as HGVs. And now those under 3.5t are Light Commercial Vehicles.

edit - I stand corrected. I think! I'm not an expert

Under the UK and European law, the LGV licence and HGV licence are the same licence. They cover all commercial trucks that feature a gross combination mass of over 3500kg which could include fridge trucks, box vans, Lutons, flat beds, tippers and ADR, drop sides, and much more.

Confusion often comes about from the incorrect use of the term LGV, as some people think it stands for Light Goods Vehicles to drive pickup trucks and vans, with a gross vehicle weight of under 3500kg. In fact you can drive up to 3500kg (3.5 tonnes) with your car driving licence – category ‘B’ entitlement.

So, if there is no difference between LGV and HGV

https://www.wallaceschool.co.uk/blog/wh ... v-training

[Yorick]

I can drive up to 7.5t.

On my Spanish licence I have C1 and C1E

[Felix]

I can drive up to 7.5t.

On my Spanish licence I have C1 and C1E

As i have on my UK one. Its the folk that passed after Jan 97 that are limited to 3.5t and cant tow but the tow rule is getting binned this year as far as i know.

[Potter]

I think it needs a line in the sand, regardless of what was said before Brexit, we're here, and the loudest voices seem to be agreeing that the UK is suffering because of the withdrawal of foreign labour.

If the government had put schemes in place to mitigate this, it would have been admitting that many Brexit voters were right all along, that they had failed to protect UK workers and the UK was indeed running on the back of cheaper foreign labour, encouraged, supported and protected by a proxy UK government sitting in Brussels.
So no plans were in place to support UK job seekers or young people looking to enter the job market, or support of certain vulnerable industries.

The Tory machine didn't want Brexit, they blindly ignored these issues, so why would they put mitigation plans in place for issues that they wouldn't admit even existed?

And Corbyn had been advocating Brexit for his whole political career, his limp wristed effort at an opposition to it was transparent and Brexit happened as a protest vote against both parties. Against the tories for being tories and against labour for abandoning them.

Parliament failed the UK public and blaming this mess on one political party just shows that you're trying exceptionally hard to ignore why it happened.

[wheelnut]

Perhaps the government didn’t think cheap foreign labour was necessarily a bad thing? It is how the world has turned for many a century.

[Yambo]

Perhaps the government didn’t think cheap foreign labour was necessarily a bad thing? It is how the world has turned for many a century.

Cotton would have been more expensive without it!

[wheelnut]

Cotton would have been more expensive without it!

And the pyramids would have been a lot smaller!

[Pirahna]

And the pyramids would have been a lot smaller!

The pyramids were built by well paid Egyptians, no slaves required.

Talking of cheap foreign labour, there's a Facebook page for jobs in my local area, lots and lots of carers required. That's another area which is going to need to up it's pay rates.

[DefTrap]

I think it needs a line in the sand, regardless of what was said before Brexit, we're here, and the loudest voices seem to be agreeing that the UK is suffering because of the withdrawal of foreign labour.

If the government had put schemes in place to mitigate this, it would have been admitting that many Brexit voters were right all along, that they had failed to protect UK workers and the UK was indeed running on the back of cheaper foreign labour, encouraged, supported and protected by a proxy UK government sitting in Brussels.
So no plans were in place to support UK job seekers or young people looking to enter the job market, or support of certain vulnerable industries.

The Tory machine didn't want Brexit, they blindly ignored these issues, so why would they put mitigation plans in place for issues that they wouldn't admit even existed?

And Corbyn had been advocating Brexit for his whole political career, his limp wristed effort at an opposition to it was transparent and Brexit happened as a protest vote against both parties. Against the tories for being tories and against labour for abandoning them.

Parliament failed the UK public and blaming this mess on one political party just shows that you're trying exceptionally hard to ignore why it happened.

Nope, you can't blame the guests at your 'shit party' for objecting to the pile of shit you're about to serve them because they didn't try hard enough to stop your shit-based cuisine.

49% of the voting population thought this was a terrible idea, pointed out the terrible consequences and were told they were either fibbers or making a meal of it.

We can only deal with the here and now, which is what the brexit ostriches wanted all along I think, before they came up with a rationale that suited them anyway, blame the victims.

It turns out there is no brexit 'bus money'. Not a bean. Brexited away
It turns out the jobs available post brexit are actually great because your brexit-voting nan genuinely dreamed of your career slaughtering animals or shitting in a bag in the back of a truck in an M25 lay-by.

[Hoonercat]

I think it needs a line in the sand, regardless of what was said before Brexit, we're here, and the loudest voices seem to be agreeing that the UK is suffering because of the withdrawal of foreign labour.

If the government had put schemes in place to mitigate this, it would have been admitting that many Brexit voters were right all along, that they had failed to protect UK workers and the UK was indeed running on the back of cheaper foreign labour, encouraged, supported and protected by a proxy UK government sitting in Brussels.
So no plans were in place to support UK job seekers or young people looking to enter the job market, or support of certain vulnerable industries.

The Tory machine didn't want Brexit, they blindly ignored these issues, so why would they put mitigation plans in place for issues that they wouldn't admit even existed?

PM Theresa May, Conservative Party Conference October 2016

I know a lot of people don't like to admit this - [for] someone who finds themselves out of work or on lower wages because of low-skilled immigration, life simply doesn't seem fair.

Boris, October 2021:

So what I won’t do is go back to the old, failed model of low wages, low skills supported by uncontrolled immigration

In the space of 5 years, two Tory PMs have spoken out about the issue of low pay and immigration. They have had plenty of time to prepare the UK for the effects of Brexit, while publicly recognising the issues.