Are you going to let David Cameron abolish your rights without a fight?

The right wing, whether Tory or UKIP, doesn’t want to exit the EU for freedom from some threat of federation, but for the freedom to abolish our human rights on employment, workplace protections, discrimination and more. Vox Political has published a brilliant summary of the threat – please read it and don’t let yourself be robbed without a fight.

Vox Political

You do realise what David Cameron means when he says he wants to re-negotiate our membership of the European Union, don’t you?

For a start, he means he wants to abolish laws that protect the human rights your ancestors fought tooth and nail to win for you.

He won’t make any deals in your interest. That’s not in his nature.

If he gets his way, you could lose the right to:

  • Written terms and conditions of work, and a job description – and the right to the same terms and conditions if transferred to a different employer.
  • Four weeks’ paid leave from work per year.
  • Not be sacked for being pregnant, or for taking time off for ante-natal appointments.
  • Come back to work after maternity leave, on the same pay, terms and conditions as before the leave started.
  • Health and safety protection for pregnant women, new and breastfeeding mothers.

View original post 775 more words

35 responses to “Are you going to let David Cameron abolish your rights without a fight?

  1. I sounds like we’re moving back to Victorian Britain by all accounts, with pregnant women shunned in the workplace, under 13s stuck up chimneys, no weekend for anyone, working all hours God sends etc. We talk about hyperbole on other posts but this is lamentable.

    This is a serious topic, but reblogging that makes it laughable. If you really think this threat exists and you’re really worried that this would get agreed in Europe then you’re barking at the moon. It will never happen, never in a month of Sunday’s – although taking the blog into account that saying will become largely redundant.

    I welcome a referendum on Europe, not because I want to leave the Union but because I’ve never been asked if I want to be part of the largest, most powerful, most undemocratic political organisation in Europe.

    • The decision was made democratically 40 years ago. Do we have to revisit every decision ever made, every generation, to make it legitimate? Referenda are a coward’s way out for politicians – especially when deferred until after the next election, if, if, if.

      If you don’t see that the right-wingers want us out because they’ll be free to exploit people with less to impede them, you need to listen to Bone, Farage et al. The EU hampers their ‘right’ to bash people into submission and maximise profits.

      • 40 years is al long time, certainly longer than a generation. What mandate does a Union have if very few people of working age are asked their opinion? I don’t fear the outcome as nothing will change, but it would be a great idea to refresh the mandate.

      • Then why not the same about the UK as a whole, or for that matter whether we’d all rather be a republic of Yorkshire or of Northumbria?

    • By the way, now that the culprit has confessed to both sending the letter and calling in the press, I look forward to your apology on the matter. I promise to accept it graciously.

      • I will of course apologise if that’s the case. Where can I find proof of this confession?

      • Ha, well the address was, but the coward has taken it down now. However, a copy has been made for the eventual GMC complaint if the guy turns out to be really a doctor.

    • Ah, what a surprise. First three threads are started by Steve’s very own stalker.

      • What are on about?

        If discussing / replying to blogs, which by their very nature are deemed successful by people leaving comments or entering in to debate then I guess I’m stalking.

      • I always assumed what made blogs successful was the extent of their readership. Some of the most widely read blogs on the internet don’t even HAVE comments. By your criteria, those blogs are failures.

        Great criteria you’ve got there… *snort*

        As for stalking – well, do please tell me which other blogs you comment on with the frequency with which you obsess over this one. Although I’m amazed, given your claims below of such extensive business, that you can find the time even to do your thing here – which suggests that you’re compulsively spending time going at Steve at the expense of your other, more productive interests. That says “stalker” to me.

  2. Pingback: Are you going to let David Cameron abolish your...·

  3. The UK is a union, a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as you well know. Yorkshire and Northumbria are not states within that union, and never have been per se so the comparison is frankly absurd.

    To be clear, I am pro-Europe but I do believe that a referendum is a good thing as it will reaffirm the EU from a UK perspective. It puts an end to UKIP, it puts an end to party in-fighting on all sides if the house and gives people a chance to provide a much needed mandate.

    Frankly if you believe any of the above is a bad thing them I’m bewildered at your lack of faith in democracy.

    • You need to brush up on your history. Northumbria was one of several kingdom-states within what is now England, along with Wessex, Mercia and so on.

      • Hence the per se, but going back that far in history serves no purpose as where do you logically draw the line? A truly bizarre and incredulous thing to state in any debate on the EU.

        If you want to go down that route do so on your own, a truly pointless waste of time.

        I’m a man in my 40’s, and at no point in my long working life have I given a mandate to membership of the EU. Is it so unreasonable to feel that having a choice is such a bad thing? Do you not trust the UK to make their own choices? Are we too stupid?

        The type of democracy I want is clearly not a view we share. Which says far more about you than it ever could me,

      • That’s exactly the point. Where do you draw the line? Logically there’s no difference, and I know there are days when I’d *love* to be part of an independent North, but I neither demand nor expect a say in the matter because it’s a done deal. Same with the EU. We should stop bitching about it and get on with it – it’s just a distraction from the real, and deadly serious, issues.

      • “I’m a man in my 40s”

        “40 years is a long time for a referendum, certainly longer than a generation”


        (Also, you’re a man in your 40s and you’re hanging around this site like a teenage groupie obsessed with getting first touch on your idol? Grow up, fella, and find a more useful way to spend some time! Jeez…)

    • When every opinion poll suggests that a referendum now will result in an overwhelming “leave” vote, to claim to be pro-EU but want a referendum strikes me as either woefully naive or thoroughly disingenuous.

      Now, given the way you’ve conducted yourself on this site so far, which alternative do you think looks more believable? (Hint: I don’t think you’re all that naive.)

      Put another way: if it looks like a concern troll, types like a concern troll and argues like a concern troll…

      • Re: the only thing worth responding to. I am pro-EU, most of my business is in Europe, I spend great chunks of my working life in Europe, I’m more than happy to be part of the rich, diverse, cultural mix that is Europe. If the opinion polls are right, and I don’t believe they are for a second, but lets assume they are, then the Great British public should have the right to a referendum on the topic. That is what living in a democracy is about. The latter is a far more fundamental right to a British citizen than any political or economic Union, as people gave their lives to protect that freedom.

        Being Pro-EU and wanting a referendum so we can put this to bed is a good thing, as I’ve clearly stated. You can choose to name-call, cast you aspersions, do whatever you feel, but if doesn’t add to the debate I’ll simply ignore it and treat it with the respect it so clearly deserves.

      • Yes, poppet, you treat my unveiled contempt for you by telling me it’s contemptible (right out of the “existence exists” school of argument, that) and pretend you’ve somehow seized the moral high ground.

        I can only assume that an awful lot of your conversations start with a passerby hearing what you have to say about something and then being completely dismissive of you; you seem so used to it. You might consider the wisdom of stepping back a second and thinking about why… but then again, sadly, you probably won’t.

        As for your position. You say that a referendum will “put it to bed”. Why? We had two in the 70s, one to join and one to stay, yet you assert that they’re too long ago to be relevant. Why will this one be any different? How long do referenda last before they lose their democratic currency? Less than 40 years – how much less? 20 years? 10? 5? And if we must revote on EU membership every 20 years, then why not other fundamental parts of our constitution, like monarchy, whether to dissolve the Union… that kind of thing.

        Your position is nonsensical. And as I say, given your past performance – to put it bluntly, the fact that you seem obsessed with trolling this blog, rather than making any coherent arguments, and it is therefore impossible to believe *one single word* you say about your circumstances or your beliefs – I suspect your position isn’t supposed to make sense.

        And if saying that makes you tell me I’m somehow not worth responding to – well, aren’t you just echoing me, but with 100% less justification?

  4. So there is no proof of the confession, on that basis consider the apology on ice.

    • If you’re going to let your actions be dictated by the sorry actions of a ‘person’ like ‘loki’, then I feel sorry for you. Copies have been made and will be sent to the GMC and possibly the police, but I’m not going to post it here and further propagate its malignancy.

      You can see the site exists. Now you’re just being obstinate.

  5. Steve, where you draw the line is blissfully simple, you draw them against countries that exist today. Logically there is every difference. Most of the states you mention were unionised in the 10th century, it would be crazy for these areas to claim any independent claim over a 1,000 years later. You draw the line at what exists today, as what exists today is the reality of the Union

    What are your thoughts on the potential Scottish independence? Should they stop bitching and get on with it?

    • What makes today so special? That’s just as arbitrary as anything else. Why isn’t 40 years so long as to make it ‘crazy’? It’s just a matter of opinion and degree.

      I am praying that the Scots decide to stick with us and keep their seats in Westminster, rather than leave us prey to the Tories with their insane popularity in the south.

  6. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the legal and sovereign union and entity that is a member state of the EU. Wessex, Cornwall, Northumberland or any other county, kingdom, past or present isn’t. That is what makes it so special in terms of EU membership, anything else, or any other claim of independence isn’t recognised.

    Scotland, if it becomes independent, can not assume automatic inclusion in the EU. I think the Scots will vote to remain but whatever way they go its democracy and they have the right to choose, in the same way we may get to choose on the EU. I don’t think a referendum will happen as its based on a Tory majority at the next election, and I can’t see that happening. I do however feel that Labour will end up offering a referendum, it could prove to be a key battle
    ground at the next general election, along with the economy.

    • It’s not the point whether Cornwall is an EU member. Cornwall didn’t have a choice about becoming part of England in the first place, and they’ve never been asked since. Their claim to a referendum would be far stronger.

      Our predecessors committed us to the EU. It doesn’t need a referendum to honour every treaty commitment. Governments decide to end/break treaties, but they should have the courage to do what they want to do without hiding behind a direct public vote on it – and then face the electoral consequences.

      • I’m sorry but the Cornish people having a far stronger claim to a referendum is nonsensical in my opinion. Cornwall has not been independent of England since circa the 10th century, although historical accuracy on exact dates is somewhat vague. Why, some 1,100 years later would a referendum be a stronger proposition that the UK’s membership on the EU? It simply doesn’t make any sense and is a nonsensical position to take.

        We have a clear and present difference of opinion. I’m open to people having their say, the cards landing where they land, and then moving on from the circular debate on Europe to more important matters, I agree there are more important matters. You’re closed to that approach, you don’t think it’s wise to let the people speak. I think that viewpoint is bordering on extreme, it doesn’t put power in the hands of ordinary folk and I’m not sure what form of Socialism you can describe that as, it’s more like an Orwellian nightmare than power to the people.

        You’re overreaching and creating a straw man around “every treaty commitment” – I don’t believe that’s the case unless the person you’re speaking with is from UKIP.

        Countries shouldn’t break treaties that they’ve agreed to, you’re either all in, or all out. It can’t be a kiddies pick ‘n’ mix. You know we can’t break the treaties, you know we shouldn’t. What we have is a two-tier Eurozone (see devalued Cyprus EURO), a two-tier EU (those in the Eurozone and those outside) and in reality very little in the way of unity. The EU is changing at pace and what our predecessors voted to remain within is vastly different. It’s time to ask the question again (if polls are to be believed) but you would deny people this opportunity if you had the choice, I don’t understand why

  7. Gwen, your tedious in the extreme, inventing stuff just to have a pop, which if I was a troll, as you keep suggesting with clearly no appreciation for the term, then I’d enjoy it. Alas, it’s a waste of time, you have nothing to say other than repetitive barbs that carry no weight.

    All your doing is putting words in my mouth, not listening and not reading. The EEC referendum was 40 years ago, ergo the vast majority of the UKs working, and therefore tax paying, population have never had a say on membership, therefore there is no mandate for membership. A refresh is needed, if you believe the polls (you seem to, I don’t take the overly seriously) then I see no problem with that, quite plain, quite simple, probably a bit like you.

    The irony is of course that I’m not trolling, you are, it’s just I’m the target. If you default to anyone that has an opposing political opinion as a troll then so be it. Dull, boring, predictable and lame. Just debate the points made, stop making 5, 10, 20 year suggestions I haven’t and wouldn’t suggest. 40 years is a long time to be an idiot, take a break.

  8. Steve, I’m well aware of EU history and well aware of treaties, so not in anyway arguing with myself. Your in favour of Governments breaking treaties, being brave etc. No UK Government is going to break the treaty without going to the people. This happens all over Europe and is called democracy, it’s too big for a single party to make that call, hence none do. If that was the case we’d been in and out of the EU based on whomever was in government at the time, Labour take us in, Tories take us out, Liberals sit on their hands because that’s what they do, so on and so forth. By having a referendum it gives the direction the people want, not what a party political majority want.

    We’ll agree to differ. I have more faith in my fellow man, and clearly less faith in politicians than you do.

    • I’ve never said the government should break a treaty. I said they *do* break treaties, which anyone knows.

      Leaving the EU is not something the government has to do, or has to go to the people about. We’re in. Done deal. Have the courage to tell people that instead of making a non-issue central to distract from other, much more real and serious issues.

      • They don’t break the treaties, they may break small parts of them but not the treaty itself and that has got to be understandable as things change, natural that things set may not be workable for all at all times. Come on Steve, stop being silly. I think only Greenland has left the then EEC, so treaties are not broken.

      • Treaties have often been disregarded throughout history. de Gaulle even said that they were like roses and young girls – they only last as long as they last. I’m starting to wonder which planet you’re on!

  9. The planet that believes in giving people a say in what impacts their daily lives, we call this planet democracy. It’s a great place to live, you should try it sometime. I’m starting to wonder if the form of Socialism you’d prefer is the totalitarian one, where state knows best and she will provide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s