Readers respond to various Guardian articles and letters on the terms and implications of any Brexit deal
I was bemused by Daryl Baldwin when he wrote “I am one of those just-about-managing parents who voted to leave the EU” (Letters, 23 August). Of course the extensive use of zero-hours contracts is completely wrong. That is why they are banned in EU countries such as Austria, Belgium, and France and heavily regulated in Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Of course it is also wrong that successive governments have failed to invest in education and training, thereby actively encouraging employers to recruit from overseas, while failing to tax businesses fairly so that the social and economic costs this recruitment model imposes on communities could be mitigated.
Many EU countries take a very different approach to these issues so the EU cannot be the cause of Daryl’s justified complaints. So why support a leave campaign that is dominated by those who actually want less regulation in the workplace and more of the economic policies that have caused so much damage? Take a look at the website of the Institute of Economic Affairs – one of the biggest cheerleaders for Brexit – and see its frequent promotion of more immigration as a way of achieving economic growth. This is one of the lies that is at the heart of the leave campaign, and it is one that is being made at the expense of people like Daryl.