***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 54 *****
==============================================================
Onward and upwards (or downwards)
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 25 Aug 18 at 21:00
|
|
If you cast your mind back to June 2016 - HMG openly admitted that since we joined the EEC there has been little need for trade negotiators consequently the UK has only very limited experience in negotiating trade deals.
|
The following quote is from RTJ but others have said similar.
"I agree the biggest issue is how the Government has handled this.... "
I expected that kind of comment from Leave but less so from Remain.
Whatever, I do wonder how the Govt should have handled it.
We have a divided and very shouty electorate and also the political parties themselves are divided, and disloyal.
|
|
In the light of this being the biggest event since the eve of WW2, there should be a government of national unity to get this sorted.
|
"There should be a government of national unity to get this sorted."
Good idea. Now lets get get started. Perhaps you can give us a plan for Brexit around which the whole country can unite. I wonder why nobody has come up with the idea?
|
>> Good idea. Now lets get get started. Perhaps you can give us a plan for
>> Brexit around which the whole country can unite. I wonder why nobody has come up
>> with the idea?
I've previously posited the idea of a national coalition based on sensible wing of both parties plus LD and Scot Nats. Would need somebody without further ambition to lead it. Vince Cable would be obvious candidate but he may be too much of a 'remoaner'.
A plan around which we can all unite isn't going to happen but we need to get away from JRM and his cronies holding the PM to ransom. Whatever happens there's a risk of disorder on the streets whether from consequence of a crash out or the 30+% of population who are avowedly anti EU protesting 'cos we're not out enough.
|
>> A plan around which we can all unite isn't going to happen but we need
>> to get away from JRM and his cronies holding the PM to ransom.
>>
Have you seen the reaction from the Labour's left wing to anyone who talks to, never mind votes with a Tory.
Your idea is good but it will not happen in political circles or in the country at large until we have got considerably further into the mire, because there is no consensus either in parliament or in the country at the moment. I also fear we are heading for some level of civil unrest with no clear "sides" and a lot of blame flying in all sorts of directions, mostly the wrong ones.
Pessimistic I know but I do not believe we have the calibre of politician to lead a uniting process, I certainly do not share your judgement of Vince Cable
|
>> "There should be a government of national unity to get this sorted."
>>
>> Good idea. Now lets get get started. Perhaps you can give us a plan for
>> Brexit around which the whole country can unite. I wonder why nobody has come up
>> with the idea?
Plenty of people have come up with ideas, but they are all different.
Unless you are implying that leaving the EU is impossible - which would just be proof clear that we should never have been in it in the first place.
We could just unite in blaming Cameron, to start with. There must be some common ground there.
The logical thing now is probably to start again. State the problem, agree the aims and criteria for a solution without being prescriptive, create, model, test and evaluate options, identify the workable ones, have another referendum (a terrible idea but probably the only way to deal with not following the original result) and then get on with it. Doing that properly will take a long time so we should generously grant the EU a 5 year extension to be going on with.
Of course we won't, because politicians are mostly ostriches.
|
As I said in the aviation conversation, leaving the EU is absolutely doable. But not in the time left, and not with the politicians we have currently got involved.
Your last paragraph makes sense.
But somehow you'd have to work out what people want, and their priorities, beyond a simply leave/remain statement. And I don't think you'd be able to.
|
>> We have a divided and very shouty electorate and also the political parties themselves are
>> divided, and disloyal.
>>
Not to mention a divided and very shouty media who pretty much mirror the range of opinions of the public.
We opened pandora's box when we tried to have a binary decision on a multiple faceted issue where there never was and never will be a "right" choice which everybody can agree on. The idea of unity is further away than it has ever been.
The best we can hope for now is a face saving compromise where we end up out of EU membership but conforming to EU rules on most things so that neither "side" ends up with huge economic and social cost which would result from a "no deal" ending.
|
It's annoying when these volume-breaks come mid-question. Couldn't there be a bit of overlap?
"Again one of the big issues is ROI/NI - so what's the solution? What did leave voters think was the answer when they voted? Or did you not think about that?"
No, I didn't give it a thought. The referendum question was do you think the UK ought to leave the EU, not "Would you like to be PM and be responsible for sorting out every single consequential detail?
If that had been the question, obviously I'd have said Yes like a shot. :)
It's ridiculous to suggest that every single voter has to have an answer to every single question before his vote becomes valid.
|
Back in vol 51, I said "I still think Boris should have become Prime Minister"
Seems BoJo has seen his popularity surge among Tory members after resigning over the PM's Brexit proposals.
The former foreign secretary, who quit the role last month, has topped a monthly poll of Conservative Party members as to who they want as their next party leader.
news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-tops-conservative-poll-as-favourite-to-replace-theresa-may-11456262
I say bring it on. Yes, BoJo can be a bit of a clown at times, but is he any worse a clown than some of the others who have been PM?
|
Yes, he'd be a unifying figure commanding respect around the world.
Not.
|
|
He sees himself as a new Winston Churchill - Great in the 1940s, the UK and the world is a different place now. He's no statesman his recent gaffs and his alleged alliance with Trump's advisors marks him as a dangerous man.
|
He is no statesman - but who is? I can't think of anyone although Rees-Mogg has the potential and gravitas. Given the challenge he could rise to that status. However he does not have enough front rank experience to be a serious contender although his election bid forleadership would probably get good support from Brexiteers.
Boris has a useful cosmopolitan background and outlook, making him at home on the world stage. Coupled with his erudition I can see him going down well with the EU negotiators, especial the French. He is learned enough to be familiar with Arnold Toynbee's observation, that mankind develops best in response to challenges. Until put to the test, we never know how people will turn out.
|
>> Yes, he'd be a unifying figure commanding respect around the world.
>>
>> Not.
I don't think he's got the slightest credibility. He's proven to have lied to his employers, both his wives, his mistresses and of course to the electorate. His buffoonery on the world stage is incredible. His performance in Burma where he was sharply rebuked by the British Ambassador for singing an Empire era ditty is merely the most egregious of many examples.
Now he's meeting, as is Rees Mogg and Gove, Steve Bannon who has been one of Trump's rabble rousers in chief. A man who wears racism on his sleeve, professes admiration of Mussolini and thinks Simon Yaxley-Lennon is the backbone of England (or something to that effect).
Bannon is also a front man for American attempts to spread American big money's influence in UK and mainland Europe to undermine our politics and the whole EU project.
It has potential, if not stopped, to make Russian interference look like small beer. Why are the BBC all over Corbyn for 10year old misjudgments while this stuff goes on in plain sight without any sort of challenge?
I don't think, in a Tory leadership election, Rees-Mogg could win the Parliamentary ballot. He could though come second and then take the prize on the membership's votes. The last time that happened it gave them Iain Duncan-Smith rather than Ken Clarke. This time it would split the party irrevocably.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 3 Aug 18 at 17:33
|
Addition to charge sheet against Boris is Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe. His carelessly loose tongue has undoubtedly worsened her situation.
As Ken Clarke says; Boris doesn't do detail.
Fatal defect in a minister.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 3 Aug 18 at 23:02
|
July 2017: Liam Fox has said a post-Brexit free trade deal with the EU should be the “easiest in human historyâ€, but insisted that the UK could survive without one.
Although he did also add politics might get in the way of economics.
August 2018: Liam Fox has suggested that a no deal Brexit is now odds on as Downing Street insisted today that Theresa May remains "confident" she can secure a good agreement with Brussels.
But our white paper at the moment is not going to be accepted for fairly obvious reasons that were predictable before the vote on EU membership.
So no-deal might be better than a bad-deal... we can't even get in the position for a bad deal. Incompetent the lot of them and Fox, Johnson et al are distancing themselves from what they said in 2016.
I suppose we are getting what we voted for. We voted the Conservatives in and then got a referendum. We voted to leave the EU. Then voted for the same Conservative government again in 2017. We also voted to join the EU in the 70s. Well I didn't because I was not old enough to vote.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 5 Aug 18 at 19:19
|
>> We also voted to join the EU in the 70s.
>> Well I didn't because I was not old enough to vote.
>>
No, we didn't.
Even if you had been old enough, you wouldn't have had a vote.
|
Yes we as a country did. We voted to join the EEC in 1973. Since then we have had numerous Governments and we have allowed them to further integrate us into what became the EU. There's been many votes on this.
Did you vote to join the EEC Duncan?
|
>> Yes we as a country did. We voted to join the EEC in 1973. Since
>> then we have had numerous Governments and we have allowed them to further integrate us
>> into what became the EU. There's been many votes on this.
>>
>> Did you vote to join the EEC Duncan?
I am not sure if you understand my point. i certainly don't understand yours.
The British electorate did not have a vote on whether or not to join the EEC because there was no referendum, plebiscite or whatever other word you wish to use. The MPs in the House of Commons had a vote. The general public didn't. Is that clear?
Did I vote to join the EEC? Apart from being irrelevant, why do you ask? I didn't vote to join, because there was no vote!
|
We voted in the Government and MPs at the time to represent us - the population had a vote.
Then there was a referendum a few years later asking the population did we want to remain the the EEC. How did you vote on that one?
Maybe you don't recall the 1975 referendum? I don't because I was 5.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 5 Aug 18 at 20:07
|
|
Actually I was still 4 when we had the referendum in 1975. Non-binding which is the same as 2016. But there was a clear majority to remain in the EEC.
|
>> The British electorate did not have a vote on whether or not to join the
>> EEC because there was no referendum, plebiscite or whatever other word you wish to use.
>> The MPs in the House of Commons had a vote. The general public didn't. Is
>> that clear?
The Conservatives, against expectations, won the General Election in 1970 with a commitment to negotiate our entry to the Common Market/EEU. They had a mandate to join and on a vote in October 1971 the UK Parliament accepted that resulting in a treaty of accession the following year.
OK there was no referendum or plebescite on question but neither was there one on any other decision of a properly elected Parliament. IIRC the 1975 referendum on whether to remain was the first in UK constitutional history.
|
>> the 1975 referendum on whether to remain was the first in UK constitutional history.
And an overwhelming majority voted to leave. I wonder how Pat and Duncan voted then? Would they answer on here - I doubt it.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 5 Aug 18 at 22:04
|
Keep away from the Express, rtj - they're becoming increasingly swivel-eyed by the week with their own fantasy about how to negotiate.
Looks like there's a movement trying to line up Jeremy Hunt to be the next PM also.
|
>> And an overwhelming majority voted to leave. I wonder how .....Duncan voted then?
>> Would they answer on here - I doubt it.
Are you quite sure on the result? 67% voted to remain, 32% voted to leave.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975
I can't imagine why you have formed the opinion that you have on my political leanings.
For the record I voted to leave in 1975. Over the years I have changed my mind and in 2016 I voted to remain.
Like so many relationships, the UK's with the EEC isn't perfect, but on balance, I believe we are better in than out.
|
Apologies Duncan - I for some reason had you down as leave. Sorry. I truly am.
With hindsight I think we'd have been better off not in the EU as many probably do. The project evolved. But we are where we are and leave is not a good idea.
Now those in the leave campaign who talked up how easy it was to have trade deals including with the EU are distancing themselves. And if there really is not deal, nothing for parliament to vote on before we leave.
|
And still one stumbling block over an EU deal is RoI/NI. We cannot get out of the single market/freedom of movement/etc. without a border. But we can't go back to that surely. And even during the troubles in Ireland there was not a proper border.
And yet if we agree nothing then there will be a border. Is that not a little ironic? We won't do a deal which avoids a border but if there's no deal there is a border.
|
It's 7 minutes 21 seconds long. Support leave or remain, you should listen to this.
A gentlemen called Jason Hunter phones into the James O'Brien's radio show on LBC.This is a recording of that.
Properly listen to it, and try to do so objectively. Listen to the facts and figures and try to think about it.
Especially listen to the bit at the beginning where James O'Brien quotes Article 50.
Jason Hunter is no fool. Not even a little bit, though I don't always agree with him on everything, he does know his stuff.
He is not saying that we should remain, he is just trying to quantify the issue in front of us.
"There's no part of it that says we can get a deal? None of it. We leave. There is no deal to be done, there never was."
amp.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/expert-schools-james-obrien-on-brexit-facts/?__twitter_impression=true
As I was trying to say the other day, this is no longer about leave or remain. This is about; "What the hell do we do to get through this?"
It is one enormous fudge up. Leaving was not, in my opinion, the smartest choice of the three options we should have had. But what will hurt us more is the absolute pile of s***e we have made of the last 2 years.
[NB: from Chile I had to disable my ad-blockers to listen to it, I have no idea if it will be the same for you or not]
|
Worked fine for me - he talks a lot of sense. And I agree the government has wasted the 2 years.
The WTO bit fits in with what I'd read. We need to negotiate tariffs to trade under WTO rules because we currently do this via the EU. So this will take time and needs to be agreed with all members of the WTO. You cannot just start trading under those rules unless you have agreements on tariffs.
I like his simple stance of saying this was never a negotiation and I agree that the EU seems to be following this approach. It is a legal progress. We need to agree on some things but the rest can only be sorted out after we leave.
I think I'll stock up the cellar with food come January/February.
|
Jason Hunter is no fool, except... that he is trying, Canute-style, to stop something that is unstoppable and that, in my book, is foolish.
I was no keen advocate for Brexit, but it is coming. So people like Hunter putting enormous amounts of effort to prevent Brexit are causing more of the problem.
If people like Hunter had accepted the Brexit result in the first place and put their brains in gear to help rather than to hinder, then we would be closer to achieving it.
I've never heard of this bloke, and I'm not convinced Google has either. He's not the partner of Russell Cooke by the same name, nor is he a technical analyst at JPM. What is clear is that he is not helping.
|
>> If people like Hunter had accepted the Brexit result in the first place and put
>> their brains in gear to help rather than to hinder, then we would be closer
>> to achieving it.
That sounds a bit close to the Brexit argument that holds 'Remoaners' to blame for the rocky road Brexit is proving to be. Appealing though that argument is as a Leaver's response to those now saying 'told you so' it doesn't hold water.
Apart from the enormity of the task itself there's one reason and one only why it's not going to plan and that reason is disunity in the Tory party which goes all the way to the Cabinet. The Chequers agreement has fallen apart and we're still hurtling towards the cliff.
I suspect there will be some sort of agreement before March but also that it will take the form of a large ball of fudge to be kicked down the road for at least two more years.
|
>> Apart from the enormity of the task itself there's one reason and one only why
>> it's not going to plan and that reason is disunity in the Tory party which
>> goes all the way to the Cabinet.
It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact the the other members of the EU have absolutely no interest in helping the UK reach any sort of deal?
There is nothing in it for them.
The more they see us struggle the more it discourages anyone else from thinking about leaving.
I firmly believe that anyone from the UK sitting down at that with the EU was on a hiding to nothing.
|
We've not asked the EU for a form of deal they could ever accept yet. We don't want a deal like Norway or Canada. What we seem to want them to agree includes:
- leaving the single market and customs union but being able to trade freely and not need any form of border checks
- have freedom of movement of goods but not people
.... basically have a cake and eat it deal.
If we started out actually discussing this with them over a year ago we might be nearer getting to a deal. But it's not going to be the one agreed by the government in Chequers.... not that they really agreed.
I still believe a starting point is a deal/solution that allows us to avoid a border on the island of Ireland. From that deal/solution a lot of the rest will follow. But we're ignoring the elephant in the room and it will come back to derail this. The so called backstop would now be illegal.
So we might not agree a way forward because we can't agree on the NI/ROI problem which might need a border. So we fall out of the EU without a deal and therefore need a border.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 9 Aug 18 at 17:46
|
The NI/RoI border issue is one of the very few sticks the UK has over Europe.
No free trade deal = border = RoI's economy gets royally pumped.
Varadkar can bring all the swagger he likes to proceedings but he has a fairly empty hand.
|
>> The NI/RoI border issue is one of the very few sticks the UK has over
>> Europe.
>>
>> No free trade deal = border = RoI's economy gets royally pumped.
>>
>>
>> Varadkar can bring all the swagger he likes to proceedings but he has a fairly
>> empty hand.
If only it were that simple. There's a lot more to NI/RoI border than whether RoI economy gets 'royally pumped'.
|
>>There's a lot more to NI/RoI border than whether RoI economy gets 'royally pumped'
Indeed, and as I have mentioned before there really isn't any conceivable way to have a borderless connection without also allowing free travel and trade.
If RoI want a non-border then freedom of travel and trade are required.
UK Govt (and presumably DUP) don't want freedom of travel, so a border it must be.
What flavour of border?
Well to prevent unwanted immigration and smuggling from the EU via RoI it needs to be a physical border.
… or fudge ;-)
|
|
Which is why I say the relationship and border needs to be decided and move from there. Little point wasting time on everything else to find you need a border and we don't want one or vice-versa.
|
>>
>>
>> Apart from the enormity of the task
Pedant mode:
Enormity doesn't mean very big, it means monstrously wicked.
But perhaps you do mean that? :)
|
"the great or extreme scale, seriousness, or extent of something perceived as bad or morally wrong."
Works for me.
|
>>he is trying, Canute-style, to stop something that is unstoppable...............….
it seems that you either did not listen to or did not understand the interview.
He is not trying to stop anything, he is pointing out the magnitude of the task and the direction in which he thinks it is going.
The rest of your post is simply nonsense.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 9 Aug 18 at 11:38
|
I love you too, Mark.
Brompton>>Apart from the enormity of the task itself there's one reason and one only why it's not going to
>>plan and that reason is disunity in the Tory party which goes all the way to the Cabinet. The
>>Chequers agreement has fallen apart and we're still hurtling towards the cliff.
Absolutely agree with you, Brompton. Everybody falls into the same category. The opposition too. You don't win a war by bickering amongst yourselves. You have to put up a united front.
And I agree with you too that there will be an agreement in time. Every contract ever involves both sides putting down firm red lines. And then eventually an agreement needs to be reached as the deadline approaches and the firm red lines turn out to be rather more flexible.
Wasting effort on explaining why it can never work (thank you Mr Canute and myriad others) is just as silly as saying that Brexit will cure all ills. We'd have been a lot better off without it in the short term (who knows about the long term), but if the politicians fail to deliver it then I fear for democracy.
|
>I love you too, Mark.
I have no feelings about you one way or the other. Nor interest for that matter.
You wrote nonsense, I pointed it out.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 9 Aug 18 at 14:09
|
|
I wrote what you describe as being nonsense. Not the same thing at all. :)
|
|
I will defer to the opinion of William James on the matter.
|
>> >>he is trying, Canute-style, to stop something that is unstoppable...............….
>>
>>
>> He is not trying to stop anything, he is pointing out the magnitude of the
>> task and the direction in which he thinks it is going.
>>
Exactly like Canute in fact.
Canute wasn't foolishly trying to stop the unstoppable, he was ridiculing the sycophancy of his courtiers who would pretend to believe anything, thinking they were pleasing him.
|
>>Exactly like Canute in fact.
Historically, yes; metaphorically, no. Simple, huh?
|
>> Exactly like Canute in fact
Swearfilter blocks C nut.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Fri 10 Aug 18 at 13:23
|
The swear filter on car4play is a snowflake.
Pat
|
>>The swear filter on car4play is a snowflake.
Was just trying to link the wiki page for the chap - interesting history about England/Denmark/Norway being under one banner.
Shame the French invaded and turned y'all into cheese-eating surrender monkeys.
tinyurl.com/canute-the-great
|
I was just wondering how tariffs will apply on 'goods' when you're not in the single market/customs union.
For example, take a gearbox made by Borg Warner in South Wales destined for a car to be made in Italy. I can see that should probably have a tariff applied.
But what about an engine made by BMW in the UK destined for a car to be assembled by BMW in Germany. The finished product is the car and BMW made the engine and will be using it in the car being produced in Germany. It's BMWs engine (they haven't sold it) - they are selling a car ultimately. And if that car gets sold in France should there be a tariff related to the engine?
VW ships car chassis/bodies, engines and gearboxes to Crewe to make Bentleys. Do you apply tariffs to all those on the way to the UK. And then potentially a tariff to the completed car when it's exported? Of course VW also assemble Bentleys in Germany so could just shut down manufacturing in Crewe and just have designers there.
So will tariffs only apply to finished goods for sale and not components? Of course the engine might be needed for an existing car and at that time is the product and tariffs would apply.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Wed 8 Aug 18 at 14:29
|
It can all be resolved. All of it. There is an answer for everything.
But not before March. (October).
When it is finally resolved it will of course be BEANO, but I think that will actually be fine for many of those who supported leave. And many of those who voted remain, as well.
|
>> It can all be resolved. All of it. There is an answer for everything.
>>
>> But not before March. (October).
>>
>>
>> When it is finally resolved it will of course be BEANO, but I think that
>> will actually be fine for many of those who supported leave. And many of those
>> who voted remain, as well.
>>
It does not of course all need to be resolved before March which is when we are due to leave the EU
What both sides need to agree by 18 October is an outline of future relations to allow time for UK parliament and EU members to ratify agreement by Brexit day. If such an outline agreement is not achieved by that date then the last last chance is the 13 December 2018: EU summit.
if such an outline agreement is reached we then have the two year transition period to sort out the details. The transition period could probably be extended.
I would say that notwithstanding the posturing by both sides it is more than likely that an outline agreement will be reached by December.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Wed 8 Aug 18 at 17:45
|
I would agree, I think you are probably correct. . But there have been some grandstanding lines drawn in the sand and they need to be undrawn.
And that undrawing is going to cause some level of disruption and end some number of careers.
I couldn't put a numerical value on "some".
|
I rather think that as the deadline approaches even the hardest of the hardliners will finesse their position. Few will want to go downs in history as being responsible for the chaos would ensue if no agreement were to be reached and we crash out of the EU.
"Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.â€
|
>>
>> "Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a
>> fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.â€
>>
I had to look that up:
Written by Rev William Dodds shortly before being hanged for forgery of a £4,000 bond, words by Samuel Johnson. Dodds was an alumnus of my old college, I discover.
|
>>
>> So will tariffs only apply to finished goods for sale and not components? Of course
>> the engine might be needed for an existing car and at that time is the
>> product and tariffs would apply.
>>
I imagine the default will be the situation that already exists for imports from the rest of the world. No reason for it to be different. Reliefs are available if the imported products are not to remain in the country. It’s only if the imported, duty attracting product remains in the EU (at present) or UK (pre EU and post BREXIt) that duty is due. That has been the case for as long as I can remember! And most (all?) manufacturing companies that export will already have systems and processes that can deal with it, because, let’s face it, most imports used in manufacturing come from outside the EU. HMRC are going to have to concede, or water down, their current guarantee requirements though. At the moment you need to be able to give HMRC a bank guarantee for the potential duty exposure. Though if you have AEO (Approved Economic Operator) status that’s already reduced.
|
As reported by remain media.
It's increasingly obvious that Brexit itself is simply a side-show to those in power.
The real show (as usual) is dividing the plebs into 'them' and 'us' so they can be more easily played.
|
|
That theory presupposes a level of strategic planning of which those in power seem incapable.
|
>> Couple of straws in the wind about changing public opinion:
Unlike a generate election, referendum result was not consituency based but total number of votes cast on each side.
There could be consituencies which swinged from remain to leave as well - which remain supporting newspaper decided to ignore.
I read few days back EU might allow UK to remain in SM without accepting freedom of movement. Not sure how much truth in that as EU always stated 4 freedoms are inseparable.
|
"I read few days back EU might allow UK to remain in SM without accepting freedom of movement. Not sure how much truth in that as EU always stated 4 freedoms are inseparable."
Some friends in a nearby village voted to remain in the EU - largely on the basis that they enjoy their continental holidays, their booze-cruises and the opportunities to re-visit their O-level French. They had taken wise counsel from the likes of Tony Blair, Bob Geldhof, Gary Lineker and a vast array of tv celebs; they also feared change.
A couple of months after the referendum, said friends were up in arms when they learned that another 800 houses were to be built in their village. Suddenly, after taking no interest in local politics whatsoever, they were to be found at every single parish council meeting; they howled and they protested that this development would almost double the size of the village.
I reminded them that, in voting to remain in the EU, they were voting for free-movement of people and that an additional 300,000 people per annum had to live somewhere. Ah, they replied, but there isn’t the room in our village, can’t they live somewhere else? A degree of embarrassment then ensued when it dawned on them that they were hypocrites (at best) or xenophobes (at worst).
Neither the EU nor the housing development has been raised in conversation since.
|
>> Neither the EU nor the housing development has been raised in conversation since.
After your snide remarks about them I am surprised they are still "friends".
|
>> I read few days back EU might allow UK to remain in SM without accepting
>> freedom of movement.
Where did you read that, link please.
|
|
Due to the source, I doubt its veracity.
|
Well, our Nige is back, Boris is launching his battle bus along with JRM and apparently extreme Remainers are suffering from a very real disease.
www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1005949/brexit-news-remain-EU-anxiety-disorder-philip-corr-simon-stuart
Meanwhile, TM is denying trying to fuel Project Fear when in fact, she intends to do just that
Strangely none of these facts have been commented on in this thread.
Pat
|
"Well, our Nige is back,......."
Leave it, Pat; leave it! We've had perfect peace on here for a whole 10 days and you try and stir 'em up again. ;-)
|
Would I do that?:)
Just wondering why they've gone all quiet? Can't all be away on holiday!
Pat
|
>> Just wondering why they've gone all quiet? Can't all be away on holiday!
>>
>> Pat
Perhaps because, like me, they are fed up with the subject?
Can I buy a newspaper and a television that isn't forever going on about either Brexit, or Donald Trump?
|
Pat, you've still not replied to a lot of comments on here such as what is the real issue with the demand on the NHS.
So can we conclude you just have no idea?
|
""Well, our Nige is back,......."
Leave it, Pat; leave it! We've had perfect peace on here for a whole 10 days and you try and stir 'em up again. ;-)"
Yep - I wuz right again ;-(
|
>> Well, our Nige is back, Boris is launching his battle bus along with JRM and
>> apparently extreme Remainers are suffering from a very real disease.
>>
>> www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1005949/brexit-news-remain-EU-anxiety-disorder-philip-corr-simon-stuart
It's the Express. Takes talking utter rubbish to a new level.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 02:12
|
I can find a different link, there are plenty Bromp if you prefer;)
The more you read it though, the more it makes sense of the behaviour of many of them!
Pat
|
>> I can find a different link, there are plenty Bromp if you prefer;)
A link to the original research would be a start :-)
|
Google is your friend!
Pat
|
Why do you repeatedly bring up the leave/remain subject, one that has essentially been decided, when everyone else here is discussing the challenges we face going forward?
|
While I was scanning round for the source I found this one. It's a lot of words and no pictures so may not suit everyone here, but it does attempt to explain why Leave voters voted the way they did.
www.jrf.org.uk/report/brexit-vote-explained-poverty-low-skills-and-lack-opportunities?gclid=CjwKCAjwqarbBRBtEiwArlfEIKHL4kT2j7lWAgD4NvN56I81ZXRRXEQxxzh2OhfNDtr3btTln5Gx2BoC2-4QAvD_BwE
I've read quite a bit of it and so far their conclusions appear to centre around poverty, educational level, age and those feeling "left behind".
But, as we enlightened folk here on C4P all know, none of these were the actual reason for the outcome. If only they'd come here to do their research :-)
Whatever - for me, the glaringly obvious conclusion is that all these poncy reports mean nothing, even when reproduced in the national press.
Anyway, I'm glad you're now feeling able to talk a little about BREXIT anyway, even though it's only to have a little prod. Tiny steps and all that... :-)
Last edited by: smokie on Thu 23 Aug 18 at 16:21
|
|
Are we meant to think of these 84 documents as project 'reality' if we do crash out without a deal?
|
It's funny to think that if only we had had a referendum long ago "Do you think Britain should form an Empire?", or perhaps later "Do you think Britain should withdraw from Empire?" and everything would have been rosy, democracy would have prevailed, and we would have found our right place in the world.
Perhaps :)
|
These 84 documents are all part of Project Fear.
Seriously I was surprised to see some on here earlier on were saying they were stockpiling stuff.
Surely they weren't serious?
Pat
|
>> These 84 documents are all part of Project Fear.
>>
>> Seriously I was surprised to see some on here earlier on were saying they were
>> stockpiling stuff.
>>
>> Surely they weren't serious?
Pat, would you please explain what you mean by the term Project Fear?
|
"Project Fear" is also known as "Price Worth Paying" . Tho as we are buying nothing, any price is a bit steep.
|
Assuming it's a term you haven't heard before Smokie, I will humour you.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Fear_(British_politics)
Or perhaps you could Google it where there are hundreds of references to it.
You do lead a sheltered life down South.
Pat
|
To dismiss any planning for the real possibility of the U.K. leaving the EU without an agreement as “Project Fear†seems foolhardy at least.
If we do leave the EU in these circumstances there will be consequences. The impact of those consequences can to a certain extent be mitigated by planning for them although there is little time to do so.
Do you not think it is the duty of the Government to advise its citizens of those consequences? I am sure that there will be lot of people saying “Why didn’t the Government tells this would happen†after the event in any case.
|
@ Pat. Thank you for your patronising response. Why do you happily give them out but take offence when on the receiving end?
Anyway in case you haven't heard of risk management....
prince2.wiki/Risk
If you read that you will see that a standard part of any project, which BREXIT would qualify as, is to assess risk and make plans and strategies for how to manage it.
Isn't that what the documents you refer to as Project Fear documents are doing - reviewing the risks and detailing the contingency planning?
Didn't Cameron get criticised for not having contingency plans on the event of a Out vote?
Can't win can they...
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 09:30
|
>> Can't win can they...
Dont worry, the "remoaners" will get the blame.
|
And the EU for not letting us have our cake and eat it.
The EU clearly should allow us to have a deal that is against their core principles because us leaving will damage the EU too.
|
Smokie.
You know, and I know exactly what Project Fear refers to, the phrase has been around since before we voted after all.
Don't ask me a patronising question and not expect a patronising response.
This is exactly why we don't even bother.
Pat
|
>>This is exactly why we don't even bother.
For someone who bangs on and on and on about how much you don't bother, you don't half seem to bother a lot.
Though I notice that you are talking for a group. I can just see you all huddled together stroking each other and plotting your next excursion into the depths of hell.
|
Pat, I didn't find Smokie's question patronising at all (and I'm not holding in with him because he's a fellow moderator either).
I've not heard of Project Fear before either, so I'm glad someone asked the question.
Your reply however was patronising.
|
VX, you don't read a newspaper, listen to the radio, watch TV or even, God forbid, go on Facebook?
It's been plastered all over every one of those for the last two years.
I may have well asked Smokie what Brexit was.
I ignore all of Mark's posts now, most of rtj's and the list is growing.
I find it more effective and amusing to watch the efforts some go to thinking I will be led:)
You can take a horse to water.....
But it's always good for forum traffic!
Pat
|
>> I ignore all of Mark's posts now,
Liar.
|
House rule Number 1 Mark....
Why do you think you can personally insult other members on here?
Last edited by: helicopter on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 11:57
|
|
That wasn't an insult, it was a statement of fact. Would you and your fellow moderators care to suggest an alternative phrase?
|
Mark..
It really boils down to the same old kiddy playground attitude on this thread.
I am not a mod as you well know but I seriously think you need to just tone it down a level with a bit of thought before posting personal comments .
This is a discussion forum not a personal insult forum...even if I did call Zero an irritating troll the other day....
|
Oh get off your sanctimonious, hypocritical high horse.
The moderators are quite capable of deleting something I write or speaking directly to me if they wish, and I listen.
|
But you don't listen Mark .....
You consider yourself above criticism...and better than those that you consider below you in status on this forum and no doubt elsewhere.
And as for sanctimonius hypocricy..well go and take a good hard look at yourself.
|
No, you'll not find me being hypocritical.
And I make no apologies for my opinions of some people on this forum.
And do you mean I should have listened to something you said? I mean, *you*??? Really????? What was that?
Since you are apparently aware that you're not a moderator, then why not point your whining in their direction? At least they may care what you think.
And if they do, and if they agree, then no doubt I shall hear about it or see my posts being deleted.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 16:56
|
|
Wow! A frowny face! Well, that told me.
|
>> VX, you don't read a newspaper, listen to the radio, watch TV or even, God forbid, go on Facebook?
I do, yes, yes, and yes.
>> It's been plastered all over every one of those for the last two years.
Well I haven't seen it before. But then politics, and this whole Brexit crap bore the pants off me, so I've probably overlooked it.
|
Having done a bit of research with the search facility maybe I can point you to a bit more info on Project Fear.
The phrase has been used on this forum numerous times during the last two years.
Bromptonaut x 3 on July 17th, 18th and 13th March 18
Dog x 1 26th Jan
Haywain x 1 28th July
rtj x 1 February 17
Movilogo x 1 January 17
These are just a few and at no time have you asked any of them to explain what it meant, neither can VX deny having heard it if he reads the threads to moderate them.
I don't like being treated like an idiot and I don't like being patronised.
When you treat me with the same respect you treat others with, you and I may finally agree on something.
Pat
|
>>I don't like being treated like an idiot
If it walks like a duck...….
|
>>>>I ignore all of Mark's posts now, most of rtj's and the list is growing.<<<<
You enjoy being the in the minority then? Maybe you have become conditioned to it from a life of breaking barriers?
|
>>You enjoy being the in the minority then? Maybe you have become conditioned to it from a life of breaking barriers?<<
What a strange comment sherlock.
I'm not sure I really understand what you mean or indeed if it is meant seriously, however I'll try and answer.
I've honestly never felt in the minority, probably because in my world of work I met a lot of opposition in the early days, and the best/only way to deal with it was to ignore it, keep my head down and go my own way with a bit more determination than before.
I don't call that breaking down barriers but maybe you do, I don't know.
All I expect from anyone is to be treated equally and respected for what I am or do. That's how I treat other people so it can't really be that hard, can it?
When it doesn't happen I go instantly into 'head down and more determined than ever mode'.
Even though I'm in touch with many who have walked away from here because of the flak I constantly get from a few of the members each and every time I post, I certainly don't agree with them giving up and walking away.
That's taking the easy way out and selling yourself short IMHO.
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 13:55
|
Missed the edit:
Don't ever think you get used to personal attacks.
Each and every one hurts just a little bit more and no doubt that will give Mark a lot of satisfaction.
It also does my pride good to know I can still take them and not run the other way.
Pat
PS Bob Segar Like a Rock playing as I write this, must mean something!
Last edited by: Pat on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 14:01
|
>>>" I met a lot of opposition in the early days, and the best/only way to deal with it was to ignore it, keep my head down and go my own way with a bit more determination than before."<<<
I regard that as an excellent example of breaking down barriers. Hence my comment on conditioning. if you don't regard it as that, I will not comment further on that aspect.
You continue to say "When it doesn't happen I go instantly into 'head down and more determined than ever mode'." And then you wonder why things escalate to the point of no return.
We all take flak at times - the secret is to fly above it.
|
Glad I got it right then Sherlock and please feel free to comment further.
>>We all take flak at times - the secret is to fly above it.<<
Not every time.
And I have to disagree on this.
By ignoring the ones who seek to hurt and still being here, I am flying above it.
....and that isn't going to change anytime soon.
Pat
|
"If it walks like a duck..."
Chuck Berry does. So does Angus Young. Obvs.
Not so sure about Wilko Johnson but I'd rather watch him any day.
|
>> These are just a few and at no time have you asked any of them
>> to explain what it meant, neither can VX deny having heard it if he reads
>> the threads to moderate them.
The term itself seems relatively new, probably coined by the No campaign in the 2014 Scots Indyref. The concept however is as old as the democratic process/hustings; vote for the other lot and something awful will happen.
Labour have used the Tory threat to the NHS for most of my adult life. The Tories have portrayed Labour as threatening totalitarianism at least since the Zinoviev letter.
It may not have been called Project Fear but the technique was used by David Cameron in both 2010 (UK will be another Greece under Labour) and 2015 (Labour will be in Nicola Sturgeon's pocket). I've already referenced it's use in the Indyref and it also played a part in the Transferable Vote Referendum.
No wonder the Tories thought it would work again.
Smokie's question may have had the more subtle spin of how papers released yesterday could really be part of Project Fear?
They were introduced by Dominic Raab who is certainly not a remainer. They set out the potential factual consequences of 'no deal' Brexit. If we crash out and go to WTO terms there WILL be tariffs customs controls and therefore delays and red tape.
Anybody who thinks that won't be case with no deal is living in the world of Mr Micawber.
|
>> neither can VX deny having heard it if he reads the threads to moderate them.
Like I previously said, politics, and Brexit bore the pants off me. I tend to just skip through those type of discussions, and hence why I've probably missed it.
>> I don't like being treated like an idiot and I don't like being patronised.
I wasn't on both counts.
>> When you treat me with the same respect you treat others with, you and I may finally agree on something.
I think part of the problem here is that you're very quick to take offence at something, then get on your high horse to try and defend yourself. I think too what you just said also applies to you.
Let's look at it another way. We're not male truckers on here, trying to belittle the girly who in their eyes is doing a 'mans' job, and subsequently you have to prove them wrong. So stop trying to make us out that we are.
You can sometimes come across as being quite hostile with your replies, then get all bolshie when someone snaps back at you.
|
>> Are we meant to think of these 84 documents as project 'reality' if we do crash out without a deal?
Just like the referendum debate, it's almost impossible to see through all the smoke, mirrors, lies, self-interest, politics and general bullplop that's coming from all sides.
We've set this beast in motion now. Very little you, I, or anyone else can do about it other than ride it out and make the best of it, whatever happens.
|
Look upon it as 'offering therapy' Smokie!
The Remainers have gone very quiet now the Brexiteers are fighting back and I wouldn't want them to feel unable to speak their mind about the facts I posted:)
Pat
|
When the leavers do not want to discuss or answer genuine questions there's little point posting in these threads anymore.
Some of what these papers say will happen if we leave with no deal. Some people are in denial.
|
...just to liven things up, the following experience only today rather sums it up for me:
One of the pins in my watch bracelet has been making an escape bid for some time, and as I headed off for a haircut, I called into the tiny old-fashioned jewellers in the next village to see if they had any.
The incumbent is an elderly gent (even to me!) and he studied the watch with an eyepiece (I wasn't convinced he could even see the watch without it, never mind the pin) and then said "that's your problem, that's a watch pin, not a bracelet pin - should be able to fix that".
So, as he was working very slowly, we passed a few pleasant words, and he asked me whether I had any holiday plans. I affirmed I was shortly off in a motorhome to tour Europe, and he responded that that would probably get more difficult after Brexit.
Then, after a short pause, he added in a rather melancholy tone "I voted out you know - after that fellow didn't do anything" (I'm assuming he meant Cameron). He then added, "it's the immigration that I don't like" - pause - "not the Poles and so on, they're OK, it's the Nigerians and such I don't like, coming over here and living on our dole".
He ended with, "anyway, at my age it won't make any difference to me!"
Nice enough guy on the surface, but I didn't half feel like slapping him ;-)
The exchange above is pretty verbatim, and, though he will have seen plenty of Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Romanians etc. where he is, Nigerians are thin enough on the ground for me to doubt he's ever seen one.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 11 Sep 19 at 10:42
|
A neighbour of mine voted out partly because of the Somali's coming. I don't know of any locally.
And oddly he has a place in Bulgaria... yet he voted to leave. So it's okay for him to go to Bulgaria he thinks but not for others to come here. And he doesn't have a problem with Poles, Bulgarians, etc. just Somali's it seems.
|
>>the Brexiteers are fighting back
Ha ha ha ha ha ha.....
Fighting back? You'd have to pull your head out of the sand and answer questions for that to happen.
If anybody asks how this is going to be done you whine "Project Fear" and stick your heads even deeper.
How much that is because you fear what is coming, how much is because you don't understand what is happening and how much because you're comfortable there I don't know.
Time and time again you get asked difficult questions and so you run away for a few days until you think it's forgotten and then come back in with the same tired, Remoaners vs. Brave, bold Brexiteers tripe.
I would have thought your own lack of knowledge would bother you. Seemingly not.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 10:45
|
>> While I was scanning round for the source I found this one. It's a lot
>> of words and no pictures so may not suit everyone here, but it does attempt
>> to explain why Leave voters voted the way they did.
>>
>> www.jrf.org.uk/report/brexit-vote-explained-poverty-low-skills-and-lack-opportunities?gclid=CjwKCAjwqarbBRBtEiwArlfEIKHL4kT2j7lWAgD4NvN56I81ZXRRXEQxxzh2OhfNDtr3btTln5Gx2BoC2-4QAvD_BwE
>>
What is missing from the key findings of this report is the i-word. The reason why lower paid, lower educated people voted Brexit is because they believed that immigration had caused the down-ward pressure on their wages, and the upward pressure on house prices. They consider immigration to be behind many of their problems and think that Brexit would solve them. Only time will tell who is right!
|
OK, the I-Word then.
At the risk of being called racist yet again on here, I will give my views on this even though it certainly wasn't the reason I voted to leave.
Immigration has put pressure on wages, on our NHS, on our housing situation, on our local council services, our Police Force and other Emergency Services as well as on our infrastructure.
But it isn't immigration that was the problem.
It was the fact that our politicians couldn't see this happening 15/20 years ago and say, 'Hey, we can't carry on like this, we have to do something about it'
It was the way we couldn't do anything about it without the EU's permission and agreement which we were never going to get with our past or present governments.
That's been the problem that has brought us to this situation.
Pat
|
>> Immigration has put pressure on wages,
I can guarantee you that Brexit is not going to put more wages in your pocket. Not going to fix the NHS either.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 23 Aug 18 at 21:30
|
>> Immigration has put pressure on.... our NHS, on our housing situation, on our local council
>> services,
An ageing UK population is putting pressure on the NHS. Most of these are UK born citizens. I would think similar for housing problems being related to an ageing population and not enough new houses being built.
As for council services, one of their biggest costs is social care. Again a big part is due to an ageing population with care needs. If someone doesn't have enough savings to pay for their own care or a property that can ultimately cover this then care will be paid for by the councils. Which we know cannot afford this. Look at Northampton.
Anyone paying for care privately is also subsidising those that did not save or buy houses and therefore get free care.
So what we need is for a fair few 80 year old plus people to die I think. Brexit and immigration is not the problem.
EDIT: When I say care I mean both home visits by carers or nurses and residential care. When we go on holiday one of our parents now goes into residential care at nearly £800 a week.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 23 Aug 18 at 23:42
|
I should also add that a lot of NHS Hospital beds are 'blocked' with elderly patents fit to be discharged but they cannot be sent home and there is no available residential care for them. Paid by council or themselves.
We need a solution to pay for the care of older people in need of looking after.
|
Something else putting a strain on the NHS model are expensive treatments. In this I include drugs and medical equipment, e.g.
- Some cancer drugs are VERY expensive. Sometimes drugs exist but NICE has not approved them so tough luck. You probably die if you need them.
- Cancer screening services.
- There are some very costly drugs helping people with HIV and without them they would get AIDS and die. Also drugs for homosexual men that prevents them ever getting infected from unprotected sex (I know they shouldn't do that but some do).
- CT Scanners, modern X-Rays, etc.
When the NHS was founded we had none of these treatments or technologies.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 23 Aug 18 at 23:58
|
A question for our resident doctor, how much does the NHS typically pay out for the treatment of someone with breast cancer?
Say they are diagnosed and need say a double mastectomy, radiotherapy, chemotherapy etc. Have a relative who went through this last year. First time they got breast cancer they only needed radio and chemo I think. So basically had the treatment twice.
And how many 'immigrants' do we offer cancer treatment to might be a followup question.
|
I think we all understood where your concerns lay when you got so upset about who was going to pay for Malala Yousafzai's treatment.
>>It was the way we couldn't do anything about it without the EU's permission
Not true. But I understand how much you want it to be.
|
Let's hope the preference of the hard Brexit supporting Tories does not come true. They seem willing to throw away manufacturing and rely ever more on us providing services. And if we don't make things then those lower educated people might struggle to find well paid jobs but can find them now.
A close relative has owned and run a few business over the last 30 years based in South Wales. He struggles to find people willing to get trained in engineering type jobs with good pay and qualifications at the end of it. They think staying on benefits is just as good. This is real and I am not making it up. Goes back over 30 years. This has included apprenticeships..... Some of these will have voted leave.
The same set of people moan when we might have foreign GPs or corner shops run by someone from overseas. These people cannot understand that we need well educated people to spend a long time and hard work to qualify as British GPs. And that the corner shop open 7am to 11pm is hard work and low paid on an hourly rate.
|
Don't worry.
Non-EU migration has taken up the slack from falling numbers of EU immigrants.
www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/dvc527/fig2.html
Since the Govt has full control over non-EU migration they must be happy with this.
|
>> Since the Govt has full control over non-EU migration they must be happy with this.
And so are all of us I guess. Result.
But who'd want to come here with devaluing currency and a poor welcome. Somalis I assume are still interested in coming.
|
>>>These people cannot understand that....<<<<
well that just about sums it up, no further words needed.
But I still cannot understand why the Sunderland, Swindon and Welsh turkeys voted for Xmas.
|
>>
>> But I still cannot understand why the Sunderland, Swindon and Welsh turkeys voted for Xmas.
>>
People who pretend not to understand why other people voted the way they did don't understand that the vote was based on sentiment and instinct, not on a spurious and dubious evaluation of supposed facts.
There were three sentiments at play:
1) Britain is part of Europe. I feel European, I want to stay part of it.
2) I'm British, I'd rather muddle through even under a socialist government than be ruled by foreigners
3) There are too many immigrants here and they are taking our jobs.
1 and 2 I can understand, although I incline towards the second.
3 is shortsighted, ungrateful, and at worst simply bigotted and despicable.
So there we have it. There is nothing to understand. We mostly run our lives on feelings, but we like to dress them up by picking facts and theories that appear to justify those feelings.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 11 Sep 19 at 10:41
|
|
If we assume that we leave and build a UK along the Brexit Tory lines, that of services, then we don't need people to built things nor transport the products.... So what do we do with those people no longer needed? Pay them benefits?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 23 Aug 18 at 21:21
|
>> If we assume that we leave and build a UK along the Brexit Tory lines,
>> that of services, then we don't need people to built things nor transport the products....
>> So what do we do with those people no longer needed? Pay them benefits?
The truth is that manufacturing is pretty stuffed anyway. That will accelerate if the supply of cheap labour is reduced, although the weakened pound has actually helped a bit.
It's a difficult area, with or without Brexit.
The real mystery is why Germany has done so much better than we have. Much has been written about that of which this is only a sample -
www.theguardian.com/global/2016/mar/30/the-uk-could-learn-a-lot-from-germanys-long-term-industrial-strategy
|
Some 'maths'...
We used to have lots of EU residents who came to the UK for seasonal work. They worked hard and maybe earned enough to contribute taxes. We as businesses made money selling the products. They work here and pay some tax and national insurance.
Somone from this group use the GP etc a few times. Dentist....
A UK resident gets cancer. Gets treated. Cost a bit more. But that's what the NHS is for.
Is this a problem? Or are there many EU members arriving for expensive life saving treatment?
|
>> Is this a problem? Or are there many EU members arriving for expensive life saving
>> treatment?
Health tourism is, in context of overall NHS spend, pretty small beer. All EU countries, or at least the vast majority, have healthcare as good as UK. Numbers coming here solely to get life saving treatment is nugatory. Those arriving in expectation of life saving or other costly treatment are (a) from countries where healthcare is costly/risky or (b) ex expats seeking to cash in their chips.
Resident EU nationals needing treatment are a different question. I have two immediate colleagues one of whom is Polish and other Czech. I'd expect them as taxpayers etc to be treated on same basis as I am and I believe they are.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 24 Aug 18 at 22:42
|
But don't we (or at least shouldn't) cross charge EU citizen healthcare via EHIC.
I think from Pat's earlier post she things EU immigration has put a load on the NHS. For GP services it possibly has but overall isn't the biggest issue the ageing population. I don't think she will comment on that because that include her.
Also some very expensive drugs and treatments.
The other issue with the NHS is lack of doctors and nurses, made worse since the Brexit vote because we are not attracting these 'immigrants' needed and some going home. Ironic I suppose.
|
>> Numbers coming here solely to get life saving treatment is nugatory.
Congratulations Bromp!
Nugatory? I like nugatory.
I hope you will forgive me, but I thought nugatory was one of your typos! But no! Nugatory is a real word. I think that I can honestly say that I had never previously heard the word.
Well done sir. You have brightened up my Saturday.
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/nugatory
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 53. - R.P.