glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
Arsehole Boris was criticising the Scottish nhs last week, he wouldn't his erse from his elbow.
no complaints about nhs round here, I think its fantastic.
G Election
- Thread starter cider_eater
- Start date
no complaints about nhs round here, I think its fantastic.
- Location
- Limousin
If your plan is privatise the NHS you need to constantly be showing the public its shortcomings to soften them up. For years the government and certain press agencies has been feeding a steady almost daily stream of misadministration, poor practice, shortages, waiting lists, pharmaceutical restrictions etc. No wonder the staff feed overworked and undervalued.
Many people who have worked in the health service at grass roots level would agree that levels of waste are unsustainable. How you solve this is clearly down to management and the workers are carrying the can.
- Location
- Westish Suffolk
Oh dear, not starting so well for the Conservatives is it?
Still, the only way is ( belly? ) up.
Lucky its a marathon, not a sprint.
Still, the only way is ( belly? ) up.
Lucky its a marathon, not a sprint.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Just listened to interview with Conservative candidate Penny Morgan. And yet again I heard the line 'get Brexit over with'. But I am pretty thick on the matter but understood that the future relationship is to be debated yet and thus to say 'get Brexit over' is an untruth? I wait to be advised I am wrong.
caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
Just a misleading soundbite to get five years of power.
His BRINO will get it on the back burner for the duration..
Now.
If he were to campaign to get rid of the FTPA and legislate for recall and automatic by election in circumstances such as we've seen recently.........
Not going wonderfully well for jeremy today ,is it
- Location
- Westish Suffolk
Danllan
Member
- Location
- Sir Gar / Carms
Hmm... they're not having a great day though are they? They've PPCs crying foul all over the place about being 'volunteered' to stand down from their constituency contests.Agreed
Lib Dems it is then..
- Location
- Westish Suffolk
Hello Dan,Hmm... they're not having a great day though are they? They've PPCs crying foul all over the place about being 'volunteered' to stand down from their constituency contests.
Yes, it seems everyone is competing to mess up the message this week. I imagine all these assorted gaffes will be forgotten in a week, and it will be something else that we couldn't even dream up today.
A mucking fuddle springs to mind...snafu
I wonder if the decision to have a GE could be reversed??
- Location
- fakenham-norfolk
- Location
- Limousin/Charentes toad land
caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
Course she is.She is not then?
Options.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
COMMENT
november 7 2019, 12:01am, the times
There’s no chance fibber Johnson will ‘get Brexit done’ by end of January
simon nixon
Share
Save
It is troubling that Boris Johnson should have chosen to launch his election campaign with two such obvious fibs. The first was that he had to call the election because parliament had blocked his Brexit deal. This was clearly nonsense since parliament in fact approved the second reading of his withdrawal act bill by a comfortable majority of 30. It was Mr Johnson who blocked his own deal when he refused to accept MPs’ reasonable demands for more than three days to scrutinise a bill of considerable complexity that had been published only 24 hours earlier. His second fib was to claim that a Tory majority would allow him to “get Brexit done” by the end of January.
One measure of how far Brexit is from being done is that the cabinet can’t agree even on what Brexit policy to put in its manifesto. An argument is raging among Tories as to whether they should rule out any extension to the transition period beyond December 2020. At the weekend the prime minister appeared to leave open the possibility; Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, ruled it out the next day. Underlying this debate is the question of whether Britain should walk away from the EU with no free trade deal if none has been agreed by the end of next year, forcing businesses to trade with the EU on World Trade Organisation terms. That this argument continues to rage is proof that hardline Brexiteers have not given up their goal of engineering a deep rupture with the EU.
Nor has President Trump, who turned up on Nigel Farage’s radio phone-in show within hours of the election being called to volunteer his views on how to get Brexit done. He insisted that on the basis of what was set out in the political declaration, Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal would severely restrict the scope for an ambitious trade deal between America and Britain. “We want to do trade with the UK, but to be honest with you, this deal, under certain aspects of the deal, you can’t do it. We can’t make a trade deal with the UK,” he said.
IN YOUR INBOX
Your daily Business Briefing
Keep up to date by getting our Times Business Briefing newsletter straight to your inbox at 8am and lunchtime
Sign up now
That was a shot across the bows of Brexiteers, for whom a free trade deal with the US is a long-cherished goal. Indeed, the whole project makes little sense without it. Inevitably, Mr Johnson said that he disagreed, protesting that Britain could secure ambitious deals with both.
Yet the US president put his finger on the central trade-off that continues to lie at the heart of the Brexit dilemma, as it has from the start. The closer Britain remains aligned with the rules and regulations of the EU, Britain’s largest market with which it conducts nearly half of its trade, the less scope it has to strike an ambitious deal with the US, which accounts for about 15 per cent of its trade. This is a trade-off that Mr Johnson resolutely refuses to acknowledge. Despite all the many ways in which his pre-referendum Brexit claims have been shown to be bogus, Mr Johnson continues to assert that Britain can have its cake and eat it. He even insists that Britain will have wrapped up its ambitious new trade deal with the EU by the end of next year.
In this respect Mr Johnson resembles no one so much as his predecessor, Theresa May, who continued to claim that Britain would have finalised a full free trade deal with the EU before the end of the two-year Article 50 process long after it had become obvious that this was delusional. Like Mrs May, Mr Johnson is making the fundamental error of assuming that just because London and Brussels will begin a future trade negotiation from a position of full alignment, negotiating a deal will be easy. This entirely misunderstands the nature of the challenge that the prime minister has set himself. Britain already has the deepest and most comprehensive trading arrangement with the EU that exists between any two sovereign nations. So his task is not to negotiate a better deal but a worse one — and to do so in a way that minimises the damage to businesses and the economy.
That won’t be easy. Mr Johnson’s goal of a new trade deal with zero tariffs and quotas hinges on him agreeing to continue to align Britain with European rules on employment rights, environmental protection and state aid. Yet even if he agreed to a free trade agreement on these terms, it would still create a lot more trade friction than presently exists, warns Sam Lowe, a trade expert, in a new paper for the Centre for European Reform. Exporters will still be obliged to submit to rules-of-origin checks to prove that goods entering the EU market originated in Britain rather than, say, China. British suppliers will face further disruption because their goods will no longer count as EU content under the terms of the EU’s own free trade agreements.
Liz Truss appeared to contradict her boss on the transition periodJONATHAN BRADY/PA
Meanwhile, all exporters will face new bureaucratic burdens in the form of customs and security declarations, while agricultural exporters will need to provide export health certificates and will face physical inspections. As Mr Lowe says: “Many businesses will find adapting to a new free trade agreement as troublesome as if the UK had crashed out without a deal.”
Of course, if Mr Johnson capitulates to the EU’s demands as completely as he did in the first phase of the negotiations, it remains theoretically possible that such a deal could be negotiated by the end of next year. Yet even then, it’s unlikely that he would have “got Brexit done”. Faced with such obvious disruption to their supply chains arising from these new frictions, businesses are bound to clamour for a new transition period to adapt to the changes. Besides, much more likely is that Mr Johnson will not want, nor will his party allow him, to capitulate so readily to EU demands. In that case, one more year of negotiations is very unlikely to be enough to “get Brexit done”.
One might hope that, going into such a momentous election, the prime minister would be honest with the British public about these trade-offs. Instead, Mr Johnson appears to have started as he means to go on.
Simon Nixon is chief leader writer of The Times
november 7 2019, 12:01am, the times
There’s no chance fibber Johnson will ‘get Brexit done’ by end of January
simon nixon
Share
Save
It is troubling that Boris Johnson should have chosen to launch his election campaign with two such obvious fibs. The first was that he had to call the election because parliament had blocked his Brexit deal. This was clearly nonsense since parliament in fact approved the second reading of his withdrawal act bill by a comfortable majority of 30. It was Mr Johnson who blocked his own deal when he refused to accept MPs’ reasonable demands for more than three days to scrutinise a bill of considerable complexity that had been published only 24 hours earlier. His second fib was to claim that a Tory majority would allow him to “get Brexit done” by the end of January.
One measure of how far Brexit is from being done is that the cabinet can’t agree even on what Brexit policy to put in its manifesto. An argument is raging among Tories as to whether they should rule out any extension to the transition period beyond December 2020. At the weekend the prime minister appeared to leave open the possibility; Liz Truss, the international trade secretary, ruled it out the next day. Underlying this debate is the question of whether Britain should walk away from the EU with no free trade deal if none has been agreed by the end of next year, forcing businesses to trade with the EU on World Trade Organisation terms. That this argument continues to rage is proof that hardline Brexiteers have not given up their goal of engineering a deep rupture with the EU.
Nor has President Trump, who turned up on Nigel Farage’s radio phone-in show within hours of the election being called to volunteer his views on how to get Brexit done. He insisted that on the basis of what was set out in the political declaration, Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal would severely restrict the scope for an ambitious trade deal between America and Britain. “We want to do trade with the UK, but to be honest with you, this deal, under certain aspects of the deal, you can’t do it. We can’t make a trade deal with the UK,” he said.
IN YOUR INBOX
Your daily Business Briefing
Keep up to date by getting our Times Business Briefing newsletter straight to your inbox at 8am and lunchtime
Sign up now
That was a shot across the bows of Brexiteers, for whom a free trade deal with the US is a long-cherished goal. Indeed, the whole project makes little sense without it. Inevitably, Mr Johnson said that he disagreed, protesting that Britain could secure ambitious deals with both.
Yet the US president put his finger on the central trade-off that continues to lie at the heart of the Brexit dilemma, as it has from the start. The closer Britain remains aligned with the rules and regulations of the EU, Britain’s largest market with which it conducts nearly half of its trade, the less scope it has to strike an ambitious deal with the US, which accounts for about 15 per cent of its trade. This is a trade-off that Mr Johnson resolutely refuses to acknowledge. Despite all the many ways in which his pre-referendum Brexit claims have been shown to be bogus, Mr Johnson continues to assert that Britain can have its cake and eat it. He even insists that Britain will have wrapped up its ambitious new trade deal with the EU by the end of next year.
In this respect Mr Johnson resembles no one so much as his predecessor, Theresa May, who continued to claim that Britain would have finalised a full free trade deal with the EU before the end of the two-year Article 50 process long after it had become obvious that this was delusional. Like Mrs May, Mr Johnson is making the fundamental error of assuming that just because London and Brussels will begin a future trade negotiation from a position of full alignment, negotiating a deal will be easy. This entirely misunderstands the nature of the challenge that the prime minister has set himself. Britain already has the deepest and most comprehensive trading arrangement with the EU that exists between any two sovereign nations. So his task is not to negotiate a better deal but a worse one — and to do so in a way that minimises the damage to businesses and the economy.
That won’t be easy. Mr Johnson’s goal of a new trade deal with zero tariffs and quotas hinges on him agreeing to continue to align Britain with European rules on employment rights, environmental protection and state aid. Yet even if he agreed to a free trade agreement on these terms, it would still create a lot more trade friction than presently exists, warns Sam Lowe, a trade expert, in a new paper for the Centre for European Reform. Exporters will still be obliged to submit to rules-of-origin checks to prove that goods entering the EU market originated in Britain rather than, say, China. British suppliers will face further disruption because their goods will no longer count as EU content under the terms of the EU’s own free trade agreements.
Liz Truss appeared to contradict her boss on the transition periodJONATHAN BRADY/PA
Meanwhile, all exporters will face new bureaucratic burdens in the form of customs and security declarations, while agricultural exporters will need to provide export health certificates and will face physical inspections. As Mr Lowe says: “Many businesses will find adapting to a new free trade agreement as troublesome as if the UK had crashed out without a deal.”
Of course, if Mr Johnson capitulates to the EU’s demands as completely as he did in the first phase of the negotiations, it remains theoretically possible that such a deal could be negotiated by the end of next year. Yet even then, it’s unlikely that he would have “got Brexit done”. Faced with such obvious disruption to their supply chains arising from these new frictions, businesses are bound to clamour for a new transition period to adapt to the changes. Besides, much more likely is that Mr Johnson will not want, nor will his party allow him, to capitulate so readily to EU demands. In that case, one more year of negotiations is very unlikely to be enough to “get Brexit done”.
One might hope that, going into such a momentous election, the prime minister would be honest with the British public about these trade-offs. Instead, Mr Johnson appears to have started as he means to go on.
Simon Nixon is chief leader writer of The Times
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
A question to a few of you on here. In previous threads I seem to recall much talk about UK debt levels and government spending money poorly.
And yet today I note that both the Conservatives and Labour Party intend to raise spending to levels around 44% of GDP - similar and last seen in the 1970s - the Callahagn goverment before Thatcher came in and cut spending ruthlessly.
I am now lost. Which political party do I cast my vote for a frugal sensible spending government. Previously it would have been the Conservatives. Hey ho. My Leaving the EU certainly has caused much ripple effect.
Hey ho.
And yet today I note that both the Conservatives and Labour Party intend to raise spending to levels around 44% of GDP - similar and last seen in the 1970s - the Callahagn goverment before Thatcher came in and cut spending ruthlessly.
I am now lost. Which political party do I cast my vote for a frugal sensible spending government. Previously it would have been the Conservatives. Hey ho. My Leaving the EU certainly has caused much ripple effect.
Hey ho.
Expanded and improved Sustainable Farming Incentive offer for farmers published
Expanded Sustainable Farming Incentive offer from July will give the sector a clear path forward and boost farm business resilience.
From: Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and The Rt Hon Sir Mark Spencer MP Published21 May 2024
Full details of the expanded and improved Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) offer available to farmers from July have been published by the...
From: Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and The Rt Hon Sir Mark Spencer MP Published21 May 2024
Full details of the expanded and improved Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) offer available to farmers from July have been published by the...