When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
The Tories have committed to some of the numbers, but that doesn't alter the fact that they have been in power for ten years, and the NHS is a disgrace. They have dramatically reduced the capacity, when demand is growing almost daily.
Some of the numbers that they have announced are comical. They say 50,000 nurses but 20,000 are already there. Forty new hospitals but maybe in 10 years time. 6,000 GPs sometime. Many surgeons cut down on their working hours because of the way they are taxed, and additional working means earning less. That's a good plan. The Tories have already had 10 years to sort it out. How long do you think it will take?
Why are the EU not helping Greece with their border problem? It’s a Union after all. Maybe it’s like the build up over the years from Calais. Turn a blind eye, unless they’re under our control?
It may surprise you to find out that each EU member is an independent country.
I don't believe that there is a build up in Calais.
I don't think anyone turns a blind eye, although we have been pretty bad on controls in this country.
It is a pity that some people can only criticise families attempting to escape wars, and persecution, in a number of places throughout the world.
Losing the plot there a bit Haysie, as I’m criticizing the powers.
Pots and kettles.
The EU have an arrangement with Turkey to look after the Syrian refugees, and make a financial contribution to Turkey for doing so.
The Turks have got the hump for a minute, but I am sure it will be resolved.
They seem to be just making a point.
This would seem preferable to many of them killing themselves at sea, trying to reach Europe.
Although it would seem that many people wouldn't care what happens to them.
The EU have a rule that migrants are dealt with by the first member country they enter.
Although some members have helped out other member countries, by accepting migrants that have landed elsewhere.
Calais doesn't have a build up.
There was a camp in Calais, but not anymore.
There are a number of refugees that try to access the UK, to join their families, etc.
What have migrants in Greece or Calais got to do with Brexit?
Or are you daft enough to think that Brexit will stop migrants from attempting to access the UK?
This is the Brexit thread.
Why don't you start a moaning about migrants thread?
Glaringly obvious. Part of the election and Brexit was to do with our borders, was it not? Think so.
We had borders before Brexit. We just didn't look after them very well.
It’s not only migrants that our border forces should keep a close eye on, it’s many things.
Leaving the EU will not stop migrants.
That Lorry that contained the deceased could have been full of arms, drugs, radical terrorists, gold, diamonds etc.
True, but leaving the EU, does not automatically stop a repeat.
When the investigations are over, you’ll find out how many corrupt drivers there are. If they publish them , that is.
I don't think you will. How will an investigation into one particular incident do that?
If you want borders, then have them. Beef them up.
We have always had borders. We could have beefed them up while being members of the EU.
I couldn’t care less if there are delays. It’s tough.
You don't matter very much. People running big businesses do care.
Better to act responsibly than to focus on commerce all the time.
We had illegal immigration before we joined the EU.
Some folk will suffer,that’s life.
Who will suffer?
One of the biggest problems in this country is drugs. We had drugs before we joined the EU, and leaving will make no difference to drugs.
It only gets a mention every now and then.
I worry about you on times.
You do know that this is the Brexit thread not the flooding thread?
You are producing arguments that will be unaffected by Brexit.
As EU members we have freedom of movement which allows EU citizens to come here to legally live and work.
Therefore the asylum seekers don't come from other EU member countries.
When we leave, freedom of movement will stop, but the asylum seekers wont.
They estimate that we may have one and a half million illegal immigrants living and working in this country.
Boris wanted to give them an amnesty.
Well how did they get here?
They are not from within the EU.
We currently have record immigration figures from outside the EU, while immigration from inside the EU is falling.
So immigration is increasing.
Leaving the EU will not necessarily decrease immigration, legal or otherwise, or put a stop to smuggling.
Nor will it reduce the number of refugees trying to reach the UK.
There’s no possible way you could know the outcome of a far stronger border, more checking, more bodies available.
I never suggested I did. I was just making the point that nothing that is occurring now is likely to stop just because we will leave the EU. The other point I was making is that some of the measures that we are being forced into because we are leaving, could have been implemented long ago. For instance, had the Government been really concerned about illegal immigration, drug, and people smuggling, etc, they could have beefed up the borders long ago. Yet they haven't bothered. We are being forced into increasing staffing levels massively just to process the increased paperwork because of Brexit. Try getting into the US. We could have adopted similar measures. The US have a trade deal with Mexico, but have the latest technology stopping smuggling etc deployed at their borders. We are amateurs in comparison. We will be employing extra people just to deal with the implementation of millions of Customs Declarations etc.
Personally I’ve always been self employed, looked after myself. So I struggle to cope with the ‘ job for life’ mob, that tend to get bailed out so often. Goes for individual businesses too.Its a jungle out there for some.
Don't understand the point.
History teaches that nearly all people who had a buisness that failed, or had lost their job in the past, went out a started again or got another job.Its surprising how many businesses fail per year,but life goes on.So I’m not bothered about each individual at all.
Boris is clearly making decisions that will harm businesses. This is a first.
I’ve said somewhere else, there are a lot of businesses that barely turn a profit, if at all, and are saddled with debt.Theyre not really viable imo,we’ll see in the coming months.
That is completely irrelevant to this argument. There is a huge difference between a business failing because they weren't very good, and one that fails because of decisions made by the PM, that could have been avoided.
Better include the ones that fold through the effects of the virus.
I am just not sure if you understand this argument.
I just keep repeating myself.
Boris has a choice.
The choice was to remain closely aligned to the EU, and cause the least damage to our economy.
He has chosen to diverge and cause more damage.
That was his choice.
He has already made it.
The virus will cause damage, but nobody is to blame.
All the Government can do is mitigate this damage.
Boris has chosen to damage our economy through Brexit.
I’ll finish with what a good strategy by Erdogan.👏 With sky reporters reporting inside Idlib for a while now, and the world watches and does nothing,that was a mighty fine move. Well thought out. So Idlib gets flattened, more refugees enter Turkey. Then after a while you send them back to nothing?
When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
The Tories have committed to some of the numbers, but that doesn't alter the fact that they have been in power for ten years, and the NHS is a disgrace. They have dramatically reduced the capacity, when demand is growing almost daily.
Some of the numbers that they have announced are comical. They say 50,000 nurses but 20,000 are already there. Forty new hospitals but maybe in 10 years time. 6,000 GPs sometime. Many surgeons cut down on their working hours because of the way they are taxed, and additional working means earning less. That's a good plan. The Tories have already had 10 years to sort it out. How long do you think it will take?
The NHS is a disgrace? That’s rather an acrid comment. The patient number is a rolling number, and it would be extremely difficult to know exactly what is needed and where. It does need more funds, as do a lot of other sectors.
I’ll finish with what a good strategy by Erdogan.👏 With sky reporters reporting inside Idlib for a while now, and the world watches and does nothing,that was a mighty fine move. Well thought out. So Idlib gets flattened, more refugees enter Turkey. Then after a while you send them back to nothing?
Why are the EU not helping Greece with their border problem? It’s a Union after all. Maybe it’s like the build up over the years from Calais. Turn a blind eye, unless they’re under our control?
It may surprise you to find out that each EU member is an independent country.
I don't believe that there is a build up in Calais.
I don't think anyone turns a blind eye, although we have been pretty bad on controls in this country.
It is a pity that some people can only criticise families attempting to escape wars, and persecution, in a number of places throughout the world.
Losing the plot there a bit Haysie, as I’m criticizing the powers.
Pots and kettles.
The EU have an arrangement with Turkey to look after the Syrian refugees, and make a financial contribution to Turkey for doing so.
The Turks have got the hump for a minute, but I am sure it will be resolved.
They seem to be just making a point.
This would seem preferable to many of them killing themselves at sea, trying to reach Europe.
Although it would seem that many people wouldn't care what happens to them.
The EU have a rule that migrants are dealt with by the first member country they enter.
Although some members have helped out other member countries, by accepting migrants that have landed elsewhere.
Calais doesn't have a build up.
There was a camp in Calais, but not anymore.
There are a number of refugees that try to access the UK, to join their families, etc.
What have migrants in Greece or Calais got to do with Brexit?
Or are you daft enough to think that Brexit will stop migrants from attempting to access the UK?
This is the Brexit thread.
Why don't you start a moaning about migrants thread?
Glaringly obvious. Part of the election and Brexit was to do with our borders, was it not? Think so.
We had borders before Brexit. We just didn't look after them very well.
It’s not only migrants that our border forces should keep a close eye on, it’s many things.
Leaving the EU will not stop migrants.
That Lorry that contained the deceased could have been full of arms, drugs, radical terrorists, gold, diamonds etc.
True, but leaving the EU, does not automatically stop a repeat.
When the investigations are over, you’ll find out how many corrupt drivers there are. If they publish them , that is.
I don't think you will. How will an investigation into one particular incident do that?
If you want borders, then have them. Beef them up.
We have always had borders. We could have beefed them up while being members of the EU.
I couldn’t care less if there are delays. It’s tough.
You don't matter very much. People running big businesses do care.
Better to act responsibly than to focus on commerce all the time.
We had illegal immigration before we joined the EU.
Some folk will suffer,that’s life.
Who will suffer?
One of the biggest problems in this country is drugs. We had drugs before we joined the EU, and leaving will make no difference to drugs.
It only gets a mention every now and then.
I worry about you on times.
You do know that this is the Brexit thread not the flooding thread?
You are producing arguments that will be unaffected by Brexit.
As EU members we have freedom of movement which allows EU citizens to come here to legally live and work.
Therefore the asylum seekers don't come from other EU member countries.
When we leave, freedom of movement will stop, but the asylum seekers wont.
They estimate that we may have one and a half million illegal immigrants living and working in this country.
Boris wanted to give them an amnesty.
Well how did they get here?
They are not from within the EU.
We currently have record immigration figures from outside the EU, while immigration from inside the EU is falling.
So immigration is increasing.
Leaving the EU will not necessarily decrease immigration, legal or otherwise, or put a stop to smuggling.
Nor will it reduce the number of refugees trying to reach the UK.
There’s no possible way you could know the outcome of a far stronger border, more checking, more bodies available.
I never suggested I did. I was just making the point that nothing that is occurring now is likely to stop just because we will leave the EU. The other point I was making is that some of the measures that we are being forced into because we are leaving, could have been implemented long ago. For instance, had the Government been really concerned about illegal immigration, drug, and people smuggling, etc, they could have beefed up the borders long ago. Yet they haven't bothered. We are being forced into increasing staffing levels massively just to process the increased paperwork because of Brexit. Try getting into the US. We could have adopted similar measures. The US have a trade deal with Mexico, but have the latest technology stopping smuggling etc deployed at their borders. We are amateurs in comparison. We will be employing extra people just to deal with the implementation of millions of Customs Declarations etc.
Personally I’ve always been self employed, looked after myself. So I struggle to cope with the ‘ job for life’ mob, that tend to get bailed out so often. Goes for individual businesses too.Its a jungle out there for some.
Don't understand the point.
History teaches that nearly all people who had a buisness that failed, or had lost their job in the past, went out a started again or got another job.Its surprising how many businesses fail per year,but life goes on.So I’m not bothered about each individual at all.
Boris is clearly making decisions that will harm businesses. This is a first.
I’ve said somewhere else, there are a lot of businesses that barely turn a profit, if at all, and are saddled with debt.Theyre not really viable imo,we’ll see in the coming months.
That is completely irrelevant to this argument. There is a huge difference between a business failing because they weren't very good, and one that fails because of decisions made by the PM, that could have been avoided.
Better include the ones that fold through the effects of the virus.
I am just not sure if you understand this argument.
I just keep repeating myself.
Boris has a choice.
The choice was to remain closely aligned to the EU, and cause the least damage to our economy.
He has chosen to diverge and cause more damage.
That was his choice.
He has already made it.
The virus will cause damage, but nobody is to blame.
All the Government can do is mitigate this damage.
Boris has chosen to damage our economy through Brexit.
Who’s “ choice”? Don’t quote Boris for Christ’s sake.
I’ll finish with what a good strategy by Erdogan.👏 With sky reporters reporting inside Idlib for a while now, and the world watches and does nothing,that was a mighty fine move. Well thought out. So Idlib gets flattened, more refugees enter Turkey. Then after a while you send them back to nothing?
He could become a good PM. Obv. Who would your choice be for PM if you had the choice of the whole house?
Beth Rigby.
Strange choice. I’ve never heard her ask a question that even I couldn’t give the expected reply to. Not exactly rhetorical questions, but close. I presume you would like her to stand for the Labour Party then. She’s female though, I’m not sure Labour want to be that radical.
I wasn't aware that you were a Beth Rigby expert. As I have pointed out a number of times before, I have not ever voted Labour. I think that any Political Party should choose the best candidate as their leader rather than perhaps just picking a woman for the sake of it.
I am. As for the Labour leader,the best candidate would be either of the women imo. If it goes pear shaped for this government, then the Labour Party could have anyone as leader and be successful.Joe Bloggs or even Joanne Bloggs.
After googling for Brexit news, there’s still nothing to see. Nothing we don’t already know. Exciting times!
Do you think we should remain closely aligned and protect the economy, or diverge and purposely damage it?
And why?
Do you think Boris has a mandate to diverge?
If so where from?
Does leaving with a Norway plus deal, still amount to leaving?
As we already conduct some checks between NI, and UK, which are done on the ferries to avoid delays. Do you think that in the light of the fact that we are about to employ 50,000 staff to process the additional post Brexit paperwork, in addition to a large number of extra Customs Officers. That we may have chosen to employ extra staff to carry out checks on the ferries, and therefore avoid delays, in order to avoid drug, and people smuggling, that this could have been implemented many years ago, and avoided any dead bodies turning up in trucks?
Do you agree that we didn't need to leave the EU, to provide more protection for our borders?
The Tory Party was fairly recently conducting an ABB campaign. This stood for anyone but Boris. What changed?
Boris has made it clear that he will not extend the EU trade negotiations past the end of December. Do you agree with this?
Or do you think he should focus on the best deal for the UK, however long that takes?
Do you think we will attract many foreign manufacturers to the UK, post Brexit. Or do you think that they will be more likely to set up in Europe, to access a bigger market?
So I’ve heard from mates,a divorce is very traumatic and damaging. But they come through it and kick on.
After googling for Brexit news, there’s still nothing to see. Nothing we don’t already know. Exciting times!
Do you think we should remain closely aligned and protect the economy, or diverge and purposely damage it?
And why?
Do you think Boris has a mandate to diverge?
If so where from?
Does leaving with a Norway plus deal, still amount to leaving?
As we already conduct some checks between NI, and UK, which are done on the ferries to avoid delays. Do you think that in the light of the fact that we are about to employ 50,000 staff to process the additional post Brexit paperwork, in addition to a large number of extra Customs Officers. That we may have chosen to employ extra staff to carry out checks on the ferries, and therefore avoid delays, in order to avoid drug, and people smuggling, that this could have been implemented many years ago, and avoided any dead bodies turning up in trucks?
Do you agree that we didn't need to leave the EU, to provide more protection for our borders?
The Tory Party was fairly recently conducting an ABB campaign. This stood for anyone but Boris. What changed?
Boris has made it clear that he will not extend the EU trade negotiations past the end of December. Do you agree with this?
Or do you think he should focus on the best deal for the UK, however long that takes?
Do you think we will attract many foreign manufacturers to the UK, post Brexit. Or do you think that they will be more likely to set up in Europe, to access a bigger market?
I don’t mind checks, as that’s showing responsibility. Whether or not this Government sticks to this year for a deal of some sort to be done who knows. Obv the strategy is to focus on doing whatever deal may be possible in a shorter than the average time.Focuses the minds, which can’t be a bad thing. I would keep my strategy or intentions under wraps anyway. But of course the media seem to think they need to know everything. Coming out of the EU and alignment with their rules doesn’t look a good mix. Don’t hold your breath for alignment . There could be a challenging recession due to the virus, even more by the disruption. That could potentially change attitudes towards any deals.
Maybe we should get our arses over to Mexico, it could be the new China. I think China will fall out of favor. I’ve been telling a Property developer I do work for, for a number of years that Carney should have increased rates, then you have wiggle room for cuts if there’s a crisis. First Carney says the BOE aren’t going to move until the unemployment hits his target, which it did. Then he says it’s not going to move unless there’s inflation, which he apparently says there wasn’t, even though I could personally see there was. Yup, I don’t like Carney,and vice versa I hope👍
He could become a good PM. Obv. Who would your choice be for PM if you had the choice of the whole house?
Most of the time he just tells half a story.
The other day he was making a big fuss about the tampon tax. Making the point that once we leave the EU, this could be stopped. The EU are forcing us to do it.
Yet the full story is as follows. The European Commission says it is aiming to bring in a zero rate for sanitary products. The tax is 5%. It makes a difference of 3 pence to a 60 pence pack of tampons. This will make little difference to the poorest women in our society. If they are unable to afford 60 pence, it is unlikely that they will be able to afford 57 pence.
In July this year, supermarket Tesco cut prices on nearly 100 menstrual protection products in order to shoulder the 5% VAT cost. Competitors Waitrose and Morrisons followed suit in August and other retailers have pledged to pass on a price cut if VAT becomes zero-rated.
The revenue produced by this tax was around £65 million last year. The whole amount is spent on womens charities, including shelters for battered women. All worthwhile causes. Where will they get their funding from now. Brilliant Boris.
The tampon tax is supposed to please a few, with a slight pop at the EU. Quite irrelevant really. Funding for all sorts of areas is about juggling numbers. As I’ve already stated somewhere at the time of the election,it’s the cabinet that matters as much as the PM. Being the Treasurer is like being the England coach. Very few succeed.
It will be interesting to see what the EU do if there’s a pandemic throughout the Eurozone. Sounds expensive to me me, whilst they’re having trouble with their budget as it is. I’m not suggesting the threat is from the virus alone, but the resulting lockdowns. The big one for the U.K. would be cases spread through the London Underground. The unions will have their drivers out, through it not being a safe environment to work in. Then up pops Sturgeon.
BREAKING NEWS!! Boris is a traitor,as in the few months he’s been PM, he should have foreseen the impending floods. Forget the election, forget Brexit,let’s build flood defenses first. Back to your meat and veg, enjoy.
Panic buying in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak is the focus of a number of front pages. "Don't be so shelf-ish" is the headline in the Metro. The accompanying story includes a warning from Boris Johnson that people do not need to panic buy. The paper says there have been "scuffles" at checkouts over products including toilet roll. The Daily Express reports that shelves across the country have been "stripped bare" of essentials including anti-bacterial wipes and long-life milk. A number of papers use editorial comment columns to call for calm. The Sun, for instance, urges its readers to follow the example set by the Queen - who the paper says is "clearly not cowed by coronavirus". It also suggests that UK follows the lead of countries who have dealt with the virus well by simply pulling together.
The Daily Mail has obtained figures which reveal a man with 66 points on his driving licence is still allowed out on the road. The paper says he is one of a number of drivers to be spared a ban by magistrates - under a loophole which allows for courts to consider whether revoking a licence would cause "exceptional hardship". The road safety charity Brake has called for a review of the system. The Magistrates Association has said the process for determining such circumstances is "robust".
DWP employees with disabilities paid almost £1m in discrimination cases across four years Government department lost more cases than any other employer, freedom of information requests reveal
When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
When it comes to the certain epidemic, and the NHS gets brought up, it’s no different than any other country that has an epidemic. Your health service will get swamped, as all countries with an epidemic will suffer the same fate. When governments tell the populations not to panic, that’s their job. Just take that with a pinch of salt. And relax.
I don't understand the point you are trying to make in yet another post.
The point that many people are making is that the NHS is in terrible shape after 10 years of the Tories being in charge. Ridiculous staff shortages, and the worst A&E waiting times since records began. This makes an epidemic much more difficult to deal with.
Give me a few numbers then. How many more doctors and nurses do we need? How many more hospitals do we need? How many more surgeons,midwives ,Carers, etc, etc. Bare in mind it’s a service,and patient numbers can rise and fall.
The Tories have committed to some of the numbers, but that doesn't alter the fact that they have been in power for ten years, and the NHS is a disgrace. They have dramatically reduced the capacity, when demand is growing almost daily.
Some of the numbers that they have announced are comical. They say 50,000 nurses but 20,000 are already there. Forty new hospitals but maybe in 10 years time. 6,000 GPs sometime. Many surgeons cut down on their working hours because of the way they are taxed, and additional working means earning less. That's a good plan. The Tories have already had 10 years to sort it out. How long do you think it will take?
The NHS is a disgrace? That’s rather an acrid comment.
That may be, but it is true.
The patient number is a rolling number, and it would be extremely difficult to know exactly what is needed and where.
The A&E waiting times are the worst since records began. Record numbers now wait over 12 hours. The Tory solution is to abandon the targets. Brilliant. Ten years of Tory underfunding.
It does need more funds, as do a lot of other sectors.
The person who has provided the best funding for the NHS in recent times was none other than your best mate, Tony Blair.
Why are the EU not helping Greece with their border problem? It’s a Union after all. Maybe it’s like the build up over the years from Calais. Turn a blind eye, unless they’re under our control?
It may surprise you to find out that each EU member is an independent country.
I don't believe that there is a build up in Calais.
I don't think anyone turns a blind eye, although we have been pretty bad on controls in this country.
It is a pity that some people can only criticise families attempting to escape wars, and persecution, in a number of places throughout the world.
Losing the plot there a bit Haysie, as I’m criticizing the powers.
Pots and kettles.
The EU have an arrangement with Turkey to look after the Syrian refugees, and make a financial contribution to Turkey for doing so.
The Turks have got the hump for a minute, but I am sure it will be resolved.
They seem to be just making a point.
This would seem preferable to many of them killing themselves at sea, trying to reach Europe.
Although it would seem that many people wouldn't care what happens to them.
The EU have a rule that migrants are dealt with by the first member country they enter.
Although some members have helped out other member countries, by accepting migrants that have landed elsewhere.
Calais doesn't have a build up.
There was a camp in Calais, but not anymore.
There are a number of refugees that try to access the UK, to join their families, etc.
What have migrants in Greece or Calais got to do with Brexit?
Or are you daft enough to think that Brexit will stop migrants from attempting to access the UK?
This is the Brexit thread.
Why don't you start a moaning about migrants thread?
Glaringly obvious. Part of the election and Brexit was to do with our borders, was it not? Think so.
We had borders before Brexit. We just didn't look after them very well.
It’s not only migrants that our border forces should keep a close eye on, it’s many things.
Leaving the EU will not stop migrants.
That Lorry that contained the deceased could have been full of arms, drugs, radical terrorists, gold, diamonds etc.
True, but leaving the EU, does not automatically stop a repeat.
When the investigations are over, you’ll find out how many corrupt drivers there are. If they publish them , that is.
I don't think you will. How will an investigation into one particular incident do that?
If you want borders, then have them. Beef them up.
We have always had borders. We could have beefed them up while being members of the EU.
I couldn’t care less if there are delays. It’s tough.
You don't matter very much. People running big businesses do care.
Better to act responsibly than to focus on commerce all the time.
We had illegal immigration before we joined the EU.
Some folk will suffer,that’s life.
Who will suffer?
One of the biggest problems in this country is drugs. We had drugs before we joined the EU, and leaving will make no difference to drugs.
It only gets a mention every now and then.
I worry about you on times.
You do know that this is the Brexit thread not the flooding thread?
You are producing arguments that will be unaffected by Brexit.
As EU members we have freedom of movement which allows EU citizens to come here to legally live and work.
Therefore the asylum seekers don't come from other EU member countries.
When we leave, freedom of movement will stop, but the asylum seekers wont.
They estimate that we may have one and a half million illegal immigrants living and working in this country.
Boris wanted to give them an amnesty.
Well how did they get here?
They are not from within the EU.
We currently have record immigration figures from outside the EU, while immigration from inside the EU is falling.
So immigration is increasing.
Leaving the EU will not necessarily decrease immigration, legal or otherwise, or put a stop to smuggling.
Nor will it reduce the number of refugees trying to reach the UK.
There’s no possible way you could know the outcome of a far stronger border, more checking, more bodies available.
I never suggested I did. I was just making the point that nothing that is occurring now is likely to stop just because we will leave the EU. The other point I was making is that some of the measures that we are being forced into because we are leaving, could have been implemented long ago. For instance, had the Government been really concerned about illegal immigration, drug, and people smuggling, etc, they could have beefed up the borders long ago. Yet they haven't bothered. We are being forced into increasing staffing levels massively just to process the increased paperwork because of Brexit. Try getting into the US. We could have adopted similar measures. The US have a trade deal with Mexico, but have the latest technology stopping smuggling etc deployed at their borders. We are amateurs in comparison. We will be employing extra people just to deal with the implementation of millions of Customs Declarations etc.
Personally I’ve always been self employed, looked after myself. So I struggle to cope with the ‘ job for life’ mob, that tend to get bailed out so often. Goes for individual businesses too.Its a jungle out there for some.
Don't understand the point.
History teaches that nearly all people who had a buisness that failed, or had lost their job in the past, went out a started again or got another job.Its surprising how many businesses fail per year,but life goes on.So I’m not bothered about each individual at all.
Boris is clearly making decisions that will harm businesses. This is a first.
I’ve said somewhere else, there are a lot of businesses that barely turn a profit, if at all, and are saddled with debt.Theyre not really viable imo,we’ll see in the coming months.
That is completely irrelevant to this argument. There is a huge difference between a business failing because they weren't very good, and one that fails because of decisions made by the PM, that could have been avoided.
Better include the ones that fold through the effects of the virus.
I am just not sure if you understand this argument.
I just keep repeating myself.
Boris has a choice.
The choice was to remain closely aligned to the EU, and cause the least damage to our economy.
He has chosen to diverge and cause more damage.
That was his choice.
He has already made it.
The virus will cause damage, but nobody is to blame.
All the Government can do is mitigate this damage.
Boris has chosen to damage our economy through Brexit.
Who’s “ choice”? Don’t quote Boris for Christ’s sake.
I’ll finish with what a good strategy by Erdogan.👏 With sky reporters reporting inside Idlib for a while now, and the world watches and does nothing,that was a mighty fine move. Well thought out. So Idlib gets flattened, more refugees enter Turkey. Then after a while you send them back to nothing?
He could become a good PM. Obv. Who would your choice be for PM if you had the choice of the whole house?
Beth Rigby.
Strange choice. I’ve never heard her ask a question that even I couldn’t give the expected reply to. Not exactly rhetorical questions, but close. I presume you would like her to stand for the Labour Party then. She’s female though, I’m not sure Labour want to be that radical.
I wasn't aware that you were a Beth Rigby expert. As I have pointed out a number of times before, I have not ever voted Labour. I think that any Political Party should choose the best candidate as their leader rather than perhaps just picking a woman for the sake of it.
I am. As for the Labour leader,the best candidate would be either of the women imo. If it goes pear shaped for this government, then the Labour Party could have anyone as leader and be successful.Joe Bloggs or even Joanne Bloggs.
Why do you think that Keir Starmer is such a long way in front then?
After googling for Brexit news, there’s still nothing to see. Nothing we don’t already know. Exciting times!
Do you think we should remain closely aligned and protect the economy, or diverge and purposely damage it?
And why?
Do you think Boris has a mandate to diverge?
If so where from?
Does leaving with a Norway plus deal, still amount to leaving?
As we already conduct some checks between NI, and UK, which are done on the ferries to avoid delays. Do you think that in the light of the fact that we are about to employ 50,000 staff to process the additional post Brexit paperwork, in addition to a large number of extra Customs Officers. That we may have chosen to employ extra staff to carry out checks on the ferries, and therefore avoid delays, in order to avoid drug, and people smuggling, that this could have been implemented many years ago, and avoided any dead bodies turning up in trucks?
Do you agree that we didn't need to leave the EU, to provide more protection for our borders?
The Tory Party was fairly recently conducting an ABB campaign. This stood for anyone but Boris. What changed?
Boris has made it clear that he will not extend the EU trade negotiations past the end of December. Do you agree with this?
Or do you think he should focus on the best deal for the UK, however long that takes?
Do you think we will attract many foreign manufacturers to the UK, post Brexit. Or do you think that they will be more likely to set up in Europe, to access a bigger market?
So I’ve heard from mates,a divorce is very traumatic and damaging. But they come through it and kick on.
Comments
They have dramatically reduced the capacity, when demand is growing almost daily.
Some of the numbers that they have announced are comical. They say 50,000 nurses but 20,000 are already there.
Forty new hospitals but maybe in 10 years time.
6,000 GPs sometime.
Many surgeons cut down on their working hours because of the way they are taxed, and additional working means earning less. That's a good plan. The Tories have already had 10 years to sort it out. How long do you think it will take?
I just keep repeating myself.
Boris has a choice.
The choice was to remain closely aligned to the EU, and cause the least damage to our economy.
He has chosen to diverge and cause more damage.
That was his choice.
He has already made it.
The virus will cause damage, but nobody is to blame.
All the Government can do is mitigate this damage.
Boris has chosen to damage our economy through Brexit.
The patient number is a rolling number, and it would be extremely difficult to know exactly what is needed and where.
It does need more funds, as do a lot of other sectors.
Don’t quote Boris for Christ’s sake.
As for the Labour leader,the best candidate would be either of the women imo.
If it goes pear shaped for this government, then the Labour Party could have anyone as leader and be successful.Joe Bloggs or even Joanne Bloggs.
But they come through it and kick on.
Whether or not this Government sticks to this year for a deal of some sort to be done who knows.
Obv the strategy is to focus on doing whatever deal may be possible in a shorter than the average time.Focuses the minds, which can’t be a bad thing.
I would keep my strategy or intentions under wraps anyway.
But of course the media seem to think they need to know everything.
Coming out of the EU and alignment with their rules doesn’t look a good mix.
Don’t hold your breath for alignment .
There could be a challenging recession due to the virus, even more by the disruption.
That could potentially change attitudes towards any deals.
Maybe we should get our arses over to Mexico, it could be the new China.
I think China will fall out of favor.
I’ve been telling a Property developer I do work for, for a number of years that Carney should have increased rates, then you have wiggle room for cuts if there’s a crisis.
First Carney says the BOE aren’t going to move until the unemployment hits his target, which it did. Then he says it’s not going to move unless there’s inflation, which he apparently says there wasn’t, even though I could personally see there was.
Yup, I don’t like Carney,and vice versa I hope👍
Quite irrelevant really.
Funding for all sorts of areas is about juggling numbers.
As I’ve already stated somewhere at the time of the election,it’s the cabinet that matters as much as the PM.
Being the Treasurer is like being the England coach. Very few succeed.
Sounds expensive to me me, whilst they’re having trouble with their budget as it is.
I’m not suggesting the threat is from the virus alone, but the resulting lockdowns.
The big one for the U.K. would be cases spread through the London Underground.
The unions will have their drivers out, through it not being a safe environment to work in.
Then up pops Sturgeon.
Boris is a traitor,as in the few months he’s been PM, he should have foreseen the impending floods. Forget the election, forget Brexit,let’s build flood defenses first.
Back to your meat and veg, enjoy.
Panic buying in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak is the focus of a number of front pages.
"Don't be so shelf-ish" is the headline in the Metro. The accompanying story includes a warning from Boris Johnson that people do not need to panic buy.
The paper says there have been "scuffles" at checkouts over products including toilet roll.
The Daily Express reports that shelves across the country have been "stripped bare" of essentials including anti-bacterial wipes and long-life milk.
A number of papers use editorial comment columns to call for calm. The Sun, for instance, urges its readers to follow the example set by the Queen - who the paper says is "clearly not cowed by coronavirus".
It also suggests that UK follows the lead of countries who have dealt with the virus well by simply pulling together.
The Daily Mail has obtained figures which reveal a man with 66 points on his driving licence is still allowed out on the road.
The paper says he is one of a number of drivers to be spared a ban by magistrates - under a loophole which allows for courts to consider whether revoking a licence would cause "exceptional hardship".
The road safety charity Brake has called for a review of the system. The Magistrates Association has said the process for determining such circumstances is "robust".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-51796042
DWP employees with disabilities paid almost £1m in discrimination cases across four years
Government department lost more cases than any other employer, freedom of information requests reveal
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-work-pensions-employees-disabilities-discrimination-cases-pay-out-million-a9385446.html
I was a remainer, we are now definitely leaving.