To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
My own Trust has decided to relax waiting list targets to ease the financial strain. Understandable but having sweated for years to get them down, a rather crushing blow to morale.
Apart from the Con Conference and Brexit buffoons, we also have spreadsheet Phils autumn budget to come. He is never very generous. I can see a rough ride this autumn for Toxic Tess.
Its being so cheerful wot keeps me going!
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong enough to make deposing May a fait accompli and b) that strife putting Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street which, whatever else they disagree on all Tories believe would be a calamity for the country.
As long as the polls have the parties neck and neck and are pretty static, that works in May's favour. She may be crap, but cling to nurse for fear of something worse. If, however the Tories begin to dip into the mid-30s consistently and Labour remain in the low 40s, possibly even pushing higher, the calculation changes. Then something must be done.
How would Labour build such a poll lead? It doesn't seem too unlikely if.
- Brexit continues to look chaotic and the government continue to look like they're not really on top of it. EU bashing may enthuse hardcore leavers, but it turns off Remainy Tories and swing voters (who don't have to drink the Corbyn Kool-Aid just withdraw their support). - The natural bad stuff that buffets a government (and tends to pile up when the narrative is against you) continues. We've already had one May era Home Office cock-up come out. There's the annual health crisis to 'look forward' to. Prisons don't seem in a good state. - She has a poor conference and Labour has a good one (Labour really can't fail to look a happier place after the last two, and May isn't exactly a performer). - The economy continues to slide or stagnate
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM, the Tory press won't continue to be as forgiving as they have been and neither will Tory MPs, and can see a challenger coming through saying 'I'm the man/woman with the plan to bring us through Brexit, trying to ride a bit of goodwill, get some sort of a deal done and then call an election having made the best of a bad job and delivered Brexit in some form, with future solid details then to be sold in their manifesto.
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
I already pay NI that would buy multiple health cover for about 50 people, how much more should we pay you turnip.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
The EU standing up for members of the club against those who don't want to be members confirms that being a member is bad...
Brexit logic
They are not standing up for members of the club. If they were they would be seeking the best deal possible. They are standing up for their own institutions in fear that other members might decide to leave.
As such they certainly do not have the best interests of their members at the forefront of their negotiations.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
My own Trust has decided to relax waiting list targets to ease the financial strain. Understandable but having sweated for years to get them down, a rather crushing blow to morale.
Apart from the Con Conference and Brexit buffoons, we also have spreadsheet Phils autumn budget to come. He is never very generous. I can see a rough ride this autumn for Toxic Tess.
Its being so cheerful wot keeps me going!
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
UCAS figures, not "my own". Do you doubt them?
so about 1.6 applicants per place, and a good number of those unsuited, or using it as a backup. It is why there are so many Nursing places in Clearing. They are struggling to fill the classrooms.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
The EU standing up for members of the club against those who don't want to be members confirms that being a member is bad...
Brexit logic
They are not standing up for members of the club. If they were they would be seeking the best deal possible. They are standing up for their own institutions in fear that other members might decide to leave.
As such they certainly do not have the best interests of their members at the forefront of their negotiations.
The Commission is negotiating the brief that was hammered out in consensus with each EU27 member. They are not allowed by the EU27 to step outside of that brief precisely because it would break the consensus. Inflexible, yes, but fully supported by individual EU27 countries, at least so far.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong enough to make deposing May a fait accompli and b) that strife putting Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street which, whatever else they disagree on all Tories believe would be a calamity for the country.
As long as the polls have the parties neck and neck and are pretty static, that works in May's favour. She may be crap, but cling to nurse for fear of something worse. If, however the Tories begin to dip into the mid-30s consistently and Labour remain in the low 40s, possibly even pushing higher, the calculation changes. Then something must be done.
How would Labour build such a poll lead? It doesn't seem too unlikely if.
- Brexit continues to look chaotic and the government continue to look like they're not really on top of it. EU bashing may enthuse hardcore leavers, but it turns off Remainy Tories and swing voters (who don't have to drink the Corbyn Kool-Aid just withdraw their support). - The natural bad stuff that buffets a government (and tends to pile up when the narrative is against you) continues. We've already had one May era Home Office cock-up come out. There's the annual health crisis to 'look forward' to. Prisons don't seem in a good state. - She has a poor conference and Labour has a good one (Labour really can't fail to look a happier place after the last two, and May isn't exactly a performer). - The economy continues to slide or stagnate
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM, the Tory press won't continue to be as forgiving as they have been and neither will Tory MPs, and can see a challenger coming through saying 'I'm the man/woman with the plan to bring us through Brexit, trying to ride a bit of goodwill, get some sort of a deal done and then call an election having made the best of a bad job and delivered Brexit in some form, with future solid details then to be sold in their manifesto.
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
I already pay NI that would buy multiple health cover for about 50 people, how much more should we pay you turnip.
Except NI is not paid for funding the NHS you turnip. It is for social benefits and pensions. And it is likely not enough to even cover that. NHS funding is from general taxation.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
I am hearing interesting noises that the government plans to have unblocked beds via social care funding are in a state of collapse, and that we will see consequences this autumn. I have been on holiday last week so may not be fully up to speed yet.
I think the bigger problem is staffing rather than funding. The Europeans are no longer coming, and others are voting with their feet.
My own Trust has decided to relax waiting list targets to ease the financial strain. Understandable but having sweated for years to get them down, a rather crushing blow to morale.
Apart from the Con Conference and Brexit buffoons, we also have spreadsheet Phils autumn budget to come. He is never very generous. I can see a rough ride this autumn for Toxic Tess.
Its being so cheerful wot keeps me going!
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Indeed the number of WTE GPs is dropping. Yet all is fine and dandy in the Tory NHS rose garden.
To the Tories, kicking out the foreigners is more important than anything else. The NHS can go without enough doctors. They don't care. They have private insurance. The bastards !
Never let the truth get in the way of a chance to bash the evil Tories.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
Down 23% for Nursing in England.
Actually according to UCAS it is down 19%. And there are still far more applicants than places.
The NHS is broken but that is because of its structure not because of any individual Government's policies. It is too expensive and we need a new model.
And before you start the normal idiocy please note I am not suggesting a US system. We should look to Europe for our model.
"I reckon it’s at least a 90% chance that Theresa May is replaced as Prime Minister by another Conservative"
Indeed, my central scenario is that the David Davis comes back with a workable deal from Brussels. But that a combination of DUP rebels (who feel the border is insufficiently "frictionless", Conservative EU-philes and a Labour Party with virtually no rebels) see the Bill defeated.
Now, what.
I sort of follow this (though I think a few Tory rebels and perhaps DUP abstain rather than vote against, leading to the bill passing by 5-15), but don't see why an election is triggered?
If the bill .
Snip
The only red .
Is the UK government prepared to throw the Good Friday Agreement overboard, with all its implications?
Of course, the obvious solution IS a United Ireland.
Not for the would
Would be interesting to put it to the vote, wouldn't it?
It won't be because the largest party in Northern Ireland is a Unionist Party
Whilst the .
No they aren't as I said there are more Unionist Catholics than Nationalist Protestants.
A referendum will of course only occur if a Nationalist party gets a majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly, as indyref in Scotland occurred after the SNP won a majority in 2011 and the EU referendum in the UK only happened after the Tories won a majority in 2015
How do you know there are more Unionist Catholics than Nationalist Protestants? Especially when the question in it's full brexit implications context hasn't been asked of them? I'd have said a referendum is inevitable if there is to be any significant change to current border arrangements.
38% of NI Catholics would vote to stay part of the UK 35% of NI Catholics would vote to join ROI
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
Down 23% for Nursing in England.
Everything is fine. Just ask Jeremy Hunt, the c**t.
I don't. If the Conservative Party cannot get its Brexit Bill through the House of Commons, then there has to be a 90% chance of another election. Theresa May may not be the Conservative leader at that election, but she would stay in Number 10 until its completion.
Indeed, my central scenario is that the David Davis comes back with a workable deal from Brussels. But that a combination of DUP rebels .... see the Bill defeated.
I do not believe this would lead to the government of the day shrugging its shoulders and saying, wistfully, "oh well, WTO it its". I believe it would lead to an election.
Now, what's the chance of this outcome? I'd say at least 20%, possibly as much as 30%.
Now, if we assume it's a 50% chance that election sees Corbyn as PM, and it's a 25% chance of an early election. Then that's a 12.5% chance of Corbyn as PM plus the chance that May stays until 2022.
I sort of follow this (though I think a few Tory rebels and perhaps DUP abstain leading to the bill passing by 5), but don't see why an election is triggered?
If the bill does not pass, then we are heading for a disorderly WTO Brexit.
An orderly WTO Brexit, which we'd planned for, is a very different thing from a disorderly last minute WTO one.
For all her faults, Mrs May genuinely loves her country and her party. I believe she, and the Conservative Party generally, would choose an election.
(I think people underestimate the impact on trade with the Rest of the World from a disorderly Brexit.)
Ah, thanks for that. I thought I might be missing some obvious FTPA clause.
So Election as only way to try and pass the deal bill again. Got it.
If the Brexit bill did not ultimately pass, the choices would be WTO or (attempt) revocation of Brexit. Are we sure an amendment that proposed revoking Brexit with or without a second referendum would not pass in the circumstances where a rejection of Brexit by parliament were on the cards? Any Tory rebels would want to do things in such a way that does not trigger a GE, Corbynism or WTO, so a third reading mugging is not likely to be their favoured method.
Even if May does fall on her sword, parliament and the rebels need to agree to a general election in preference to (a) holding out hope for a Tory succession / caretaker or (b) waiting for Corbyn to fail to form a government with the current numbers then the baton being thrust on a caretaker Centrist unity candidate who it was felt could command enough parliamentary support to complete revocation (the unity being of the centre itself against both Corbynism and WTO - this sort of semi-accidental scenario is pretty much the only route I see by which a new Centre party might emerge).
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
My own Trust has decided to relax waiting list targets to ease the financial strain. Understandable but having sweated for years to get them down, a rather crushing blow to morale.
Apart from the Con Conference and Brexit buffoons, we also have spreadsheet Phils autumn budget to come. He is never very generous. I can see a rough ride this autumn for Toxic Tess.
Its being so cheerful wot keeps me going!
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
UCAS figures, not "my own". Do you doubt them?
so about 1.6 applicants per place, and a good number of those unsuited, or using it as a backup. It is why there are so many Nursing places in Clearing. They are struggling to fill the classrooms.
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
I have to say the language of "teaching the UK a lesson" is probably quite helpful to the post-Brexit environment for the Tories if we do end up in a no-deal situation. It will show the EU have not been negotiating in good faith.
No.
For us, a deal is essential.
For the EU, maintaining the integrity of the project is essential.
Negotiating the latter at the expense of the former is not a breach of faith if you represent the EU.
This is not about how the EU will view it but about how the British public will view it. Making sure we repeat the claims by the EU that Britain must be 'punished' will do wonders for people's view of things.
But how does it solve UK's predicament. Or, are you so wedded to the concept of sovereignty that 5 years of below trend GDP is acceptable to you. Perhaps it is OK for you.
Brexiters and lying go together. Barnier did not say they will be "teaching the UK a lesson" .
Translation notwithstanding, he said that British people will be taught the consequences of Brexit. Their belief is that the British people have been misled, which is true. The word "lesson" has been deliberately used by Brexiters to poison the atmosphere.
Where did I mention Barnier? I was quoting Juncker who said Britain must be punished as a warning to other countries who might want to leave. Seems that Surbiton and lying go together.
And yes, 5 years of below trend GDP is well worth paying. After all we put up with worse when we have our own Governments screwing up - but with the advantage that we can get rid of the buggers at the end of it.
"I reckon it’s at least a 90% chance that Theresa May is replaced as Prime Minister by another Conservative"
Indeed, my central scenario is that the David Davis comes back with a workable deal from Brussels. But that a combination of DUP rebels (who feel the border is insufficiently "frictionless", Conservative EU-philes and a Labour Party with virtually no rebels) see the Bill defeated.
Now, what.
I sort of follow this (though I think a few Tory rebels and perhaps DUP abstain rather than vote against, leading to the bill passing by 5-15), but don't see why an election is triggered?
If the bill .
Snip
The only red .
Is the UK government prepared to throw the Good Friday Agreement overboard, with all its implications?
Of course, the obvious solution IS a United Ireland.
Not for the would
Would be interesting to put it to the vote, wouldn't it?
It won't be because the largest party in Northern Ireland is a Unionist Party
Whilst the .
No they aren't as I said there are more Unionist Catholics than Nationalist Protestants.
A referendum will of course only occur if a Nationalist party gets a majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly, as indyref in Scotland occurred after the SNP won a majority in 2011 and the EU referendum in the UK only happened after the Tories won a majority in 2015
How do you know there are more Unionist Catholics than Nationalist Protestants? Especially when the question in it's full brexit implications context hasn't been asked of them? I'd have said a referendum is inevitable if there is to be any significant change to current border arrangements.
38% of NI Catholics would vote to stay part of the UK 35% of NI Catholics would vote to join ROI
I reckon Mrs May might be toppled because if that Sunday Times story is true and she's going to sign off a £50 billion divorce bill after the Tory conference.
So much for that excellent analysis by a civil servant that we didn't owe anything that had the EU cowering in fear.
The first line of the story has the words 'up to' included where the headline does not.
Rather like the '50% Off' signs with the words 'up to' in much smaller letters.
I imagine that the words such as 'could' and 'might' also made an appearance somewhere.
Whatever, there are so many politicians and journalists with their own agendas involved in these stories I don't anyone has much of an idea what is happening.
Can I quote you on that? I can think of one specific example where a paragraph laced with "could" and "might" and similar has recently been collapsed into an unambiguous statement.
I have to say the language of "teaching the UK a lesson" is probably quite helpful to the post-Brexit environment for the Tories if we do end up in a no-deal situation. It will show the EU have not been negotiating in good faith.
No.
For us, a deal is essential.
For the EU, maintaining the integrity of the project is essential.
Negotiating the latter at the expense of the former is not a breach of faith if you represent the EU.
This is not about how the EU will view it but about how the British public will view it. Making sure we repeat the claims by the EU that Britain must be 'punished' will do wonders for people's view of things.
But how does it solve UK's predicament. Or, are you so wedded to the concept of sovereignty that 5 years of below trend GDP is acceptable to you. Perhaps it is OK for you.
Brexiters and lying go together. Barnier did not say they will be "teaching the UK a lesson" .
Translation notwithstanding, he said that British people will be taught the consequences of Brexit. Their belief is that the British people have been misled, which is true. The word "lesson" has been deliberately used by Brexiters to poison the atmosphere.
Where did I mention Barnier? I was quoting Juncker who said Britain must be punished as a warning to other countries who might want to leave. Seems that Surbiton and lying go together.
And yes, 5 years of below trend GDP is well worth paying. After all we put up with worse when we have our own Governments screwing up - but with the advantage that we can get rid of the buggers at the end of it.
I was replying to Max PB.
Actually you didn't. You replied to me. It is down there at 9.24pm.
"I reckon it’s at least a 90% chance that Theresa May is replaced as Prime Minister by another Conservative"
Indeed, my central scenario is that the David Davis comes back with a workable deal from Brussels. But that a combination of DUP rebels (who feel the border is insufficiently "frictionless", Conservative EU-philes and a Labour Party with virtually no rebels) see the Bill defeated.
Now, what.
I sort of follow this (though I think a few Tory rebels and perhaps DUP abstain rather than vote against, leading to the bill passing by 5-15), but don't see why an election is triggered?
If the bill .
Snip
The only red .
Is the UK government prepared to throw the Good Friday Agreement overboard, with all its implications?
Of course, the obvious solution IS a United Ireland.
Not for the would
Would be interesting to put it to the vote, wouldn't it?
It won't be because the largest party in Northern Ireland is a Unionist Party
Whilst the .
No they aren't as I said there are more Unionist Catholics than Nationalist Protestants.
A referendum will of course only occur if a Nationalist party gets a majority in the Northern Ireland Assembly, as indyref in Scotland occurred after the SNP won a majority in 2011 and the EU referendum in the UK only happened after the Tories won a majority in 2015
.
38% of NI Catholics would vote to stay part of the UK 35% of NI Catholics would vote to join ROI
As I said there will of course be no referendum while the DUP remain the largest party in NI
Lol. I see, a poll from 2013, three years before the Brexit vote. The case has altered a tad since, no?
Has it? The DUP have won 3 elections since Brexit
It wasn't DUP voters who you were claiming were key to ensuring a vote against Irish union. Like the Tories they may be the biggest party but without a majority of voters. You seem to want it all ways.
I have to say the language of "teaching the UK a lesson" is probably quite helpful to the post-Brexit environment for the Tories if we do end up in a no-deal situation. It will show the EU have not been negotiating in good faith.
Dear god, an almost perfect example of "failing and blaming"! I shall have to start making a list...
As for your point regarding Barnier, I'm sure you can come up with the offending statement in the original French/Italian so we can all check the translation. Before you start painting it on a bus, I mean...
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
UCAS figures, not "my own". Do you doubt them?
so about 1.6 applicants per place, and a good number of those unsuited, or using it as a backup. It is why there are so many Nursing places in Clearing. They are struggling to fill the classrooms.
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Now, once you add in the 30% non completion rate you might begin to understand why recruitment and retention is a major issue for the NHS.
My own ward has 5 Staff Nurse vacancies that are unfillable. I do have some knowledge of this well beyond your old copies of the Daily Mail!
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Aren't there always now applicants than places, because people apply to more than one institution?
rcs, don't bother ! HYUFD is not clued on. He is also awaiting the results of the first round of the French Presidential election to see if Le Pen won.
But they were "mad enough" to choose the idiotic IDS and solely because he was against the EU. The average Tory party member has as much connection with sanity as your average inmate of Bedlam.
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Aren't there always now applicants than places, because people apply to more than one institution?
That may be the explanation for the Daily Mail figures, but UCAS counts individual applicants for its figures, though as I pointed out many do not get the grades, are unsuitable for other reasons, or using Nursing as a back up.
"Google faces a multibillion-euro fine by the European Commission for using its Android smartphone software to stifle competition" - are there any EU smartphone OS's about which have been held back?
I have to say the language of "teaching the UK a lesson" is probably quite helpful to the post-Brexit environment for the Tories if we do end up in a no-deal situation. It will show the EU have not been negotiating in good faith.
No.
For us, a deal is essential.
For the EU, maintaining the integrity of the project is essential.
Negotiating the latter at the expense of the former is not a breach of faith if you represent the EU.
This is not about how the EU will view it but about how the British public will view it. Making sure we repeat the claims by the EU that Britain must be 'punished' will do wonders for people's view of things.
But how does it solve UK's predicament. Or, are you so wedded to the concept of sovereignty that 5 years of below trend GDP is acceptable to you. Perhaps it is OK for you.
Brexiters and lying go together. Barnier did not say they will be "teaching the UK a lesson" .
Translation notwithstanding, he said that British people will be taught the consequences of Brexit. Their belief is that the British people have been misled, which is true. The word "lesson" has been deliberately used by Brexiters to poison the atmosphere.
Where did I mention Barnier? I was quoting Juncker who said Britain must be punished as a warning to other countries who might want to leave. Seems that Surbiton and lying go together.
And yes, 5 years of below trend GDP is well worth paying. After all we put up with worse when we have our own Governments screwing up - but with the advantage that we can get rid of the buggers at the end of it.
I was replying to Max PB.
Actually you didn't. You replied to me. It is down there at 9.24pm.
I was reading MaxPB 's bold letters. I do not have much to reply to you.I am not aware of your views.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
Down 23% for Nursing in England.
Actually according to UCAS it is down 19%. And there are still far more applicants than places.
The NHS is broken but that is because of its structure not because of any individual Government's policies. It is too expensive and we need a new model.
And before you start the normal idiocy please note I am not suggesting a US system. We should look to Europe for our model.
From what I can see, the structure is perfectly viable - even with funding at the current levels - so long as the other pieces of the welfare state jigsaw are properly funded. Social care is the biggie - but right across government, non-core budgets have been slashed and the burden has fallen on the NHS. This is, of course, intentional.
The right are just doing what the right always does: Try to break the NHS and convince the public it is unviable and must be replaced with a private system.
Untrue. I suggest you go and look at John Major's letters to the Commission over the extension of EU competence into areas we did not agree to via rulings of the ECJ.
It's a bit of a drive-by tonight as I am humungeously busy, but I can fit this in. I was referring to the treaties (which is why I listed them). Oddly, I was aware of Sir John's habit of writing letters - I've read his autobiography, which I can recommend btw - but I had not read that one, so thank you for the link, which I read with some interest.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
Down 23% for Nursing in England.
Actually according to UCAS it is down 19%. And there are still far more applicants than places.
The NHS is broken but that is because of its structure not because of any individual Government's policies. It is too expensive and we need a new model.
And before you start the normal idiocy please note I am not suggesting a US system. We should look to Europe for our model.
From what I can see, the structure is perfectly viable - even with funding at the current levels - so long as the other pieces of the welfare state jigsaw are properly funded. Social care is the biggie - but right across government, non-core budgets have been slashed and the burden has fallen on the NHS. This is, of course, intentional.
The right are just doing what the right always does: Try to break the NHS and convince the public it is unviable and must be replaced with a private system.
Most other European nations have an insurance based system for healthcare, we are the exception not the rule on that
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
The EU standing up for members of the club against those who don't want to be members confirms that being a member is bad...
Brexit logic
They are not standing up for members of the club. If they were they would be seeking the best deal possible. They are standing up for their own institutions in fear that other members might decide to leave.
As such they certainly do not have the best interests of their members at the forefront of their negotiations.
I realise that you don't believe they are acting in their members' interests, but they seem to think so.
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Aren't there always now applicants than places, because people apply to more than one institution?
There has been a shortage of NHS training places for years which is why the government is now correctly expanding the number of training places available
"Google faces a multibillion-euro fine by the European Commission for using its Android smartphone software to stifle competition" - are there any EU smartphone OS's about which have been held back?
The main accusations seem to revolve around Google telling manufacturers to install Google play and chrome apps as part of the deal for them getting to have android on their hardware (but are still able to customise android). Some how that is illegal, but what apple does it comes to forcing you to use the app store and preinstalling the likes of safari is ok.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
No it is funding and reforming it to increase private health insurance.
EU nurses and doctors make up less than 10% of the total in the UK, it is expanding training places which is key and which the government is now doing, especially given the historic oversupply of applicants to training places available
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
UCAS .
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Now, once you add in the 30% non completion rate you might begin to understand why recruitment and retention is a major issue for the NHS.
My own ward has 5 Staff Nurse vacancies that are unfillable. I do have some knowledge of this well beyond your old copies of the Daily Mail!
Yes and Staff Nurse vacancies of course are exacerbated by the shortage of training places, so despite your patronising tone nothing you have said at all contradicts the central point
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Aren't there always now applicants than places, because people apply to more than one institution?
rcs, don't bother ! HYUFD is not clued on. He is also awaiting the results of the first round of the French Presidential election to see if Le Pen won.
Which she did in terms of Regions and Departements won
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
The EU standing up for members of the club against those who don't want to be members confirms that being a member is bad...
Brexit logic
They are not standing up for members of the club. If they were they would be seeking the best deal possible. They are standing up for their own institutions in fear that other members might decide to leave.
As such they certainly do not have the best interests of their members at the forefront of their negotiations.
This, to be frank, is incredibly daft, but we should expect nothing less from intransigent Brexiteers unable to accept their folly. No EU country, even Greece, looks close to looking like they want to leave for a start. The point about the single market or customs union is that they break down barriers between members to allow free trade but those terms are not offered to non-members to protect from unfair competition. Those terms are not on offer to us not because they're worried about their institutions but because that's simply not how the EU works. You get all the unfettered trade, multi-national institutions, freedom to sell services because all the complexities of harmonising regulation and laws have already been worked out and agreed upon.
Outside that they are seeking 'the best deal possible', but it can't be the same as everything has to be checked, agreed and go through the process other third-party nations do, with the exception of those who largely sign up to EU law through their own agreements (Switzerland) or via the EEA or EFTA. They are going to argue each detail because that's the negotiators job, to get the best deal for those inside, not to help a third party - whether something's mutually beneficial will ultimately depend on the terms of the agreement.
It's in the EU's interests to have Britain as a member. It is not to have it as a semi-belligerent trade partner that wants to dictate terms on what's good for them from outside. The problem we've got is that no deal, while hurting both us and them, hurts us a lot more, while a deal that gives us what Brexiteers promised - the same single market access and no customs barriers, an end to free movement and shared regulation and the ability to do third-party trade deals with whoever we like, is actively harmful to EU members and so they won't even begin to discuss it. People were sold a pack of lies, which the government has maintained, resulting in the UK and EU starting miles apart in negotiations. We knew this would be the EU position long before the referendum, Boris and co just lied and sneered at those who bothered to point it out.
OK, let's wrap this up. The kerfuffle tonight about Barnier illustrates a wider problem (that indeed has been a problem for some time): all the reportage we have about the EU is in the English language, and most of the chatter from the EU is in other languages. So finding out what they really think or say is going to be a total pain.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
There is still a large part of the political class that clings onto the false assumptions and wishful thinking. It's improbable that these people will not grasp the reality over the next 18 months, and, I think, equally improbable that they will be content to carry on regardless.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
That list was not on the ballot paper I am afraid. (It might have been useful if it had been!) We simply voted out.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
So are we leaving the UN as well then because we have given up sovereignty there too? It's what you do to be a member of a club for mutual benefit.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
There is still a large part of the political class that clings onto the false assumptions and wishful thinking. It's improbable that these people will not grasp the reality over the next 18 months, and, I think, equally improbable that they will be content to carry on regardless.
That's the £350 million question (or is it a €40 billion question?) You would have to be a psychoanalyst to answer. Will people say, "It's pointless. Let it go..."? Doesn't seem likely to me, even though Brexit IS ACTUALLY pointless.
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw. The NHS deficit is substantially more than stated, helped out by accounting that would make Enron blush:
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 billion extra a year and will be until more of those who can afford it take out private health insurance easing the pressure on it
Yet even on your own figures there are still substantially more applying for places to train as a nurse than there are currently places available
UCAS .
So still comfortably more applicants per place than there are places available, thanks for confirming yet again
Now, once you add in the 30% non completion rate you might begin to understand why recruitment and retention is a major issue for the NHS.
My own ward has 5 Staff Nurse vacancies that are unfillable. I do have some knowledge of this well beyond your old copies of the Daily Mail!
Yes and Staff Nurse vacancies of course are exacerbated by the shortage of training places, so despite your patronising tone nothing you have said at all contradicts the central point
The promise of funding for extra places has not materialised:
A good analysis, but it may leave out the importance of the polls. The major things keeping May in place at the minute are a) Fear that a contest would spark a civil war because no Tory candidate or faction is strong
If she does slide in the polls and Corbyn looks like the next PM
A winter NHS crisis is on the cards btw.
The NHS is always 'in crisis' despite £8 the pressure on it
I am !
No it is funding and
Training is a good idea. But it takes 7 years of training to get a doctor.
The cenral point that I have been making is that there is a real staffing crisis in the NHS, affecting both recruitment and retention.
Paper pronouncements by Hunt are as worthless as Potemkin villages.
The central point you have been making completely ignores the elephant in the room that the key problem with staffing in the NHS, particularly for nurses, is the shortage of places for nurses training which has been allowed to build up for years.
As it says at the end of the article ' A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said the planned changes would create up to 10,000 more training places for nurses and allied health professionals by the end of this parliament, adding that there was likely to be a bounceback on applications next year. She said that even with a 23% drop in applications the NHS would still be able to fill the required 20,000 student nursing places this year.'
By the way, did anyone notice the big news today? Merkel says Turkey EU accession talks should end because Turkey will never be an EU member.
So that means the UK is out and Turkey is not in, so the EU's two biggest neighbours are now outside the organisation and not in the greatest of moods with it
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
So are we leaving the UN as well then because we have given up sovereignty there too? It's what you do to be a member of a club for mutual benefit.
There is no UN government like wot there is for the EU.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
That list was not on the ballot paper I am afraid. (It might have been useful if it had been!) We simply voted out.
Ashcroft's exit poll of 12 000 people on EU referendum day had the following as the 2 top reasons for voting Leave
1The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK
Poor old Surbiton, 31 years deep cover with the Germans. No wonder he has been so relentlessly pro the EU. No doubt thinks his internet access is being monitored at work - I wouldn't be surprised.
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
So are we leaving the UN as well then because we have given up sovereignty there too? It's what you do to be a member of a club for mutual benefit.
60% of UK laws do not come from the UN (as they have done from the EU once you include regulations)
@ThatTimWalker: May's pitch at the Tory conference is going to have to be better than 'I know I'm crap, I know Brexit is crap, but Corbyn's even more crap.'
To strike trade deals, a country needs to have something to trade: tariffs or regulation or ideally both. Yet the only way to maintain frictionless trade between the U.K. and the EU is for the U.K. to remain in both a customs union and a regulatory union with the EU, mirroring exactly the EU’s external tariffs and regulations, leaving no scope to sign its own independent trade deals. The U.K. government has spent more than a year trying to devise ways around this conundrum but the reality is that it can’t be done.
Of course it can be done. The EU just don't (politically) want it.
The EU being intransigent is not news, and only confirms why we were right to leave.
That's not quite the issue. Whether we are in a customs union with the EU or not, we have to strike our own trade deals, even if they aim to mirror the EU ones as far as possible. The potential problem is that if the EU has already negotiated the external tariffs with a third country that we must automatically apply, the third country will have what it wants from us and has no incentive to offer benefits to us, including those they have previously offered EU members to get the original deal.
It's a major problem for advocates of Brexit who claim practical benefits from leaving behind EU 'protectionism'. As the reality of the situation sinks in, what will their case for Brexit rest on?
We voted out. Simply that.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
We voted out to reclaim sovereignty and end free movement in that order
So are we leaving the UN as well then because we have given up sovereignty there too? It's what you do to be a member of a club for mutual benefit.
Oh do please tell me what laws the UN has passed that effect my day to day life? You Eurofanatics are like a stuck record with all your false analogies and straw men.
This, to be frank, is incredibly daft, but we should expect nothing less from intransigent Brexiteers unable to accept their folly. No EU country, even Greece, looks close to looking like they want to leave for a start. The point about the single market or customs union is that they break down barriers between members to allow free trade but those terms are not offered to non-members to protect from unfair competition. Those terms are not on offer to us not because they're worried about their institutions but because that's simply not how the EU works. You get all the unfettered trade, multi-national institutions, freedom to sell services because all the complexities of harmonising regulation and laws have already been worked out and agreed upon.
Outside that they are seeking 'the best deal possible', but it can't be the same as everything has to be checked, agreed and go through the process other third-party nations do, with the exception of those who largely sign up to EU law through their own agreements (Switzerland) or via the EEA or EFTA. They are going to argue each detail because that's the negotiators job, to get the best deal for those inside, not to help a third party - whether something's mutually beneficial will ultimately depend on the terms of the agreement.
It's in the EU's interests to have Britain as a member. It is not to have it as a semi-belligerent trade partner that wants to dictate terms on what's good for them from outside. The problem we've got is that no deal, while hurting both us and them, hurts us a lot more, while a deal that gives us what Brexiteers promised - the same single market access and no customs barriers, an end to free movement and shared regulation and the ability to do third-party trade deals with whoever we like, is actively harmful to EU members and so they won't even begin to discuss it. People were sold a pack of lies, which the government has maintained, resulting in the UK and EU starting miles apart in negotiations. We knew this would be the EU position long before the referendum, Boris and co just lied and sneered at those who bothered to point it out.
Bollocks from start to finish. It is the EU apparatchiks themselves who have said they need to punish us to make sure no one else leaves, not the Brexiteers. Once you realise that your first sentence is garbage the rest of your posting is simply drivel.
The only ones lying are people like you who can't accept the fact we are leaving and so have to insist it was some sort of deception.
Their postgraduate training is not supernumary, they are the junior doctors who keep the services functioning. 5 years NHS work would be 2 years Foundation and 3 years as GP Vocational Trainee, none as a qualified GP.
Medical School apllications are down too this year. I have never known so many places in clearing.
The young are voting with their feet. They see little future here.
Funding can be restored, but that cadre cannot be easily replaced.
All university applications are down. Tuition fees are driving people away. And UCAS says there is a demographic effect in that there are simply fewer 18 year olds to draw from.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
Down 23% for Nursing in England.
Actually according to UCAS it is down 19%. And there are still far more applicants than places.
The NHS is broken but that is because of its structure not because of any individual Government's policies. It is too expensive and we need a new model.
And before you start the normal idiocy please note I am not suggesting a US system. We should look to Europe for our model.
From what I can see, the structure is perfectly viable - even with funding at the current levels - so long as the other pieces of the welfare state jigsaw are properly funded. Social care is the biggie - but right across government, non-core budgets have been slashed and the burden has fallen on the NHS. This is, of course, intentional.
The right are just doing what the right always does: Try to break the NHS and convince the public it is unviable and must be replaced with a private system.
@ThatTimWalker: May's pitch at the Tory conference is going to have to be better than 'I know I'm crap, I know Brexit is crap, but Corbyn's even more crap.'
Talking of the conservative party conference, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump made an appearance.
I think TM would calculate that it would, on balance, help shore up her position. Aso, he'd be returning TM's RNC favour. The main thing with a trump visit is that it's quite likely it'll be unannounced, IMO.
By the way, did anyone notice the big news today? Merkel says Turkey EU accession talks should end because Turkey will never be an EU member.
So that means the UK is out and Turkey is not in, so the EU's two biggest neighbours are now outside the organisation and not in the greatest of moods with it
Surely recognising the obvious is a rare moment of sanity.
By the way, did anyone notice the big news today? Merkel says Turkey EU accession talks should end because Turkey will never be an EU member.
So that means the UK is out and Turkey is not in, so the EU's two biggest neighbours are now outside the organisation and not in the greatest of moods with it
Surely recognising the obvious is a rare moment of sanity.
Comments
As such they certainly do not have the best interests of their members at the forefront of their negotiations.
Overall University applications are down 4% on last year.
so about 1.6 applicants per place, and a good number of those unsuited, or using it as a backup. It is why there are so many Nursing places in Clearing. They are struggling to fill the classrooms.
The NHS is broken but that is because of its structure not because of any individual Government's policies. It is too expensive and we need a new model.
And before you start the normal idiocy please note I am not suggesting a US system. We should look to Europe for our model.
Even if May does fall on her sword, parliament and the rebels need to agree to a general election in preference to (a) holding out hope for a Tory succession / caretaker or (b) waiting for Corbyn to fail to form a government with the current numbers then the baton being thrust on a caretaker Centrist unity candidate who it was felt could command enough parliamentary support to complete revocation (the unity being of the centre itself against both Corbynism and WTO - this sort of semi-accidental scenario is pretty much the only route I see by which a new Centre party might emerge).
As for your point regarding Barnier, I'm sure you can come up with the offending statement in the original French/Italian so we can all check the translation. Before you start painting it on a bus, I mean...
My own ward has 5 Staff Nurse vacancies that are unfillable. I do have some knowledge of this well beyond your old copies of the Daily Mail!
The right are just doing what the right always does: Try to break the NHS and convince the public it is unviable and must be replaced with a private system.
Yup. Brexit will be a walk in the park ! I have customers in Broughton. They will be nervous now.
But you're right. There aren't any practical benefits to Brexit. It was false assumptions and wishful thinking.
Outside that they are seeking 'the best deal possible', but it can't be the same as everything has to be checked, agreed and go through the process other third-party nations do, with the exception of those who largely sign up to EU law through their own agreements (Switzerland) or via the EEA or EFTA. They are going to argue each detail because that's the negotiators job, to get the best deal for those inside, not to help a third party - whether something's mutually beneficial will ultimately depend on the terms of the agreement.
It's in the EU's interests to have Britain as a member. It is not to have it as a semi-belligerent trade partner that wants to dictate terms on what's good for them from outside. The problem we've got is that no deal, while hurting both us and them, hurts us a lot more, while a deal that gives us what Brexiteers promised - the same single market access and no customs barriers, an end to free movement and shared regulation and the ability to do third-party trade deals with whoever we like, is actively harmful to EU members and so they won't even begin to discuss it. People were sold a pack of lies, which the government has maintained, resulting in the UK and EU starting miles apart in negotiations. We knew this would be the EU position long before the referendum, Boris and co just lied and sneered at those who bothered to point it out.
We simply voted out.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/27/fund-extra-nursing-training-places-dropped-universities
The cenral point that I have been making is that there is a real staffing crisis in the NHS, affecting both recruitment and retention.
Paper pronouncements by Hunt are as worthless as Potemkin villages.
As it says at the end of the article ' A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said the planned changes would create up to 10,000 more training places for nurses and allied health professionals by the end of this parliament, adding that there was likely to be a bounceback on applications next year. She said that even with a 23% drop in applications the NHS would still be able to fill the required 20,000 student nursing places this year.'
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/27/fund-extra-nursing-training-places-dropped-universities
1The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK
2 Voting to leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
@ThatTimWalker: May's pitch at the Tory conference is going to have to be better than 'I know I'm crap, I know Brexit is crap, but Corbyn's even more crap.'
The only ones lying are people like you who can't accept the fact we are leaving and so have to insist it was some sort of deception.
I think TM would calculate that it would, on balance, help shore up her position. Aso, he'd be returning TM's RNC favour. The main thing with a trump visit is that it's quite likely it'll be unannounced, IMO.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4383549/theresa-may-scraps-public-sector-pay-cap/
Austerity ends.
For the record, I have had £50 on George Clooney to be the next POTUS "winner" 2020 at 200/1 with Ladbrokes.