More Brexit good news.......

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 8:56 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

I've made a point of telling my kids about how poor Britain was in the 60s and 70s Dave.

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 9:06 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 8:56 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

I've made a point of telling my kids about how poor Britain was in the 60s and 70s Dave.

 

.......and that was because we weren't part of the EU? *-) ..........

 

BTW I think it would also be useful to point out to your kids that it was Labour who were in charge for the majority of that period >:-) ............

 

 

[Barryd999]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 9:14 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 9:06 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 8:56 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

I've made a point of telling my kids about how poor Britain was in the 60s and 70s Dave.

 

.......and that was because we weren't part of the EU? *-) ..........

 

BTW I think it would also be useful to point out to your kids that it was Labour who were in charge for the majority of that period >:-) ............

 

 

We were the basket case of Europe when we joined Dave and look how we have prospered. People keep harping on about the good old days but although I am young compared to most on here I seem to remember a lot of stuff about strikes, power cuts, three day weeks, rubbish piling up, bodies piling up, smog, filthy rivers, seas and beaches. crap food and booze (and no French cheese). Doesnt sound that good to me.

[Barryd999]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-01 6:40 PM

Archiesgrandad - 2017-11-01 6:06 PMAll right I give in. It is entirely possible that 200,000 people in banking etc., might lose their jobs if we cannot reach a suitable agreement with the EU. I will go further, it could be that 350,000 people could lose their jobs in that situation, because that's how many people are employed in the industry. Equally, it is possible that only 15 people will lose their jobs if the talks fail. Please note that I accept that it is possible, I do not believe that it is likely. Of course failure to achieve a settlement could be disastrous, it could also be the making of our country.On the basis that there is not one person living on this planet who actually knows what the outcome will be, and I suspect that most of us who express our views on this forum fall a long way short of being in such a favoured position as to even know what is being talked about, I believe that we all have a vested interest in not doing anything that makes the position of our negotiating team any more difficult than it needs to be.If you feel that your actions might influence the outcome then please think carefully about what you want and what are the possible outcomes if you succeed.AGD

I think your post is very measured AJD but I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread. We all want what is best for the UK whatever position we have on Brexit. I remain of the opinion that the referendum came at a time when we just could not risk the possible consequences of Brexit. So, in defence of those that would wish to bring us back from the brink,.....1 there is nothing wrong with their efforts to find ways to extricate ourselves from the process of leaving. Yes, it is bad for negotiations but.....2 their aims are true in the sense that they are intent on achieving an outcome they truly believe would benefit the UK in the end. Veronica

1:

I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country.

2:

Surely that is what those who voted to leave desire also?  I can not believe anyone (other than those who desire the downfall of the nation of which I suspect there are thankfully few) would knowingly vote in such a way as to demonstrate a desire to deliver the country to a place where the outcome would seriously damage the nation.  Sorry Veronica but to be honest that premise, to imply that 'out' voters considered the opposite is absurd.

You admit the constant harping on about the disaster awaiting is harming negotiations.  So why, if the remain camp is intent on being of benefit to the UK, are they forging ahead with an agenda that gives out signals of dissension, split and weakness in terms of direction of purpose to our opposite numbers in Brussels?

Lastly you said:

"I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread". 

As has been said so many times here and in a myriad of other places/press etc the path as a remaining member of the EU is unknown not least because of their expansionist ideas and diminishing the of powers and scope of National veto.  So just where should 'the angels tread' without fear I ask?

Morning Roger,...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown, the unpredictable and all things not entirely within their control Roger. We have effectively abandoned any hope of contributing to EU policy that will have an effect on us whether we like it or not in the future. I remain (no pun intended) respectful of your views, however I cannot subscribe to your optimism that Brexit is going to result in a better future for the UK from what has emerged so far. I don’t know about you but I am also a bit cross, to put it mildly, that the research into the effects of Brexit across 58 areas of the economy was not undertaken and published before the referendum. Now we are in another fine mess about what can be disclosed and what cannot without harming our negotiating position. Veronica

Why indeed! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/30/government-refuses-to-release-details-of-studies-into-economic-impact-of-brexitCould be one for Gina Miller to get her teeth into.. That should see a few more purple faces explode. :DIf Davis is wetting himself about it being leaked then I Take it its not full of good news then. *-)

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 9:14 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 9:06 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 8:56 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

I've made a point of telling my kids about how poor Britain was in the 60s and 70s Dave.

 

.......and that was because we weren't part of the EU? *-) ..........

 

BTW I think it would also be useful to point out to your kids that it was Labour who were in charge for the majority of that period >:-) ............

 

I recall that those countries that were members of the EU before we joined were doing much better than us. You and I will continue to disagree about whether it was a good move or not in light of subsequent developments. It was of course a Conservative PM who first mooted joining the EEC in 1961 and a Conservative PM who finally did the deed in 1973.

 

;-)

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Barryd999 - 2017-11-02 9:33 AM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-01 6:40 PM

Archiesgrandad - 2017-11-01 6:06 PMAll right I give in. It is entirely possible that 200,000 people in banking etc., might lose their jobs if we cannot reach a suitable agreement with the EU. I will go further, it could be that 350,000 people could lose their jobs in that situation, because that's how many people are employed in the industry. Equally, it is possible that only 15 people will lose their jobs if the talks fail. Please note that I accept that it is possible, I do not believe that it is likely. Of course failure to achieve a settlement could be disastrous, it could also be the making of our country.On the basis that there is not one person living on this planet who actually knows what the outcome will be, and I suspect that most of us who express our views on this forum fall a long way short of being in such a favoured position as to even know what is being talked about, I believe that we all have a vested interest in not doing anything that makes the position of our negotiating team any more difficult than it needs to be.If you feel that your actions might influence the outcome then please think carefully about what you want and what are the possible outcomes if you succeed.AGD

I think your post is very measured AJD but I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread. We all want what is best for the UK whatever position we have on Brexit. I remain of the opinion that the referendum came at a time when we just could not risk the possible consequences of Brexit. So, in defence of those that would wish to bring us back from the brink,.....1 there is nothing wrong with their efforts to find ways to extricate ourselves from the process of leaving. Yes, it is bad for negotiations but.....2 their aims are true in the sense that they are intent on achieving an outcome they truly believe would benefit the UK in the end. Veronica

1:

I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country.

2:

Surely that is what those who voted to leave desire also?  I can not believe anyone (other than those who desire the downfall of the nation of which I suspect there are thankfully few) would knowingly vote in such a way as to demonstrate a desire to deliver the country to a place where the outcome would seriously damage the nation.  Sorry Veronica but to be honest that premise, to imply that 'out' voters considered the opposite is absurd.

You admit the constant harping on about the disaster awaiting is harming negotiations.  So why, if the remain camp is intent on being of benefit to the UK, are they forging ahead with an agenda that gives out signals of dissension, split and weakness in terms of direction of purpose to our opposite numbers in Brussels?

Lastly you said:

"I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread". 

As has been said so many times here and in a myriad of other places/press etc the path as a remaining member of the EU is unknown not least because of their expansionist ideas and diminishing the of powers and scope of National veto.  So just where should 'the angels tread' without fear I ask?

Morning Roger,...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown, the unpredictable and all things not entirely within their control Roger. We have effectively abandoned any hope of contributing to EU policy that will have an effect on us whether we like it or not in the future. I remain (no pun intended) respectful of your views, however I cannot subscribe to your optimism that Brexit is going to result in a better future for the UK from what has emerged so far. I don’t know about you but I am also a bit cross, to put it mildly, that the research into the effects of Brexit across 58 areas of the economy was not undertaken and published before the referendum. Now we are in another fine mess about what can be disclosed and what cannot without harming our negotiating position. Veronica

Why indeed! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/30/government-refuses-to-release-details-of-studies-into-economic-impact-of-brexitCould be one for Gina Miller to get her teeth into.. That should see a few more purple faces explode. :DIf Davis is wetting himself about it being leaked then I Take it its not full of good news then. *-)

So your pinning your hopes on a sexed up dossier produced by government funded Remoaner doom & gloom merchants? ;-) ........

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 9:53 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 9:14 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 9:06 AM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 8:56 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

 

...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown,

 

Its only unknown to snowflakes and those under 40 ;-) ........

 

 

I've made a point of telling my kids about how poor Britain was in the 60s and 70s Dave.

 

.......and that was because we weren't part of the EU? *-) ..........

 

BTW I think it would also be useful to point out to your kids that it was Labour who were in charge for the majority of that period >:-) ............

 

I recall that those countries that were members of the EU before we joined were doing much better than us. You and I will continue to disagree about whether it was a good move or not in light of subsequent developments. It was of course a Conservative PM who first mooted joining the EEC in 1961 and a Conservative PM who finally did the deed in 1973.

 

;-)

 

 

Which is why I'm a UKIP voter who like several million others has currently just lent his vote to the Tories ;-) .........

 

I suspect the sainted Theresa knows where her increased share of the vote came from :D ......

 

 

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 9:56 AM

Barryd999 - 2017-11-02 9:33 AM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 8:47 AM

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-01 6:40 PM

Archiesgrandad - 2017-11-01 6:06 PMAll right I give in. It is entirely possible that 200,000 people in banking etc., might lose their jobs if we cannot reach a suitable agreement with the EU. I will go further, it could be that 350,000 people could lose their jobs in that situation, because that's how many people are employed in the industry. Equally, it is possible that only 15 people will lose their jobs if the talks fail. Please note that I accept that it is possible, I do not believe that it is likely. Of course failure to achieve a settlement could be disastrous, it could also be the making of our country.On the basis that there is not one person living on this planet who actually knows what the outcome will be, and I suspect that most of us who express our views on this forum fall a long way short of being in such a favoured position as to even know what is being talked about, I believe that we all have a vested interest in not doing anything that makes the position of our negotiating team any more difficult than it needs to be.If you feel that your actions might influence the outcome then please think carefully about what you want and what are the possible outcomes if you succeed.AGD

I think your post is very measured AJD but I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread. We all want what is best for the UK whatever position we have on Brexit. I remain of the opinion that the referendum came at a time when we just could not risk the possible consequences of Brexit. So, in defence of those that would wish to bring us back from the brink,.....1 there is nothing wrong with their efforts to find ways to extricate ourselves from the process of leaving. Yes, it is bad for negotiations but.....2 their aims are true in the sense that they are intent on achieving an outcome they truly believe would benefit the UK in the end. Veronica

1:

I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country.

2:

Surely that is what those who voted to leave desire also?  I can not believe anyone (other than those who desire the downfall of the nation of which I suspect there are thankfully few) would knowingly vote in such a way as to demonstrate a desire to deliver the country to a place where the outcome would seriously damage the nation.  Sorry Veronica but to be honest that premise, to imply that 'out' voters considered the opposite is absurd.

You admit the constant harping on about the disaster awaiting is harming negotiations.  So why, if the remain camp is intent on being of benefit to the UK, are they forging ahead with an agenda that gives out signals of dissension, split and weakness in terms of direction of purpose to our opposite numbers in Brussels?

Lastly you said:

"I cannot give up the hope that we will somehow extricate the UK from a path that has so many variables and uncertainties that it is one where angels would fear to tread". 

As has been said so many times here and in a myriad of other places/press etc the path as a remaining member of the EU is unknown not least because of their expansionist ideas and diminishing the of powers and scope of National veto.  So just where should 'the angels tread' without fear I ask?

Morning Roger,...they should fear to tread paths involving the unknown, the unpredictable and all things not entirely within their control Roger. We have effectively abandoned any hope of contributing to EU policy that will have an effect on us whether we like it or not in the future. I remain (no pun intended) respectful of your views, however I cannot subscribe to your optimism that Brexit is going to result in a better future for the UK from what has emerged so far. I don’t know about you but I am also a bit cross, to put it mildly, that the research into the effects of Brexit across 58 areas of the economy was not undertaken and published before the referendum. Now we are in another fine mess about what can be disclosed and what cannot without harming our negotiating position. Veronica

Why indeed! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/30/government-refuses-to-release-details-of-studies-into-economic-impact-of-brexitCould be one for Gina Miller to get her teeth into.. That should see a few more purple faces explode. :DIf Davis is wetting himself about it being leaked then I Take it its not full of good news then. *-)

So your pinning your hopes on a sexed up dossier produced by government funded Remoaner doom & gloom merchants? ;-) ........

Your head’s in the sand Dave and soon only your feet will be visible

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 10:04 AM

Your head’s in the sand Dave and soon only your feet will be visible

 

I'm too polite to point out what you Remoaners are talking out of (lol) .......

 

 

[Violet1956]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 10:07 AM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 10:04 AM

Your head’s in the sand Dave and soon only your feet will be visible

 

I'm too polite to point out what you Remoaners are talking out of (lol) .......

 

 

(lol) too polite (lol) made my day...guess I had it coming having strayed into ad hominem ;-)

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM....................

1 I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country................................

Just to say I disagree with this line of argument. We have a well, and long, established form of democracy. We elect MPs, the largest party forms the government, and they make the decisions. If we don't like the way they govern, we replace them with a different government, and off we go again. To the best of my knowledge, both sides begin planning for the next election as soon as one election closes, and continue doing so until the election is announced. No-one following an election chucks in the sponge and say OK, we lost, we give up. Continuing to promote an opposing viewpoint throughout a government is a vital part of our system. Lack of, or ineffective, opposition, leads to bad government. The whole process is one of continual argument and debate. That is our system of democracy.

 

The Brexit decision was not reached on that basis. It was on the basis of a referendum, one of only three ever held in UK. Referendums take a snapshot of public opinion on a single issue at a point in time. If that opinion is to be taken as binding the properly elected government and opposition to subservience, as it has been, then, when and if public opinion on that single issue appears to have changed, it is necessary to hold a new referendum, to test whether the majority view has changed. It is then reasonable, within the democratic process, to seek to influence public opinion to change, and to argue for that change.

 

There is no system of democratic government anywhere that seeks to adhere for all time to a decision made as a result of a public plebiscite of whatever type, be it general election or referendum. To seek to impose that degree restriction on political debate smacks of totalitarianism, which is definitely a debased form of democracy - against which I would argue even more than I do over Brexit. :-D

[Bulletguy]

 

Keeping on topic with the thread title of "more Brexit (good) news"......

 

The increase in qualified European medics leaving the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s (NMC) register: from 2,435 in 2015-16 to 4,067 in the last year – a rise of 67% and the number of nurses and midwives coming to work in Britain from Europe has plunged by 89% since the UK voted to leave the EU.

 

The data sourced from the NMC register also shows a third worrying trend relating to the NHS’s already short staffed workforce – that the number of UK-trained nurses and midwives leaving the register rose by 11%, from 26,653 in 2015-16 to 29,019 last year.

 

“Far from delivering the staff needed to keep patients on wards safe, nurse numbers are now in fact falling in our NHS. It’s staggering that numbers are falling when all the evidence shows we need more nurses in the NHS, not less”, said Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary.

 

Will those exhorting the virtues of Brexit please explain why the number of qualified nursing and midwife staff from EU countries has plunged to such a serious level post referendum? How do you intend to address this extremely serious shortfall? Where do propose to recruit qualified nursing staff from to bring these figures back to an acceptable level?

 

Please don't tell me you read a slogan on a big red bus and thought we'd be ok because the figures above are telling you that's not the case.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/02/european-nurses-midwives-leaving-uk-nhs-brexit-vote

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-02 1:57 PM

 

 

Keeping on topic with the thread title of "more Brexit (good) news"......

 

The increase in qualified European medics leaving the Nursing and Midwifery Council’s (NMC) register: from 2,435 in 2015-16 to 4,067 in the last year – a rise of 67% and the number of nurses and midwives coming to work in Britain from Europe has plunged by 89% since the UK voted to leave the EU.

 

The data sourced from the NMC register also shows a third worrying trend relating to the NHS’s already short staffed workforce – that the number of UK-trained nurses and midwives leaving the register rose by 11%, from 26,653 in 2015-16 to 29,019 last year.

 

“Far from delivering the staff needed to keep patients on wards safe, nurse numbers are now in fact falling in our NHS. It’s staggering that numbers are falling when all the evidence shows we need more nurses in the NHS, not less”, said Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary.

 

Will those exhorting the virtues of Brexit please explain why the number of qualified nursing and midwife staff from EU countries has plunged to such a serious level post referendum? How do you intend to address this extremely serious shortfall? Where do propose to recruit qualified nursing staff from to bring these figures back to an acceptable level?

 

Please don't tell me you read a slogan on a big red bus and thought we'd be ok because the figures above are telling you that's not the case.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/02/european-nurses-midwives-leaving-uk-nhs-brexit-vote

 

Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

[Violet1956]

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 5:16 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

 

We're waiting Dave ;-)

 

Veronica

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 1:11 PM

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM....................1 I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country................................

Just to say I disagree with this line of argument. We have a well, and long, established form of democracy. We elect MPs, the largest party forms the government, and they make the decisions. If we don't like the way they govern, we replace them with a different government, and off we go again. To the best of my knowledge, both sides begin planning for the next election as soon as one election closes, and continue doing so until the election is announced. No-one following an election chucks in the sponge and say OK, we lost, we give up. Continuing to promote an opposing viewpoint throughout a government is a vital part of our system. Lack of, or ineffective, opposition, leads to bad government. The whole process is one of continual argument and debate. That is our system of democracy. The Brexit decision was not reached on that basis. It was on the basis of a referendum, one of only three ever held in UK. Referendums take a snapshot of public opinion on a single issue at a point in time. If that opinion is to be taken as binding the properly elected government and opposition to subservience, as it has been, then, when and if public opinion on that single issue appears to have changed, it is necessary to hold a new referendum, to test whether the majority view has changed. It is then reasonable, within the democratic process, to seek to influence public opinion to change, and to argue for that change.There is no system of democratic government anywhere that seeks to adhere for all time to a decision made as a result of a public plebiscite of whatever type, be it general election or referendum. To seek to impose that degree restriction on political debate smacks of totalitarianism, which is definitely a debased form of democracy - against which I would argue even more than I do over Brexit. :-D

'....adhere for all time'?  Strangely I don't recall ever mentioning anything close to that.  On that premise we would still have capital punishment........so please don't insult my intelligence.  

Is that comment an indication that your straw man is coming out to play? 

Your argument comes across as that delivered on the Irish populace....vote, vote and vote again until the desired result is obtained by those holding the reins of power.  Clearly that is 'not' democracy at work.

'Chucking in the sponge'.....In an election scenario I completely agree because in such an situation one knows one has the opportunity, in a few years, to fight at the ballot box once more but this is not the result of an election.  The referendum simply asked does one want to remain or leave the EU?  The decision was leave, not leave but let's have another look when we know the outcome of the negotiations.  Had that been the case why not, instead of holding a referendum, simply enter into talks with the EU on the understanding that the British public will have the final say?

Ooops silly me ......isn't that what Cameron tried to do?   From  his January 2013 Bloomberg speech until 20 February 2016 he was in negotiations with the EU in order to try and bring about, and I quote:

"concessions from Brussels that would convince Britons to remain in a newly-invigorated Europe".

So three years of talks with the 'remain' ideology firmly at the forefront and the EU negotiators still failed to deliver anything to Cameron (and the press) that would convince voters to place their 'X' in the remain box.

We are not talking about effective political opposition which one is clearly aware of the need for in a democratic society.  However, as an aside to the main issue, it is a pity Labour is so ineffective.  Here we are talking about a section of society that is hell bent on delivering the message that the UK can not survive outside of the EU club....it is demonstrating it is running scared.  It is delivering the message that whatever the outcome of the negotiations the UK will come crawling back....'Please Monsieur/Madame can we rejoin your club' which is not the message one wants to deliver in negotiations where strength and belief in ones country is akin to holding the best 'poker face' around the table.  We should be demonstrating the message 'you need us more than we need you' not the weak, can't survive outside nonsense coming from the remain camp.

[John52]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 6:29 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 5:16 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

 

We're waiting Dave ;-)

 

Veronica

 

The Mad Hatter prefers to answer questions he hasn't been asked (lol)

[antony1969]

Looks like bureaucracy and the language test could be to blame for some of the hiring problems .... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4698328/Nurses-desperate-work-NHS.html ... According to my daughter who's at our local hospital a number of Americans are now at our hospital

[Guest pelmetman]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 6:29 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 5:16 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

 

We're waiting Dave ;-)

 

Veronica

 

Here's a novel idea ;-) ........We train our own rather than poach them from other countries, I would also suggest they're taught for free unless they leave the profession within 10 years, then they should repay the cost of their training on a pro rata basis :-| .........

 

 

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 10:25 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 6:29 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 5:16 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

 

We're waiting Dave ;-)

 

Veronica

 

Here's a novel idea ;-) ........We train our own rather than poach them from other countries,

Novel?!?! More like wishful thinking from cloud cuckoo land and fiddling while Rome burns.

 

First you must find those willing to enter the profession, willing to work, and above all, dedicated and committed. The pay scale isn't bad either with NHS Scotland offering a better scale rate than NHS England.

 

https://www.rcn.org.uk/employment-and-pay/nhs-pay-scales-2017-18

 

However it takes three to four years to train a nurse (longer if only studying part time) before they become fully qualified........and you have just 17 months left. So the question still remains.....

 

How do you intend to address the extremely serious shortfall which came about post referendum?

 

Where do you propose to recruit qualified nursing staff from to bring those figures stated back to an acceptable level?

[Barryd999]

RogerC - 2017-11-02 7:33 PM

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 1:11 PM

RogerC - 2017-11-01 8:17 PM....................1 I would say unequivocally that yes there is something seriously wrong with that.  Should the 'remain' camp contrive to derail the negotiations and reverse the decision of a legally, democratically held and processed referendum it would demonstrate a signal failure of the very foundations of this country................................

Just to say I disagree with this line of argument. We have a well, and long, established form of democracy. We elect MPs, the largest party forms the government, and they make the decisions. If we don't like the way they govern, we replace them with a different government, and off we go again. To the best of my knowledge, both sides begin planning for the next election as soon as one election closes, and continue doing so until the election is announced. No-one following an election chucks in the sponge and say OK, we lost, we give up. Continuing to promote an opposing viewpoint throughout a government is a vital part of our system. Lack of, or ineffective, opposition, leads to bad government. The whole process is one of continual argument and debate. That is our system of democracy. The Brexit decision was not reached on that basis. It was on the basis of a referendum, one of only three ever held in UK. Referendums take a snapshot of public opinion on a single issue at a point in time. If that opinion is to be taken as binding the properly elected government and opposition to subservience, as it has been, then, when and if public opinion on that single issue appears to have changed, it is necessary to hold a new referendum, to test whether the majority view has changed. It is then reasonable, within the democratic process, to seek to influence public opinion to change, and to argue for that change.There is no system of democratic government anywhere that seeks to adhere for all time to a decision made as a result of a public plebiscite of whatever type, be it general election or referendum. To seek to impose that degree restriction on political debate smacks of totalitarianism, which is definitely a debased form of democracy - against which I would argue even more than I do over Brexit. :-D

'....adhere for all time'?  Strangely I don't recall ever mentioning anything close to that.  On that premise we would still have capital punishment........so please don't insult my intelligence.  

Is that comment an indication that your straw man is coming out to play? 

Your argument comes across as that delivered on the Irish populace....vote, vote and vote again until the desired result is obtained by those holding the reins of power.  Clearly that is 'not' democracy at work.

'Chucking in the sponge'.....In an election scenario I completely agree because in such an situation one knows one has the opportunity, in a few years, to fight at the ballot box once more but this is not the result of an election.  The referendum simply asked does one want to remain or leave the EU?  The decision was leave, not leave but let's have another look when we know the outcome of the negotiations.  Had that been the case why not, instead of holding a referendum, simply enter into talks with the EU on the understanding that the British public will have the final say?

Ooops silly me ......isn't that what Cameron tried to do?   From  his January 2013 Bloomberg speech until 20 February 2016 he was in negotiations with the EU in order to try and bring about, and I quote:

"concessions from Brussels that would convince Britons to remain in a newly-invigorated Europe".

So three years of talks with the 'remain' ideology firmly at the forefront and the EU negotiators still failed to deliver anything to Cameron (and the press) that would convince voters to place their 'X' in the remain box.

We are not talking about effective political opposition which one is clearly aware of the need for in a democratic society.  However, as an aside to the main issue, it is a pity Labour is so ineffective.  Here we are talking about a section of society that is hell bent on delivering the message that the UK can not survive outside of the EU club....it is demonstrating it is running scared.  It is delivering the message that whatever the outcome of the negotiations the UK will come crawling back....'Please Monsieur/Madame can we rejoin your club' which is not the message one wants to deliver in negotiations where strength and belief in ones country is akin to holding the best 'poker face' around the table.  We should be demonstrating the message 'you need us more than we need you' not the weak, can't survive outside nonsense coming from the remain camp.

So really Roger what you are saying is that Brexit is for keeps no matter what, no matter if it does turn out to be a disaster and everyone ends up regretting it, thats it! Nope, we voted out and thats it forever now?And just so I have got this right you are also suggesting that half the country despite them being against Brexit should pretend that its a great idea and that the UK will be just fine outside of the EU just in case the EU might get the idea that we might not all be singing from the same hymn sheet over here (lol) is that right?Do you think the EU are totally stupid? Everything is in the public domain. The whole world knows we are completely split over it. The very people who are in charge, our beloved government dont even know what version of Brexit or any Brexit they want! Its like a flipping carry on film. I bet the other 27 countries are completely pishing themselves at the stupid Ingleeese! And rightly so. This country will never be united over Brexit. It will be a bitter and grim divide for the rest of our lives I suspect. Your only hope of a united UK is if somehow we get this fantastic deal, it all works out wonderfully, the economy booms, we still have access to the single market and customs union but can make our own laws and control immigration. That happening is about as likely as Dave Pelmet becoming my next wife. 8-)

[Muswell]

Barryd999 - 2017-11-02 11:53 PM

 

Dave Pelmet becoming my next wife. 8-)

 

Happy days

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-02 11:32 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 10:25 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-02 6:29 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-02 5:16 PM

 

pelmetman - 2017-11-02 2:26 PM.................................Just goes to show you cant rely on those Johnny foreigners >:-) ........

Correct. But the question was, how will we to make up the shortfall? Any offers?

 

We're waiting Dave ;-)

 

Veronica

 

Here's a novel idea ;-) ........We train our own rather than poach them from other countries,

Novel?!?! More like wishful thinking from cloud cuckoo land and fiddling while Rome burns.

 

First you must find those willing to enter the profession, willing to work, and above all, dedicated and committed. The pay scale isn't bad either with NHS Scotland offering a better scale rate than NHS England.

 

https://www.rcn.org.uk/employment-and-pay/nhs-pay-scales-2017-18

 

However it takes three to four years to train a nurse (longer if only studying part time) before they become fully qualified........and you have just 17 months left. So the question still remains.....

 

How do you intend to address the extremely serious shortfall which came about post referendum?

 

Where do you propose to recruit qualified nursing staff from to bring those figures stated back to an acceptable level?

 

Its far from cloud cuckoo land.........its a fact that the NHS has cut back on the training of nurses for at least a decade preferring to poach them from other countries.......thus helping to create a "Worldwide" shortage *-) ...........

 

So in the short term the NHS will need to carry on recruiting from overseas, hopefully from those countries where English is spoken, which will be a bonus from a safety and retraining point of view ;-) ......

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Barryd999 - 2017-11-02 11:53 PM

 

This country will never be united over Brexit. It will be a bitter and grim divide for the rest of our lives I suspect. Your only hope of a united UK is if somehow we get this fantastic deal, it all works out wonderfully, the economy booms, we still have access to the single market and customs union but can make our own laws and control immigration. That happening is about as likely as Dave Pelmet becoming my next wife. 8-)

 

Agreed .........

 

The UK will carry on as before "except" the boot is now on the other foot hopefully for the next 40 years B-) .......

 

Darling ;-) ........