Cable Forum
Page 212 of 263 « First 112162202208209210211 212 213214215216222262 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Brexit (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33707507)

nomadking 03-06-2019 13:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35997745)
GPs have always been slightly outside NHS control.

What I fear is the NHS sold off piecemeal until nothing is left, then a US style insurance based system imposed. Brexit, leaves us in a weak negotiating position and the US will be circling like sharks to kill off the NHS even sooner.
Utter nonsense.



Why would the US need a trade agreement for those matters. A US firm can(and do) set up a company in this country and supply goods/services in the same way as anybody else can. No trade agreement required.


The nearest thing to something needing a trade agreement is providing medical supplies, which are currently supplied from outside the NHS anyway. Anything else would require a physical presence in the UK.

1andrew1 03-06-2019 13:37
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35997749)
Whereas staying in the EU:
That's a 2016 article concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which was canned so not a live prospect, unlike the US-UK one.

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35997750)
Utter nonsense.

Why would the US need a trade agreement for those matters. A US firm can(and do) set up a company in this country and supply goods/services in the same way as anybody else can. No trade agreement required.

The nearest thing to something needing a trade agreement is providing medical supplies, which are currently supplied from outside the NHS anyway. Anything else would require a physical presence in the UK.
The larger negotiating power (eg EU, US) has more negotiating strength. So it will bring in other things into the deal to help its own economy. We've already seen the NHS one, another suggestion from that country to include in a trade deal is for the UK not to deal with Huawei.

nomadking 03-06-2019 13:49
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35997751)
That's a 2016 article concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which was canned so not a live prospect, unlike the US-UK one.

---------- Post added at 13:37 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------


The larger negotiating power (eg EU, US) has more negotiating strength. So it will bring in other things into the deal to help its own economy. We've already seen the NHS one, another suggestion from that country to include in a trade deal is for the UK not to deal with Huawei.
If the EU were considering it, they could still consider it within the EU.


Just because one side is claimed to have more power, doesn't mean it will flex that supposed power. A trade agreement is about mutual benefits overall.

The core NHS concept is "free at the point of use". Doesn't matter who provides it.

The price paid for drugs is not something that is subject to a trade agreement.

heero_yuy 03-06-2019 14:10
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Quote from 1andrew1:


That's a 2016 article concerning the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership which was canned so not a live prospect,
Article was updated on May 6th this year so it still looks Kosher.

1andrew1 03-06-2019 14:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35997753)
If the EU were considering it, they could still consider it within the EU.
The price paid for drugs is not something that is subject to a trade agreement.
If one of the parties stipulates it as a condition for a trade agreement it will be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35997753)
Just because one side is claimed to have more power, doesn't mean it will flex that supposed power. A trade agreement is about mutual benefits overall.
If a trade negotiator does not maximise their country's negotiating position, their boss will find someone who does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35997753)
The core NHS concept is "free at the point of use". Doesn't matter who provides it.
It does. Outsourcing could result in increased costs and lack of knowledge transfer. But, I think we're moving off the Brexit debate somewhat.

---------- Post added at 14:22 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35997759)
Article was updated on May 6th this year so it still looks Kosher.
Not sure what you mean by that but the deal has been canned.

jonbxx 03-06-2019 15:20
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35997749)
Whereas staying in the EU:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote from The Express:


Hundreds of papers from the secretive trade talks between the US and EU have been released online.

They appear to confirm fears that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership talks between Brussels and Washington will, when ratified, lead to the health service being privatised or dismantled.

The documents, obtained by Greenpeace Netherlands, include a US proposal to have a committee with representatives from Washington and Brussels to meet each year “to review state-owned enterprises and monopolies” which would include the NHS.

The committee would meet annually and would not be guaranteed a representative from Britain.

But it would still be able to review state-run services in this country. Its duties would include checking that state services do not “distort” the market.
Luckily the Lisbon Treaty requires unanimity from the EU Council for any trade deals which include services; direct foreign investments; audiovisual and cultural services; social, educational and health services; and intellectual property. So that would be knocked back pretty quick by any country that has critical services, including the UK.

You would have thought that Louise Bours who is quoted in that article and has been an MEP since 2014 would know that.

1andrew1 03-06-2019 16:06
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 35997770)
You would have thought that Louise Bours who is quoted in that article and has been an MEP since 2014 would know that.
She's ranked as the worst MEP so her ignorance does not surprise me!
https://theovertake.com/~meps/meps-t...and-the-worst/

Hugh 03-06-2019 17:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35997749)
Whereas staying in the EU:
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35997759)
Article was updated on May 6th this year so it still looks Kosher.
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-...p/index_en.htm
Quote:
Negotiations and agreements

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)

The TTIP negotiations were launched in 2013 and ended without conclusion at the end of 2016. A Council decision of 15 April 2019 states that the negotiating directives for the TTIP are obsolete and no longer relevant.

1andrew1 03-06-2019 18:12
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35997779)
Well found.
Yet another reason why people need to become less dependent on the Express for their supply of Brexit knowledge.

Sephiroth 03-06-2019 18:22
Re: Brexit
 
I rather like what that curly haired American professor said on last week's Question Time:

In a modern democracy, there are two subsystems that need both to work together:

1/
Indirect Democracy which is the process of representation;

2/
Direct Democracy which is the process of consultation (Referendum).


Our democratic system is broken and shame should be heaped on anyone who tries to weasel-word their way round that.

1andrew1 03-06-2019 18:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35997781)
Our democratic system is broken and shame should be heaped on anyone who tries to weasel-word their way round that.
If you want proportional representation, the Lib Dems are your best bet then. If you want the existing duopoly the Labour or Conservative parties will serve you well.

ianch99 03-06-2019 18:49
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35997781)
I rather like what that curly haired American professor said on last week's Question Time:

In a modern democracy, there are two subsystems that need both to work together:

1/
Indirect Democracy which is the process of representation;

2/
Direct Democracy which is the process of consultation (Referendum).


Our democratic system is broken and shame should be heaped on anyone who tries to weasel-word their way round that.
I think it was mentioned that these two systems were mutually incompatible in 2016. BTW, I am not sure that the technique of "heaping shame on anyone who tries to weasel-word" is that effective.

You should take a leaf of Femi's book: he turns up, talks to Leave supporters and tries to engage in courteous and rational debate.

Sephiroth 03-06-2019 19:01
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35997784)
If you want proportional representation, the Lib Dems are your best bet then. If you want the existing duopoly the Labour or Conservative parties will serve you well.
I want the first past the post system to work as a democratic tandem between indirect and direct democracy.

i.e. Our representatives should deliver the Referendum decision and not upstage it by demanding a second referendum nor by procrastination over what Leave means.

Angua 03-06-2019 19:25
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35997790)
I want the first past the post system to work as a democratic tandem between indirect and direct democracy.

i.e. Our representatives should deliver the Referendum decision and not upstage it by demanding a second referendum nor by procrastination over what Leave means.
Then the UK should have elected a government who would deliver your wishes in 2017. Unfortunately for you we didn't.

Sephiroth 03-06-2019 19:33
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35997791)
Then the UK should have elected a government who would deliver your wishes in 2017. Unfortunately for you we didn't.
That is a ridiculous observation.

The representatives had a duty to uphold the instruction they received from the direct democracy route.

Whoever is in power or opposition has that duty.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:28.
Page 212 of 263 « First 112162202208209210211 212 213214215216222262 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum