Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology1 min ago
The Tories Are Coming! What It Means.......
58 Answers
....is that people are going to vote for cuts and austerity. If they get a large majority at the GE in June I wouldn't be surprised to see them privatize a lot of the NHS and put a compulsory charge on education. You see, people in this country are loaded aren't they? Most people own a car, take foreign holidays; own a mobile phone and a computer; own a flat screen tv and Playstation or equivalent; give to charity in record amounts. Everyone's got pots of cash and can afford the pending rise in new taxes and local govt cuts. You've never had it so good, have you? The Tories want a lot of that off you. It's coming!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 10ClarionSt. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
When a patient in the community can have a district nurse visit four times a day to put in his eyedrops because he doesn't like doing it himself I can see the justification for at least charging for some aspects of care. I don't think there is enough money in the country to enable the NHS to offer state of the art drugs and other treatments and perfect cradle to grave care Maybe a compromise position with routine surgery and gp services being covered by a dedicated affordable insurance scheme and the NHS being there for emergencies and the bigger stuff might work.
I agree, Jim. Even aside from the disastrous Tory record on public services, the UK has already declined in press freedom rankings and the Conservative party has made no secret of the fact that it wants to repeal the Freedom of Information Act and pull out of the European Convention on Human Rights (a treaty we have been signed up to since 1950). Meanwhile, they're going to have dominance of parliament for likely the next 15-20 years and no chance of being removed.
"I don't get this 'strong' opposition twaddle. The opposition, be it strong or weak, is by definition in the minority, and the governing party, which is in the majority, will always win."
Governments with smaller majorities usually need to work harder at winning elections (this present one is unusual) - which means more accountability to voters. If they know they can win regardless, that accountability slims to nothing. A strong opposition prevents a government from getting too extreme or from being too distant from the people they actually need to win elections. Which is patently not happening at the moment.
Governments with smaller majorities usually need to work harder at winning elections (this present one is unusual) - which means more accountability to voters. If they know they can win regardless, that accountability slims to nothing. A strong opposition prevents a government from getting too extreme or from being too distant from the people they actually need to win elections. Which is patently not happening at the moment.
To be sure Naomi, I don't think that Labour being a weak opposition is somehow also the Tories' fault. It is, however, slightly ironic that Theresa May called this election citing concerns about the opposition "blocking her at every turn", or trying to, which is (a) precisely their job, but also (b) not even happening. Not a single piece of Brexit legislation has been blocked; the Article 50 Bill passed unamended; and Labour as an opposition are currently a shambles anyway. So exactly what opposition is she moaning about?
As to JD's post: of course it's not twaddle. A strong opposition is vital because the electorate needs to have a choice when it comes to the election. If the opposition is not strong then the choice is gone and the government can run government with an effective carte blanche to do whatever it likes. That is completely unhealthy and dangerous, not because the government can get away with malice but because it can get away with incompetence.
As to JD's post: of course it's not twaddle. A strong opposition is vital because the electorate needs to have a choice when it comes to the election. If the opposition is not strong then the choice is gone and the government can run government with an effective carte blanche to do whatever it likes. That is completely unhealthy and dangerous, not because the government can get away with malice but because it can get away with incompetence.
Jim, //So exactly what opposition is she moaning about? //
You can hardly deny there is opposition. Gina Miller who is threatening more legal action, aside, perhaps Theresa May is talking about this sort of thing.
https:/
You can hardly deny there is opposition. Gina Miller who is threatening more legal action, aside, perhaps Theresa May is talking about this sort of thing.
https:/
//vote tory, vote for this...//
nailit, posting facebook links isn't very helpful, not everyone subscribes, meaning the link remains hidden behind a log-in for many.
but by dint of research it's a sad case indicative of a reason the following select committee report was needed:-
https:/
i do not know the intricacies of the david clapson case, but it can't be good that job centres are permitted to interpret the rules as they see fit (as it encourages score-settling), nor that they are incentivized to issue sanctions to meet local targets.
nailit, posting facebook links isn't very helpful, not everyone subscribes, meaning the link remains hidden behind a log-in for many.
but by dint of research it's a sad case indicative of a reason the following select committee report was needed:-
https:/
i do not know the intricacies of the david clapson case, but it can't be good that job centres are permitted to interpret the rules as they see fit (as it encourages score-settling), nor that they are incentivized to issue sanctions to meet local targets.
I'm not saying that there's no opposition, I'm just struggling to understand why she's moaning. Gina Miller's actions, whatever the motivations behind them, have ended up with establishing a constitutionally-valid approach to Brexit, which is hardly a bad thing. Nor should it be unreasonable for those who wanted us to remain in the EU to still have a voice -- a role in shaping Brexit, at least.
At about this point NJ would say something like how the referendum was a vote to leave the EU. Nothing more, nothing less. Agreed -- but then the question of what leaving the EU will mean, what positions we should or aim for, what trade and political deals we should reach, are all open to question and debate. An "opposition", in the sense of people disagreeing with Theresa May's objectives on this, is welcome to all, surely? At the very least, it forces her to explain and defend her choice of stance.
At any rate, the motives for calling the election are dubious. I imagine that Theresa May was more scared of the opposition in her own party than of Labour. Although then, which wing of her party was she wanting to challenge?
At about this point NJ would say something like how the referendum was a vote to leave the EU. Nothing more, nothing less. Agreed -- but then the question of what leaving the EU will mean, what positions we should or aim for, what trade and political deals we should reach, are all open to question and debate. An "opposition", in the sense of people disagreeing with Theresa May's objectives on this, is welcome to all, surely? At the very least, it forces her to explain and defend her choice of stance.
At any rate, the motives for calling the election are dubious. I imagine that Theresa May was more scared of the opposition in her own party than of Labour. Although then, which wing of her party was she wanting to challenge?
One position that has to be off the table is agreeing to be bound to the very things we voted to throw off, thus changing the goal to a useless paperwork Brexit only: which many of the opposition seem to want, thus winning them a remainer victory from the jaws of referendum defeat. There is only one shape for Brexit. The rest is trying to ensure good relationships, especially trading ones, going forward, whilst rejecting all attempts to ensnare us in the same trap; and also avoiding getting mugged on the way out.
Re. OP and NHS and Education. French hospitals charge 'Hospitallier' fees to cover your stay in terms of bed and food. I can't, for the life of me, see why this shouldn't apply in the UK- we have to pay to eat & sleep anyway - and this would take a huge chunk off the costs. You can take out insurance to cover it if you want to. As a bonus, the food would probably improve!
Education - it is standard in France for all parents to take out termly insurance for their children (the school does not then have to pay huge insurance bills). It is also accepted that all parents send their children to school with files, file paper, exercise books, colours....everything that could be needed in that way. A list is given to parents of items that they must provide. This is an enormous expense for UK schools and teaches pupils to be responsible for their equipment. I see nothing at all wrong with that attitude either - especially as, when I was a teacher, funding once ran out for the Summer term (an OFSTED insisted on computers being updated). I was forced to buy file-paper, pens/pencils etc. for several forms in order to deliver the curriculum and work required.
(Some staff allowed their pupils to write nothing rather than foot the bill.)
'Amelie' exists to means-test people and fund medical treatments by the state in rare cases where people cannot pay.
Education - it is standard in France for all parents to take out termly insurance for their children (the school does not then have to pay huge insurance bills). It is also accepted that all parents send their children to school with files, file paper, exercise books, colours....everything that could be needed in that way. A list is given to parents of items that they must provide. This is an enormous expense for UK schools and teaches pupils to be responsible for their equipment. I see nothing at all wrong with that attitude either - especially as, when I was a teacher, funding once ran out for the Summer term (an OFSTED insisted on computers being updated). I was forced to buy file-paper, pens/pencils etc. for several forms in order to deliver the curriculum and work required.
(Some staff allowed their pupils to write nothing rather than foot the bill.)
'Amelie' exists to means-test people and fund medical treatments by the state in rare cases where people cannot pay.
Yes it’s odd that many of her opponents (not least Ms Sturgeon) criticised Mrs May for being “unelected”. Now she has sought to remedy that perceived (though unjustified) criticism, she gets slated again.
“You're happy for us to join Belarus as the only country not signed up to the Convention [the ECHR] Jack?”
I most certainly am. The ECHR is past its sell-by date and is widely abused by foreigners and criminals to circumvent the laws and conventions with which the rest of the population have to comply.
“You're happy for us to join Belarus as the only country not signed up to the Convention [the ECHR] Jack?”
I most certainly am. The ECHR is past its sell-by date and is widely abused by foreigners and criminals to circumvent the laws and conventions with which the rest of the population have to comply.
We pay taxes so society as a whole has the benefit of a health service and education. I see charging hospital fees and asking users if the education system to contribute further as simply watering down that concept of everyone providing a service.
Having insurance to cover it blatantly flies in the face of it being a vital service society pays for, for the benefit of all; whilst splitting off bed and food costs is the last thing you want to be bothered with when ill. It's petty and simply a way to grab more wherever possible. If the food needs to improve the ring-fence part of the medical budget to cover that. It's bad enough one has a so called free health service, but then has to pay for the prescribed medicines thus disproving the claim.
Having insurance to cover it blatantly flies in the face of it being a vital service society pays for, for the benefit of all; whilst splitting off bed and food costs is the last thing you want to be bothered with when ill. It's petty and simply a way to grab more wherever possible. If the food needs to improve the ring-fence part of the medical budget to cover that. It's bad enough one has a so called free health service, but then has to pay for the prescribed medicines thus disproving the claim.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank92 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles138 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles139 mins ago
News201 mins ago