Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Sentinel1 wrote:


The whole wood chippings plan isn’t balanced, you would have to plant more than just the same rate per tree you cut down, because this does not take into account the growth rate of a tree. A good strong combustible pine may take 10 years to grow to an efficient length, as if you only planted the same rate as cutting, there would be a point whereby the trees would be yielding less and less material.

Biomass is viable if planned for correctly. It won't meet all out energy requirements but then we don't need it to. It can be part of a managed solution. Instead of miners you have foresters and so on. You need to combine multiple sources of renewable energy to make things viable.

No doubt green energy is the future, I think the focus should sway from infinite fields of basic panels to a program of solar tiles for new houses, which look like traditional house tiles, contribute to green energy, don’t take up land, can easily be replaced in smaller sections if broken and don’t look like the current eyesore Barry and his mates hooked onto his existing roof. If the UK could get a good surplus energy stock we could sell it to inefficient countries on the continent and no one could disagree the advantages of that.

Well Labour had planned that all new houses should be carbon neutral (and trial schemes with solar panels were being built) but the Tories scrapped that policy as soon as they came in. You are also fundamentally missing why solar panels the way they are. You can't just make a material that is a releases electrons when hit by a photon. Only specific materials can do that which limits the design and style of such panels. They are black because that is the most efficient colour (effectively it is absorbing the majority of optical photons). Any other colour is significantly less efficient because a proportion of the photons are reflected (which is why you can see them). If the criteria for success is that they have to be 'pretty' by todays standards then you'll never have an effective green energy supply. It's a complete lack of basic science you are displaying here.

The idea of a EU wide green energy grid is viable, but not as a way of earning income. We have plenty of wind and wave energy (and some geothermal in Scotland) but that relies on certain conditions. We're not going to be able to rely on solar panels providing much of our energy needs in the winter when we have less than 6 hours of sunshine. At such times you are probably going to need to import energy; of source this all requires that we are part of an EU wide consortium. We could also be at the forefront of fusion energy but that project is cofounded by the EU and there is great concern that this project will leave the UK and head for EU shores now (but then that's a benefit from leaving the EU yes?)

The fact of the matter is there would be no agreement if too many people stuck their fingers in pieces of the pie. So for all this debating has been diddly squat! Now we have Article 50 go ahead the proper debating can begin. There was no reason to debate starting the Article 50 process other than Inners complaining they didn’t want it but we can’t say that, so ‘it’s for the people by the people!’ and throwing legal battles at it. We all knew the bill would be passed and no denial could stop it.

Erm, that's what parliamentary debate is? That's how our democracy works? Otherwise you are just advocating a dictatorship. It's more of a case as to whether there should be amendments that meant that for example the populace could choose which option they would prefer. It's less "for the people by the people" and more by "Brexiters for bigots" or "by 30% of the population and the rest of you can take our medicine we force down the gullet regardless of how nasty it is"!

More likely they will wait to day 1 independent UK from EU and then begin preaching negativity and gearing up for a second Referendum. I believe if the Scots want independence by all means they can take it. However I don’t know if the S.N.P would be able to keep an independent Scotland buoyant. To my mind Scotland would struggle to keep its economic privileges such as free University places and would still have a struggling NHS. Whether they would go Euro or not we don’t know.

Scotland would have to make their own choices, but then it would be their choices; not Westminster's railroading bigotry led choices on to them. Malta is independent and they are OK. England might severely suffer though if Scotland went independent as they'd have nation on their doorstep with access to the EU, it would likely drain the north of any remaining educated people. And good on them for singing the EU anthem (even if off key, but then how many of us are actually good singers?). I'm embarrassed to be English at the moment and would much prefer to be considered European to get rid of the stigma of being English.

 Ketara wrote:

Blimey mate, ease off the generalised attacks at people who voted Brexit and go have a cuppa or something. You're skating Rule 1 as it is. I'd recommend one of these to go with it (always puts me in a good mood).

Spoiler:

I like the dark chocolate ones.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Blimey mate, ease off the generalised attacks at people who voted Brexit and go have a cuppa or something. You're skating Rule 1 as it is. I'd recommend one of these to go with it (always puts me in a good mood).

Spoiler:

I like the dark chocolate ones.

I prefer double chocolate chip ones...plus there's something to hold on to if the ice breaks....

@Ketara it was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek, but with there is some reality to this. All evidence suggests that those with better education and younger preferred to remain. Both those that are younger (they are ones that have their working life still in front of them) and better educated (those in higher paid, higher tax, skilled jobs) are going to be the ones that drive 'the innovation' and economy that a lot of Brexiters want (and has even been argued here on this board). As such there is some reality to the statement that a significant proportion of Brexiters are relying on those that want to remain in the EU to ensure the UK pulls through (whilst maybe eating hobnobs! ). That's not really an insult on the case of 'Brexiters' (or on any work ethic) but more of a supposition given what people say and the inferences.

So to keep you happy and prevent the consumption of too many hob nobs I've amended the statement to "a proportion of".

 Whirlwind wrote:


@Ketara it was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek...

You say that, but when your subsequent post holds something along the lines of:-

I'm embarrassed to be English at the moment and would much prefer to be considered European to get rid of the stigma of being English.

You start to sound like you're about to chuck yourself off the White Cliffs over the whole affair!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I read an article the other day about how Germany is basically destroying the Eurozone. Unintentional of course.

Because the Euro is weak, and because Germany exports so much and has such a huge trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries, nations like Portugal, Spain, Italy etc etc suffer as a result, as the centre and economies of scale, makes their purchasing so much harder and more expensive.

In the USA, they get round this because huge transfers of capital are made to the less prosperous areas of the USA in an effort to keep the playing field level.

Since you didn't link the article in question, I'm not sure you misremembered or it was a tabloid-style "the Huns are evil" article like we used to read during the Greece crisis.

The EU is a giant exercise on capital transfers. I started traveling to Romania, Poland, Bulgaria, etc. some 15 years ago, and even though there's still a huge gap the contrast is huge. That comes out of EU funds.

The German trade surplus thing is also a myth, mostly made up after some Fed quotes (which were later conveniently picked by the Trump campaign). It's true that Germany has a big trade surplus.... with the rest of the world, not the EU.



http://openeurope.org.uk/impact/is-the-german-trade-surplus-a-problem-for-the-eurozone/

The country with the highest intra-EU trade surplus (relative to GDP) is the Netherlands. Italy, Spain have trade surplus within the EU (while, say France or the UK have a deficit)

Germany's high trade surplus does have an effect on the euro.... as it should be since it's a big part of it. The effects on it are global, not just at an EU level:

https://www.theglobalist.com/germany-stubbornness-economy-trade-surplus-eurozone/

Really now Ket, we have a separate thread for images like that so don't think they belong in the politics thread

 Ketara wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:


@Ketara it was meant to be a bit tongue in cheek...

You say that, but when your subsequent post holds something along the lines of:-

I'm embarrassed to be English at the moment and would much prefer to be considered European to get rid of the stigma of being English.

You start to sound like you're about to chuck yourself off the White Cliffs over the whole affair!

Not chuck myself off, more leave by the soonest ferry/train and happily wave farewell. I know/come in contact with a lot of people from other countries (not just EU) and the first question is usually (and I abbreviate) "why are the English being so stupid in leaving the EU, we'd love to be in something like that" or "are the English really that intolerant of other people" and it is, frankly, embarrassing to try have to start most conversations trying not to feel like a bit of pilchard.

On the other hand, given that you commented on my first statement before I posted the second I can't see how you could infer one interpretation on the first from the second before it had even happened (unless you're psychic...).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jouso wrote:


Since you didn't link the article in question, I'm not sure you misremembered or it was a tabloid-style "the Huns are evil" article like we used to read during the Greece crisis.

Unfortunately it's too easy for complex issues to be popularised into 'simple' misleading messages. The issue with Greece started before they even joined the Euro as they effectively hired banks to adjust the books to make their economy look better than it was (it was their choice to join the Euro as well). Once in rather than try and improve the situation they carried on regardless until the point it became no longer viable and Germany (honourably) tried to bail them out, the price being the reforms they should have implemented years ago now being thrust on them all at once.

 Whirlwind wrote:

Not chuck myself off, more leave by the soonest ferry/train and happily wave farewell. I know/come in contact with a lot of people from other countries (not just EU) and the first question is usually (and I abbreviate) "why are the English being so stupid in leaving the EU, we'd love to be in something like that" or "are the English really that intolerant of other people" and it is, frankly, embarrassing to try have to start most conversations trying not to feel like a bit of pilchard.

I begin to see why it plays a bit more heavily your mind if it gets brought up that regularly for you.

On the other hand, given that you commented on my first statement before I posted the second I can't see how you could infer one interpretation on the first from the second before it had even happened (unless you're psychic...).

It's more a general inference from your posts the last week or two on the subject. We've had our twos and fros on the matter and annoyed each other in the process thereof a number of times, but when all was said and done, the good humour tended to be back in reasonably short order. There's been something of an increasingly desperate/depressed/combative flavour about your posting recently though (if you'll forgive me the imputation).

Hence my friendly recommendation of a nice cup of tea and a good chocolate hob nob (or double chocolate chip variant thereof).

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Really now Ket, we have a separate thread for images like that so don't think they belong in the politics thread

There is some cross over - hob nob prices increases due to the falling £ due to Brexit. "A hob nobbled catastrophe"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

It's more a general inference from your posts the last week or two on the subject. We've had our twos and fros on the matter and annoyed each other in the process thereof a number of times, but when all was said and done, the good humour tended to be back in reasonably short order.

That's still there, it never goes away. I can't say you've ever annoyed me though, frustrated perhaps but then trying to discuss points of principle on a forum is likely to generate that as body language can never really come across.

There's been something of an increasingly desperate/depressed/combative flavour about your posting recently though (if you'll forgive me the imputation).

Not sure about this bit though? Combative maybe, but then it is the off topic forum, there's been sparring with Sentinel but that's because we fundamentally disagree on a few things... Desperate and depressed I am slightly baffled about, well I don't have a partner right now but it's not that bad.... ? The only thinking is that you are misreading the comments that in ten years enough old people will have died off to make the country pro-EU but then statistically as it stands this correct, so I see it more as in 10 years we may have a period of enlightenment as we rejoin the EU and that's only positive. I've also made these comments for much longer than two weeks so I'm not sure this is what you are referring to?

I'm not going to trail your past few weeks pulling up examples, that's veering too far off topic.

It was just an observation; I'm not saying it was an accurate one. But on the offchance it was, I was proffering a metaphorical cuppa and biscuit.

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Could have fairly played out the vote by allowing his MP's to vote as their constituents did. So if they're from a remain majority let them vote against and same for leave majority.

That also then forces it onto the conservatives to apply their whip etc etc.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Blimey mate, ease off the generalised attacks at people who voted Brexit and go have a cuppa or something. You're skating Rule 1 as it is. I'd recommend one of these to go with it (always puts me in a good mood).

Spoiler:

I like the dark chocolate ones.

Dunked in milk til they're soggy! Only way to have a hobnob

 Ketara wrote:

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Its interesting that most of the Article 50 commons vote related news centered on the Tories and the SNP. Who are the opposition again?

Jeremy Corbyn has been a grey man throughout this entire process, at the very least he should have backed some of the article 50 amendments, such as the one to provide an additional £350 million per week to the NHS that all the 'Vote Leave' Tories voted against despite being all in favour of it not even a year ago.

The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

 Ketara wrote:
I'm not going to trail your past few weeks pulling up examples, that's veering too far off topic.

Gah, public accusations and no chance to publicly refute them. What is this guilt by accusation?

It was just an observation; I'm not saying it was an accurate one. But on the offchance it was, I was proffering a metaphorical cuppa and biscuit.

And an insult over the hob-nob, we all know that it should be a digestive and tea otherwise the chocolate melts....

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Unfortunately Corbyn seems to be completely oblivious that he is going to send his party into a nose dive. What 65%ish of Labour voters are supporters of remaining in the EU. Instead they are worried about losing some northern seats that in reality they have such a large majority in they are never likely to lose anyway. By being so passive on the Brexit bill they've effectively allowed the Tories to roll over any dissent in their own ranks (what's the point sticking your neck out if its not going to achieve anything) and try and get some at least sensible starting positions agreed (like Gibraltar and current EU residents). Instead they are crowing on twitter that they got the government to agree that parliament would have a final vote on the agreement which will be between what the Tories want and nothing at all (which they fail to recognise is not a useful vote at all).

May must be laughing how easily she can ride over Corbyn as his questions are weak and never really calls May out on giving answers that are for the most part just broad sweeping non-committal statements. Given the problems we currently have (like the NHS, social care, whatever happened with Surrey CC) he is making a complete hash of it. Yet there is no sight of how Labour will get rid of him until because of the grass roots support he has vs effectively 'Blairites'.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Its interesting that most of the Article 50 commons vote related news centered on the Tories and the SNP. Who are the opposition again?

Jeremy Corbyn has been a grey man throughout this entire process, at the very least he should have backed some of the article 50 amendments, such as the one to provide an additional £350 million per week to the NHS that all the 'Vote Leave' Tories voted against despite being all in favour of it not even a year ago.

The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

That's the question.

Labour has one, maybe two leaders left in which to pull themselves together now. Otherwise, I genuinely think the Lib Dems will topple them as the official opposition. It's not hard to see which way the political winds are blowing right now.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:


The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

Sadiq Khan maybe or Chuka Ummuna perhaps, but whether the current supporters of the labour party would support these candidates is unknown. David Miliband is also an option if he were to return to the fold, even Ed Miliband (in reality I think he quit too early)

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:


The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

Sadiq Khan maybe or Chuka Ummuna perhaps, but whether the current supporters of the labour party would support these candidates is unknown.

Sadiq couldn't, he needs to see out his term as Mayor first. That won't expire until well after the next election.

Chuka? Perhaps I suppose. But if it's Chuka, that'll be it for Labour. He actually is a Blairite, greasy as they come. Wrote articles licking Blair's bum, moved into Ed's shadow cabinet, got caught editing his own wiki page to call himself 'The english Barack Obama', massively pro-business (who slip him cash round the back).

He'll never get the rank and file behind him, he's a lawyer for christ sake.

 Ketara wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:


The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

Sadiq Khan maybe or Chuka Ummuna perhaps, but whether the current supporters of the labour party would support these candidates is unknown.

Sadiq couldn't, he needs to see out his term as Mayor first. That won't expire until well after the next election.

Chuka? Perhaps I suppose. But if it's Chuka, that'll be it for Labour. He actually is a Blairite, greasy as they come. Wrote articles licking Blair's bum, moved into Ed's shadow cabinet, got caught editing his own wiki page to call himself 'The english Barack Obama', massively pro-business (who slip him cash round the back).

He'll never get the rank and file behind him, he's a lawyer for christ sake.

True on all accounts, but I can't see Corbyn going before the next election anyway (and we are probably going to have to get used to an ineffectual opposition from Labour during this period) - if (when) he nose dives at the GE then that might be enough of a wake up call that Labour need to get rid of him. We also have to remember that Blair got in last time because he was 'suave' and business orientated enough to persuade enough centralists (and Tories) to vote for him and there is enough slimey politicians there that you could swing a cat and hit one. There's still enough support I think in the Labour MPs to support a Blairite at the moment. Of course that could all change if the very left labour supporters become more entrenched but then Labour will be a spent force for a long time then.

I think Corbyn is likely to be in for the long haul now, the PLP have tried to oust him and failed too many times. They're going to wait for the next election, watch him fail, and then knife him I suspect.

And it's all very well and good for Umunna if he can get the PLP behind him, but it'll do nothing whatsoever for Labour's deepening identity crisis. He's the polar opposite of the working class by profession and personality. With him in charge, they'll just carry on shedding votes. If Farron's replacement is in any way canny, he'll make mincemeat of Umunna.

Wouldn't it be funny if ol' Cleggy came back? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he did. Credit to the fellow at least, he stuck to his guns and keeps doing his job, unlike some conservative ex-prime ministers I could mention...

 Whirlwind wrote:
Of course that could all change if the very left labour supporters become more entrenched but then Labour will be a spent force for a long time then.

It may well be already. Just look at SLab, flailing around and generally being ineffectual while Rome burns around them. I can certainly see the same thing happening to the Labour party in general.

 Ketara wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Its interesting that most of the Article 50 commons vote related news centered on the Tories and the SNP. Who are the opposition again?

Jeremy Corbyn has been a grey man throughout this entire process, at the very least he should have backed some of the article 50 amendments, such as the one to provide an additional £350 million per week to the NHS that all the 'Vote Leave' Tories voted against despite being all in favour of it not even a year ago.

The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

That's the question.

Labour has one, maybe two leaders left in which to pull themselves together now. Otherwise, I genuinely think the Lib Dems will topple them as the official opposition. It's not hard to see which way the political winds are blowing right now.

I think that would be a very good thing if it happened. Labour has lost its direction between the "New Labour" era (not quite as right-wing as the Tories) and the £3 member inspired neo-old-medium-hard-left-wishy-washy-Labour that Corbyn seems to follow.

So, it seems the Tories are keen for Scotland to gain independence, or so it would seem after this statement...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-scotland-idUKKBN15O1NV

"The Scottish government should get on with what it was elected to do which is to improve school standards in Scotland, to tackle the problems of the Scottish health service and above all to revive the Scottish economy where unemployment is now rising. Those are the priorities for Scotland, not a second referendum," Fallon said.

I'm sure being told what their priorities actually are by a conservative is likely to go down well.

In the news, at least Ireland is keeping it's cool...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-ireland-idUKKBN15O2K4

If there's an invisible border and relaxed rules in the North, I think there's a high chance of customs and immigration into the rest of the UK to accommodate, otherwise it's an open back door.
One step closer to a united Ireland I think, probably go down with unionists like a bucket of cold sick.

..let's hope they don't notice the open back door then

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/private-eye-hits-highest-circulation-in-55-year-history-which-is-quite-something-given-that-print-is-meant-to-be-dead/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2017-02-09&utm_source=Press+Gazette+Daily+new+layout

Private Eye hit its biggest ever print circulation in the second half of 2016 – up 9 per cent year on year, according to ABC.

The title has also revealed that the 2016 Christmas issue achieved the biggest sale in the title’s 55-year history, 287,334 copies.

fair play.

I have nothing more to add to this debate. A certain individual has been 'bone picking' everything I have had to say, and it's becoming agony to write anything meaningful without further 'banter bashing'. I am feeling pretty burnt out at the minute and when it gets to their opinion of being ashamed of the 'stigma of being English' I lose all faith in their sanity and reputation.

Henceforth, I call quits (for the moment) to focus on other things.

I leave with one piece of undeniably solid advice:

 r_squared wrote:
So, it seems the Tories are keen for Scotland to gain independence, or so it would seem after this statement...

Michael Fallon has been making this sort of statement for a while with no apparent signs of rebuke from number 10.

Its just the Tories putting party politics before national politics (again). This sort of thing suits their natural inclination and it pleases their voters but at this stage the only thing that is likely to save the union is conciliation and further devolution.

 Sentinel1 wrote:

Henceforth, I call quits (for the moment) to focus on other things.

Whats with all the 'flouncing' going on in this thread? If you don't want to post here, don't post here. Its as simple as that.

Earlier, I posted a claim about the effect of Germany's exports on the Eurozone.

I was rightly challenged to provide links and have a debate.

On reflection, I can't be arsed!

I'm getting political fatigue, what with Brexit, 2015 GE, months of the Scottish indy referendum etc etc

I need a few days break from posting about stuff.

So, I'm flouncing off as well, but due to fatigue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:
..let's hope they don't notice the open back door then

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/private-eye-hits-highest-circulation-in-55-year-history-which-is-quite-something-given-that-print-is-meant-to-be-dead/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2017-02-09&utm_source=Press+Gazette+Daily+new+layout

Private Eye hit its biggest ever print circulation in the second half of 2016 – up 9 per cent year on year, according to ABC.

The title has also revealed that the 2016 Christmas issue achieved the biggest sale in the title’s 55-year history, 287,334 copies.

fair play.

It's very good investigative journalism, which is needed more than ever.

The stuff it prints about that corrupt Liam Fox, and the shambles that is British defence procurement, is well worth the price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Its interesting that most of the Article 50 commons vote related news centered on the Tories and the SNP. Who are the opposition again?

Jeremy Corbyn has been a grey man throughout this entire process, at the very least he should have backed some of the article 50 amendments, such as the one to provide an additional £350 million per week to the NHS that all the 'Vote Leave' Tories voted against despite being all in favour of it not even a year ago.

The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

That's the question.

Labour has one, maybe two leaders left in which to pull themselves together now. Otherwise, I genuinely think the Lib Dems will topple them as the official opposition. It's not hard to see which way the political winds are blowing right now.

I think that would be a very good thing if it happened. Labour has lost its direction between the "New Labour" era (not quite as right-wing as the Tories) and the £3 member inspired neo-old-medium-hard-left-wishy-washy-Labour that Corbyn seems to follow.

Funnily enough, when Labour followed the Corbyn approach back in the 1960s/70s, they not only won elections, but got more votes than Blair/Major/Cameron ever did...

and so it begins...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/08/two-tier-nhs-gps-allow-patients-pay-jump-the-queue-bournemouth?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=blast2017-02-09

Fears of 'two-tier NHS' as GPs allow fee-paying patients to jump the queue
MPs claim Dorset Private GP service, at up to £145 per appointment, will mean NHS patients without money will wait even longer for care

Family doctors in Bournemouth have set up the first private GP service at which people who pay up to £145 a time will be seen faster and get longer appointments than their NHS patients.

The creation of the clinic has prompted fears that other GPs will follow suit and that NHS patients will become “second-class citizens” as general practice increasingly becomes a two-tier health service.

The three doctors running the Dorset Private GP service are offering “the unhurried, thorough, personal care we believe is best for patients” – at a price. Patients pay £40 for a 10-minute phone consultation, £80 for a 20-minute face-to-face appointment and £145 for 40 minutes with a GP.

Thanks Mr Hunt !

Well, thank God I'm under the umbrella of NHS Scotland. It's not perfect, but it gets the job done

It's a shame that NHS England, abolished under the Health and Social Care Act 2012, no longer exists

My sympathies to English Dakka members. This is just the start.

 r_squared wrote:
So, it seems the Tories are keen for Scotland to gain independence, or so it would seem after this statement...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-scotland-idUKKBN15O1NV

"The Scottish government should get on with what it was elected to do which is to improve school standards in Scotland, to tackle the problems of the Scottish health service and above all to revive the Scottish economy where unemployment is now rising. Those are the priorities for Scotland, not a second referendum," Fallon said.

Scotland would have a better chance of improvement when staying in the EU.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Earlier, I posted a claim about the effect of Germany's exports on the Eurozone.

I was rightly challenged to provide links and have a debate.

On reflection, I can't be arsed!

I'm getting political fatigue, what with Brexit, 2015 GE, months of the Scottish indy referendum etc etc

I need a few days break from posting about stuff.

So, I'm flouncing off as well, but due to fatigue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:
..let's hope they don't notice the open back door then

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/private-eye-hits-highest-circulation-in-55-year-history-which-is-quite-something-given-that-print-is-meant-to-be-dead/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2017-02-09&utm_source=Press+Gazette+Daily+new+layout

Private Eye hit its biggest ever print circulation in the second half of 2016 – up 9 per cent year on year, according to ABC.

The title has also revealed that the 2016 Christmas issue achieved the biggest sale in the title’s 55-year history, 287,334 copies.

fair play.

It's very good investigative journalism, which is needed more than ever.

The stuff it prints about that corrupt Liam Fox, and the shambles that is British defence procurement, is well worth the price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

Back on topic, Corbyn is running out of MP's who HAVEN'T been in his Shadow Cabinet already or slagged him off, meaning he can't fire the ones who defied his orders on the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38925552

Its interesting that most of the Article 50 commons vote related news centered on the Tories and the SNP. Who are the opposition again?

Jeremy Corbyn has been a grey man throughout this entire process, at the very least he should have backed some of the article 50 amendments, such as the one to provide an additional £350 million per week to the NHS that all the 'Vote Leave' Tories voted against despite being all in favour of it not even a year ago.

The problem with the Labour party is, who would replace him?

That's the question.

Labour has one, maybe two leaders left in which to pull themselves together now. Otherwise, I genuinely think the Lib Dems will topple them as the official opposition. It's not hard to see which way the political winds are blowing right now.

I think that would be a very good thing if it happened. Labour has lost its direction between the "New Labour" era (not quite as right-wing as the Tories) and the £3 member inspired neo-old-medium-hard-left-wishy-washy-Labour that Corbyn seems to follow.

Funnily enough, when Labour followed the Corbyn approach back in the 1960s/70s, they not only won elections, but got more votes than Blair/Major/Cameron ever did...

Aye labour have a big problem.

Half of corbyns party have designed his front bench, or some voted against but.. He lacks people to replace so cannot just fire them.
They have a someewhat idenetly issue, other parties digging at heals.

Conservatives not best but labour are a weaker opposition party and a gift to May.

Labours power base of Scotland is greatly depleted to which hurts them badly...
Unless they doa deal with SNP... But that's risky move I think.