yes but we need to ensure reciprocal agreements are in place for UK ex pats after all how are we going to cope if all the elderly ex pats come back from Spain
It is interesting that Leadsom perceived as being more right wing, shows her "social" credentials by guaranteeing the status of EU migrants in the country immediately whilst May the remainer shows her right wing grit in declaring that we cannot guaranteeing the EU migrants status without a reciprocal agreement. It shows that in this House of Cards political world nothing is as it seems. Liam fox asking for the NHS not be used as a political football anymore?
Lies, false promises and jumping into the vast unknown... From the Times: ... Did you hear Iain Duncan Smith on the BBC last week? “Our promises,” he said, “were a series of possibilities.” Pretty special. Let’s not forget that one. Or Boris Johnson, that broken sad clown, that pied piper of pyramids of piffle, writing in The Daily Telegraph yesterday, that Britain needs a plan, and “it is time for this nonsense to end”. Is it, indeed, Mr Johnson? A plan, you say? All of sudden, uncertainty is bad?... Isn't it amazing that politicians conveniently forget what they said just a week earlier? priti patel now insists on the promotion of social cohesion and tolerance from the new PM. A couple of weeks ago, she declared without any hint of irony that the current flow of migrants from the EU was unacceptable and had to be stemmed to protect our NHS. As we have all said it, you just couldn't make it up.
as i have said earlier in this thread i think the politicians have done huge damage to what remained of their tattered reputation. The squalid nature of the campaigns and clear using such a vital subject for personal gain beggars belief. they should all hang their heads in shame but we know full well they won't in fact they will think it is business as usual, They seem oblivious to the fact disenchantment with established politics is spreading throughout the western world and causing a rise in support for fringe parties / fringe politicians
UK Politics is that ****ed, that you've got absolute cretins like this standing for the role of PM.... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...sed-for-links-to-gay-cure-group-a6941281.html
The sad thing is that there does not seem to be a boundary or a limit to the lying or false promising that these politicians are willing to carry out to get what they want. In the past you would think this is so big, or basic or evident that surely they wouldn't dare. But No. Nowadays there is absolutely no limit. Boris and his leave friends was prepared to say anything. Insisting that £350m was true, that they would put all of it into the NHS if we Brexit (even though this was very very unlikely and they had no such power anyway). The worst lie in my opinion was saying that there would be no economic effect immediately post Brexit and that in fact new jobs will be created. That is deliberate lying because they knew full well that there would be immediate chaos and the markets will drop from the uncertainty. Yet they hoodwinked those who trusted them. Everything is now up in the air. Who can predict the next referendum or next GE? When no one can be trusted to tell the truth.
Indeed mate. There used to be a political consequence for telling blatant lies to the British public - you were finished. Now it seems that lying through your teeth is just 'part of the game'. It's truly shocking that its just been treated with little more than a shrug.
We all know it all politicians are liars, the level of their lies is difference from one to another. Definitely Boris Johnson and his friends lied to get what they wanted and the whole thing backfired against them.
And the voters retaliate in kind both in the opinion polls and the real ones. They all lie and say the exact opposite of their intentions.
i saw IDS just after the result in an interview justifying the lies by saying they were just "possibilites" they had put out there. the interviewer tried pinning him down that they had knowingly lied and he sort of admitted that some of the claims weren't fully true but they hadn't lied as they were right in principle i.e. some money did go to EU even if it wasn't £350m and tes they weren't going to spend it on NHS but they could have. Even the interviewer just looked gobsmacked at this version of "truth"
Corbyn is a tory plant elected by tories exploiting labours bylaws and now he's assured a tory dictatorshop
Conservative are just praying that there is no change in labour's leadership. David Cameron never meant what he said.
Paul Nurse: 'Research needs free movement to thrive' By Pallab GhoshScience correspondent, BBC News 29 June 2016 From the sectionScience & Environment Share please log in to view this image Image copyrightSPL A leading scientist has said UK science will suffer unless any post-Brexit agreement allows the free movement of people. Prof Sir Paul Nurse said the country's research was facing its biggest threat in living memory. He added that researchers had to have a big voice in negotiations with the EU. But Leave campaigners say the UK should be able to negotiate a deal to continue to receive European funding and still curb overall immigration. British science was one of the biggest winners from EU funding. And so it is among those that have most to lose. UK universities receive 10% of their research funding from the EU, amounting to just over £1bn a year. Full membership of the funding body requires participating countries to allow free movement of people. Sir Paul Nurse said that exit from the EU jeopardised the world-class science for which the UK was known. It risked damaging the economy and could lead to a loss of skills and talent. "For science to thrive it must have access to the single market, and we do need free movement," he said. "We could negotiate that outside the EU, which will probably end up costing more money and we would have little influence [in deciding research priorities]. "Or perhaps we should just reconsider this entire mess and see if there is something that can be done to reconsider this once the dust has settled." The Nobel Prize-winning scientist added that even if the government agreed to reimburse the lost funds, which Leave campaigners had suggested might be possible, it would not replace the important international collaborations that British science needed to remain at the forefront of research. please log in to view this image Image captionSir Paul Nurse says science will fail to thrive unless free movement is maintained But Leave campaigners, such as Chris Leigh, from Scientists for Britain, say that there are several ways for the UK to negotiate a deal to continue to receive grants from the main European research programme, called Horizon 2020, and still stop free movement. He said: "The first involves H2020 access for members of the European Free Trade Association, and, in the case of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland, this does appear to be linked to free movement. "The second involves countries whose H2020 access is covered by the EU's Neighbourhood Policy, such as Israel, Tunisia, Georgia and Armenia, and this does not appear to require free movement. "We also note that the current 'partial-access' status of Switzerland has opened up a third option, in that Swiss scientists have full access to Tier 1 H2020 activities, but participate in other aspects of H2020 (Tier 2/3) as a third country, but do so by funding their involvement directly. "We would, however, urge our own government to recognise the importance of researcher mobility to science, and recommend that any future arrangements should ensure that scientists and students from around the world are still encouraged to visit, study and work in the UK." British Universities employ about 30,000 scientists from EU countries. The president of the Royal Society, which represents the UK's leading scientists, Sir Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, said many of them were now facing an uncertain future and so may choose to work elsewhere. He said: "They are not just statistics; they are people worried about their job security. "Government needs to act quickly to ensure that these researchers know that their jobs are safe. "Universities have employed them because they are the brightest and the best, and other countries will know that and will come and get them." Dr Noemie Bouhana, 40, a French researcher who arrived in the UK 18 years ago, lectures in crime science at UCL and leads an EU-funded project to track terrorism and the radicalisation of young men, involving collaborators across Europe. She said: "Never in a million years would I get funding from central UK funds for this type of project, which is international, interdisciplinary and involves a mix of engineering and social sciences. "I was shocked and disappointed when I heard the referendum result. "At first, I did not believe it. "I checked on several websites to see if it really was true. "I then knew that I would not be in an EU country, and I hadn't realised how important that was to me, and I don't want to live in a non-EU country." Mike Galsworthy, of pro-Remain campaign group Scientists for EU, said the country's current full relationship with the EU brought huge added value for UK science "from our strong policy voice on academic and single market standards through to leading roles on the EU multinational research programme". He added: "We want to keep as much as possible, but, as the case of Switzerland showed us, negotiations will be complex. "Much policy voice will be lost, and our renegotiated level of access will revolve around freedom of movement, the relationship with the single market, financial contributions and the interests of the remaining countries."
A warning to Gove and Johnson - we won’t forget what you did please log in to view this image Jonathan Freedland Though events are moving fast, it’s crucial to hold on to our fury at the selfishness that caused this crisis please log in to view this image ‘Some may be tempted to turn Johnson into an object of sympathy – but he deserves none.’ Photograph: Leon Neal/AFP/Getty Images @Freedland Friday 1 July 2016 20.10 BSTLast modified on Tuesday 5 July 201607.26 BST Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+ Shares 50,345 Comments 3,289 Save for later It’s gripping, of course. Game of Thrones meets House of Cards, played out at the tempo of a binge-viewed box-set. Who could resist watching former allies wrestling for the crown, betraying each other, lying, cheating and dissembling, each new twist coming within hours of the last? And this show matters, too. Whoever wins will determine Britain’s relationship with Europe. And yet it can feel like displacement activity, this story of Michael Gove, Boris Johnson and Theresa May – a distraction diverting us from the betrayal larger than any inflicted by one Tory bigwig on another. Now that the news cycle is measured in seconds, there’s a risk that 23 June might come to feel like history, that we might move on too soon. But there can be no moving on until we have reckoned with what exactly was done to the people of these islands – and by whom. This week’s antics of Gove and Johnson are a useful reminder. For the way one has treated the other is the way both have treated the country. Some may be tempted to turn Johnson into an object of sympathy – poor Boris, knifed by his pal – but he deserves none. In seven days he has been exposed as an egomaniac whose vanity and ambition was so great he was prepared to lead his country on a path he knew led to disaster, so long as it fed his own appetite for status. He didn’t believe a word of his own rhetoric, we know that now. His face last Friday morning, ashen with the terror of victory, proved it. That hot mess of a column he served up on Monday confirmed it again: he was trying to back out of the very decision he’d persuaded the country to make. And let’s not be coy:persuade it, he did. Imagine the Leave campaign without him. Gove, Nigel Farage and Gisela Stuart: they couldn’t have done it without the star power of Boris. He knew it was best for Britain to remain in the EU. But it served his ambition to argue otherwise. We just weren’t meant to fall for it. Once we had, he panicked, vanishing during a weekend of national crisis before hiding from parliament. He lit the spark then ran away – petrified at the blaze he started. please log in to view this image FacebookTwitterPinterest Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney. ‘The outlook for the economy is so bleak, the governor of the Bank of England talks of ‘economic post-traumatic stress disorder’.’ Photograph: Matt Dunham/AP He has left us to look on his works and despair. The outlook for the economy is so bleak, the governor of the Bank of England talks of “economic post-traumatic stress disorder.” The Economist Intelligence Unit projects a 6% contraction by 2020, an 8% decline in investment, rising unemployment, falling tax revenues and public debt to reach 100% of our national output. No wonder George Osborne casually announced that the central aim of his fiscal policy since 2010 – eradicating the deficit – has now been indefinitely postponed, thereby breaking what had been the defining commitment of the Tories’ manifesto at the last election, back in the Paleolithic era known as 2015. Perhaps headlines about Britain losing its AAA credit ratings don’t cut through. Maybe it’s easier to think in terms of the contracts cancelled, the planned investments scrapped, the existing jobs that will be lost and the future jobs that will never happen. Or the British scientific and medical research that relied on EU funding and European cooperation and that will now be set back “decades”, according to those at the sharp end. And what was it all for? For Johnson, it was gross ambition. Gove’s motive was superficially more admirable. He, along with Daniel Hannan and others, was driven by intellectual fervour, a burning belief in abstract nouns such as “sovereignty” and “freedom”. Those ideas are noble in themselves, of course they are. But not when they are peeled away from the rough texture of the real world. For when doctrine is kept distilled, pure and fervently uncontaminated by reality, it turns into zealotry. propel Scotland towards saying yes in a second independence referendum. The more honest leavers admit – as Melanie Phillips did when the two of us appeared on Newsnight this week – that they believe the break-up of the union is a price worth paying for the prize of sovereignty. But what kind of patriotism is this, that believes in an undiluted British sovereignty so precious it’s worth the sacrifice of Britain itself? Just look at what this act of vandalism has wrought. There has been a 500% increase in the number of hate crimes reported, as migrants are taunted on the street, told to pack their bags and get out – as if 23 June were a permission slip to every racist and bigot in the land. And for what? So Boris could get a job and so Gove, Hannan and the rest could make Britain more closely resemble the pristine constitutional models of the nation-state found in 17th-century tracts of political philosophy, rather than one that might fit into the interdependent, complex 21st-century world and our blood-drenched European corner of it. They did it with lies, whether the false promise that we could both halt immigration and enjoy full access to the single market or that deceitful £350m figure, still defended by Gove, which tricked millions into believing a leave vote would bring a cash windfall to the NHS. They did it with no plan, as clueless about post-Brexit Britain as Bush and Blair were about post-invasion Iraq. They did it with no care for the chaos they would unleash. Senior civil servants say Brexit will consume their energies for years to come, as they seek to disentangle 40 years of agreements. It will be the central focus of our politics and our government, a massive collective effort demanding ingenuity and creativity. Just think of what could have been achieved if all those resources had been directed elsewhere. Into addressing, for instance, the desperate, decades-long needs – for jobs, for housing, for a future – of those towns that have been left behind by the last 30 years of change, those towns whose people voted leave the way a passenger on a doomed train pulls the emergency cord. Instead, all this work will be devoted to constructing a set-up with the EU which, if everything goes our way, might be only a little bit worse than what we already had in our hands on 22 June. This week of shock will settle, eventually. Events will begin to move at a slower pace. We will realise that we have to be patient, that we need to wait till France and Germany get their elections out of the way, and hope that a new future can be negotiated – one that implements the democratic verdict delivered in the referendum, but which does not maim this country in the process. But even as we grow calmer, we should not let our anger cool. We should hold on to our fury, against those who for the sake of their career or a pet dogma, were prepared to wreck everything. On this day when we mourn what horror the Europe before theEuropean Union was capable of, we should say loud and clear of those that did this: we will not forget them.
The junior doctors have rejected the new contract (against the advice of their own union) by 58% to 42%. The turn out was more than 2 thirds. The immediate reaction of Jeremy Hunt? " This means only 40% of all the doctors rejected the new proposals !!" Contrast this with the reaction to the Brexit vote from the brexiteers (not from JH): " Overwhelming endorsement of the electorate for Brexit." yet the % of the electorate who have actually voted for Brexit was only 37.4% meaning that 62.6% were either against or didn't express a view. Statistics will always be used by politicians to suit their needs.
Ken Clarke has been caught criticising Tory leadership candidates in a candid off-air moment at Sky News' Westminster studio. The former chancellor had just been interviewed when he was recorded on a live microphone giving his opinions to Sir Malcolm Rifkind about the "fiasco". Sir Malcolm, who was also appearing as a guest, started the conversation with Mr Clarke when he leaned in to say: "I don't mind who wins as long as Gove comes third. As long as Gove doesn't come in the final two I don't mind what happens." http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...es-tory-candidates/ar-AAi7eF9?ocid=spartandhp
