Politics, politics, politics

[r-u-s-x]

and what message does that send to non EU nationals who may have been considering the NHS as a career path?

What message would a Greek Nurse choosing not to come to the UK have for Non Eu Nations? I am not sure.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Is this not the same as the downturn in Investment? IE - current turbulence/uncertainty is keeping people away until a more settled/predictable situation unfolds?

Were we to leave the EU, and control our own immigration - offering Visa's to healthcare professionals - why wouldnt they come back?

This seems, to me at least, to be one of those red herring things. Clearly a short term thing, rather than long term predictor.

Possibly, could also be a trend depending on the policy we take up after Brexit. I was questioning GB assertion that losing EU NHS staff was not a big deal.


* the ease of movement may be a big selling point to coming over, if we restrict this it is very feasible that we would have to pay more / offer more incentive to keep the same numbers. All things being equal I would think that the numbers would be lower long term but not as low as now.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Possibly, could also be a trend depending on the policy we take up after Brexit. I was questioning GB assertion that losing EU NHS staff was not a big deal.

* the ease of movement may be a big selling point to coming over, if we restrict this it is very feasible that we would have to pay more / offer more incentive to keep the same numbers. All things being equal I would think that the numbers would be lower long term but not as low as now.

Clearly the NHS losing staff is a big deal. Particularly when its front line staff (Ive long held the view the NHS could be virtually gutted when it comes to management.)

A big argument on the leave side of Brexit is on immigration, obviously. Many Remainers like to paint it as if Leavers want to just stop it, and get rid of all those pesky foreigners.

The more consistent view Ive seen, is that Leavers want to control it. Targetting immigration on our wants and needs - IE Healthcare staff.

So the argument then begins to build on previous ones, and gets somewhat convoluted.

For me:
1) People not coming over now (in general, not just for NHS) is a reaction to not knowing what their status will be in the future.
2) Once Brexit is settled, in whatever form it takes, that certainty will return and people will react accordingly (be that for better or worse)
3) Ideally, hypothetically, "I hope", should we leave we set up a streamlined immigration system for everyone, and target those we need most (regardless of where they are from).

So the debate goes from practical into theoretical, and becomes a bit muddy there after...

 

[r-u-s-x]

Clearly the NHS losing staff is a big deal. Particularly when its front line staff (Ive long held the view the NHS could be virtually gutted when it comes to management.)

A big argument on the leave side of Brexit is on immigration, obviously. Many Remainers like to paint it as if Leavers want to just stop it, and get rid of all those pesky foreigners.

The more consistent view Ive seen, is that Leavers want to control it. Targetting immigration on our wants and needs - IE Healthcare staff.

So the argument then begins to build on previous ones, and gets somewhat convoluted.

For me:
1) People not coming over now (in general, not just for NHS) is a reaction to not knowing what their status will be in the future.
2) Once Brexit is settled, in whatever form it takes, that certainty will return and people will react accordingly (be that for better or worse)
3) Ideally, hypothetically, "I hope", should we leave we set up a streamlined immigration system for everyone, and target those we need most (regardless of where they are from).

So the debate goes from practical into theoretical, and becomes a bit muddy there after...

We are not doing a good job of it now, perhaps we will get better.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...taffing-crisis-unless-visa-caps-lifted-report
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ters-to-allow-nhs-to-bring-in-foreign-doctors

It is very likely as we add complexity and red tape the numbers applying from the EU will either go down or we will have to pay more. I think we should be training our own as importing health workers leaves a bitter taste in my mouth (draining the country they are from) - we will not pay the rate needed to fill the roles in the near future.

 

[Gutter Boy]

But leaving the EU also allows us to end discrimination against skilled workers from the rest of the world. To get in more of those Indians and Philippinos. It's just a case of reorientation and ending the effective 'whites first' principle of the EU

 

[r-u-s-x]

But leaving the EU also allows us to end discrimination against skilled workers from the rest of the world. To get in more of those Indians and Philippinos. It's just a case of reorientation and ending the effective 'whites first' principle of the EU

we can do that now and in the case of the NHS are choosing not to fill the gap in this way (see the linked articles above). It does appear that a lot of "when we leave the EU" we can do now but choose not to, I don't really get why we would start to do all of these desirable things in the future. I guess you have more faith in the government than I do.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

We are not doing a good job of it now, perhaps we will get better.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...taffing-crisis-unless-visa-caps-lifted-report
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ters-to-allow-nhs-to-bring-in-foreign-doctors

It is very likely as we add complexity and red tape the numbers applying from the EU will either go down or we will have to pay more. I think we should be training our own as importing health workers leaves a bitter taste in my mouth (draining the country they are from) - we will not pay the rate needed to fill the roles in the near future.

My personal ambition for future immigration is a single, streamlined process. No pro EU bias, no ridiculous and lengthly process as for non EU.

Something sensible that we can use to appeal to the people we need to attract.

So, as you point out, probably pie in the sky.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

we can do that now and in the case of the NHS are choosing not to fill the gap in this way (see the linked articles above). It does appear that a lot of "when we leave the EU" we can do now but choose not to, I don't really get why we would start to do all of these desirable things in the future. I guess you have more faith in the government than I do.

In the case of immigration, in general, while we could simplify non-EU immigration, we cant control EU immigration.

Leaving non-EU as our only means of managing numbers.

Anyone from the EU can come in and set up shop, we have little say.

Take that off the table, treat everyone the same, and I really believe immigration can be managed in a much better way.

 

[r-u-s-x]

In the case of immigration, in general, while we could simplify non-EU immigration, we cant control EU immigration.

Leaving non-EU as our only means of managing numbers.

Anyone from the EU can come in and set up shop, we have little say.

Take that off the table, treat everyone the same, and I really believe immigration can be managed in a much better way.

I was not talking about generalities but addressing the point:

"But leaving the EU also allows us to end discrimination against skilled workers from the rest of the world. To get in more of those Indians and Philippinos. It's just a case of reorientation and ending the effective 'whites first' principle of the EU"

We have shortages in the NHS now, we can make the change now (see linked articles) - we chose not to do it now why would we make the changes after BREXIT.

 

[DTA]

Im not talking about 5 years later (though I agree, no special terms whatsoever then), Im talking about now.

And thats grey area. And comes back to the talk yesterday - can we just unilaterally cancel A50 or not?

The concensus seemed to be it was a political decision, rather than legal, and so would likely mean the EU having to consent - which leads right back to what Ive been talking about the whole time. Why would they just consent to a forgive and forget cancellation, rather than take the opportunity to bring us closer into the fold?

As to controlling immigration - already declined with Cameron. Not even politely, I think they are still laughing at him now. One of the major blocks on deals going forward (assuming Brexit) is FOM - which they want to insist upon.

Do really think its anything more than wishful thinking they will suddenly allow us to put caps/limits etc on it?

(while keeping our Veto, rebate, currency...)





Is this not the same as the downturn in Investment? IE - current turbulence/uncertainty is keeping people away until a more settled/predictable situation unfolds?

Were we to leave the EU, and control our own immigration - offering Visa's to healthcare professionals - why wouldnt they come back?

This seems, to me at least, to be one of those red herring things. Clearly a short term thing, rather than long term predictor.

Us leaving is bad for the EU. Worse for us, but undoubtedly bad for the eu as well.

So unless our government manage to "negotiate" a Brexit which is actually better for the EU then us actually staying in would be. Which should be impossible, but is unfortunately a possibility (if a remote one) with the shower of S hit we have in charge.
Then the EU would be open to us staying in possibly with small consessions (possibly not).

But as it stands it is in their interests for us to stay in, and we could use the fact that a second referendum still needs to be won to get some small concessions out of them. That's if our government approach that properly... Which um... Might not happen.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I was not talking about generalities but addressing the point:

"But leaving the EU also allows us to end discrimination against skilled workers from the rest of the world. To get in more of those Indians and Philippinos. It's just a case of reorientation and ending the effective 'whites first' principle of the EU"

We have shortages in the NHS now, we can make the change now (see linked articles) - we chose not to do it now why would we make the changes after BREXIT.

I was just speaking to the wider argument around immigration, on which I mostly agree with GBs intention.

I would hope, a single policy would inherently lead to these things being accomodated.

Cant argue on the specifics here. The government is a shambles and this shouldnt even be an issue. We should be getting it sorted already.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Us leaving is bad for the EU. Worse for us, but undoubtedly bad for the eu as well.

So unless our government manage to "negotiate" a Brexit which is actually better for the EU then us actually staying in would be. Which should be impossible, but is unfortunately a possibility (if a remote one) with the shower of S hit we have in charge.
Then the EU would be open to us staying in possibly with small consessions (possibly not).

But it is in their interests for us to stay in, and we could use the fact that a second referendum still needs to be won to get some small concessions out of them. That's if our government approach that properly... Which um... Might not happen.

Us leaving is bad for the EU, Ive said all along. Its why, reasonably, they should be willing to deal on more than just their own terms. Ive maintained throughout - with compromise both sides can do well. It doesnt need to be a winners and losers thing.

Im sure they would like us to stay, its much more profitable and secure for them. As much as people like to talk us down (easy to do with the muppets we have in government), we are a major player with much to offer.

The catch comes with - after all this - the likelihood of them just allowing everything to be forgotten - if we ever chose to back out.

You talk of small concessions as a sweetner, but are unable to actually flesh that out to be anything meaningful. I think that says a lot.

Just as, you seem to avoid the possibility of them demanding more integration from us to come back into the bloc. Again, I think it says a lot.

For me, the liklihood of us trying to cancel it is very low, the EU trying to offer us a sweet deal to do so even lower.

Everything about their approach so far says to me they would demand something of us to make it all go away. Maybe that will be the £, the Rebate, the veto - or all/more besides.

 

[DTA]

Us leaving is bad for the EU, Ive said all along. Its why, reasonably, they should be willing to deal on more than just their own terms. Ive maintained throughout - with compromise both sides can do well. It doesnt need to be a winners and losers thing.

Im sure they would like us to stay, its much more profitable and secure for them. As much as people like to talk us down (easy to do with the muppets we have in government), we are a major player with much to offer.

The catch comes with - after all this - the likelihood of them just allowing everything to be forgotten - if we ever chose to back out.

You talk of small concessions as a sweetner, but are unable to actually flesh that out to be anything meaningful. I think that says a lot.

Just as, you seem to avoid the possibility of them demanding more integration from us to come back into the bloc. Again, I think it says a lot.

For me, the liklihood of us trying to cancel it is very low, the EU trying to offer us a sweet deal to do so even lower.

Everything about their approach so far says to me they would demand something of us to make it all go away. Maybe that will be the £, the Rebate, the veto - or all/more besides.

We keep going around in circles.

1) EU 28. They have a responsibility to us as one of the 28. They have shown they are willing to compromise in the past. How do you think we got our rebate? Who was pushing for EU expansion etc etc.

2) EU27 they only have responsibility to the EU27. So it is their absolutely right and in fact responsibility to ensure the best deal for the 27 remaining nations... NOT US.

Using your own terminology

EU28 = win win
EU27 = both lose. We lose more

Also in terms of small consessions who am I? And how am i supposed to flesh that out? That's down to our government to persuade the EU that we need them to ensure we win the final vote. I have offered my opinion only.

 

[Gutter Boy]

I was not talking about generalities but addressing the point:

"But leaving the EU also allows us to end discrimination against skilled workers from the rest of the world. To get in more of those Indians and Philippinos. It's just a case of reorientation and ending the effective 'whites first' principle of the EU"

We have shortages in the NHS now, we can make the change now (see linked articles) - we chose not to do it now why would we make the changes after BREXIT.

I'm not confident on the detail, but I think to be able to give a Tier 2 visa to someone from the RoW, you have to prove that the job cannot be filled by an EU citizen

 

[r-u-s-x]

I'm not confident on the detail, but I think to be able to give a Tier 2 visa to someone from the RoW, you have to prove that the job cannot be filled by an EU citizen

the detail was in the articles I posted.

issue more Tier 2 Visas for healthcare the cap is of our own choosing (take NHS out of the cap) due to Tories political stance on net immigration.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

We keep going around in circles.

1) EU 28. They have a responsibility to us as one of the 28. They have shown they are willing to compromise in the past. How do you think we got our rebate? Who was pushing for EU expansion etc etc.

2) EU27 they only have responsibility to the EU27. So it is their absolutely right and in fact responsibility to ensure the best deal for the 27 remaining nations... NOT US.

Using your own terminology

EU28 = win win
EU27 = both lose. We lose more

Also in terms of small consessions who am I? And how am i supposed to flesh that out? That's down to our government to persuade the EU that we need them to ensure we win the final vote. I have offered my opinion only.

Thats because you skip the key points.

1)
"EU 28" isnt a plain statement you can just assume. How do we become/remain part of the 28? Can we simply cancel brexit and all is forgotten? Will the EU allow this? There is a lot of "what if" and potential trouble between where we are today and "EU 28".

It is this point where I believe the EU will capitalise - in the best interests of the EU - to have us "all in". You skip over it completely.

As to compromise - again skipped on your part - we already tried and got told where to go. And this is where your concessions fall apart. The one, MAJOR, concession we want is control on immigration. Already tried, already failed, already lead to a leave vote. It just wont happen, Im sorry to say.

And thats why it keeps coming back, your hope isnt viable.

2)
Believe it or not, I do understand this. Where I disagree is in what "best deal for 27" looks like. IMHO it doesnt have to be "Lets screw the UK". Thats a difference of opinion, not understanding.


Finally, be honest - thats a cop out. You suggest they can make concessions to make staying in the EU agreeable so a second referendum can go the remain way - but you completely fail to put anything forward that would achieve this and be remotely likely. If you cant flesh it out, is it any more than wishful thinking?

 

[DTA]

EU 28" isnt a plain statement you can just assume. How do we become/remain part of the 28? Can we simply cancel brexit and all is forgotten? Will the EU allow this? There is a lot of "what if" and potential trouble between where we are today and "EU 28".

We are still a member. Numerous EU officials said we can remain on the same terms A50 is cancelled before time runs out.

As @milo pointed out legal experts have said this would be a political decision not legal one.

It is this point where I believe the EU will capitalise - in the best interests of the EU - to have us "all in". You skip over it completely

It is in there interests to have us all in i agree. But a second referendum still needs to be won. Insisting on us going all in... Will mean that a second referendum is less likely to result in a remain victory... They know this and they are not stupid. They don't want us to leave so will not do anything that will improve leaves chances of a second victory.

As to compromise - again skipped on your part - we already tried and got told where to go. And this is where your concessions fall apart. The one, MAJOR, concession we want is control on immigration. Already tried, already failed, already lead to a leave vote. It just wont happen, Im sorry to say.

It is a completely different political scenario now. Very few people thought that leave would win a referendum... So they called Cameron's stupid bluff.

Believe it or not, I do understand this. Where I disagree is in what "best deal for 27" looks like. IMHO it doesnt have to be "Lets screw the UK". Thats a difference of opinion, not understanding.

What's best for the EU27 is the very best deal that they can get. It's not a matter of let's screw the UK. It's a matter of how do we leverage our size and power to ensure that the EU27 are the least effected by the UK leaving.

You want them to compromise... Fine they will. But the UK has to compromise much much more in relation to the size of the two parties. Otherwise they will be being stupid and negligent. They are not either.

Finally, be honest - thats a cop out. You suggest they can make concessions to make staying in the EU agreeable so a second referendum can go the remain way - but you completely fail to put anything forward that would achieve this and be remotely likely. If you cant flesh it out, is it any more than wishful thinking?

I'm saying that concessions may help a remain victory in a second referendum. which they want.

I'm saying that our government needs to use this to our advantage.

I'm saying that a second referendum is just about the only Carrot we have.

And our government should go them and say that:

We want to call a second referendum but are still unsure if remain will win because of xyz
What can you guys (best friends for ever) do to help us ensure a remain victory as we both don't want the cluster fudge of Brexit to go ahead as it will negatively affect us both.

These Europeans are a pragmatic bunch on the whole and I am sure that they will move a little (just a little mind)

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

We are still a member. Numerous EU officials said we can remain on the same terms A50 is cancelled before time runs out.

As @milo pointed out legal experts have said this would be a political decision not legal one.

If yesterday proved anything, its that its clear as mud. Absolutely uncertain. Personally I find it difficult to accept a forgive and forget option exists, you disagree thats fine - but clearly neither option is certain.

It is in there interests to have us all in i agree. But a second referendum still needs to be won. Insisting on us going all in... Will mean that a second referendum is less likely to result in a remain victory... They know this and they are not stupid. They don't want us to leave so will not do anything that will improve leaves chances of a second victory.

As you later point out - they were complacent before, thinking they had the upper hand and played that hand. If there is a real horror narrative around hard Brexit, I would not be at all surprised to see them leverage that. Why wouldnt they? Precedent suggests they will.

It is a completely different political scenario now. Very few people thought that leave would win a referendum... So they called Cameron's stupid bluff.

And regardless, concessions on immigration will not be an option.

What's best for the EU27 is the very best deal that they can get. It's not a matter of let's screw the UK. It's a matter of how do we leverage our size and power to ensure that the EU27 are the least effected by the UK leaving.

You want them to compromise... Fine they will. But the UK has to compromise much much more in relation to the size of the two parties. Otherwise they will be being stupid and negligent. They are not either.

You are too entrenched in all this.

Think about it. What leaves them least effected? Continuing to trade and take our money - as much of it as possible.

What do we want? To trade.

There is plenty of room in that debate for both sides to be absolutely fine. It need not be an ideological thing about pillars, politics or any of it.

I'm saying that concessions may help a remain victory in a second referendum. which they want.

I'm saying that our government needs to use this to our advantage.

I'm saying that a second referendum is just about the only Carrot we have.

And our government should go them and say that:

We want to call a second referendum but are still unsure if remain will win because of xyz
What can you guys (best friends for ever) do to help us ensure a remain victory as we both don't want the cluster fudge of Brexit to go ahead as it will negatively affect us both.

These Europeans are a pragmatic bunch on the whole and I am sure that they will move a little (just a little mind)

And yet you cannot point to concessions that would swing it - this is the point. There really arent any that will be on the table hat will make a difference.

Our government is not going to out manouvre the EU in this way, forget it. They wont budge on the pillars for us as a member. Is a straight up "no".

And - ALL of it is based on the notion somehow a second referendum comes up. Something that is far less than likely.

As I said, its all just wishful thinking. Hopes stacked on hopes - I dont think it actually bares much scrutiny.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Yes - and how do we get back in?

If - as it is coming to seem - its a political decision, why assume a forgive and forget option?

The union, with regard to us, will want more - they will want us all in, IMO - not the arms length outsider we have always been.

They would be foolish not to, and their negotiating manner so far suggests exactly what Im saying.



And - lets flesh this out - small concessions, what have you got?

You have this idea that we can go for a second referendum, and that the EU can offer us a pretty deal to swing it your way - what is it?

As we both know FOM wont be on the table, what do you suppose they can do to make us vote that way?


I get told Im wishful thinking, just saying what I want as if it will happen - what do you suppose this looks like?

What is it you propose? Now we’re aware of the challenges with negotiating trade agreements, and some of the issues with hard Brexit, what do you think we should do?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[milo]

This thread (and some of the replies) are well worth a read. The author is a former Aussie trade negotiator and is well worth a follow if you are on Twitter. He has no stake in the Brexit game and gives clear comment on it and other trade related stuff.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1023938209309437953