NHS after Brexit?

**jonboi** · 09/09/2019 10:08 AM

If Brexit happens, and it’s by no means certain that it will, what happens to the NHS?
So assuming Brexit happens with a no-deal which is the direction the Johnson government has been driving the process under the pretence of trying to get a deal with the EU, what then for the NHS.
It has been apparent all along that the Johnson government doesn’t want anything to do with the EU, instead it wants us to do trade deals mainly with the US and ignoring all the negatives that will bring in our weakened negotiating position desperate for deals, what exactly will happen to the NHS under those trade deal conditions? On his State Visit to the UK recently and at a state lunch with the then PM Mrs May Trump blurted out that he wants to do “trade deals” between the US and the UK and that will include everything including our NHS. Mrs May caught on the hop by this statement from the US President had to hastily intervene to say that any deals would have to be negotiated.
Recently Trump’s ambassador to the UK has said that the NHS MUST be on the table in negotiations over a future US/UK trade deal. There are also the big American Corporates; the medical health insurance companies, and the big drug companies, the latter being desperate to have regulations over their products relaxed – those regulations that ensure any drugs administered for our medical needs are safe for purpose. These Corporations have turnovers bigger than some countries GDP and can wield a lot of power in negotiations!
The other thing the big US Corporates are pushing for, is the ability to sue governments who impede their products going to market. This would be a very dangerous precedent, and would also lead to lowering of safe standards to benefit big business profits.
Given the current PM’s track record, do you really think that the NHS really would be safe in “negotiations” with the US over trade deals?
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m

ispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m

efJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

**Ceam** · 09/09/2019 10:27 AM

Easy, it's going to be privatized. Conservatives have been try to do this for decades. Now's the perfect opportunity.

**Toodles McGinty** · 09/09/2019 10:30 AM

We know what will happen.

Whether or not you're rich enough to not give a monkey's is another thing altogether.

Or stupid enough to believe that they won't do it...

**local** · 15/09/2019 08:17 AM

Yawn ............

Project fear and the NHS,

same old same old, the NHS to be privatised and swallowed up by greedy American companies and charge us a fortune.

So why would any government commit this electoral suicide when the opposition would overturn it asap.

Besides isn't Jeremy winning the next election so we should really be looking at a Venezuela style health care system,

The Venezuelan Pharmaceutical Federation has reported shortages in 80% of medical supplies.

**Toodles McGinty** · 15/09/2019 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by local

Yawn ............

Project fear and the NHS,

same old same old, the NHS to be privatised and swallowed up by greedy American companies and charge us a fortune.

So why would any government commit this electoral suicide when the opposition would overturn it asap.

Besides isn't Jeremy winning the next election so we should really be looking at a Venezuela style health care system,

The Venezuelan Pharmaceutical Federation has reported shortages in 80% of medical supplies.

Why on earth would a Labour government introduce anything like a Venezuelan health care system?

How many Labour governments have brought in a Venezuelan health care system? They brought in the NHS, why would they change it for any other system of healthcare?

'Venezuela' is one of your favourite buzzwords at the moment, isn't it? It's on the same list as 'lefty loser' and your strange impulse to mention Diane Abbott.

But please, taking your usual knee-jerk, bar stool politics aside, explain how a Labour government is going to bring about a far left autocracy. Then import 47% of medical supplies from the United States.

Doesn't sound much like a Labour government to me, but please enlighten us all. See if you can manage it without your list of Pavlovian jibes.

**said** · 15/09/2019 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by jonboi

If Brexit happens, and it’s by no means certain that it will, what happens to the NHS?
So assuming Brexit happens with a no-deal which is the direction the Johnson government has been driving the process under the pretence of trying to get a deal with the EU, what then for the NHS.
It has been apparent all along that the Johnson government doesn’t want anything to do with the EU, instead it wants us to do trade deals mainly with the US and ignoring all the negatives that will bring in our weakened negotiating position desperate for deals, what exactly will happen to the NHS under those trade deal conditions? On his State Visit to the UK recently and at a state lunch with the then PM Mrs May Trump blurted out that he wants to do “trade deals” between the US and the UK and that will include everything including our NHS. Mrs May caught on the hop by this statement from the US President had to hastily intervene to say that any deals would have to be negotiated.
Recently Trump’s ambassador to the UK has said that the NHS MUST be on the table in negotiations over a future US/UK trade deal. There are also the big American Corporates; the medical health insurance companies, and the big drug companies, the latter being desperate to have regulations over their products relaxed – those regulations that ensure any drugs administered for our medical needs are safe for purpose. These Corporations have turnovers bigger than some countries GDP and can wield a lot of power in negotiations!
The other thing the big US Corporates are pushing for, is the ability to sue governments who impede their products going to market. This would be a very dangerous precedent, and would also lead to lowering of safe standards to benefit big business profits.
Given the current PM’s track record, do you really think that the NHS really would be safe in “negotiations” with the US over trade deals?
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-GB</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w

ontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m

ispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m

efJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->

You have a point, and it is true that the Conservatives have a reputation for wanting to privatise the NHS - even though it was not the Conservatives who brought in part privatisation of the NHS - that was down to Labour.

The Americans, invest heavily in pharmaceuticals. After Oil and Arms - it is one of their highest priorities. It bothers me somewhat, that reports claim that medical people have been issuing prescription drugs so energetically in the States that a huge number of the population have become dependent on them. But that was in media reports.

Suing Governments -
During the run up to the referendum, it was mentioned that the US wanted to introduce TTIP in future trade deals. There was a huge petition sent to the government, from the people to reject this. Basically the system was said to remove duplication of regulations for cheaper prices on cars etc.,, and give more regulation over food safety. It is difficult to accept that the USA were seeking an agreement over food since there have been numerous disputes between the EU and US, for the past twenty years with regard to the EU's very strict application to food safety. In addition to that, the USA are quite happy to distribute GM foods in America - foods that are banned in the UK. The UK regulations are in themselves very strict and always have been. Far more serious is the ISDS part of this agreement. Investor State Dispute Settlement, which basically means that if the USA had invested in a particular field in the UK, any activity, law or otherwise that would act to reduce the profits in that investment would be liable for a law suit to recover costs. The UK does not need that, since investments are well regulated in the UK - how would anyone trust a court, say in - Mississippi to make a fair decision?

The EU is all set to sign up for this agreement, and I believe that Canada has signed to a softer option of it. But the UK does not need it. The whole legislation is American, which means it will be American legislation that will govern various goods in the UK. No-one trusts the USA, they have one focus only - Money! All American goods sold in the UK already cost at least 25% higher than our own products.

State of the art hospitals have already been built in many major towns in the UK - a programme that has been going on for the past ten years - which include the latest technology, separate rooms not wards, etc., These are hardly to be for NHS patients.

It is likely that there will be a number of privatised facilities that run alongside the NHS. There would be a huge outcry if the NHS was disbanded. But will it also mean a two tier health facility where one receives a lower standard of care in the free NHS compared to private care? This is nothing to do with Brexit - it has been ongoing for some years.

**libraryguy** · 15/09/2019 11:17 AM

What will happen to the NHS after Brexit - Nothing. It'll be exactly the same as it is now, no worse no better.

A lot of the world's medicines are manufactured in India, so that has nothing to do with the EU.

Next...

**seivad** · 15/09/2019 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by said

The EU is all set to sign up for this agreement, and I believe that Canada has signed to a softer option of it.

Canada has not signed up to a new softer version of anything. Canada has had free trade agreements with the US since 1987. From '87-'94 it was a bilateral agreement. In 1994 a trilateral agreement between Canada/Mexico/US superceded it. That agreement, NAFTA, is still in effect.

NAFTA, was renegotiated in 2018. The changes were so small as to be considered immaterial. Mexico has ratified it, we have not, neither has the US. The Democrat controlled congress is still sitting on it. Bear in mind that Democrats have never been the party of trade. They are far more protectionist than Republicans. Canada is sitting on it until we see what happens in Congress.

Negotiating with the US isn't easy. Trump's claim of a "big beautiful deal" means nothing. For your own sake I hope you manage to pull a skilled negotiating team together. Apparently that's been a major problem thus far. Several countries have reported that the inexperience of British negotiators has complicated trade talks. The UK tried to recruit negotiators from Canada. They turned them down due to the low pay that was offered.

Just because the US wants certain things on the table, it doesn't mean that you have to accept them. In trade talks both sides will naturally have sectors that they want to protect and standards that must be maintained. Trade talks are complex, which is why they take such a long time... and why you need seasoned people at the table. Right now you're shark bait!

**Ceam** · 15/09/2019 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by seivad

Just because the US wants certain things on the table, it doesn't mean that you have to accept them. In trade talks both sides will naturally have sectors that they want to protect and standards that must be maintained. Trade talks are complex, which is why they take such a long time... and why you need seasoned people at the table. Right now you're shark bait!

Yep.

**Alikado** · 15/09/2019 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by libraryguy

What will happen to the NHS after Brexit - Nothing. It'll be exactly the same as it is now, no worse no better.

A lot of the world's medicines are manufactured in India, so that has nothing to do with the EU.

Next...

Except that any Medical Equipment or Drugs imported from EU will be subject to Tariffs.

**seivad** · 15/09/2019 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by said

Suing Governments -
During the run up to the referendum, it was mentioned that the US wanted to introduce TTIP in future trade deals. There was a huge petition sent to the government, from the people to reject this. Basically the system was said to remove duplication of regulations for cheaper prices on cars etc.,, and give more regulation over food safety. It is difficult to accept that the USA were seeking an agreement over food since there have been numerous disputes between the EU and US, for the past twenty years with regard to the EU's very strict application to food safety. In addition to that, the USA are quite happy to distribute GM foods in America - foods that are banned in the UK. The UK regulations are in themselves very strict and always have been. Far more serious is the ISDS part of this agreement. Investor State Dispute Settlement, which basically means that if the USA had invested in a particular field in the UK, any activity, law or otherwise that would act to reduce the profits in that investment would be liable for a law suit to recover costs. The UK does not need that, since investments are well regulated in the UK -

It's nothing to do with the regulation of investments. I'll give you an example of an ISDS case so that you can better understand what triggers a dispute.

When Quebec banned the sale of some lawn herbicides, Dow filed a claim under NAFTA for losses incurred due to the ban. On this occasion Dow & Canada reached an agreement and settled. In a similar case with Ethyl Corporation, we lost and paid $15 million compensation.

how would anyone trust a court, say in - Mississippi to make a fair decision?

Cases are not heard in courts anywhere. Disputes are heard by international arbitration tribunals.

The secret to helping avoid investor state disputes, is including your country's environmental/food/labour standards. If they're codified in an agreement, an investor state has no recourse. Unfortunately for Canada, this wasn't even considered as being a problem back then. The renegotiated NAFTA includes these provisions. It was a hard battle won with the US. The Trump admin. hates all things involving environmental protection. And countries who pay higher rates than they do, with social welfare for all.

The EU is all set to sign up for this agreement

The EU/US are negotiating on a piece by piece basis. It's already been established that the EU won't accept meat from animals treated with hormones, or GM crops. The US, like most countries, does produce organic meat and produce. The EU will accept these products, as they did in CETA with Canadian meat.

**seivad** · 15/09/2019 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Alikado

Except that any Medical Equipment or Drugs imported from EU will be subject to Tariffs.

The EU is a signatory to the Pharmaceutical Tariff Elimination agreement. By virtue of being in the EU, so is the UK. The agreement doesn't eliminate tariffs on every drug, but I believe it covers quite a lot of them. I imagine that the UK will sign the agreement in its own right when it leaves the EU.

You export a lot of pharmaceuticals don't you? There might be tariffs on them if you export to countries who aren't signatories. I know that China and India aren't signatories, but I've no idea if you sell to them.

**local** · 15/09/2019 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Toodles McGinty

Why on earth would a Labour government introduce anything like a Venezuelan health care system?

How many Labour governments have brought in a Venezuelan health care system? They brought in the NHS, why would they change it for any other system of healthcare?

'Venezuela' is one of your favourite buzzwords at the moment, isn't it? It's on the same list as 'lefty loser' and your strange impulse to mention Diane Abbott.

But please, taking your usual knee-jerk, bar stool politics aside, explain how a Labour government is going to bring about a far left autocracy. Then import 47% of medical supplies from the United States.

Doesn't sound much like a Labour government to me, but please enlighten us all. See if you can manage it without your list of Pavlovian jibes.

Aah is it a bit of a sore point bringing up Jeremy's praising of all things Venezuelan

Still just to cheer you up here's a video of Jeremy in action just for you, it's from the Torygraph you will love it.

I don't think Diannes in it but we could work through all the lefty losers, imagine dozens of pages of lefty no marks spouting crip you would be like a pig in ****.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ist-venezuela/

**Toodles McGinty** · 15/09/2019 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by local

Aah is it a bit of a sore point bringing up Jeremy's praising of all things Venezuelan

Still just to cheer you up here's a video of Jeremy in action just for you, it's from the Torygraph you will love it.

I don't think Diannes in it but we could work through all the lefty losers, imagine dozens of pages of lefty no marks spouting crip you would be like a pig in ****.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...ist-venezuela/

I think I've written about 15,000 times that I'm not a particular fan of Corbyn. I'm not really interested in Corbyn praising Venezula, Outer Mongolia or Mars. Great if he does, fine if he doesn't. I suppose you'd have to have a smattering of knowledge about Venezuelan politics to understand.

Given the extent of your political expertise is repeating 'lefty loser' as often as possible, I don't expect to debate the finer points of socialism with you. Just keep dragging those knuckles and repeating 'lefty loser, Dianne(sic), remoaner' (dribble dribble).

I asked you:

Why on earth would a Labour government introduce anything like a Venezuelan health care system?

How many Labour governments have brought in a Venezuelan health care system? They brought in the NHS, why would they change it for any other system of healthcare?

You haven't answered. I could, say, praise Mahatma Gandhi. Doesn't actually mean I'm going to transform into a little old Indian pacifist bloke wrapped in a length of cloth.

Neither could you manage without your usual dribbling Pavlovian ' lefty losers, imagine dozens of pages of lefty no marks spouting crip (?) you would be like a pig in ****' (ooh pottymouth) jibes.

I'll try again.

Why on earth would a Labour government introduce anything like a Venezuelan health care system?

How many Labour governments have brought in a Venezuelan health care system? They brought in the NHS, why would they change it for any other system of healthcare?

Grab a tissue and give it another shot.

**local** · 15/09/2019 09:29 PM

I think it's quite reasonable for the electorate to think that someone who praises and espouses a political system could be inspired to copy some of it's ideas over here.

You would soon jump up and down with faux outrage if Boris said how wonderful Americas crummy system is.

The NHS has changed before.

It certainly is a sore point bringing up some of Jeremies meanderings with you grab a tissue or even a box there's plenty more of his lefty loser madness to bring up.

The swivel eyed hypocrite makes a great leader for you despite the Conservatives civil war he still manages to be 12 points behind in the polls,

amazingly even Jo Swindle and the oxymorons are coming up on the rails.

Thread: NHS after Brexit?

Thread Tools

NHS after Brexit?

Latest UK News by Qlocal - Have Your Say

User Control Panel

Member Login

Not a Member? Sign Up!