comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
In a write up about the Oz-US FTA:
Some of the adverse effects feared by critics of the AUSFTA have not come to pass. Eli Lilly used the appeal provisions of the agreement regarding decisions by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in relation to Forteo, an osteoporosis drug, which had been rejected for listing under the PBS (except for a limited set of cases) four times. The appeal was unsuccessful, however, and the decision of the PBS was upheld. Following further studies, Forteo was listed in May 2009.
Thus, while the appeal mechanism may be of some marginal benefit to pharmaceutical companies, it has not fundamentally changed the operation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. More generally, the PBS remains a central feature of Australian health policy. Policy changes aimed at cost containment have allayed concerns about the sustainability of the scheme, and criticism from pharmaceutical companies regarding the prices paid and criteria for listing have been ineffectual.
Irrational racism to the USA!
AmeriKKKa, even more racist than Little Britain ffs.
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet Australia has some of the cheapest medicines in the world...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2019-11-25/medicine-costs-australia-cheaper-than-overseas/11728422
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 8 minutes ago
Irrational racism to the USA!
AmeriKKKa, even more racist than Little Britain ffs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalising an entire nation of people = racist.
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet Australia has some of the cheapest medicines in the world...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2019-11-25/medicine-costs-australia-cheaper-than-overseas/11728422
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 seconds ago
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not entirely accurate as per the link I provided. And as noted procurement is a process.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 seconds ago
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not entirely accurate as per the link I provided. And as noted procurement is a process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But again, even if it did have a disastrous affect for Australia (which after 14 years has not materialised - how long is this process you're referring to?) then comparing a country a third of the size of the UK in economic terms isn't realistic.
We have far more leverage than a country like Australia. Let's not forget that even with all the uncertainty in the UK political climate, London remains tied with New York as the world's top financial centre. That gives us enormous leverage in any trade deal.
Financial services markets between the UK/US (mutual recognition agreements) are already saturated. The US are keen to address our surplus in favour of (unsurprisingly) Donald’s America first plans.
What leverage do you think UKrep could utilise to prevent the US achieving the vast majority of its trade policy objectives?
When partners’ enter trade talks it’s not typically from a position of desperation. UKrep will be looking to offset the massive downturn of trade / investment into the country asap. Concessions will have to be made.
Whether it’s pharma, services, agri-foods, or wherever. The fact that the government have yet to (and probably won’t) publish UK trade policy objectives (with anyone) should be a warning to everyone.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
Financial services markets between the UK/US (mutual recognition agreements) are already saturated. The US are keen to address our surplus in favour of (unsurprisingly) Donald’s America first plans.
What leverage do you think UKrep could utilise to prevent the US achieving the vast majority of its trade policy objectives?
When partners’ enter trade talks it’s not typically from a position of desperation. UKrep will be looking to offset the massive downturn of trade / investment into the country asap. Concessions will have to be made.
Whether it’s pharma, services, agri-foods, or wherever. The fact that the government have yet to (and probably won’t) publish UK trade policy objectives (with anyone) should be a warning to everyone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are 100% doing the right thing not publishing our trading objectives. To put it into an every day context (although I accept this is drastically simplifying events) you don't email a car salesman with your negotiation strategy before entering the room.
Of course the US are interested in America First, why the hell shouldn't be? But I really don't think we are in the position of desperation you think we are and I don't expect any part to bend over, and make themselves unelectable by, as people so crudely put it, selling off the NHS.
Hope you’re saving your pennies.
Under the American health care system it will cost you $2500.00 for an ambulance call out, $400 per inhaler, $30,000 for delivering a baby, and God forbid you get diabetes or cancer.
Cheap black market insulin ain’t no joke.
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 minute ago
Hope you’re saving your pennies.
Under the American health care system it will cost you $2500.00 for an ambulance call out, $400 per inhaler, $30,000 for delivering a baby, and God forbid you get diabetes or cancer.
Cheap black market insulin ain’t no joke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Admin can you ban users for fake news?
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 8 minutes ago
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, you clearly know more than me about that particular subject
In fairness though, and this is a question to yourself, are we permitted as EU members to be publishing anything like this considering we have no right to be negotiating trade deals?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-nhs-privatisation-general-election-hospitals-conservatives-manifesto-a9230606.html
Never trust a Tory
The NHS is for sale.
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 minute ago
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-nhs-privatisation-general-election-hospitals-conservatives-manifesto-a9230606.html
Never trust a Tory
The NHS is for sale.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's it, read the headlines and write sensationalist comments.
Idiot.
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 8 minutes ago
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, you clearly know more than me about that particular subject
In fairness though, and this is a question to yourself, are we permitted as EU members to be publishing anything like this considering we have no right to be negotiating trade deals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can talk/discuss with partners but not enter into formal negotiations, as we’re still signatories of the EU’s common commercial policy.
Nothing to prevent us setting out objectives (trade policy) which very few of the political parties have touched on in their manifestos.
In the haste to get ‘deals done’ little is ever discussed on what exactly the UK wants.
Which sectors do they want to prioritise etc. Consulting industry, to understand their needs might be a good place to start. Rather than ignoring trade body after trade body and parroting meaningless soundbites.
Which when all is said and done will (and is) garner more public support than truthfully informing folk of the complexities, and harsh decisions that lie ahead in the years to come.
https://news.sky.com/story/british-child-becomes-homeless-every-eight-minutes-shelter-report-finds-11876896
Suffer the children.
You vote Tory, you’re responsible for this.
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 3 minutes ago
https://news.sky.com/story/british-child-becomes-homeless-every-eight-minutes-shelter-report-finds-11876896
Suffer the children.
You vote Tory, you’re responsible for this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Labour government was directly responsible for the financial mess that caused us to enter austerity.
Blood is on your hands.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
Know your enemy.
Labour the polotics of envy.
Sign in if you want to comment
The xenophobic cosing up to the upper
Page 5 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
posted on 3/12/19
In a write up about the Oz-US FTA:
Some of the adverse effects feared by critics of the AUSFTA have not come to pass. Eli Lilly used the appeal provisions of the agreement regarding decisions by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in relation to Forteo, an osteoporosis drug, which had been rejected for listing under the PBS (except for a limited set of cases) four times. The appeal was unsuccessful, however, and the decision of the PBS was upheld. Following further studies, Forteo was listed in May 2009.
Thus, while the appeal mechanism may be of some marginal benefit to pharmaceutical companies, it has not fundamentally changed the operation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. More generally, the PBS remains a central feature of Australian health policy. Policy changes aimed at cost containment have allayed concerns about the sustainability of the scheme, and criticism from pharmaceutical companies regarding the prices paid and criteria for listing have been ineffectual.
posted on 3/12/19
Irrational racism to the USA!
AmeriKKKa, even more racist than Little Britain ffs.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet Australia has some of the cheapest medicines in the world...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2019-11-25/medicine-costs-australia-cheaper-than-overseas/11728422
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 8 minutes ago
Irrational racism to the USA!
AmeriKKKa, even more racist than Little Britain ffs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalising an entire nation of people = racist.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wow instead of consulting the experts you're know inventing imaginary ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Labour delusion, crossed with institutional racism towards the US.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never voted/supported Labour in my life
As I mentioned the other day, this issue should transcend political divides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take out labour then, it's still delusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've provided evidence of USTR's (long established) objectives. Proof that the conservatives voted against a motion to protect privatising health care:
https://keepournhspublic.com/conservatives-vote-no/
Evidence that the PM supports privatising health care, and greater access for US pharma:
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2018/02/22/downing-street-raised-concerns-boris-johnson-hosting-hard-brexit-think-tank-event/
Call it delusion if you like but the evidence suggests otherwise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never denied once it's not a US objective, we all know it is. Doesn't mean we have any intention of allowing it. Australia didn't bow down to those demands (which were the same) and they have far smaller leverage in a trade deal to us as they are a third of the size.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd posted this the other day in regard to the Aussies:
http://theconversation.com/how-the-us-trade-deal-undermined-australias-pbs-32573
If the UK carve out health care procurement what sectors/industries do you think will be offered as a concession to the US? To prevent them from walking away?
Given health care procurement is one of USTR's main objectives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet Australia has some of the cheapest medicines in the world...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2019-11-25/medicine-costs-australia-cheaper-than-overseas/11728422
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
posted on 3/12/19
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 seconds ago
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not entirely accurate as per the link I provided. And as noted procurement is a process.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 seconds ago
As I mentioned procurement is a process, not a one off event.
They've already got their foot in the door. It's inevitable over time the US companies will gain greater and greater market access.
The same goes for the UK unless we carve it out, and offer alignment on agri-foods for example.
_______________________________________
As my article shows, clearly seems to be working for Australia...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not entirely accurate as per the link I provided. And as noted procurement is a process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But again, even if it did have a disastrous affect for Australia (which after 14 years has not materialised - how long is this process you're referring to?) then comparing a country a third of the size of the UK in economic terms isn't realistic.
We have far more leverage than a country like Australia. Let's not forget that even with all the uncertainty in the UK political climate, London remains tied with New York as the world's top financial centre. That gives us enormous leverage in any trade deal.
posted on 3/12/19
Financial services markets between the UK/US (mutual recognition agreements) are already saturated. The US are keen to address our surplus in favour of (unsurprisingly) Donald’s America first plans.
What leverage do you think UKrep could utilise to prevent the US achieving the vast majority of its trade policy objectives?
When partners’ enter trade talks it’s not typically from a position of desperation. UKrep will be looking to offset the massive downturn of trade / investment into the country asap. Concessions will have to be made.
Whether it’s pharma, services, agri-foods, or wherever. The fact that the government have yet to (and probably won’t) publish UK trade policy objectives (with anyone) should be a warning to everyone.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 5 minutes ago
Financial services markets between the UK/US (mutual recognition agreements) are already saturated. The US are keen to address our surplus in favour of (unsurprisingly) Donald’s America first plans.
What leverage do you think UKrep could utilise to prevent the US achieving the vast majority of its trade policy objectives?
When partners’ enter trade talks it’s not typically from a position of desperation. UKrep will be looking to offset the massive downturn of trade / investment into the country asap. Concessions will have to be made.
Whether it’s pharma, services, agri-foods, or wherever. The fact that the government have yet to (and probably won’t) publish UK trade policy objectives (with anyone) should be a warning to everyone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are 100% doing the right thing not publishing our trading objectives. To put it into an every day context (although I accept this is drastically simplifying events) you don't email a car salesman with your negotiation strategy before entering the room.
Of course the US are interested in America First, why the hell shouldn't be? But I really don't think we are in the position of desperation you think we are and I don't expect any part to bend over, and make themselves unelectable by, as people so crudely put it, selling off the NHS.
posted on 3/12/19
Hope you’re saving your pennies.
Under the American health care system it will cost you $2500.00 for an ambulance call out, $400 per inhaler, $30,000 for delivering a baby, and God forbid you get diabetes or cancer.
Cheap black market insulin ain’t no joke.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 minute ago
Hope you’re saving your pennies.
Under the American health care system it will cost you $2500.00 for an ambulance call out, $400 per inhaler, $30,000 for delivering a baby, and God forbid you get diabetes or cancer.
Cheap black market insulin ain’t no joke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Admin can you ban users for fake news?
posted on 3/12/19
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 8 minutes ago
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, you clearly know more than me about that particular subject
In fairness though, and this is a question to yourself, are we permitted as EU members to be publishing anything like this considering we have no right to be negotiating trade deals?
posted on 3/12/19
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-nhs-privatisation-general-election-hospitals-conservatives-manifesto-a9230606.html
Never trust a Tory
The NHS is for sale.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 1 minute ago
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dominic-raab-nhs-privatisation-general-election-hospitals-conservatives-manifesto-a9230606.html
Never trust a Tory
The NHS is for sale.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's it, read the headlines and write sensationalist comments.
Idiot.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 8 minutes ago
Take Mahomes
It’s certainly not normal practice (not publishing trade policy objectives) and not one that any trade specialist would ever recommend.
Transparency and setting out your key objectives is critical – especially when it comes to ratification/implementation of agreed terms. Keeping stakeholders and industry in the dark as to how the prospective FTA will impact them, their clients, supply chains etc. is (to my knowledge) not something that has ever happened before.
Typically both partners publish their (mandated) objectives, then after each round of talks publish sector by sector position papers, as well as consulting stakeholders etc throughout.
Getting any FTA though parliament will be much much harder if everyone is kept in the dark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, you clearly know more than me about that particular subject
In fairness though, and this is a question to yourself, are we permitted as EU members to be publishing anything like this considering we have no right to be negotiating trade deals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can talk/discuss with partners but not enter into formal negotiations, as we’re still signatories of the EU’s common commercial policy.
Nothing to prevent us setting out objectives (trade policy) which very few of the political parties have touched on in their manifestos.
In the haste to get ‘deals done’ little is ever discussed on what exactly the UK wants.
Which sectors do they want to prioritise etc. Consulting industry, to understand their needs might be a good place to start. Rather than ignoring trade body after trade body and parroting meaningless soundbites.
Which when all is said and done will (and is) garner more public support than truthfully informing folk of the complexities, and harsh decisions that lie ahead in the years to come.
posted on 3/12/19
https://news.sky.com/story/british-child-becomes-homeless-every-eight-minutes-shelter-report-finds-11876896
Suffer the children.
You vote Tory, you’re responsible for this.
posted on 3/12/19
comment by Automatic For The People (U21889)
posted 3 minutes ago
https://news.sky.com/story/british-child-becomes-homeless-every-eight-minutes-shelter-report-finds-11876896
Suffer the children.
You vote Tory, you’re responsible for this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Labour government was directly responsible for the financial mess that caused us to enter austerity.
Blood is on your hands.
posted on 3/12/19
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
Know your enemy.
posted on 3/12/19
Labour the polotics of envy.
Page 5 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10