Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

ben501

Herzlos wrote: »

Even if you squint hard enough to see it as a loose suggestion, how do you excuse away the fact the £350m is just over double the actual figure?

Personally I don't. Like many I agree that it is misleading, but misleading statements aside, which plenty were made by both sides, why do so many, including the national press, keep reusing this lie when there are so many genuine arguments that could be used. (I'm now assuming the '£350M promise' argument is a lie as no one has said otherwise)

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

One suspects the Unions would consider all public services "vital". Still room to improve efficency and productivity.

Happy to concede that only the public services which are vital can rightfully be described as vital. Your example of the NHS is probably one of the vital ones. You might want to ask yourself why your contention that further savings can still be made has now become politically untenable. It’s got nothing to do with Unions by the way.

Herzlos

ben501 wrote: »

Personally I don't. Like many I agree that it is misleading, but misleading statements aside, which plenty were made by both sides, why do so many, including the national press, keep reusing this lie when there are so many genuine arguments that could be used. (I'm now assuming the '£350M promise' argument is a lie as no one has said otherwise)

Hypocrisy at its finest.

If you're looking for a quote from someone saying "I promise to give 350m to the nhs if we leave" then you'll be disappointed. Our liars are too good to make such a clear statement. It was deliberately vague to be as misleading as possible.

You can't blame the public for thinking a claim made in the campaign would at least be considered if the campaign won.

phillw

Herzlos wrote: »

If you're looking for a quote from someone saying "I promise to give 350m to the nhs if we leave" then you'll be disappointed. Our liars are too good to make such a clear statement. It was deliberately vague to be as misleading as possible.

It wasn't vague at all, they said two things:

Let us fund our NHS instead.
Let us take back control.

Repeatedly we are told that if we don't take back control then you aren't honouring the referendum and delivering the will of the people.

It therefore follows that if we don't give 350 million a week then you aren't honouring the referendum and delivering the will of the people.

Jacob Reese Mogg and the other leave MPs either needs to accept Brexit In Name Only, or give 350 million a week to the NHS. Otherwise they are just hypocrites looking out for their own interest.

Seems pretty clear to me.



If their argument is that the leave campaign had no right to make any promise that the NHS would receive the 350 million a week, then that sounds like election fraud.

The NHS will need way more than 350 million a week now that Britain has become less attractive and foreign NHS staff are getting out before all the good overseas jobs are gone.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

You might want to ask yourself why your contention that further savings can still be made has now become politically untenable. It’s got nothing to do with Unions by the way.

With regards to further savings. Think no further than the inbreed culture of much of the public sector. Lack of accountability being a major issue. With the Unions themselves intwined in the whole structure.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

With regards to further savings. Think no further than the inbreed culture of much of the public sector. Lack of accountability being a major issue. With the Unions themselves intwined in the whole structure.

Nice soundbite, but I’m not sure it answers my question.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

Nice soundbite, but I!!!8217;m not sure it answers my question.

Not a soundbite. It's the reality of the ongoing day to day work that's now happening in certain areas of the public sector. When something is normal. Changing outlooks and attitudes often requires new blood. As the old lacks the vision and understanding to think differently. Out of the box so to speak. Understandable given it's the people's own jobs that are at risk. Removing the foundations of self created empires is a challenging task.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not a soundbite. It's the reality of the ongoing day to day work that's now happening in certain areas of the public sector. When something is normal. Changing outlooks and attitudes often requires new blood. As the old lacks the vision and understanding to think differently. Out of the box so to speak. Understandable given it's the people's own jobs that are at risk. Removing the foundations of self created empires is a challenging task.

What’s that got to do with the relaxing of the purse strings and the advent of the NHS 3 year pay deal?
You seemed trapped in a Thatcherite narrative about the public sector.
The new scandal re. public services are dodgy procurement and useless outsourcing companies.

Arklight

Unbelievable. It looks like a Brexiteer thug has even invaded our Eurovision entry.

Anyone supporting this "movement" should find their cheeks burning with shame.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

What’s that got to do with the relaxing of the purse strings and the advent of the NHS 3 year pay deal?
You seemed trapped in a Thatcherite narrative about the public sector.
The new scandal re. public services are dodgy procurement and useless outsourcing companies.

Simply increasing pay levels. Isn't going to stop experienced staff exiting the NHS. It's the culture, the abuse from the public, demand from the public to provide the answers without any personal responsibility , poor management etc that needs to be addressed also.

People that refer to Thatcher are the ones that are trapped in a bygone era. There's far more than that which could be written about the public sector than that hits the news headlines. Outsourcing and procurement was only a neccessity due to much of the public sectors inability to manage change internally. There are some beacons of light. Unfortunately not enough yet .