Brexit benefits - where are they?

Were you aware that the EU directive on the free movement of people did not oblige that all EU countries simply open their borders to all other EU citizens, in an unregulated, unchecked, uncontrolled way? It has always been the case that individual countries could send back people who were not able to financially look after themselves, who had no employment, who were (or were going to be) a burden on the state. No EU country was obliged to provide free medical treatment if that person was not paying taxes and social security charges - and even then, the migrant was not guaranteed immediate access to free care. It might take weeks or months to get that approved access. Thus it was a requirement, unless the country receiving the migrant decided not to set that requirement, that the migrant had full private medical insurance (not just travel insurance) until being granted access to the host country’s state medical care system.
As it happened, uniquely, the UK decided not to bother with any checks, any pre-requisites for medical care, any obligation to demonstrate sufficient financial means, or any confirmed job. That was a UK decision not an EU requirement.
I’ll bet you did not know that.

1 Like

Exactly, which is why it is now reasonable to say that the Brexit movement is now an anti-river movement (even if decent people who voted for Brexit did not realise that this was one outcome). It also shows that when sneaky politicians like Rees-Mogg claimed post-Brexit it will be great that the UK can strip out regulations and red-tape, he intentionally implied such things were simply a burden on people and businesses. Of course, he knew he meant removing necessary protections so that businesses would be free to pollute or cut corners. But he was careful not to mention that. Rees-Mogg = Brexit = pollute. Simples.

1 Like

Swim we shouldn’t have any shortages in hospitality, they need to ask themselves are they paying their employees enough money.

The Ukrainians will hopefully go home one day. We should take in the Hong Kongers. The students will go home one day unless they’re ones we need. I’m grateful to all the doctors and nurses who have come over here. It’s the quality of immigration I care about not the quantity.

I’ll bet I did. And did you know it was the doctor’s who didn’t want to charge people for their medical care and now they go on strike asking for more money.

Good, I’m glad you were and are informed. It strikes me, then, that your anger is misdirected. It was the UK government who decided to not apply any checks or controls. It was the UK government who failed to tell the NHS and doctors to not provide care without payment. It would have been simple to put card readers in every surgery and hospital, to make the ability to pay the very first check, to verify NHS numbers for everyone else. They had years to plan and implement this. And yes, I know that this is a criticism of past Labour governments as well as of Tory ones. The EU established a means for fair and controlled movement of people that prevented migrants becoming a burden on the state. The UK decided to ignore that.
(Don’t try to change the subject to doctors striking, find another thread for that.)

It wasn’t the Governments, it was the doctors.

You will need to explain how doctors would have been able to do the job of NHS management - who act on government directions. Doctors take care of people. If the government and the NHS has instructed doctor surgeries to make such checks prior to letting people onto their books then they would have had to do so. The government and NHS could have decided to withhold payment for any breach of their rules. Simple. Not doctors, government.

The BMA is critical of doctors pay but that does not mean the government automatically coughs up. I think you have (1) got confused over who determines the policies of a state service, and (2) forgotten about all the other prerequisites for migrants that I highlighted.
Funnily enough, I thought you’d leap at the chance to criticise a Labour government.

What on earth has doctors pay got to do with it. That article was about the doctors not wanting to charge patients from overseas. Well that was another thing you got wrong then regarding the Labour government. Me thinks you presume too much.

Hi
I agree Wendeey. everyone else charges, quick and simple, we are not a Charity,

2 Likes
1 Like

As 100,000 new homes ar unlikely to benefit the majority of British people I would say this is nothing to write home about and is certainly not a benefit of Brexit .

4 Likes

It’s likely to benefit the youngsters the most and I thought you were a supporter of the youngsters. As you say this certainly isn’t a benefit of Brexit I’d write into the Telegraph letters page to tell them that if I was you:

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fopinion%2F2023%2F08%2F30%2Fnet-neutrality-a-belated-reform-eu-law%2F

It is not as if ministers have been unwilling to abort or mitigate green policies when they have proved problematic in other areas. New proposals to rip up so-called “nutrient neutrality” rules, a hangover of Britain’s EU membership, may well unblock the building of 100,000 homes.

These rules require construction projects to show that they will not release nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates into water bodies before building can begin. They have been a considerable burden and led to many councils blocking projects. Their replacement is clearly to be welcomed.

Predictably, green critics are out in force. Lib Dem environment spokesman Tim Farron has described the change as a “disgraceful act”, and the RSPB warned it could lead to “total ecological collapse” for some rivers.

Yet as written, the rules are an expensive way to achieve little. The construction industry estimates that less than 5 per cent of the water pollution targeted is accounted for by homes and buildings. The value of construction halted is vast. At the price of a £280 million investment in mitigation, the Government says it is now poised to unblock £18 billion in economic activity.

This, however, raises questions. The Brexit transition period ended more than two years ago, returning to our elected and sovereign Parliament the right to make its own laws. The costs of this regulation, meanwhile, were clear in April last year.

Why has it taken so long to act? With the Government seemingly committed to a high tax, high spend model, it is imperative that Britain’s regulations are as competitive as they can be. How many other EU laws remain quietly embedded in the economy, slowing growth and piling up costs? Their reform must be made a priority.

Although we cannot really know the true intentions of JRM and the others I tend to agree with your assessment.

Maybe it is the same reasons why it is never told which exact EU rules are to be removed? They only say “we will remove 800 or more EU rules”. But which ones?
I guess if people knew which ones they could say “hey stop, those are good rules, good for the public at least”. Like worker protection or water pollution rules for example…

1 Like

The economy is tanking they are inundated with student debt and no jobs ,mortgages are impossible to get and house prices are in the stratosphere .
How do you imagine they are going to buy them ?

2 Likes

I now realise that my comparison was not made sufficiently clear for you to follow the argument. The point was that the representative body, the BMA, campaigns on behalf of doctors. It does not make government decisions. So the BMA states that it does not want people who are not registered in the NHS to be charged. That is their opinion and not government policy. In the same way the BMA opinion is that doctors should be paid lots more. The government policy is different.
Do you see that this is a comparison to help highlight that BMA does not dictate policy.
Phew, thought it was simple and straighforward but sometimes you need to walk people through it short step at a time.

They are not inundated with student debt there’s only some who go onto university and of those if they earn below a certain amount, they’ll never have to pay it off. Mortgages aren’t impossible to get, if we have more houses then the price of houses will come down.

1 Like

The doctors are refusing to chase up overseas patients. How much clearer do you want me to make it.

What’s it like living in cloud cuckoo land ?

2 Likes