Jump to content

Recommended Posts

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > TheCat Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > pk Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > TheCat Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > >

> > > > > Certainly, not all

> > > > > remains, but a vocal minority would

> prefer

> > to

> > > > take

> > > > > the self-righteous high ground, rather

> than

> > > > engage

> > > > > to help make the future relationship

> (such

> > as

> > > > it

> > > > > is) with the EU as successful as

> possible.

> > .

> > > >

> > > > what is it that you're doing to make the

> > future

> > > > relationship successful?

> > >

> > > Engaging with your trolling bullshit for a

> > start

> >

> >

> > why is asking someone who's going on about

> > engaging what they're doing to engage trolling?

> >

> > an why would engaging with me help make a

> > successful relationship with the EU?

>

> One of life's mysteries I guess.


I guess I'm not surprised that you don't even understand what you say yourself


and to be factual it'd be two mysteries, but I guess maths is another of your weak points

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ?maybe more neoliberalism, cheap labour, tearing

> the fabric and traditions of it's members

> countries? ?

>

> I mean you are hardly without an agenda here. And

> you obviously see the eu as some root of these

> things

>

> But if you think the eu is going to be LESS any of

> those things in the coming years outside the eu,

> you have a rude awakening ahead


You don't have an agenda? We voted out three years ago yet you're still banging on. It's kind of fun seeing the bile and ranting here and elsewhere from remainers. How dare those pesky thick racists piss on our chips!

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Once leavers can agree what they want then perhaps

> then they can ask Remainers to get on board

>

> As things stand they are still a very loose

> coalition of competing ideologies, which will lead

> to open hostilities as soon as the hard choices to

> be made come to pass


@TheCat I notice you didn't respond to this and chose instead to only engage with the ad-hominems.

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> stepdown Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > DulwichFox Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Since then, if there has been a conflict

> between

> > national law and European law the UK courts

> have

> > to give priority to European law.

> >

> > Everybody in this thread understands that, the

> > question you are unable or unwilling to engage

> > with is which laws or conflicts specifically

> were

> > unacceptable to you.

>

> As I said there are over 4,200 of them.

> I do not know what those laws are or how they

> affect us .... and that's the problem


You can find a list of all those laws 'forced on us' here: https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/rationalist-destroys-leavers-with-list-of-all-eu-laws-that-have-been-forced-on-us-against-our-will/22/01/#.XjQjpPs_reg.twitter


Take your time.

Grove boy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You don't have an agenda? We voted out three years

> ago yet you're still banging on. It's kind of fun

> seeing the bile and ranting here and elsewhere

> from remainers. How dare those pesky thick racists

> piss on our chips!


If you're going to make up a straw man to argue against, maybe don't quote the post you're replying to? It makes it a bit too obvious you haven't tried to respond to their actual point, other than your excellent "I know you are, but what am I?" rebuttal.

stepdown Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I will happily discuss why I think membership of

> the EU is the best option going forward.



So you'll happily discuss how you think brexit is a bad idea? Not really conductive is it? How is advocating EU membership in anyway useful? It's not an option at this stage. And invariably every discussion on this forum gets dragged down into the leave versus remain question. Which is moot.


Failing

> that, staying in the single market would be my

> preference, but it is unlikely to satisfy leave

> voters now that the Overton window has shifted so

> far towards a hard Brexit.


Fair enough. That's actually an worthwhile discussion.

>

> On the other hand, there is still no plan years

> after the vote. It's because there are a whole

> host of competing incentives for all the different factions that made up the leave vote. By contrast the remain "solutions" are incredibly clear.



Do you think the lack of a plan 4 years later has anything to do with remain leaning MP's trying every means possible to disrupt brexit?

The vote happened 3+ years ago but for the umpteenth time you can vote for whatever you like - it doesn't mean it's deliverable. And whatever is delivered is going to be less than what we have and by definition unable to please all leavers


If the government promises to deliver on a referndum about (say) divorce then it can do that


If a government promises to deliver on a referendum to give everyone in the country eternal life - it can't deliver that - even if 99.99% of people vote for it


A tiny majority in this country voted for massive ruptions on the promise of easiest deal in history


I'm not pretending it didn't happen. I'm not pretending we aren't out of the EU. I'm not trying to argue old points - I'm simply restating the facts that haven't changed. Voting to leave the EU brings with it enormous consequences and hard choices that leavers haven't even begun to face up to yet

stepdown Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Grove boy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > You don't have an agenda? We voted out three

> years

> > ago yet you're still banging on. It's kind of

> fun

> > seeing the bile and ranting here and elsewhere

> > from remainers. How dare those pesky thick

> racists

> > piss on our chips!

>

> If you're going to make up a straw man to argue

> against, maybe don't quote the post you're

> replying to? It makes it a bit too obvious you

> haven't tried to respond to their actual point,

> other than your excellent "I know you are, but

> what am I?" rebuttal.



What agenda do i have?

Loutwo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Happy brexit day everyone. It?s nice to finally

> take back control. I?m going to crack open a nice

> bottle of Chateauneuf du pape to celebrate. We

> sure do make the bestest wine in the world.

>

> Louisa.

Happy brexit day to you!

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So you'll happily discuss how you think brexit is

> a bad idea? Not really conductive is it? How is

> advocating EU membership in anyway useful? It's

> not an option at this stage.


Revoking Article 50 has always been an option, just never one that could command a majority in the house of Commons. Similar in that respect to all the other options that were presented, we just disagree that it's the best option.



TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fair enough. That's actually an worthwhile

> discussion.


And yet you don't engage with it at all, instead focusing all your attention on the brief preamble.



TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you think the lack of a plan 4 years later has

> anything to do with remain leaning MP's trying

> every means possible to disrupt brexit?


No, like I said I think it's "because there are a whole host of competing incentives for all the different factions that made up the leave vote". I think it has everything to do with:



Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Once leavers can agree what they want then perhaps

> then they can ask Remainers to get on board

>

> As things stand they are still a very loose

> coalition of competing ideologies, which will lead

> to open hostilities as soon as the hard choices to

> be made come to pass

Grove boy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> stepdown Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> > If you're going to make up a straw man to argue

> > against, maybe don't quote the post you're

> > replying to? It makes it a bit too obvious you

> > haven't tried to respond to their actual point,

> > other than your excellent "I know you are, but

> > what am I?" rebuttal.

>

>

> What agenda do i have?



I never said you have an agenda, I said you didn't respond to the actual point being made:



Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But if you think the eu is going to be LESS any of

> those things in the coming years outside the eu,

> you have a rude awakening ahead

"It's kind of fun seeing the bile and ranting here and elsewhere from remainers. How dare those pesky thick racists piss on our chips!"


this does seem to be the predominant emotion amongst leavers - imagine doing so much harm for such a petty reason

That's it isn't it, the remainers still shouting the same old crap, prophecies of disater, dodgy Chicken (lol. If only people had listened to monied liberals,the guardian and the likes of Investment banker Gina Miller eh! It's been a joy to watch and listen to these types spout shit, lie, talk down to people and the eventual meltdown from their ivory towers. Pay your nannies, au pairs , builders the going rate from now on and weep. See ya!

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "It's kind of fun seeing the bile and ranting here

> and elsewhere from remainers. How dare those pesky

> thick racists piss on our chips!"

>

> this does seem to be the predominant emotion

> amongst leavers - imagine doing so much harm for

> such a petty reason


See, you're still frothing, So much harm? you sound like you've been brainwashed.

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> geez, you really just want to dig for anything to

> have a go at people about don't you. Holding

> people who disagree with you to higher standards.


Not higher standards, the same standards.


> What did you do to engage with the EU? What did 90

> percent of remain do? Also @#$%& all.


Approving of the EU is in itself engaging with it. I've always been happy for us to be in the EU, I'm old enough to remember when we were called 'the poor man of Europe' before we joined, the country was on it's knees. I liked the underlying reasons why the EU had been formed after WW2. I liked that collectively we could stand up to the big hitters like the US and China. On a more personal level I partook in the Erasmus scheme, have friends who met through it, married and now live in Europe. In recent years I have embraced what FoM brought to UK citizens as well as Europeans, travelling freely round Europe with the option to work and/or live there, or in my dotage to even retire there. I engaged with the EU by the very fact I didn't bleat on about it and blame it for every problem going.



> I'm glad you find it hilarious though. At least I

> can bring a small amount of joy to you dark and

> disastrous existence in brexit Britain.


I have a very happy existence thank you very much, and I'll survive Brexit. However, some of us look at the bigger picture and my concern is for future generations who will have to pick up the tab...

Grove boy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> See, you're still frothing, So much harm? you

> sound like you've been brainwashed.



That's because they are brainwashed.


If they seriously wanted to hear what leavers have to say; what they think and want, they would have turned up to Q&A events, held by leavers/conservatives. Turning Point UK for example, anyone? Didn't think so. Would have loved to see those smug expressions wiped off of your faces in a real debate... y'know, instead of attacking DulwichFox? I mean... low blow.


Cat, your posts have been a breath of fresh air on this toxic thread. EDF needs more of you... less of this filth.

Grove boy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> stepdown Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Grove boy Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > You don't have an agenda? We voted out three

> > years

> > > ago yet you're still banging on. It's kind of

> > fun

> > > seeing the bile and ranting here and

> elsewhere

> > > from remainers. How dare those pesky thick

> > racists

> > > piss on our chips!

> >

> > If you're going to make up a straw man to argue

> > against, maybe don't quote the post you're

> > replying to? It makes it a bit too obvious you

> > haven't tried to respond to their actual point,

> > other than your excellent "I know you are, but

> > what am I?" rebuttal.

>

>

> What agenda do i have?


Is it to act like a provocative idiot cos you think it?s clever and funny?

FreyaMikaelson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Grove boy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > See, you're still frothing, So much harm? you

> > sound like you've been brainwashed.

>

>

> That's because they are brainwashed.

>

> If they seriously wanted to hear what leavers have

> to say; what they think and want, they would have

> turned up to Q&A events, held by

> leavers/conservatives. Turning Point UK for

> example, anyone? Didn't think so. Would have loved

> to see those smug expressions wiped off of your

> faces in a real debate... y'know, instead of

> attacking DulwichFox? I mean... low blow.

>

> Cat, your posts have been a breath of fresh air on

> this toxic thread. EDF needs more of you... less

> of this filth.


You got issues

You've* got issues. That's rich. But if I have any issues it's with angry little delusional leftists like you trying to destroy a country you're not being forced to live in. If you love the EU so much, what are you doing here on the ED forums raging at those who don't want to be controlled by a foreign country? If you want to be controlled by Brussels, go live in Brussels, or any other country abiding by their laws, or suck it up and get over it.

FreyaMikaelson Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You've* got issues. That's rich. But if I have any

> issues it's with angry little delusional leftists

> like you trying to destroy a country you're not

> being forced to live in. If you love the EU so

> much, what are you doing here on the ED forums

> raging at those who don't want to be controlled by

> a foreign country? If you want to be controlled by

> Brussels, go live in Brussels, or any other

> country abiding by their laws, or suck it up and

> get over it.


How childish

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...