Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A disunited SNP, more like? We in teh south don't really get what is going on up there from anything other than a London broadsheet or tabloid, or even the BBC and ITN - it is broadbrush when it comes to the regions/nations (probably because time is short on a bulletin and being general appeals to most people, so not knocking them). The nationalists/separatists/SNP/Scottish National Party (different people call them different things) are very popular but there is a large proportion of people who are fed up of them, especially the leadership. I hold no side but just ask that people educate themselves more on the positives and negatives of any nationalist party, even if it goes against what you believe. Next week should bring more attention to the workings of the SNP, if not its policies.

Nigello Wrote:

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


> Next week should bring more attention to the workings

> of the SNP, if not its policies.


Spoke to a Scottish friend last night, they think the SNP is more than capable of shooting itself in the foot e.g the Salmond issue, but for many voting SNP is simply a conduit to achieve independence, they don't feel any allegiance to then run with the SNP if it's achieved, again strong similarities with England and Brexit i.e non-Tory voters in England voting for the Tories to 'get Brexit done'...

Salmond's allegations have been redacted after concerns by the Scottish Crown Office and some (mainly the Spectator) are calling conspiracy hinting that Sturgeon was involved in some sort of dirty tricks operation.


Sturgeon denies having any involvement and accuses the accusers of being conspiracy theorists.



It's all murky up there in Scotland and that's not just the weather.

If Sturgeon is forced to resign in the near future, will it take the wind out of the sails of the independence movement, at least for the near term?


Clearly the SNP and independence issue is not goin got go away, but Sturgeon is clearly a formidable political and the face of the independence movement...

I'd guess Ian Blackford the Westminister head of the SNP would take over ? Would be no change in policy - may even be a harder line.


She's giving evidence now - I can't see her resigning. No-one in the UK government resigns anymore whatever the accusations, why should she ?

It's a sad state of affairs where lying/misleading is common practice, it wasn't so long ago that we expected integrity from our lords and masters. But now (Trump/Johnson) it no longer seems to matter to many of the electorate. Not that others didn't tell fibs, massage the truth etc but endemic now.

Very true about the general public's lack of interest in lies from our leader.....but looking more broadly than just politics, is it because society at large has too many versions of what 'truth' is? So it all starts to become a bit meaningless?


The reason I raise this...I was skimming an article today about the upcoming Meghan Markle/Harry interview with Oprah....and in one of the clips pre-released of the inteview, Oprah asks Meghan ?How do you feel about the palace hearing you speak your truth today??...YOUR truth?...WTF does that mean? It used to be something was either true or false....sure, we can talk about peoples 'perceptions' or 'interpretation' of events....but YOUR truth?

diable rouge Wrote:

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

> It's not only the Scots who are revolting...

> https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-04/is-the-united-

> kingdom-on-the-brink-of-a-break-up



Wales will follow Scotland to an extent - but there is a bit of a campaign at the moment (yes cymru)


https://www.yes.cymru/

  • 2 weeks later...

BBC News - Alex Salmond inquiry says Nicola Sturgeon misled committee

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56451170


Should she stay or should she go now?

If she go's, there will be trouble

And if she stays it will be double

So come on Nicola and let me know

No sign of her resigning yet.


I can't help thinking of the affair in Wales (Carl Sargeant killing himself and Carwyn Jones resigning "at the end of the year"). That never really had the same level of media coverage in England.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sargeant

Ahhh Sky News update. The leaked (and it is only leaked) report says she misled parliament, the guidelines say you should resign if you KNOWINGLY mislead parliament.


The fix is in :)


Although of course nobody resigns over misleading anybody about anything these days - it's just how politics works..

Its notable how the decline in objective truth and need for integrity is perpetuated by tribes of ALL political colours. It seems in both mainstream and social media that tribalism generally trumps the need to avoid outrageous hypocrisy for many people these days....


For those who are typically pro-brexit/pro-tory (the two are of course not one and the same, but im generalising), they are accepting/silent on Boris's lies/inaccurate statements/misleading; but insistent that Nicola must go.


For those who are typically anti-brexit/anti-tory (so a generalization of many posters on the EDF perhaps?!), there's a general 'whataboutery'; glossing over the Nicola lies/inaccurate statements/misleading; and pointing the finger at Boris, saying well of he doesn't go, then why should she..?


The outcome is a general degrading of a requirement for the truth, and unfort pointing the finger at the 'other side' misses the point and perpetuates the decline...we are all complicit in this race to the bottom unfortunately....

I haven?t read the leaked report but if it is as described then yes she should resign. Of course I recognise I don?t have a dog in the fight and so it?s easy for me to say that. For me it?s a genuine conundrum, I think the pro-Brexit/pro-Tory side have been successful by dispensing with many democratic norms so I can see the temptation for my side of the argument to do the same. On the other hand you can?t get a healthy, liberal society through populism and norm breaking, so better to try to hold the line and hope that it starts resonating with the public.


Fundamentally the last 5-10 years in the UK and US have shown that the general public don?t place much value on honesty in politics and until that changes the behaviour of politicians won?t change either.

Cat,


I don't think the lies that Boris Johnson has told and those that Nicoloa Sturgeon has been accused of are on anything like the same scale.


Boris's lies have been fundamental whoppers. He has been dismissed from two journalism jobs for lying, and once as a shadow mininister. He has told inmumerable bare-faced lies whilst campaigning and in office, the most famous being the ?350M for the NHS. It is clear that he is deceitful in his personal life too - and indeed this has crossed over into his political life as when he was sacked by Michael Howard.


The accusations against Nicola Sturgeon seem to be of a more technical nature. Did she know about the allegations (now legally disproven) against Alec Salmond on Mar 29th or April 2nd - was a phone call between the two recorded as government or party business, etc.


FYI - I would fall into the Labour/Remain camp - but on that basis, have no particular candle for SNP politicians - I would also like the UK to remain intact, but at this stage - who can blame them for wanting to go their own way?

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...