Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm an immigrant and it may surprise some, but I will be voting for UKIP again this time.


I am fed up with the the amount of money we have to contribute to Europe - approx a net ?55 Million every day!


I also dislike the way that the European Court can over-rule the decisions of our courts.


I am fed up with the electorate being taken for mugs by the main stream political parties and how the politicians of all persuasions are out to feather their own nests. On the rare occasion when one is caught fiddling, they get put in purdah for a year or so and then they get back on to the gravy train again.


Some of our friends who dont like UKIP will vote for some fringe party or spoil their ballot papers. Most are motivated by the need to give the established career political charlatans a reality check.

You get the feeling He's a Scottish version of the Welsh Crachach - it's one of the reasons voters will

vote to stay in the UK IMHO. Won't be given as a reason however and in Wales no-one agress on anything :).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crachach



Otta Wrote:

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

> El Pibe Wrote:

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

> -----

> and I find Salmond genuinely awful.

> >

> > But I guess that's for anoher thread.

>

>

> I probably is for another thread, but whilst we're

> here, from the first time I saw/heard him on

> telly, well before I was really interested in

> politics at all (not that I'm THAT in to it these

> days to be totally honest) I just found myself

> really really disliking the man. He just stinks of

> self interest.

Villager, you are a perfect example of the kind of sucker that UKIP seeks. There a many reasons why UKIP would be a disaster for this country, as LadyD's post above illustrates perfectly.


But just on Europe, here are some things you might want to consider.


50% of our exports go to the EU. Because membership of the EU is membership of a free market, our businesses do not have to pay tariffs, import taxes or worry about quotas. I suggest you take a look at the tariffs that non-members have to pay and consider the damage that would do to business in the UK.


That single market is a magnet for foreign investment. Millions of pounds of investment have come to the UK from large companies and service providers because of the access to that single market.


And then there is competiton law. That EU law is the reason why government departments have to put contracts out to tender.


There is something called structural funding. It is a pot of money the EU doles out to help deprived areas. Aside from the billions already given to the UK (for things like infrastructure) England will receive over ?6 billion, Wales ?2 billion, Scotland ?795 million, and Northern Ireland ?457 million over the next five years.


Workers rights are perhaps the most important thing to consider. Four weeks paid holiday a year, the 48 hour working week, anti-discrimination law, guaranteed rights for agency workers, worker consultation, all exist because of the EU. Anyone who thinks the free market economists that dominate British politics are interested in any of those kinds of workers rights is misguided.


And let's not forget that 5 million Brits live and/or work in Europe. We are free to travel too, without having to apply for visas etc.


Being part of the EU makes the fight against international crime easier too. We are benefactors of the European Arrest Warrant.


If we want the EU to work in Britain?s interests, then we need to be involved in EU decision-making. If we leave, there will be no one to stand up for our interests when decisions are made that affect us, such as changes to trade or investment laws.


There are counter arguments to some of those points, of course. But rarely (in fact never) do I see anyone voting for UKIP engage in that kind of debate. Here's a chance now though Villager, for you to have a stab at it.

Pokertime. Some interesting points, but was it necessary to start by insulting Villager?


It should be noted that import tariffs are something of a relic and are generally regarded as economically damaging. The EU and US are currently negotiating the removal of almost all tariffs and both parties expect substantial gains as a consequence. Why keep them at all after that point? Some might argue to keep poor countries poor. We have certainly done substantial damage to various commomwealth partners through EU membership.

OK, so the odd UKIP person says something racist. But who could be offended at comments like:


- "Black African nurses would be unsuitable at certain hospitals as they might have never seen a white person before."


- "Illegal immigrants play 'divide and rule'. We should not play their game."


- "White mums will go to the wall for their children."


Hardly anything there to get worked up about, is there?

I can't vote this time around because of some admin stuff I didn't do in time. As a non white son of immigrants, the idea of people like Farage and the people he associates with is genuinely quite scary.


There's a chance he's not a racist or whatever, but I think parties like UKIP are a fertile ground for prejudice to thrive on. All his comments about people not speaking English on trains and not wanting to live next door to Romanians...knocking about with Nationalist types in Europe...

I take your point Grabot. It's not my style to insult and I apologise to Villager for my sarcasm, and that's a genuine apology. All viewpoints are valid in a forum, and momentarily I forgot that.


There's no right or wrong on the detail of Europe, which is why I said some of my points are open to debate (I even have informed retorts to my own points). I was just trying to illustrate how no debate of any sort has happened. The EU has become some kind of B&W issue and UKIP has been able to exploit that, on a single issue it seems. I would love to engage in a detailed debate with a UKIP supporter on the detail of europe.

oh god, i feel a fisk coming on....


>>I'm an immigrant

me too, twice over


>>I am fed up with the the amount of money we have to contribute to Europe - approx a net ?55 Million every day!


really, genuinely fed up or just repeating trite phrases from a daily mail article? we pay three times that on our interest payments alone, at least that 55 million ends up doing something.


I've been to places like Sarajevo where European money makes a difference, I've seen how European investment has transformed Spain and Ireland and the new emerging markets of eastern europe, from backward agrarian economies to dynamic (if occassionally troubled) 21st century countries who are now expanded markets for british goods.


>>I also dislike the way that the European Court can over-rule the decisions of our courts.


To be fair they're far more disposed to overturn stupid arbitrary rulings by the executive than the courts, and are often ignored any way. in fact the government often ignores rulings by our own courts, see passim over the chagos islanders for starters.

Remember for every 50 articles about 'its political correctness gone maaaad' there are ususally only one or two follow ups hidden on p94 that acknowledge that in fact it was all bollocks.


So please tell me which rulings have specifically annoyed you.


>>I am fed up with the electorate being taken for mugs by the main stream political parties and how the politicians of all persuasions are out to feather their own nests. On the rare occasion when one is caught fiddling, they get put in purdah for a year or so and then they get back on to the gravy train again.


well, as loz has pointed out, im not sure how ukip are different in this respect, but it's a democracy, just make sure you use your vote to good effect.


>>Some of our friends who dont like UKIP will vote for some fringe party or spoil their ballot papers. Most are motivated by the need to give the established career political charlatans a reality check.


none of the above will give them a reality check, voting for ukip is more like an unreality check

Loz Wrote:

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

> OK, so the odd UKIP person says something racist.

> But who could be offended at comments like:

>

> - "Black African nurses would be unsuitable at

> certain hospitals as they might have never seen a

> white person before."

>

> - "Illegal immigrants play 'divide and rule'. We

> should not play their game."

>

> - "White mums will go to the wall for their

> children."

>

> Hardly anything there to get worked up about, is

> there?


I hope your joking. That's typical of UKIP's hate language.

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...