- No-deal prep for health supplies shows Brexit must stop
- Boris Johnson is the champion of the well-off, not the people – Davey
No-deal prep for health supplies shows Brexit must stop
Responding to the National Audit Office’s report on the Government’s preparations on health and social care supplies under a no deal Brexit, Liberal Democrats Health and Social Care Secretary, Sir Vince Cable MP, said:
This report reinforces what we already knew from the Yellowhammer documents. We know that a no-deal Brexit would have a devastating impact on the UK’s health and social care supplies.
The risk is very real that traders may not be ready for new border processes on 31 October. Given that 7,000 out of 12,300 prescription-only medicines come from or via the EU, delays in supplies could affect a huge number of people’s health.
People deserve better. Liberal Democrats will work with other parties to stop no-deal – and then campaign for an Exit from Brexit.
Boris Johnson is the champion of the well-off, not the people – Davey
Responding to new analysis published today by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, suggesting Boris Johnson’s proposed raising of the Higher Rate income tax threshold from £50,000 to £80,000 would cost more than £8 billion annually and mostly benefit those on high incomes, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Ed Davey said:
This shows what Boris Johnson does not want people to know – that if he manages to Brexit, his plan is then to slash taxes for the top earners, at the expense of ordinary voters.
Far from championing the people, Johnson really wants to take from the poor to give to the rich – he’s the Sheriff of Nottingham not Robin Hood.
With millions of people struggling to make ends meet, Johnson’s unfair tax policies would divide our country even more.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Last West End Christmas Fortnight events today! #dundeewestend
How national insurance increase will undermine homeless services
Rediscovering the Wisbech and Upwell Tramway
North London's expanse
Paul Reynolds
David Allen
Ahmad
Matthew Radmore
14 Comments
Nicola Sturgeon has backed the idea of Jeremy Corbyn becoming a caretaker prime minister, in a bid to secure an extension to the Brexit deadline……The Scottish first minister tweeted on Friday that she agrees with the idea of installing the Labour leader as PM through a vote of no confidence in the Conservative administration so he can secure a Brexit extension, before then calling an immediate general election…..
When even the old school Tory, Ken Clarke, backs Corbyn it rather leaves Jo Swinson as the only one keeping Johnson in No.10.
If JC is to be PM on SNP’s terms, he must be denied security clearance.
Any potential adverse effect on intelligence sharing under 5-eyes or otherwise must rule out his selection.
Geoffrey Dron 27th Sep ’19 – 2:37pm……………If JC is to be PM on SNP’s terms, he must be denied security clearance……….Any potential adverse effect on intelligence sharing under 5-eyes or otherwise must rule out his selection………….
As a privy councillor, and as leader of HM’s opposition, The Right Honourable Jeremy Corbyn already has the top classification for security.
@expats
“As a privy councillor, and as leader of HM’s opposition, The Right Honourable Jeremy Corbyn already has the top classification for security.”
I simply don’t believe that. Have you any evidence to support your claim?
@Geoffrey Dron
Also Corbyn’s previously clear stated view re the UK nuclear dererrent clearly rule him out as caretaker PM.
Security clearance? Is it seriously suggested that Jeremy Corbyn is a greater risk to the our nation’s security than the present Prime Minister?
It is sad to see people prepared to put politics before the security of our country by refusing to look objectively at our present problems.
Simon Shaw 27th Sep ’19 – 5:48pm…….@expats…..I simply don’t believe that. Have you any evidence to support your claim?…
Firstly, read the rules on privy councillor/leader of HM’s opposition and then read the furore in the right wing press ( some written by ‘tame’ ex security chiefs),at the time, abour what security clearance that gave Corbyn.
I don’t remember much interest from you when Liam Fox ( the disgraced secetary of state for defence who was allowed to resign on the grounds of ‘breaking the ministerial code’) was welcomed back into a cabinet position. Had I done such, in my meetings on military matters, I’d’ve been locked up.
BTW….May’s cabinet and ‘Cobra’ meetings leaked like a sieve and I don’t remember much outrage on LDV.
Perhaps, you might try and control your, and other’s, obsession with Corbyn.
@expats
You very clearly claimed that Corbyn has the “the top classification for security”. Quoting the ‘right wing press’ and Liam Fox doesn’t count as evidence in my book.
Any chance you could produce some real evidence (you know, maybe with a link) to support your claim?
And as to obsession with Corbyn, you were the one who mentioned him, and made ridiculous claims about him, not me.
I don’t like Jeremy Corbyn and don’t support most of his policies. I also loath Boris Johnson and almost all of his policies. In my book Johnson is as much a risk to national security as Jeremy Corbyn, yet he is PM.
In this country we have a system of security vetting and it’s not for those of us who know nothing of it and how it works to demand that a duly elected member of the House of Commons be denied security clearance. That’s neither Liberal nor Democratic.
We should not be falling in with the Tories and making the whole thing personal. We should not be attacking the man but his policies, not the individual but the Labour Party. The word Corbyn should not pass our lips.
What matters right now is stopping Brexit. If we are serious about that then we should make it happen, even if it puts the leader of the opposition in Downing Street for a few weeks.
What is not mentioned re Brexit and those who want it to come and get it over is the fact that things will not be over when we leave. There will be many many years of trade negotiations with different countries, we will have less leaverage than now, and no doubt we will get one quickly with the US because politically the government will need one but the US are always tough and with Trump it will be worse. The EU regulations on workers rights and agriculture will go. Perhaps we will end up as another US state?
It’s interesting that we now have Brexit spokespeople mentioning the threat of riots if we don’t leave on the 31st October; the words, “project fear” spring to mind. We need a second referendum to counter these threats. Do they know they are going to lose?
There would be no publicly accessible links to find anyone’s security clearance let alone Corbyn’s.
“Security” is a house with many mansions. There are a number of “layers” then beyond that “groups” into which you get briefed and signed up to (with all the code words and that).
I am sure that JC has all the clearances he “needs” of the many available.
As expats says, the Leader of the Opposition and Privy Councillor is automatically granted high security privileges, whoever he/she might be. As Hard Rain says, security itself demands that no details are made public, so asking for a weblink to confirm the point is an impossible demand.
Politicians are a security risk. Pretty much all of them are. They blab, they double-deal behind their own Government’s back over defence liaisons, they seek personal alliances with foreign leaders, they talk to Israeli government lobbyists, they talk to their Palestinian opponents, they talk to terrorists. Corbyn is no more a risk than many others. It would be scandalous political interference with national security if Corbyn were to be treated as a special risk.
@Mick Taylor,
“I don’t like Jeremy Corbyn and don’t support most of his policies……. We should not be attacking the man but his policies”
OK so why even say you dislike him? But just what policies do you have in mind as the most objectionable?