LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Unless I am mistaken you posted data on where the staff are from not where new staff are from. This is just evidence that lots of staff used to come from commonwealth countries which is certainly true.elbowloh said:
I posted some data above regarding exactly where we get our NHS staff from. India and Philippines are number 1 and 2 (if you don't count the UK).TheBigBean said:
This isn't true. The Phillipines had a whole industry in training nurses, exporting them and then receiving repatriations. When the EU harmonised all medical qualifications, it made EU nurses far easier to hire as the non-EU ones had to sit an exam to ensure standards. As a result, there were too many nurses in the Philippines. This in turn annoyed many of the current nurses with a Filipino background - a high percentage of which then voted for Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
It does also show that John80's point that EU membership stopped us recruiting the best candidates from outside of the block was not true.
0 -
Okey dokey, in the year 2015/16, the year before the referendum we were still getting 8% of new NHS staff from outside the EU.0 -
Yes, but presumably that used to be a lot higher, or at least higher than the EU figure, and much more like the 2019 figure.elbowloh said:
Okey dokey, in the year 2015/16, the year before the referendum we were still getting 8% of new NHS staff from outside the EU.0 -
Would be good to see absolute numbers. The 8% and 22% could be the same number of nurses (appreciate it probably isn't).- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
We've been in the EU for quite a while though. You would have thought that if EU nationality was the main driver behind numbers, then India and the Filipines wouldn't be at number 1 and 2 in the overseas staff numbers.TheBigBean said:
Yes, but presumably that used to be a lot higher, or at least higher than the EU figure, and much more like the 2019 figure.elbowloh said:
Okey dokey, in the year 2015/16, the year before the referendum we were still getting 8% of new NHS staff from outside the EU.0 -
I find it hard to imagine that overall numbers vary much by year. The places at universities for nursing should be relatively constant.pangolin said:Would be good to see absolute numbers. The 8% and 22% could be the same number of nurses (appreciate it probably isn't).
It's one for the Brexit thread, but the whole argument that without the EU there would be no medical staff was a misrepresentation, and one that ignored the reason for the original shift to EU staff.0 -
That was never my point but hey ho.elbowloh said:
I posted some data above regarding exactly where we get our NHS staff from. India and Philippines are number 1 and 2 (if you don't count the UK).TheBigBean said:
This isn't true. The Phillipines had a whole industry in training nurses, exporting them and then receiving repatriations. When the EU harmonised all medical qualifications, it made EU nurses far easier to hire as the non-EU ones had to sit an exam to ensure standards. As a result, there were too many nurses in the Philippines. This in turn annoyed many of the current nurses with a Filipino background - a high percentage of which then voted for Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
It does also show that John80's point that EU membership stopped us recruiting the best candidates from outside of the block was not true.0 -
I'm confused then, as this is what you saidjohn80 said:
That was never my point but hey ho.elbowloh said:
I posted some data above regarding exactly where we get our NHS staff from. India and Philippines are number 1 and 2 (if you don't count the UK).TheBigBean said:
This isn't true. The Phillipines had a whole industry in training nurses, exporting them and then receiving repatriations. When the EU harmonised all medical qualifications, it made EU nurses far easier to hire as the non-EU ones had to sit an exam to ensure standards. As a result, there were too many nurses in the Philippines. This in turn annoyed many of the current nurses with a Filipino background - a high percentage of which then voted for Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
It does also show that John80's point that EU membership stopped us recruiting the best candidates from outside of the block was not true.
"I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership..."0 -
Freedom of labour movement for all, except nurses. Is that your view?surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.0 -
EU membership involved freedom of movement. There is no picking and choosing in this setup. You get whoever lands from the EU regardless of whether you need that skill or not. If you think this is the optimum system for a fair immigration policy then crack on. I suppose in some sense it is the same as not having an immigration policy. Why even bother with passports let the free for all commence. Its not like the UK electorate had a problem with this approach when they voted for Brexit.elbowloh said:
I'm confused then, as this is what you saidjohn80 said:
That was never my point but hey ho.elbowloh said:
I posted some data above regarding exactly where we get our NHS staff from. India and Philippines are number 1 and 2 (if you don't count the UK).TheBigBean said:
This isn't true. The Phillipines had a whole industry in training nurses, exporting them and then receiving repatriations. When the EU harmonised all medical qualifications, it made EU nurses far easier to hire as the non-EU ones had to sit an exam to ensure standards. As a result, there were too many nurses in the Philippines. This in turn annoyed many of the current nurses with a Filipino background - a high percentage of which then voted for Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
It does also show that John80's point that EU membership stopped us recruiting the best candidates from outside of the block was not true.
"I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership..."0 -
Ask your carer to read and explain it to youballysmate said:
Freedom of labour movement for all, except nurses. Is that your view?surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.-1 -
Yes they could come here, but that didn't mean you had to give them a job over anyone else if they didn't have the skills. The NHS and others were free to hire who ever had the competencies to fulfil the role and met the criteria of the Australian style, points-based immigration system that we already had for anyone who wasn't an EU national.john80 said:
EU membership involved freedom of movement. There is no picking and choosing in this setup. You get whoever lands from the EU regardless of whether you need that skill or not. If you think this is the optimum system for a fair immigration policy then crack on. I suppose in some sense it is the same as not having an immigration policy. Why even bother with passports let the free for all commence. Its not like the UK electorate had a problem with this approach when they voted for Brexit.elbowloh said:
I'm confused then, as this is what you saidjohn80 said:
That was never my point but hey ho.elbowloh said:
I posted some data above regarding exactly where we get our NHS staff from. India and Philippines are number 1 and 2 (if you don't count the UK).TheBigBean said:
This isn't true. The Phillipines had a whole industry in training nurses, exporting them and then receiving repatriations. When the EU harmonised all medical qualifications, it made EU nurses far easier to hire as the non-EU ones had to sit an exam to ensure standards. As a result, there were too many nurses in the Philippines. This in turn annoyed many of the current nurses with a Filipino background - a high percentage of which then voted for Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
It does also show that John80's point that EU membership stopped us recruiting the best candidates from outside of the block was not true.
"I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership..."0 -
Very Trumpesque of you. He moaned about people from sh1thole countries rather than Norway (his words not mine) arriving in the US.surrey_commuter said:
Ask your carer to read and explain it to youballysmate said:
Freedom of labour movement for all, except nurses. Is that your view?surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
I appreciate your motives may be different but the result is the same.
How orange is your skin today?0 -
My apologies I really thought you were being a dick for the sake of it.ballysmate said:
Very Trumpesque of you. He moaned about people from sh1thole countries rather than Norway (his words not mine) arriving in the US.surrey_commuter said:
Ask your carer to read and explain it to youballysmate said:
Freedom of labour movement for all, except nurses. Is that your view?surrey_commuter said:
Nurses is a very bad example as we already recruited them globally. I know this because I count it as an absolute disgrace that we actively recruited trained nurses from poverty stricken countries.john80 said:
Your point scoring knows no bounds. I am in favour of a skills based immigration system that takes a worldwide view and is equitable. Need nurses then go and seek them out and get the best English speaking applicant you can. This was not compatible with EU membership or the wishes of a significant proportion of UK voters. It is not that hard for you to grasp surely. Not everyone who wants an equitable immigration policy is a racist or a xenophobe contrary to your continual assertions to the contrary.rick_chasey said:
Right. Can you not see why there is cognitive dissonance there?john80 said:
Yeah and people moving to one part of the UK to another affects our immigration stats. Absolute Muppet.rick_chasey said:
Someone will correct me but you’ve consistently used reducing immigration as a justification for Brexit so forgive me for thinking that what you thought.john80 said:
Unfortunately I am not as one dimensional as you like to make out. Its a shame when people mess up your stereotypes.rick_chasey said:
Eh ? I thought you were anti migrant?john80 said:
It certainly reduces labour mobility. This in my view is a bad thing.surrey_commuter said:
Nope I am arguing that stamp duty distorts the property market. Taxing people on how often they move is madness compared to a fixed annual sum.rjsterry said:
Wait, what? You, of all people on here, are advocating central control of property values?surrey_commuter said:
My suggestion so it hit a knee jerk rejection in some quarters.rick_chasey said:
Didn’t this very thread declare this unworkable?
It would be less market distorting.
There are problems with implementation but the biggest problem is that the losers will shout ten times louder than the gainers.
I appreciate your motives may be different but the result is the same.
How orange is your skin today?
If that is truly your comprehension of what I wrote then somebody else will have to help you out.0 -
So if 2 equally qualified nurses apply to come here, one a blue eyed blond from Scandinavia and the other from a dirt poor country, you would choose the Scandinavian one every time?
I appreciate your motives are different but you land up doing the same as Trump.
Would you welcome unskilled workers but turn away someone who has trained in a profession because you think you should decide where they should put those skills to work. That's quite arrogant
Or do you say to people wanting to migrate for a better life, "Don't bother training in a profession because if you do, you will have to stay put"0 -
I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them. In effect getting another, much poorer country to pay for the training of our medical staff, so that we can continue to underfund training in this country.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them.
I am aware of his motives and I get where he is coming from.
Just pointing out the outcome.0 -
Except as I pointed out before, it is a business model for the Philippines.rjsterry said:I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them. In effect getting another, much poorer country to pay for the training of our medical staff, so that we can continue to underfund training in this country.
0 -
There's a difference between opening a vacancy for a training place or a qualified job to anyone, regardless of where they live, and actively targeting a recruitment drive at poorer countries to save on training costs. I think it's just the latter that SC is objecting to.ballysmate said:rjsterry said:I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them.
I am aware of his motives and I get where he is coming from.
Just pointing out the outcome.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I refer you to my learned friend, BB above.rjsterry said:
There's a difference between opening a vacancy for a training place or a qualified job to anyone, regardless of where they live, and actively targeting a recruitment drive at poorer countries to save on training costs. I think it's just the latter that SC is objecting to.ballysmate said:rjsterry said:I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them.
I am aware of his motives and I get where he is coming from.
Just pointing out the outcome.0 -
Is there a shortage of nurses in the Philippines?ballysmate said:
I refer you to my learned friend, BB above.rjsterry said:
There's a difference between opening a vacancy for a training place or a qualified job to anyone, regardless of where they live, and actively targeting a recruitment drive at poorer countries to save on training costs. I think it's just the latter that SC is objecting to.ballysmate said:rjsterry said:I think SC's issue is us creaming off the well trained medical staff from another country that is far less able to replace them.
I am aware of his motives and I get where he is coming from.
Just pointing out the outcome.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Probably not, if they are busy training nurses for export, no.
Imagine a nurse in uniform walking into a British embassy in some far flung poor part of the world.
Nurse "Excuse me, I'd like to be granted permission to come to work in the UK"
Official "I'm sorry. In my arrogance I have decided that it is best that you stay and work here."
Nurse "But I read that the UK needs potato pickers, I can do that."
Official "Why didn't you say? That's different. Here's your visa, welcome to the UK"
I'm sure you'd agree such a scenario would be madness. But that is the result of SC's thinking, however well intentioned.
0 -
you keep spinning the Waltzerballysmate said:Probably not, if they are busy training nurses for export, no.
Imagine a nurse in uniform walking into a British embassy in some far flung poor part of the world.
Nurse "Excuse me, I'd like to be granted permission to come to work in the UK"
Official "I'm sorry. In my arrogance I have decided that it is best that you stay and work here."
Nurse "But I read that the UK needs potato pickers, I can do that."
Official "Why didn't you say? That's different. Here's your visa, welcome to the UK"
I'm sure you'd agree such a scenario would be madness. But that is the result of SC's thinking, however well intentioned.0 -
A simple no would do. 😉ballysmate said:Probably not, if they are busy training nurses for export, no.
Imagine a nurse in uniform walking into a British embassy in some far flung poor part of the world.
Nurse "Excuse me, I'd like to be granted permission to come to work in the UK"
Official "I'm sorry. In my arrogance I have decided that it is best that you stay and work here."
Nurse "But I read that the UK needs potato pickers, I can do that."
Official "Why didn't you say? That's different. Here's your visa, welcome to the UK"
I'm sure you'd agree such a scenario would be madness. But that is the result of SC's thinking, however well intentioned.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses, do you think that the EU should ban the movement of medical staff from Poland, for example, where they are suffering a critical shortage?
I suppose it goes without saying that you think we in the UK shouldn't take on any Polish nurses.0 -
Nobody is advocating that.ballysmate said:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses, do you think that the EU should ban the movement of medical staff from Poland, for example, where they are suffering a critical shortage?
I suppose it goes without saying that you think we in the UK shouldn't take on any Polish nurses.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Has anyone said that?ballysmate said:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses.
There are some steps between having freedom of movement and then actually hiring them for a role.
If someone is here in the country (from wherever), have the skills, is allowed to work and has applied for the job, sure give it to them if they're the best candidate.
0 -
Did people not say that there is no logical distinction between free internal labour movement and cross border movement? And to make such a distinction was xenophobic? It was then suggested that nurses in some countries should be denied this right to movement.rjsterry said:
Nobody is advocating that.ballysmate said:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses, do you think that the EU should ban the movement of medical staff from Poland, for example, where they are suffering a critical shortage?
I suppose it goes without saying that you think we in the UK shouldn't take on any Polish nurses.0 -
No, it really wasn't.ballysmate said:
Did people not say that there is no logical distinction between free internal labour movement and cross border movement? And to make such a distinction was xenophobic? It was then suggested that nurses in some countries should be denied this right to movement.rjsterry said:
Nobody is advocating that.ballysmate said:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses, do you think that the EU should ban the movement of medical staff from Poland, for example, where they are suffering a critical shortage?
I suppose it goes without saying that you think we in the UK shouldn't take on any Polish nurses.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I think you have to split out the three different posters as they (we) don't all have the same views on this.ballysmate said:
Did people not say that there is no logical distinction between free internal labour movement and cross border movement? And to make such a distinction was xenophobic? It was then suggested that nurses in some countries should be denied this right to movement.rjsterry said:
Nobody is advocating that.ballysmate said:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524182/
Those that advocate freedom of movement for all except nurses, do you think that the EU should ban the movement of medical staff from Poland, for example, where they are suffering a critical shortage?
I suppose it goes without saying that you think we in the UK shouldn't take on any Polish nurses.
0
