U-Kippin' across the universe

Looks like an in-out referendum could be a long way away in the future if at all, after negotiations with all of Europe and with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The larger political landscape could be rather different by 2018 or whenever, with very different priorities on the agenda. No ifs no buts and not going to happen?

The worst thing that could happen would be a 'locked' government. One that is paralysed and unable to 'govern' (i.e. pass legislation) due to no perceivable overall majority even with 'others' involved. We could end up having another election in October/November in an effort to remove the deadlock. It's not a good outlook as things stand at the present. Disaffection of the electorate takes time to overcome. Belgium had no government at all for over a year just recently due to similar problems. It couldn't come at a worse moment when the International situation is at its most volatile since the Cuban Crisis 62/63. Regardless of personal likes and dislikes it would be better to have any strong government over these next few years rather than none.

The power of UK government is diminished, national debt means less financial clout, power and influence. Power is devolved to regional assemblies and to Brussels. London is a city state to itself.

Within that context, yes a coherent government with clear majority is best placed to do what it can, but the question of political arrangement with Europe, i.e. who runs the UK, remains sort of unresolved.

We are up against a number of more powerful nations than our self. Nations that could, given the reasons, take us apart in our present vulnerable position. We would have to spend double our present commitment to this islands defense over the next ten years if we were to retain our self-respect in the face of belligerents. That is why, one of the main reasons, we are part of the EU and the semi-protection NATO gives us. We could remain part of NATO without being a member of the EU but we wouldn't have the same influence against all the rest. and would have to accept whatever the majority were to decide - hardly suitable when it comes to one's own self-defense.
I remember Churchill's words after the Fall of France in June 1940 - "well at least now we only have ourselves to worry about" meaning we didn't have to put up with all the in-fighting that had gone on previously. We were free to use our own initiatives even at the expense of being practically defenseless.
I say again, for the umpteenth time, united we stand, divided we fall. One couldn't make it any plainer.

Not sure who you recommend to be united with there, Atlas. With the EU? Or domestically within the UK?

Being in the EU would seem to put the UK more at risk from terrorism, as we have no border controls. 

As events are unfolding and we move towards the election, more people seem to be of the opinion that membership of the EU has ravaged the UK so far, piling on the problems, housing, infrastructure, social stresses, etc.

The Cameron government did well patching up the financial crisis, but since then has failed to do enough on some major issues. They blame the LibDems and the EU.

I can't see any potential 'strong' government emerging, more a choice of least worst. If UKIP had a lineup of really convincing politicians with an agreeable and clear agenda for an exit from the E.U. the voters might go for it, but, they seem a bit wibbly at the moment.

We need 'all' the friends we can get as we settle down from 'Empire' to 'normal'. The process is almost at an end as we are far too small a nation (even with a population of 65million) to protect others or our interests outside these islands. It is therefore incumbent upon us to 'join in' a protective arrangement with those we trust (too a point) in order to maintain some self-respect and to assist us, should we need it, when our international interests are threatened. To this end our arrangements with NATO and the EU are critical to our security. Terrorism has been with us now since the beginning of the 20th century. There is nothing new in what is presently happening other than it comes from a non-European quarter and the indigenous aspect is more difficult to root out than it might have been in the past. As for the immigration problems we must look towards all the previous ten governments who have failed to add into the equation the infrastructure that it required. Getting out of the EU on that pretext alone is like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. I don't think for one moment that UKIP will do anything like they maintain they will (even if I agreed with it). It's a con for power and influence. Nothing more, nothing less - and IT IS DANGEROUS. They don't have the expertise to manage things properly and will bungle the lot if left to their own devices. They may then end up falling into the hands of the 'bad guys', those that lurk behind all jam today power structures - with all that such a consequence may contain. It's too much a risk as far as I'm concerned. If it looks too good - then generally is. And I don't want to go there thank you very much. And nor should anyone else with half a brain.

Do we need to worry about UKIP being in government, not very likely is it? But yes, the lineup of parties for the coming general election does look a bit more fragmented unpredictable and complicated than usual. Still, that probably just reflects the realities.

It's no bad thing to give the main parties a shock. Rattle a few cages and get rid of the dross.
Too many long-term lifers in some parties. Only there for the ride.
As with everything life goes on and evolves. Small changes, well thought out, prioritise for fraud or those things which are blatantly immoral, concentrate on those things with the greatest returns for the country - tax avoidance comes to mind, and we should move on reasonably well and in concert with our friends and supporters. We shall see.

Mr.Farage relates his experiences with the N.H.S,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31883683

Chimes in with what the lady in the waiting room said, "They are good with broken bones, but not so good with the squishy bits."

It can be traumatic to have a bad experience with the N.H.S., but it has to be down to those who work in it to speak up, patients are often in no position to do so.

I cannot say that my last experience of the NHS was at all satisfactory in any shape or form. The fact that my aged father was nearly 90 years old had without doubt some bearing on the lack of what I considered was 'reasonable' care in their hands.
That was some 9 years ago. And the fact he had lived a good life until then lessened my anger at the time. Had he have been ten years younger I may have been a lot more vociferous in my dealings with them. And probably have lodged a complaint - for what good it would have done.

Still - was it down to a lack of staff or facilities or overall funding or care. Probably. In which case who is to blame? Which of the hard working nurses do you point fingers at. Or managers? Or executive panels? Or what?

We will never satisfy the demands we place on the NHS without a cart-blanc on money provision. And which society can ever do that?

We have what we have. It's better than most and better than was previously when I was born.

Your guess is as good as mine.

Too many people, too much strain on an overworked system.

As the NHS becomes more of an efficient factory, the opportunity to care is diminished. There needs to be more room in the NHS for nurses who specialise in old fashioned patient care nursing, and are trained to do it well. Ideally, there should be one or two of those on every ward.

Discipline. Duty. Seems we have lost most of this in the intervening years. Bring back 'matron'.
God was she something. Just like my mother. A force to be reckoned with. Perhaps then we might just get back to 'caring' and 'pride in a job well done'. ??

The days of old fashioned matron may be over, but balance could be put back into the NHS by making a place for nurses who specifically provide care, and report on behalf of patients.

A new style matron could be in charge of that team of care nurses, a team of half a dozen such people might make a difference within a hospital ?

I'll drink to that - and vote for it.