Whatever your political persuasion, defend your corner here. All we ask is that you voice YOUR opinion, rather than just post a link to a half-hour youtube video. Politics can get a bit lively, and if you prefer a less combative debate, please post in the Politics for Moderates section instead.
Hudswell wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:33 am
It really is amazing how BREXIT is being blamed for everything when perhaps,there are other reasons for the sky falling in, thenGuardian recently run an article in regard to the fall in recruitment of nurses from the EU
However, an article in the daily mail reports that recruitment agencies are putting the reason for the drop firmly at the feet of the introduction of new "Language" tests designed to,ensure potentional recruits can understand, read and speak English....a basic requirement you might think in the medical profession.
Call me a skeptic, *you're a skeptic!" but the graph in the article provided rather shows a boom in the months leading up to the vote (as would be expected) and an (obviously steep) decline thereafter...
It would be interesting to know what the figure was in say April 2015.
But then I suppose, "number of EU nurses fall by 10%" wouldn't make anywhere near such a good headline...
Whether you choose to believe the 96% reported figure....
Whether you believe the Daily Mail.....
Whether English tests have affected recruitment....
Brexit, without doubt, causes foreign potential recruits a lot of concern.
I do work for a Finnish company looking to locate in the UK. They ask constantly about Brexit. It concerns their future thoughts and potential business and if this is typical across Europe (I have spoken to Spanish, French and Germans recently as well) then no doubt, people are scared to commit to a serious move, until more is known about the future.
Britain made a serious mistake in not committing to secure the future of currently employed European immigrants. They should have done this proactively as it would have sent out a message of cooperation, instead of May's antagonistic ones. She really does live in dreamland. She put herself forward as the chief negotiator, when sessions were expected to be 12 hour days, 5 days a week. That strikes me as a narcissistic control freak.
Jimgward wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:20 am
Whether you choose to believe the 96% reported figure....
Whether you believe the Daily Mail.....
Whether English tests have affected recruitment....
Brexit, without doubt, causes foreign potential recruits a lot of concern.
I do work for a Finnish company looking to locate in the UK. They ask constantly about Brexit. It concerns their future thoughts and potential business and if this is typical across Europe (I have spoken to Spanish, French and Germans recently as well) then no doubt, people are scared to commit to a serious move, until more is known about the future.
Britain made a serious mistake in not committing to secure the future of currently employed European immigrants. They should have done this proactively as it would have sent out a message of cooperation, instead of May's antagonistic ones. She really does live in dreamland. She put herself forward as the chief negotiator, when sessions were expected to be 12 hour days, 5 days a week. That strikes me as a narcissistic control freak.
Jimgward
Your last paragraph. Mrs May did make such an offer to Europe providing there was a reciprocal arrangement as to those of UK citizens working or retired in Europe coming from Europe. Sadly no such assurance was forthcoming and therefore that matter is in the negotiating pot. If statements being muted are to be believed it is one of the matters to be thrashed out in the early stages of negotiations. In that light I am sure you will appreciate it was hardly surprising the UK took the stance it did - who on earth would guarantee such a deal for one side leaving the other totally exposed?
Hudswell wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 3:17 pm
Jim, the UK Offered, it was the EU who turned the issue down....but the offer was based on discussions regarding reciprocal agreements for UK nationals living in the EU, why on earth would the UK commit to retaining the rights of EU nationals if the EU were not willing to the same?
Hudswell
You have repeated what I have just said above.
However there is a very interesting article in "The Daily Telegraph"
You may be asked to register but it is free for the use of one Premium article etc per week. Shows insight as to why training of home grown personnel has declined over the years. Worth a few seconds to register in my opinion.
Jimgward wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:20 am
Whether you choose to believe the 96% reported figure....
Whether you believe the Daily Mail.....
Whether English tests have affected recruitment....
Brexit, without doubt, causes foreign potential recruits a lot of concern.
I do work for a Finnish company looking to locate in the UK. They ask constantly about Brexit. It concerns their future thoughts and potential business and if this is typical across Europe (I have spoken to Spanish, French and Germans recently as well) then no doubt, people are scared to commit to a serious move, until more is known about the future.
Britain made a serious mistake in not committing to secure the future of currently employed European immigrants. They should have done this proactively as it would have sent out a message of cooperation, instead of May's antagonistic ones. She really does live in dreamland. She put herself forward as the chief negotiator, when sessions were expected to be 12 hour days, 5 days a week. That strikes me as a narcissistic control freak.
Jimgward
Your last paragraph. Mrs May did make such an offer to Europe providing there was a reciprocal arrangement as to those of UK citizens working or retired in Europe coming from Europe. Sadly no such assurance was forthcoming and therefore that matter is in the negotiating pot. If statements being muted are to be believed it is one of the matters to be thrashed out in the early stages of negotiations. In that light I am sure you will appreciate it was hardly surprising the UK took the stance it did - who on earth would guarantee such a deal for one side leaving the other totally exposed?
Rita
Rita
I was aware of that, which is why I said proactively. We have loads to lose if EU nationals leave. It would have been an olive branch to offer safe harbour for them - and would have put the EU on the back foot regarding UK nationals in Europe. Yes, a slight risk, but sometimes in negotiations you need to make an offer, to receive others back.
I happen to believe we simply antagonised by the stance.
Jimgward wrote: ↑Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:20 am
Whether you choose to believe the 96% reported figure....
Whether you believe the Daily Mail.....
Whether English tests have affected recruitment....
Brexit, without doubt, causes foreign potential recruits a lot of concern.
I do work for a Finnish company looking to locate in the UK. They ask constantly about Brexit. It concerns their future thoughts and potential business and if this is typical across Europe (I have spoken to Spanish, French and Germans recently as well) then no doubt, people are scared to commit to a serious move, until more is known about the future.
Britain made a serious mistake in not committing to secure the future of currently employed European immigrants. They should have done this proactively as it would have sent out a message of cooperation, instead of May's antagonistic ones. She really does live in dreamland. She put herself forward as the chief negotiator, when sessions were expected to be 12 hour days, 5 days a week. That strikes me as a narcissistic control freak.
Jimgward
Your last paragraph. Mrs May did make such an offer to Europe providing there was a reciprocal arrangement as to those of UK citizens working or retired in Europe coming from Europe. Sadly no such assurance was forthcoming and therefore that matter is in the negotiating pot. If statements being muted are to be believed it is one of the matters to be thrashed out in the early stages of negotiations. In that light I am sure you will appreciate it was hardly surprising the UK took the stance it did - who on earth would guarantee such a deal for one side leaving the other totally exposed?
Rita
Rita
I was aware of that, which is why I said proactively. We have loads to lose if EU nationals leave. It would have been an olive branch to offer safe harbour for them - and would have put the EU on the back foot regarding UK nationals in Europe. Yes, a slight risk, but sometimes in negotiations you need to make an offer, to receive others back.
I happen to believe we simply antagonised by the stance.
The EU's current Brexit rhetoric does in no way shape or form indicate that they would have appreciated the 'olive branch' and reciprocated accordingly...
Had they been so disposed to do so, they could have simply taken up on the UK's offer of a bilateral agreement. After all, given the numbers, who had the most to concede...?
The antagonism has come solely from the side of the EU and laying down and showing them our tummies won't really be a positive step towards successful negotiations...
According to the Reuters article I read this morning it was an incorrect statement as the UK is a member until March 2019 and can withdraw article 50 at any time during this period. It is only after this period we would have to negotiate new membership terms.
So far as recruitment of nurses/doctors is concerned had/should the UK authorities invest/ed money for training of their home grown talent there would be less need to recruit from overseas but over the years the cheap option has been preferred and to hell with the general populace. One of the reasons for the decline in take up from overseas is the long overdue requirement that the candidates should be proficient in the English language and these days a test is required. Cannot see anything wrong with that requirement given that the ability to read medical notes, treatment directives and prescription directions (all in English) should/must be mandatory as opposed to just using "google" translations as has been found to be the case at times.
How true. Not only invest money for training, but also consider the level of qualifications possessed by an applicant. One shouldn't have to have a string of GCE's to be considered for training.
You are also correct in the proficiency of English, most of us in the UK have found it difficult to understand medical staff in the UK, indeed, I saw a foreign doctor in an out patients clinic, who told me that I was being discharged, but that I could return to the hospital of my surgery, Wrightington, if necessary in the future. When the letter from him came through, the hospital named was Brighton !
I suppose anyone could make a minor mistake like that, but was it because he hadn't fully grasped the English Language, or an admin error, I don't know.
Jackie
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Most of the Vendor Reps from the EU I deal with can speak better English than the native speakers; come to that , so can the Japanese and Koreans ones as well.
Of course the people you deal with speak better English than the native populace - that is always the case with you I am afraid. If it is English or rather anything to do with the UK it does not meet with your approval and is subject to the insulting comment you have just made. For someone who says he loves his country you have a very poor view of it. You have chosen not to live in the country so why not leave it at that? The question was about recruitment and I still say it should be, nay is the duty of those who govern us, to put the interest of the born and bred citizens (many of whom have the qualifications) of the country first. I have no objection to foreign medical staff but and it is a big but if there are people qualified to train who are of British heritage they should be the first choice.
No Rita , I just have a poor opinion of some of the people who come from the country I do care about. Below is an article from the Telegraph how the people who govern us (who are not putting the interests of the born and bred citizens of the country first) are discussing lowering the standard of English required for Nursing Recruits because of the fall in EU applicants due to the Brexit. Many British trained Nurses are going abroad for better pay and opportunities, that's one of the reasons there is a fall in British Nurses working in the NHS.
What I wrote was tongue in cheek (did you not see the wink) but most Europeans English is excellent. Oh and every month I pay taxes into the coffers of the UK Government so have as much right as anyone else to comment on how our taxes are spent.
After reading the article, it appears to be very one sided. No mention of the strain of influx of non Engilsh speaking immigrants who receive not only medical attention, nursing care and dental treatment on the NHS, but translators financed by the tax payer. The constant waste of money paid to Managers, Matron didn't need them, bring her back. It's all the fault of the ageing population, YET AGAIN ! Tough, we will survive and make no apology for doing so.
Jackie
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Jackie
Thank you for at least reading it. It was from the Telegraph but there are several similar articles on the internet. I was pointing out the lowering of the bar relating to applicants being able to speak English rather than the other problems of the NHS which I agree are many.
How many do you want me to post Jaqs? There are the headlines from across the spectrum of media, not personal presumption???? or poetic licence. I do stick to the facts, unfortunately you choose to ignore them.
