It's Trident or NHS prescription drugs for your granny
Mick Smith Weblog
The Travesty of a Trident Debate
The cabinet had its first sight of the White Paper produced to justify continuing with a submarine-based nuclear deterrent on Thutsday ahead of its official unveiling in Parliament in all probability next week. Tony Blair has promised MPs a full debate on the issue sometime early next year and reportedly told last week's cabinet meeting that he wants to launch the debate very quickly "because a decision needs to be made". OIt's a good quote that isn't it? You can actually hear him saying it, with that little bit of irritation that we just don't get it in his voice. The truth is that a decision doesn't need to be made now at all. But whether it does or not is irrelevant, because the key decisions have already been made. So MPs from whatever side of the house can go whistle, what they say will not change a thing. Is this what passes for democracy under President Blair? I'm afraid it is and the sooner we get rid of it the better.
There are three parts to the Trident system, the 58 missiles themselves, American-owned and loaned to us each time we use them at exorbitant cost; the 192 warheads, which are at least British-made and owned; and the four British Vanguard-class submarines that fire the missile. According to the spin, it is the last part of the equation, the submarines, which make it essential to decide now.
The Prime Minister and his supporters say the procurement process is so slow and cumbersome that it is imperative that we order new submarines now. It is total codswallop. You, I and every gatepost across Britain know that the key issues here are that a) Blair sold his soul to the neo-cons and part of the deal was that Britain continued to have a nuclear deterrent, and b) he sees it as part of his legacy to leave Britain with a powerful nuclear deterrent - evidence that the old nuke-hating Labour is no more. Read more
db: 25,000,000,000 quid is not insignificant - and that's the minimum Blair's nukes will cost us. It's about 3 times the cost of NHS therapeutic drugs dispensed in England during the whole of 2005, which was 7,936,564,000 quid. Next time you hear of 'NICE' withdrawing/banning NHS use of certain drugs - because of the expense - think about Trident .... and the Bush-poodle-bitch.
Drug ban will force Alzheimer's patients to take 'dangerous' alternatives
The Travesty of a Trident Debate
The cabinet had its first sight of the White Paper produced to justify continuing with a submarine-based nuclear deterrent on Thutsday ahead of its official unveiling in Parliament in all probability next week. Tony Blair has promised MPs a full debate on the issue sometime early next year and reportedly told last week's cabinet meeting that he wants to launch the debate very quickly "because a decision needs to be made". OIt's a good quote that isn't it? You can actually hear him saying it, with that little bit of irritation that we just don't get it in his voice. The truth is that a decision doesn't need to be made now at all. But whether it does or not is irrelevant, because the key decisions have already been made. So MPs from whatever side of the house can go whistle, what they say will not change a thing. Is this what passes for democracy under President Blair? I'm afraid it is and the sooner we get rid of it the better.
There are three parts to the Trident system, the 58 missiles themselves, American-owned and loaned to us each time we use them at exorbitant cost; the 192 warheads, which are at least British-made and owned; and the four British Vanguard-class submarines that fire the missile. According to the spin, it is the last part of the equation, the submarines, which make it essential to decide now.
The Prime Minister and his supporters say the procurement process is so slow and cumbersome that it is imperative that we order new submarines now. It is total codswallop. You, I and every gatepost across Britain know that the key issues here are that a) Blair sold his soul to the neo-cons and part of the deal was that Britain continued to have a nuclear deterrent, and b) he sees it as part of his legacy to leave Britain with a powerful nuclear deterrent - evidence that the old nuke-hating Labour is no more. Read more
db: 25,000,000,000 quid is not insignificant - and that's the minimum Blair's nukes will cost us. It's about 3 times the cost of NHS therapeutic drugs dispensed in England during the whole of 2005, which was 7,936,564,000 quid. Next time you hear of 'NICE' withdrawing/banning NHS use of certain drugs - because of the expense - think about Trident .... and the Bush-poodle-bitch.
Drug ban will force Alzheimer's patients to take 'dangerous' alternatives
Alzheimer's patients with behavioural problems will be forced to take dangerous medication after a ban comes into effect next month on Ebixa.
Psychiatrists will have to fall back on antipsychotic drugs which trigger serious side effects such as strokes, heart disease and falls.
NHS funding for the drug Ebixa is set to be withdrawn after campaigners lost an appeal to the Government's 'rationing' body, NICE, which ruled it was too expensive. Link
posted by exoplanet at 9:43 PM
<< Home