British Politics Thread.

[Psychosplodge]

You could argue going off to join whatever acronym they're using this week is pretty effectively giving up your citizenship? Considering it's general attitude to the western world.

[Mr Mystery]

There is that.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Indeed, there's a solid line between authorising drone strikes on overseas British citizens who dissent against the government here, and those who join a militant organisation who are very open about their intentions and have already committed attacks on British citizens abroad to prove it.

To be fair to Mr Cameron, or any person in that position, you have to choose between being accused of being a murdering tyrant, or being accused of being an incompetent failure to defend your nation. The problem comes from the fact that we'd only know if these people were genuinely willing and able to commit terror attacks when we either caught them red-handed or they did the act, both of which are a bit too late and would result in scandal even if there were no casualties.

So, the only way to guarantee avoiding such a threat is to kill them when you have the chance. Who knows if they've been tracking these guys or have infiltrated ISIS to track them? They can't reveal sources or proof because that would compromise the ability to find further threats, which may then be delivered.

It's a scary evolution, but drone strikes are highly regulated in the RAF, and they don't happen to be used on specific targets like this without firm authorisation. I've got plenty of issues with how Mr Cameron runs things, but I think he made the right call here.

[Morgrim]

The logic being used by aussie politicians here is that if you join Daesh, you've joined a group that 1) calls themselves a state and 2) has declared war on australia, so you've automatically gotten yourself a treason charge. There is, I suppose, some logic in that.

[Alaric]

[QUOTE=Mr Mystery;512302][url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk

Glad to see your country is still doin the hard to do jobs.

[Haighus]

Yeah, I agree with CG on this one. Based on current evidence released to the public, it seems justified.

[Haighus]

What do people think about the whole '7-day NHS' concept that keeps occasionally being mentioned by the Government? (Yet to have any kind of plan though).

[Psychosplodge]

If they've only got the same amount of doctors and they're not currently struggling to access equipment all I can see it doing is pissing doctors off. If people are having to wait for access, not because of doctor numbers it kinda makes sense. Either way emergency care has always been available 24/7 so I'm not really sure what difference it'll make to the vast majority.

[Haighus]

Yeah, and there is also junior doctor, nursing and care assistant staff on over the weekend, with senior doctors available as an on call service for Hospitals. GPs do close entirely at weekends.

At the moment, they haven't laid out any plans, and other policies (like the current 'renegotiation' of the junior doctor contract) are all leaning towards reducing doctor numbers by forcing them abroad.

Not to mention that the 'weekend effect' is probably not worth such an expenditure in resources such a plan would entail. Personally I think the money would be much better spent elsewhere, it just seems a stupid idea in the first place. If the same money went into heart disease, obesity and diabetes, it would be far more cost-effective imo.

[Psychosplodge]

The other problem with I see with it is the people that have all the time in the world to go will still want the time slots meant for the people working the traditional working week (because lets face it thats who weekend opening is intended to benefit) It happened when our GP started having a late night and one saturday a month, it was still retired people that could have gone at anytime filling the waiting room.