To change who I'm voting for based on one news story?

[ShouldIStayOrShouldIRun]

This one ->

www.itv.com/news/2019-11-27/jeremy-corbyn-says-uncensored-documents-show-nhs-is-part-of-toxic-post-brexit-trade-talks-with-us/

I had already decided to vote for the conservatives, mainly because I couldn't bring myself to vote for any of the others who seem hell bent on gleefully ripping up womens rights. I've always voted so abstaining/spoiling wasn't an option.

But after reading/watching the above I think I am going to switch to voting labour. We are a disabled family, and could never afford to pay for healthcare (and I doubt insurance would touch us with a barge pole).

I don't like Momentum/Corbyn really but I'd rather complain and fight for my right to a single sex ward than not be able to use one at all

Re: brexit I voted remain in the last referendum but to be honest just have fatigue about the whole thing, so I'm not basing my vote on any of that. (Though seems a second vote isn't that terrible an idea).

Just posting because I can't see anything on here about this yet and I've gone from feeling quietly confident that Conservatives would win to feeling nervous about it now. Anyone else?

www.reddit.com/r/worldpolitics/comments/dkzlfc/officialsensitive_great_britain_is_practically/

Obviously it doesn’t use the phrase “the NHS is for sale” in trade talk minutes. You should read it, it’s quite illuminating.

What it says is the USA can sell to th nhs, drugs etc, this is a good thing.

No, not if it means US prices!

Voting for Labour now means voting for a hard left Marxist

Sorry but this is bordering on hilarious. Such hyperbole. Their policies are not radical by any means. Most of Europe has higher taxes and better funded services and infrastructure than the U.K.

What it says is the USA can sell to th nhs, drugs etc, this is a good thing.

You clearly have no understanding of drug procurement in the NHS or the impact of patent laws in the US vs U.K.

Maybe watch the Dispatches episode on this topic?

What it says is the USA can sell to th nhs, drugs etc, this is a good thing

And not if it means they have a monopoly, which they are bound to demand. Anyone trying to downplay this is deluded.

What's the point in a booming economy if infant mortality is rising? I mean really?

Whatever people think of the leaders, the Tories have been effectively dismantling the NHS for the last few years. That's all the evidence you need that they can't be trusted to protect it. The way that they've passed huge contracts to private companies is terrifying.

Do you remember what’s happened in the last couple of years with American pharmaceutical companies hiking up the prices of some drugs by hundreds of percent?

Martin Shkreli, ring any bells? As founder and CEO of Turing, Shkreli bought the rights to the cheap, off-patent drug and—without any generic competitors—abruptly raised its price from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill in the fall of 2015.

www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/28/martin-shkreli-daraprim-hiv-drug-price-hike-interview

Do you want to give them the power to bankrupt the NHS once they’ve forced us to change our patent laws to prevent the prescribing of generics for an extended period? Estimated cost to the NHS of this sort of change: almost £30bn

www.channel4.com/press/news/trumps-plan-nhs-channel-4-dispatches

I agree blunt this is just a post trying to get us all to vote for Corbyn 'for the sake of the NHS', not a genuine tory supporter suddenly turning red because they feel 'worried'.

This is one of the reasons I don't like to get involved in political discussions much these days. Between the rights rhetoric of 'thick lefty idiots' and the lefts of 'cruel greedy right-wing bigots' there isn't really a place for a floating/centrist voter to have a discussion.

I started this thread because of a news story that genuinely worried me and that has probably changed who I will be voting for in this election. I couldn't see a thread already on it then started one.

No,I'm not a 'genuine' Tory supporter. I have vited for most of the parties at some point or other and was fairly certain I would vote for them this year.

From smug Labour supporters wondering how anyone like me could ever be so cruel/stupid to ever consider voting conservative, to tin-foil hat Tory supporters who reckon I'm a paid shill and/or too thick to read a document myself, it's been almost non stop mudslinging and quite a few insults.

Trust me, wish I'd never started the thread. Trying to wade through and sort the propaganda and facts coming from ALL parties is exhausting. But I know what I can infer from what I've read, and I am changing my vote.

Provably going to leave the thread to the bickerers now. Thanks to all who contributed like rational human beings and sent me info to look up for myself.

What it says is the USA can sell to th nhs, drugs etc, this is a good thing

This already happens.

It is currently boundaried by the NHS which keeps costs down.

www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/369727-us-drug-prices-higher-than-in-the-rest-of-the-world-heres-why%3famp

This article is from a USA perspective and explains differences in drug costs.

I have been an IPR lawyer for 2 decades. Please do enlighten me on what today’s document tells us about “patent laws in the US vs U.K” since you are making a limp attempt to blind a PP with your superior knowledge.

At present we can prescribe generics before the US exclusivity period is up on medications they produce.

From the Dispatches investigation: Unlike here, patients in the US will not be allowed to be prescribed cheaper alternatives to Humira until 2023. Trade experts fear that should a trade deal be signed with America, then the US administration will force Britain to adopt similar policies. In recent other US trade deals this has emerged as an important issue.

The document says the talks *provided a useful insight into the offensive areas the US is likely to pursue in an Free Trade Agreement [...] for us to start to determine the areas where we may find ourselves in difficult territory... The impact of some patent issues raised on NHS access to generic drugs (i.e. cheaper drugs) will be a key consideration going forward."

Is that enough for you? You could just read it yourself or read one of the articles that quotes it.

My sibling works for the NHS and doesn’t trust any party. She is also not a labour voter.

Corbyn is as much of a liar as any other politician. I liked Andrew Neil’s quote ‘free Rolls Royces for everyone’. They’ll probably borrow a lot of money to plough into the NHS initially...meanwhile raising taxes for the average Joe, who weren’t expecting it. Then ten years down the line, Corbyn will be retired in wealth whilst we all are stuck paying off Labour debts. Again.

Sorry, but no thank you. Parts of the NHS may well be privatised, As they have been in the past (also by a labour government), but it will always be free at the point of delivery.

Op, I kinda think you probably were a labour voter anyway.

Thank you Deathgrip for the link, I always prefer to read things for myself rather than other people's interpretations of it. The only bits I've seen is little snippets amongst lines of redacted text that say "free market access".

A poster on another thread, I think it was a Westminders one, helpfully posted this link to the more recently published US Objectives in future US-UK negotiations. I have to say if you read it all (only 18 clear to read pages) some of the USA Objectives seem quite reassuring to me.

ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf

Key words are ‘Corbyn Says’. Corbyn says a lot of things that aren’t true. If it is true (which I doubt given the hard on Brits have for the NHS) and you care then YABU

What many people don’t realise is that, despite the lack of healthcare for uninsured people, the US government spends more per person on healthcare than we do. This is largely due to the increased costs of drugs and of private service providers.

The figures are here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42950587

Whatever happens to the NHS, we really don’t want American healthcare and pharmaceutical companies getting involved at all.

HateIsNotGood that objectives document clearly states under Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices:
“Seek standards to ensure that government regulatory reimbursement regimes are transparent, provide procedural fairness, are nondiscriminatory, and provide full market access for U.S. products.“

That right there is essentially confirmation of what’s in these documents - the US will seek to ensure we cannot prescribe the generics we can now, and others going forward. We won’t be in a strong position to refuse.

Actually Deathgrip I did know that about the higher per capita $ public health care spend.

Started to read bits of the Reddit stuff provided by your link - I do note that the Reddit poster has taken parts of the 'dossier' of the redacted documents, provided his own interpretations to the parts he/she wishes to highlight and then provided links to the relevant dossier document.

I'm a bit suspicious about the validity of some of the 'evidencial' documents provided; usually Agenda have the Year on them too.

But then I'm a bit cynical about all this Internet Forum stuff as the font of all wisdom.

The leading article in the times online this evening is this

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/nhs-to-pay-more-for-drugs-under-us-trade-deal-275jmq6m6

The times is a right wing publication. Its behind a paywall but here are the 1st 3 paragraphs that sums it up.

One of Britain’s most senior trade negotiators raised concerns that the NHS may have to pay more for drugs under US plans for a post-Brexit trade deal, leaked documents show.

A cache of 451 pages of official files detailing trade negotiations show that the US has “pushed hard” to lengthen patents on drugs produced by American pharmaceutical companies.

The head of trade policy at the Department for International Trade said “we may find ourselves in difficult territory” and warned that it could make it more difficult for the UK to access cheaper, generic drugs.

Voting Labour as I cannot in any good conscience vote Tory based on NHS and what is best for the majority of the country

YANBU

How are Labour ripping up women's rights? It's the conservatives who have screwed over the waspi women and like to punish single mums with the benefit cap, freeze, changes etc. Not to mention how they treat poor children plunging them into poverty and misery. They do the same to sick and disabled people. My mother is disabled and I would never ever vote tory. I would not trust them an inch. Lying and underhand tactics are synonymous with them. Anyone who's disabled, sick, poor, in an average job as opposed to a profession and even female would surely be better off under Labour.

YADNBU

Depends how you read it Deathgrip - being able to sell pharmaceuticals or anything in fact in a fair market is a good thing really. It doesn't mean the NHS has to purchase anything - although given the often inexplicably overly expensive procurement practices the NHS currently operates anything could be possible.

The USA knows full well that the NHS is one of the major single pharmaceutical purchasers in the World and of course are keen to negotiate a Trade Deal for selling the NHS such products.

Which is a strong negotiating position for the UK to be in. So, I see it the other way round - we're not selling the NHS to the US, it's about the US selling to the NHS.

YANBU, it’s not just the NHS, it’s everything from Social Care, Mental Health to the Police, Education etc