The UK relies on 370 million packs of medicine from the EU each month, in addition to blood plasma supplies and radioactive isotopes used in X-rays and treatment.
Senior civil servants said in June that hospitals could run out of medicines within two weeks of a hard Brexit where the UK leaves the EU without a trade deal in place.
It could also lead to fatal delays in cancer treatments if unstable radioactive isotopes or blood supplies from the continent are rendered useless while stuck in customs queues.
What a load of c**p does anyone really believe any of this remain c**p we get on a daily basis.
Well I hope you don't run out of medication (if you take any) and food (which you most certainy do).
Up to you what you decide to believe.
Talking of c**p and the NHS
Business is business. Everybody appears to be making assumptions as to what might happen when we leave. What could we do if those that assume something are correct when it happens? Prove by way of facts before any conclusions are made is my motto.
The supply chain to the NHS is complicated, are the suppliers going to bite their nose to spite their face. I will imagine that measures are already being addressed by the suppliers to keep it going, and that applies to most things we import.
So I say don't panic, wait and see because either way, we can do nothing about it, it just makes a good talking point at the moment.
Lynne i do take medication that my life depends on am i concerned not in the slightest why because it wont happen and if it does so be it.
"I will imagine that measures are already being addressed by the suppliers to keep it going, and that applies to most things we import."
They are stockpiling in the eventuality of there being a no deal, hard Brexit. Which will mean import tariffs and customs checks leading to increase in costs and increase in delay of supplies.
If they just stood back and did nothing (wait and see to use your expression) then they would be failing in their duty.
Stockpiling,and tarriffs cost money and if the cost go too high, then people will stop buying that particular product and start on something else. I am sure some will remember the steep price that potatoes once went too in 1976, well it did not last long as people switched and bought rice and new crops started to flood in. It is a balancing act as to how things will pan out and market forces and demand will play it's hand as it does now. I know I will not starve, I know how to forage for food in the countryside. As for medical supplies. well there are many problems that we face where there is no cure at the moment, tough on those that may have one of those medical problems now, same will apply if the medicine that some of us rely on now runs out - tough sh1t.
The quarterly return, July, August, September, from the Ministry of Agriculture showed that the amount spent each week on potatoes doubled from 7.9p to 16.15p, despite a 14 per cent. drop in sales. The overall food increase, including beef and milk along with potatoes, meant that the food bill for a family of four went up by £2.88 a week in that quarter.
BUT WE SURVIVED!!!!!!!
"if the medicine that some of us rely on now runs out - tough sh1t."
Look the mother of a desperately sick child in the eye and say that!
oh and btw - this contingency planning (stockpiling) is being pushed by hardline Brexiteers not Remainers. I'll give you an example of this in a couple of hours time when the Hansard coverage of today's Prime Minister's Questions is online.
Lynne the country voted to LEAVE right or wrong that was the result as far as i am concerned the elected house of commons are there to carry out the will of the people again right or wrong they should just get on with it thats what the people wanted so they should deliver a clean break with the EU. Now folk argue the truth wasnt told so whats new at every general election they lie, do we carry on for years, no we accept the demacratic result and by the way elections are won on smaller margins than the referendum was.
I believe the remainers will go to any length to get a new referendum so lets say they do and the result is the same what then Lynne.
I refer the honorable member to my posting above dated 18th July timed at 13.14.
I am not arguing about the result of the referendum. I am putting forward information concerning contingency plans should we leave the EU without a deal. I repeat, it is Brexiteers, not Remainers, who are arguing for these contingency plans because they wish this country to be in a position to walk away from the EU with no deal.
If we go into a no deal scenario we will end up trading under WTO terms. This will involve tariffs and border checks. Which will then increase costs and delays in supply chains. So with that in mind it makes sense that contingency plans very much do include stockpiling of food and medication and any other essentials that we presently import from the EU.
From today's Hansard coverage of Prime Minister's Questions.
It is in the national interest that we should have, and have implemented, contingency plans for the unwanted eventuality of exiting the European Union with nothing agreed. Now there is collective agreement to accelerate the delivery of our plans, will my right hon. Friend please give instructions that every communication related to no deal serves to bolster our negotiating position by reinforcing the credibility and feasibility of those contingency plans?
I thank my hon. Friend also for the work he was doing in the Department for Exiting the European Union, and particularly for the work he was doing on this issue. He is absolutely right that we need to make sure that we have those no deal preparations in place while we negotiate with the European Union on a deal, because we need to ensure that we have made contingency arrangements for every eventuality. Also, the European Union needs to be in no doubt that we are making those preparations and are ensuring that, should that be the outcome, we are prepared.
So Lynne what if we have another referendum and the result is the same what then because it could happen would you then want a third vote then a fourth, i believe remainers would never accept a leave vote however many times it was rerun.
Excuse me? Hello? Where have I mentioned having another referendum?
If you read my posts above you will see that I am talking about contingency plans should there be a no deal Brexit scenario.
The Brexiteers in parliament are talking about, and pushing for, a no deal Brexit scenario by dint of their pushing for contingency arrangements to be in place.
So what we, the public need to know, is how a no deal Brexit will impact on us. And I can only think that the Brexiteers must have a pretty good idea otherwise why would they be arguing for contingency measures?
It is incumbent on the government to plan for all outcomes, including a no-deal Brexit. Planning for a no-deal doesn't mean it is going to come to pass. Even the European Commission is advising member states to be prepared for such an eventuality.
It may not come to pass but I feel pretty certain that I am not the only one in the UK who would like to know what the outcome is likely to be if we should have a no deal Brexit.
I've just been watching the Liaison select committee on tv. The PM was asked several times when it would be that the public would be told the consequences of a no deal Brexit but she evaded giving a straight answer.
But surely she must know if she is in charge of the contingency measures.
So why not tell us?
Lynne i dont believe you want us to leave the EU no one knows what the outcome will be the UK is writing the book and maybe if we are successful others may dare to follow.
Well, actually, as I understand it, there are some facts if we leave without a deal. Like us going on to WTO terms. That means tariffs and delays.
So.........from those facts it wouldn't be beyond the dint of those who deal in such things for an impact assessment to be made concerning a no deal scenario.
I believe impact assessments are made on any legislation passing through parliament so there is no reason why this shouldn't happen for such a big thing as Brexit. Actually, I'll correct that statement - I believe such an impact assessment has indeed already been made but it has not been made overtly public. But the signs are there if you wish to read them:- Government saying it will stockpile processed foods. NHS stockpiling medication.
In other words, for the government to be taking contingency measures they need to know what contingency measures they need to take. And they will only know that by way of a no deal Brexit impact assessment.
Why can't someone just be upfront about it with us - or is that too much to ask?
If the medicine that some of us rely on now does run out it WILL BE tough sh1t and I will not need to look anyone in the eye and say it, they will find out about it soon enough and I will not be held responsible for it if it did happen.
So who would be responsible then? eh?
Yet another reason why we all need to be told what a no deal Brexit could mean!
Lynne nobody knows, the reason it's never happened before and it's all speculation this may happen that might happen maybe nothing will happen its all a big maybe. It doesnt bother me one way or the other and i dont lose sleep over it what will be will be just wait and see March 2019 will soon be here. The Brexit ship is set on its course were it makes landfall depends in what direction the EU wind blows.
Leatash: I agree it has never happened before. That is why the government is (now) making contingency plans in case it all goes **** up and it is making those contingency plans at the behest of those hardline Brexiteers in parliament who want a hard Brexit.
As Burneside has correctly pointed out it is a government's responsibility to make contingency plans and act upon them.
And as I have pointed out impact assessments of the various forms of Brexit have been made. MPs have seen them. The general public has not.
You may not be interested. Fair enough. But I am, and I suspect I am not alone in that.
I'd like someone to give me one good reason why we, the public, should not be privy to the impact assessements made concerning Brexit when whatever happens, whatever form Brexit takes, we will ALL be impacted by it.
The terms hard and soft Brexit had never been used until Leave won the referendum. Soft Brexit is a ruse invented by Remainers to try to keep us in the EU by the back door,
and it was fully endorsed by May with the publication of her Chequers plan. It's the game she has been playing for the last two years, but thankfully her wings have now been clipped
by true Brexiteers in the government.
Since when did our elected goverment of any colour make the general public privy to there decisions going to war etc we elect our representative to represent us thats democracy. But could it be that the outlook of a hard brexit is so bad that goverment finds it impossible to tell us as it may cause mass hysteria riots and looting or is it there is nothing to tell.
The Irish PM has announced in the event of a "hard" Brexit then UK aircraft could be banned from flying across EU territories. The right to fly over another country's land is not governed by the EU at all, but by the global International Air Services Transit Agreement. His assertion is made even more ridiculous with the revelation that the RAF actually polices Ireland's airspace because it does not have suitable aircraft for the role.
The question is what have the EU to lose after brexit.
Not a lot if anything. The only thing I can think of is they will not be able to tell us what to do or how to do it.
Other than that.
Business as usual
The EU will lose its third largest financial contributor, the 2016 figures show our contributions amounted to 13.45% of the EU budget,.
That's quite a large hole to fill once we've gone.