Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sir Tigger KC]

I saw a claim on another forum that buried in the Lisbon Treaty is a provision to standardise the way healthcare is delivered across the EU.

Now I'm no expert on this but as far as I'm aware most countries on the continent operate a hybrid system where people have to have basic health insurance and governments pick up the tab for the rest via taxation. In the Republic of Ireland for example it costs about 60 Euros to see a GP I believe? 

If this is true it seems likely that if we ended up staying in the EU and the EU decided to standardise healthcare, the government of the day would be forced to restructure the NHS to a European system where we all have to have health insurance and maybe even end the principle of free at the point of delivery.   

The obvious answer is No, we'd just Veto it!, but and this where it gets interesting as the EU are due to end national vetoes and issues will be decided with Qualified Majority Voting.  So it seems likely that if this is true and happened, more countries would vote to keep the status quo rather than restructure their healthcare systems. 

I havn't read the Lisbon Treaty so it might be a huge conspiracy theory, but it's an interesting thought non the less! 

And the next time you come across some shouty Momentum leftie/remainer headbanger claiming that the Tories are going to sell the NHS to the Yanks, this is a handy comeback!   

[Varche]

It would make sense that health along with other aspects of daily living, would be harmonised.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

It sounds very plausible and I hope that its true. If all those lefties overturn the vote and force us to stay in, only to see their national religion abolished by the EU, would be a delicious irony. 

[LC0112G]

I saw a claim on another forum that buried in the Lisbon Treaty is a provision to standardise the way healthcare is delivered across the EU.

Now I'm no expert on this but as far as I'm aware most countries on the continent operate a hybrid system where people have to have basic health insurance and governments pick up the tab for the rest via taxation. In the Republic of Ireland for example it costs about 60 Euros to see a GP I believe? 

If this is true it seems likely that if we ended up staying in the EU and the EU decided to standardise healthcare, the government of the day would be forced to restructure the NHS to a European system where we all have to have health insurance and maybe even end the principle of free at the point of delivery.   

The obvious answer is No, we'd just Veto it!, but and this where it gets interesting as the EU are due to end national vetoes and issues will be decided with Qualified Majority Voting.  So it seems likely that if this is true and happened, more countries would vote to keep the status quo rather than restructure their healthcare systems. 

I havn't read the Lisbon Treaty so it might be a huge conspiracy theory, but it's an interesting thought non the less! 

And the next time you come across some shouty Momentum leftie/remainer headbanger claiming that the Tories are going to sell the NHS to the Yanks, this is a handy comeback!   

Fake news.

Doing so requires treaty change, which in turn requires the unanimous approval of all EU28/EU27 member states. The veto exists unless we (and every other EU country) chose to give it up.

Same for all this tosh about rebates, EU army, forced into Schengen, forced to use the Euro etc. I've no doubt that some in the EU would like these things to happen, but it can't unless all EU members agree.

[Varche]

Dont new member states have to adopt the Euro?

The old folk in Spain remember wistfully how going to the Euro created inflation. E.g. overnight a coffee went from 100 pesetas to 166 pesetas i.e. one euro. There were many other examples . Just mention it as an aside.

[TheBoy]

If that NHS story is right, then I'm all for putting N Leave back on the table, contrary to previous comments about ruling it out.

[Sir Tigger KC]

Fake news.

Doing so requires treaty change, which in turn requires the unanimous approval of all EU28/EU27 member states. The veto exists unless we (and every other EU country) chose to give it up.

Same for all this tosh about rebates, EU army, forced into Schengen, forced to use the Euro etc. I've no doubt that some in the EU would like these things to happen, but it can't unless all EU members agree.

Fake news? Well yes maybe, but what is the truth is that the national vetoes have been pared down to a small number of areas and the majority of decisions made by the European Council are taken by QMV.  Whether standardisation of healthcare would require a unanimous vote or QMV I don't know.

Where national vetoes still exist, there are provisions within the Lisbon Treaty that allow the Commission to override the decision of a country to exercise it's veto.  They are considering using this to bypass Ireland and Luxembourg's objections to the Commissions proposals to harmonise taxes across the EU. So maybe not so fake, as once they have overridden a veto once....

Dont new member states have to adopt the Euro?

The old folk in Spain remember wistfully how going to the Euro created inflation. E.g. overnight a coffee went from 100 pesetas to 166 pesetas i.e. one euro. There were many other examples . Just mention it as an aside.

Yes. Of the nine EU countries that don't use the Euro only Denmark and the UK are not bound by treaty to join the Euro. 

[Olympia5776]

Britain was always the exception to the harmonised edict issued by the appointed owners of the eu .
If the UK is unilaterally sucked back into the eu they , our then undisputed masters , will destroy every vestige of individuality and sovereignty preserved within the UK .
The people within the UK are the only populace to have stood up to that cabal and to believe that they , the eu ,will pass the opportunity to show any other member their total power of control by completely destroying any and every remnant of that identity is at best imprudent and at worse moronic.

[Marks DTM Calib]

Its not entirely true, as an example, in Germany you need private cover once you earn above a certain value.....and it works pretty well.

But then, unlike our NHS, they are organised and efficient (something the NHS isn't and why I would not give them any more money until they are!)

[STEMO]

As we all know, the NHS wastes billions every year. Some of things it could save money on, such as central purchasing, seem obvious to business people. But, like the GPO of old, it's hard to get an old dog to perform new tricks.

[LC0112G]

Dont new member states have to adopt the Euro?

The old folk in Spain remember wistfully how going to the Euro created inflation. E.g. overnight a coffee went from 100 pesetas to 166 pesetas i.e. one euro. There were many other examples . Just mention it as an aside.

Yes. Of the nine EU countries that don't use the Euro only Denmark and the UK are not bound by treaty to join the Euro. 

New members of the EU have been obliged to join the Euro once they meet the "convergence criteria" ever since the adoption of the Maastricht treaty in 1994. One of the convergence criteria is to join ERM II. However, joining ERM II is voluntary, and a country can choose not to join - which is exactly what Sweden and 6 other EU countries have chosen to do (or more accurately not to do). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_and_the_euro

So whilst it looks like new countries MUST join the Euro, in practice they have an opt-out.

[Sir Tigger KC]

As I understand it, although Sweden has not joined ERM II they voluntarily keep the Swedish Krona within the parameters against the Euro as though they were members of ERM II, so I can't think there would be any obstacles for an advanced economy like Sweden joining the Eurozone.    But given that their neighbours Finland had to contribute 6 billion Euros to the Greece bailout, you can understand their reticence. 

I think that there is little doubt that the EU Commission will apply pressure on all the Non Euro countries to join the Eurozone, which will include us if we do end up staying in. 

[LC0112G]

As I understand it, although Sweden has not joined ERM II they voluntarily keep the Swedish Krona within the parameters against the Euro as though they were members of ERM II, so I can't think there would be any obstacles for an advanced economy like Sweden joining the Eurozone.    But given that their neighbours Finland had to contribute 6 billion Euros to the Greece bailout, you can understand their reticence. 

No doubt Sweden have their reasons, as do Poland, Czech Rep etc who could probably all meet the Euro requirements if they really wanted to. Point is, they all have an effective and simple to use opt-out.

I think that there is little doubt that the EU Commission will apply pressure on all the Non Euro countries to join the Eurozone, which will include us if we do end up staying in. 

The pressure wouldn't bother me. What does bother me is UK politicians who seem unable to say no. After the first no, any repeat of the same question gets a "What part of no didn't you understand?" response till they move onto the next issue..

[Sir Tigger KC]

Yes all we will need is an EU enthusiast PM like Blair and it will be goodbye Sterling, hello Schengen. Goodbye rebate, hello PESCO! 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I saw a claim on another forum that buried in the Lisbon Treaty is a provision to standardise the way healthcare is delivered across the EU.

Now I'm no expert on this but as far as I'm aware most countries on the continent operate a hybrid system where people have to have basic health insurance and governments pick up the tab for the rest via taxation. In the Republic of Ireland for example it costs about 60 Euros to see a GP I believe? 

If this is true it seems likely that if we ended up staying in the EU and the EU decided to standardise healthcare, the government of the day would be forced to restructure the NHS to a European system where we all have to have health insurance and maybe even end the principle of free at the point of delivery.   

The obvious answer is No, we'd just Veto it!, but and this where it gets interesting as the EU are due to end national vetoes and issues will be decided with Qualified Majority Voting.  So it seems likely that if this is true and happened, more countries would vote to keep the status quo rather than restructure their healthcare systems. 

I havn't read the Lisbon Treaty so it might be a huge conspiracy theory, but it's an interesting thought non the less! 

And the next time you come across some shouty Momentum leftie/remainer headbanger claiming that the Tories are going to sell the NHS to the Yanks, this is a handy comeback!   

Fake news.

Doing so requires treaty change, which in turn requires the unanimous approval of all EU28/EU27 member states. The veto exists unless we (and every other EU country) chose to give it up.

Same for all this tosh about rebates, EU army, forced into Schengen, forced to use the Euro etc. I've no doubt that some in the EU would like these things to happen, but it can't unless all EU members agree.

Merkel and Macron signed a new bi lateral treaty today, after which Merkel announced "this will contribute greatly towards the creation of an EU army".