Doesn't look like anyone's going to be living in Gaza for some time to come either ways SD. Place is all but uninhabitable now.
A few weeks ago a family member came to our house and said that she was having problems getting medication she was being prescribed (on a regular basis as part of her ongoing treatment) at our local pharmacies.
I'd heard about shortages of certain medications on an irregular basis in the media since we left the EU, but this was the first time anyone I knew had personally been affected.
But a report in yesterday's Guardian has brought into focus just how severe the problems are. We are now in a situation where hundreds of vital medications for the treatment of cancers, diabetic conditions, psychoses and hormonal therapies are on the list of products in short supply to the point where lives are being put at risk. Data shows that the length of the list is growing by the day and now stands at double that which it was two years ago.
Much of this has to do with drug prices increasing to the point where they no longer fall within the strict purchasing limits of the NHS budget. The increased cost of importation brought about by our no longer being members of the EU has pushed the branded products off the purchasing lists, leaving only the generic products still within the scope of NHS purchasing. The production levels of the cheaper generic products are however not sufficient to satisfy the needs of the NHS and where it was previously possible to fall back on more expensive branded products to make up the shortfall, this is now no longer allowed. Hence we are reduced to a situation where too many pharmacies are chasing too small a supply of product.
And this was exactly what we were warned would happen by the remain lobby, when deciding whether to leave the EU, or remain in membership. But you will remember that such warnings were dubbed as "project fear". This we were told by the Leave campaign, would never happen. It was the use of nightmare scenarios by the Remain campaign to frighten people away from voting to leave.
I await to hear the response from Farage in respect of what we now know was
not project fear, but was just a simple logical prediction based upon no more than an understanding of how our systems of procurement work. I'm not expecting one any time soon to be honest, but I promise you this. The first time Richard Tice, or whoever happens to be leading the Reform Party (ie the Brexit Party as was) at the time of the next election, puts themselves up for answering questions, my question will be what they have to say in response to this. And that if they were so unable to use the simple reasoning that led to the now demonstrably correct assumption of what would happen to our drug procurement system upon leaving the EU, why now should we trust their reasoning on anything else?
But perhaps I ought to be careful here. Because although Reform could never win an election, they do have a very real prospect of ensuring that the Tories do not win another one either. They are scooping up dissatisfied Tory voters in their millions (they sit at around ten percent in the polls) and in so doing are splitting the Tory vote in numerous key marginals without which a Conservative victory cannot be achieved. In fact the situation is extremely bad for the Tories indeed. In a recent poll carried out by YouGov - the largest of it's kind yet carried out - the Tories are set to be
decimated in the next election, and this is in no small part down to this very splitting effect. It was estimated by the pollsters that the entire red-wall tranche of seats that Boris Johnson won in the North of England would be lost because of it. Stripped down to its core support in the South, the advantage that won Johnson his huge majority is gone, and a combination of dissatisfaction with the Tories generally, Sunak in particular, and the obvious train-wreck of the UK economy (and immigration policy) they have brought about.......well, the job of defeating the Tories is effectively done.
And it isn't that Kier Stamer has had anything to do with it. The poll shows that he is as unpopular as ever. People don't like him - but they don't like the Tories even more. They just want them out and will take Stamer as the price to pay for that.
But we are entering into dangerous waters.
I've observed before that what makes the Tories winners - the thing that has made them the party of government for much of the post war period since WW2 - is their inbuilt belief that they have the
right to rule, but more importantly their preparedness to do anything -
anything - to ensure that they do. And if this means going to war, or working to create the circumstances where we have no choice but to go to war - then I believe that they would quite possibly be prepared to do it, in order to reverse the fortunes that this poll predicts for them. And remember they have seen the benefits of a war in reversing their electoral chances before. Had it not been for the wave of patriotism, of support for the ruling party that the Falklands War brought about, it is highly probable that Margaret Thatcher would have lost the election in 1983. Is it then a coincidence that we find ourselves in the thick of a renewed possibility of conflict? How much will decisions we make over the coming months be influenced by an eye kept on the polls? There is small reason why we, a two-bit nation of little prosperity and even less international importance should be the 'tip of the spear' in two major regions of conflict in the world. Yet here we are, spearheading the support for Ukraine Iin Europe (and recognised by Zelensky in an article in last week's Sunday Times as such) and standing alongside America in mounting retaliatory strikes against the Houthi strongholds in Yemen. We do this of course, as a way of keeping ourselves on the top-table, of punching (as it were) above our weight. But it's pretty good positioning from the point of going into an election when you are trailing in the polls as well. Make no mistake: if we can fight a war from a distance, with bombs and drones rather than boots on the ground, and this will win the Tories a further term in office, then it's a done deal. We'll go to war.
-----0-----
Incidentally, it's worth noting as well, the Americans have no real interest in protecting Red Sea trade routes. Their economy isn't dependent upon these routes, they don't recieve either goods or energy products via them, nor do their exports take this route.
The reason they are there, leading the world's response to the threat to Red Sea traffic is exactly that - to be seen to be leading the world's response. Because to be seen
not to be leading the world's response is an admission that they no longer lead the hegemony of the Western dominance of the World. It would be a tacit admission that the days of American dominance are over. And who else would step into the place to lead the response: why China of course. They are currently keeping their heads down, because the Americans are doing their work for them. It's Chinese interests that are most threatened by disruption of Red Sea trade (and the EU 's). It's their route for exporting their goods to Europe and they should by rights be the ones defending it.
So why aren't they.
Well, firstly their shipping is not nearly as much at risk as that of nations that have connections with, or are actively supporting Israel. And secondly, why do it (and incur all of the cost and political trouble both at home and abroad, that it will bring, when another country is prepared to do it for you.
And can you really see America standing by and letting China step into its role as 'policeman of the world'? Yeah right. Like that's going to happen!
So, as with all things, its wheels within wheels. The game is international geopolitics and the game, my friends, is afoot!
)
