Should therasa may quit?

What will it achieve by getting rid of our prime minster right now, at this point in time? Don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of hers, but I have lost faith in all government leaders. Labour, Lib Dem’s, not one of them will listen to the people of this country. They all make promises, then go back on them! Why would we want Jeremy Corbin as our leader. The man is nasty & evil. The whole system is ego based. None of them care about their country or people. Sorry, just my opinion 

Horrid state of affairs, can’t believe what has happened over the past few days. She s digging her heels in and not listening, feel Britain is broken and very divided. Leaving us all in a very vunrable unstable economy 

I think her wicked Government should go. I don’t care if she remains Tory leader. Labour and Corbyn may not be perfect but they are the only alternative and they have said they’ll ‘fix’ the welfare system. Whether they do only time and an election victory will tell.

Conserative go.
Labour all the way.

It is nonsense to run a country like a rivalry between City and United, with fans jeering at one another.   

Obviously, there should have been an all party parliamentary group, consulting with  non- m.p. experts,  to decide O U R terms, and the cleverest negotiators to be found anywhere in the world should have been hired to fight our 27, using our best bargaining chips. 

People who were against Brexit, and therefore keen to sabotage it, should not have been entrusted onto the All Party Group.   Nor should any 'opinion former' likely to have been directly or indirectly influenced by ?£18 billion? said to be owned by Soros, who declared he intended to thwart brexit, at any cost, regardless of the vote.

I have not read the 500 pages, but if it amounts to all the disadvantages of being in, at the same time as every disadvantage of being out, then the choice cannot be between getting out on those terms, or staying in.

Getting O U T on our O W N terms looks a better option, of course. 

But there is no single team captain or club scarf to follow to a golden land of milk and honey.  Nor will one man or woman, red scarf or blue, ensure paradise on earth for disabled people.

Maybe. Or maybe £ 18 billion persuades people to say things?

 EHR has not been as good on disability as it has on race, or at least in the u,k,'s interpretation of the rules. 

As an example, NHS and all public services provide translation to any language on earth,  at vast expense from taxpayer pockets. Other e.u. countries don't. 

N.h.s. pays for health service training, without ensuring value by retaining the resulting trained staff.  E.g. a man arrives not only from e.u. but from any country, saying truthfully he has been a nurse. 

 But his English language is not good, and his standards don't match, and he brings his family, to be treated on n.h.s, to be educated on u.k. tax funds, to be housed.

 He eventually, at uk taxpayer expense, gets qualified. Then, he works in admin for private hospitals. By now, his entire family can get automatic  citizenship in u.k.

A Nigerian arrives on a student visa, bringing a family which increases every year.  His visa expires, he and they are not deported, just housed .   A Jamaican arrives with a family party of 20, on a holiday visa. The children are sent to school, the whole lot get medical help and, somehow, finish up with council housing and no hint of deportation 15 years after the travel visa ran out.

E.U. has nothing to do with sending such immigrants, but the u.k. terror of being called racist is fuelled by fear of EHR.    Other e.u. countries aren't so easily scared.

 E.g. An English nurse, whose Spanish is so good nobody believes she wasn't born in Spain, must work as an estate agent, because Spain refuses to let foreigners from other E.U. countries take secure pensionable jobs such as nursing, by classifying it as civil service work, only available to  Spanish citizens. 

The fact there's no free translation means people choose to use private health insurance and private hospitals.   Why does u.k. permit anyone into the country without health insurance? 

Why don't we send everyone back to the nearest convenient drop off point on e.u. soil, to prevent the perverse incentives for them to cross the world in the first place, and to risk their lives to get here?  The answer is, terror.  Terror of distorted interpretation of human rights law.     

But, some equalities are more equal than others. Disabilism is second to last, ageism is hardly even mentioned.

Sadly, the whole EU has inadequate disabled access housing stock, and u.k. has inaccessible public transport, but legal aid won't be used to help fight through courts to change that.  Legal aid will be unlimited to spend on fighting deportation, instead.

One political group want paradise for civil service and other unions. Another party wants paradise for a different elite.   No party even bothers to promise any paradise for people being beaten up in old people's homes, or for people fighting disability problems.