[Politics] NHS Protection Amendment

Guy Fawkes said:

Comparing the importance of the NHS to importance of London taxi or bus colour schemes....No
Comparing the two in terms of actually being part of any Government's plans, meaning either will actually happen and therefore legislation is required to prevent this ...yes

The NHS is an emotive subject and therefore bound to provoke a strong reaction so no wonder it's used to scaremonger and stoke up a fear over something that isn't likely to happen (the point being that the colour ban for London buses or taxi's are equally unlikely)

Yet the tone of the original post is that the Government are actively considering selling it off (political suicide for any political party) and only this legislation can prevent this and without it, the NHS is doomed. - Which is on a par with Trump's claim that the election was stolen by the Democrats, or the claims that his election win in 2016 meant a nuclear war started by him will undoubtedly happen (both preposterous claims with no real basis in fact, li8ke the claim that the NHS is about to be lost to some trade deal)

Their proof that a sell off is imminent is the failure of the legislation to pass to prevent it (basically 2+2 = 5) but by the same logic, there is no legislation to stop an imminent ban on the certain colours being banned in place, so does that mean that a Government ban for that is also imminent?

Do we need countless laws put through Parliament on any little thing just in case some Government ever plans to do something other see as a bad move, how many millions of laws would that amount to? is it necessary? and are there more important things that should be the main focus right now, like... responding to a pandemic ?

Click to expand...