Petition to save the NHS
- Thread starter stockhausen
- Start date
Well, except every honest comparison between the NHS and the European systems that use the sort of system proposed in the Bill...
Although this line of argument is pointless, because those on the left have demonstrated time and time again that ideology is more important than saving lives where the NHS is concerned.
My mother was an RCN and RCM steward (at different points in her career), they are a trade union in all but name, same with the BMA, which is largely how they get away with pushing the health service close to a closed shop system which is outlawed elsewhere...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_College_of_Nursing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Medical_Association
for reference
Last edited:
whereas your contentless vomiting of lefty communist claptrap is always so enlightened?
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,380
What a waste of time. What's the point in screwing around with the NHS while we're still borrowing money at high interest putting ourselves into even more debt. Stop private banks from creating money and issue it debt-free then at least our income tax can pay for services we need. Or scrap income tax, I hate paying for other peoples healthcare and education.
The point of 'screwing around' with the NHS is to address the massive structural flaws that mean that even though investment in the NHS tripled in the last 14 years, outcomes barely improved at all.
If the NHS performed equivilent to the better systems in Europe (which pretty much all use an any willing provider competitive model where the government ensures access rather than being sole provider of services), we'd save an extra 10-15 thousand people a year from dying unnecessarily. (source)
Some people think this level of unnecessary death is an acceptable price to pay to maintain the NHS in it's current state, I don't.
Well, except every honest comparison between the NHS and the European systems that use the sort of system proposed in the Bill...
Although this line of argument is pointless, because those on the left have demonstrated time and time again that ideology is more important than saving lives where the NHS is concerned.
My mother was an RCN and RCM steward (at different points in her career), they are a trade union in all but name, same with the BMA, which is largely how they get away with pushing the health service close to a closed shop system which is outlawed elsewhere...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_College_of_Nursing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Medical_Association
for reference
So if its acting as a union wouldn’t a ballot of been taken to go against the reforms? Meaning most of the GP's would not want these changes and responsibility?
Most union ballots have a return rate of around 15-20%
Also, argumentum ad populum is a fallacy.
and your right wing have all the poor people die and privatise the NHS and kiss *** the tories is such a great argument. Jeez, if you hate the NHS so much go and move to the USA then see how much you like your healthcare
I can't work out whether you are ignorant or deliberately misleading with the comparison of the planned changes to the NHS and the USA, because they are absolutely nothing alike. The changes bring us into line with more successful systems across Europe that use the partnership model.
I've cited the evidence to support the changes, you've ranted and made irrelevant comparisons. Why is your ideology more important than saving people's lives?
Were these "honest comparisons" done by US healthcare corporations by any chance, because what is being proposed isn't a European style system at all, it's much closer to the US system and will set us firmly along that path. Did you see Question Time this week? There was some silly American woman on (didn't catch her name) who when asked a question about the NHS said something along the lines of "Why not turn the NHS into a multi-trillion pound industry?" That's exactly what Lansley wants to see (the audience on QT booed her for that btw, not often that happens).
My mother was an RCN and RCM steward (at different points in her career), they are a trade union in all but name, same with the BMA, which is largely how they get away with pushing the health service close to a closed shop system which is outlawed elsewhere...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_College_of_Nursing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Medical_Association
for reference
For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_association
Though lets be honest here, you dislike the idea of a professional association at an ideological level - it gets in the way of the free market doesn't it, that only certain people can call themselves nurses or doctors and it's not a general free-for-all where quacks are free to set up and take the consequences (bankruptcy) if they screw up.
Most union ballots have a return rate of around 15-20%
Also, argumentum ad populum is a fallacy.
Can you quote the figure of the return from this ballot then? I have not seen any GP stand out and say the BMA is going against what they believe in.
I do believe that there was interest to begin with from a minority of GP’s, however now that there not really been given choice on size off there CCG (to do with management & running costs etc.) and how much mandatory things they have to do which they don’t want to, there turning away from this.
Ok, here is an example from the HSJ. They reported that Clinical commissioning groups have been instructed to base themselves in existing NHS buildings – most of which are to be taken over by the Department of Health’s new property company – and pay for them out of their running cost allowance…..
Most of the CCG work will be done by commissioning support organizations, which are meant to be standalone private companies by 2016……. So what are we not privatizing here?
What's being proposed has virtually no resemblance to healthcare in the US, far closer to France, Germany and the Nordic countries (where the state provides access to multiple competing care providers). It is probably worth mentioning that virtually no other country in the world runs their healthcare system like the NHS.
I fail to see why a professional association should have a monopoly on terms or access. That doesn't mean a free for all, it just means an end to closed shop mentalities.
400 out of 34000 in England have been involved in the decision by the BMA to oppose the plans
Reference for voting numbers
Reference for GP numbers
It's probably worth noting the BMA have been making far more song and dance with their members about pensions (where they balloted everyone and recieved a 38% turnout) than about reforms, further confirming that the BMA are for their members, not patients.
Access to healthcare, the important part. The experience of the rest of Europe shows the benefits in splitting access to healthcare from provision, and raising standards through competing providers.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 1,890
- Location
- On the road
Politics aside, sOme people have really no idea what a national treasure we have in the NHS. Yes it does need reform, and several layers of managers "peeled off" from it.
But we should be very careful, I have seen the stress from my friends in the US and China about health care, just think about it, get ill and if you do not have health insurance, you will pretty much go bankrupt after long illness, or not be able to afford treatment straight away. Quite a nice system right?
But we should be very careful, I have seen the stress from my friends in the US and China about health care, just think about it, get ill and if you do not have health insurance, you will pretty much go bankrupt after long illness, or not be able to afford treatment straight away. Quite a nice system right?
does dolph really believe that the tory pigs are doing this for the good of the NHS and to provide a better service............... LOL
they are doing it because they get millions in donations and many tory MPs and Lords are involved in private healthcare companies, thats why
better service doesn't even come into lansley's half baked health bill, its about selling as much off to his mates in healthcare companies in return for big fat donations and directorships
they are doing it because they get millions in donations and many tory MPs and Lords are involved in private healthcare companies, thats why
better service doesn't even come into lansley's half baked health bill, its about selling as much off to his mates in healthcare companies in return for big fat donations and directorships
It is indeed, but the same applies across most of Europe, which is where the reforms being implemented originate.
The NHS is a wonderful idea, but the implementation is structurally flawed. That's why pouring massive amounts of cash into it hasn't improved patient outcomes (at least not any more than they were improving year on year prior to the spending increases).
The problem is, if we get too hung up on keeping the system how it is now, we never address the flaws in the system, and people keep dying unnecessarily because we don't have a structure that drives the best results for patients, and without that, no matter how good or how dedicated the staff are, people will keep dying needlessly.
Your irrationality is showing through again.
But that is a symptom of the structural flaw. When a system is run based on politics in a monopolistic environment, then the focus is all wrong. You increase your income by getting people to push politicians for more money. That means when more money comes, you create more managers, and when cuts come, you cut frontline staff, as that is what will lead to more money.
This is completely the opposite to normal business structures, where money comes from the customer upwards, and hence the focus is always on improving customer satisfaction to attract more. Hence you employ more frontline staff, and cut managers if savings are needed.
Without addressing this structural flaw (something that any capable provider achieves well, although there is an argument that this reform doesn't go far enough in devolving that power down to the patient), all attempts at fixing the problem are going to fail in the long term.
We need a healthcare system run for the patients, and that means making the patients, not staff and not politicians, the key focus of it, and that requires fundamental reform of the NHS and an end to the state healthcare provision monopoly.
It is a good thing the government didn't listen to the BMA when the NHS was proposed isn't it? Considering that they opposed it and we're instead pushing for an insurance based system instead...
