Save the NHS!

OldCoals said:
I have no idea to be honest.

I just want the debate about the NHS to move away from the political football that is privatisation and focus on patient outcomes.
Click to expand...

Indeed they are, and always have been.

The problem with the NHS being a political football is not due to privatisation, it is due to the fact that it is nationalised and hence intrinsically linked with politics. The biggest challenge facing patient outcomes is the sacred cow status of the service which means protecting it is considered more important than the patient outcomes.
 
Dolph said:
Revealed: The inaccuracies that damned 'stitch-up' hospital http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...og-report-gave-lowest-score-patient-care.html

Let's see whether people engage with the content or attack the source.

My take, if this is true, it is a truely shocking example of politics before patients up there with north Stafford, driven by the same thing.
Click to expand...

The content being a letter from Circle's CEO to an MP defending his company's performance? Yes I'm sure it's all a conspiracy against him.
 
scorza said:
The content being a letter from Circle's CEO to an MP defending his company's performance? Yes I'm sure it's all a conspiracy against him.
Click to expand...

The CQC have acknowledged 215 of the 284 errors highlighted as per the article.

Is it acceptable to have a major report with 215 factual errors suggesting bias in it?
 
Far better to let the NHS scrap medical services and run everything using complimentary medicine and astrology:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...lp-nhs-claim-conservative-mp-david-tredinnick

In safe hands with the Tories aren't we ...

Oh and let's see what the real facts are before damning it all on a Daily Mail article ... based upon a letter from the CEO of the hospital in question without any other evidence whatsoever.

Kings Report incoming in 5, 4, 3 ,2 ...
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
The CQC have acknowledged 215 of the 284 errors highlighted as per the article.

Is it acceptable to have a major report with 215 factual errors suggesting bias in it?
Click to expand...

And yet they still say Circle's performance at Hitchingbrooke was "inadequate". Since you're suggesting bias, I think there's plenty of it in that article - where's the other side's version of events for example? I have faith that if there's any legs in this story then other news outlets will pick up on it, seen nothing so far.
 
scorza said:
And yet they still say Circle's performance at Hitchingbrooke was "inadequate". Since you're suggesting bias, I think there's plenty of it in that article - where's the other side's version of events for example? I have faith that if there's any legs in this story then other news outlets will pick up on it, seen nothing so far.
Click to expand...

The stars were only aligned for the Daily Mail to get the story out this morning. If Jupiter was in Capricorn then the Tories would have ensured it was The Telegraph that got the article however because that was not the case, due to a hefty advertising contribution from HSBC, then were have to suffer the Daily Mail.
 
scorza said:
And yet they still say Circle's performance at Hitchingbrooke was "inadequate". Since you're suggesting bias, I think there's plenty of it in that article - where's the other side's version of events for example? I have faith that if there's any legs in this story then other news outlets will pick up on it, seen nothing so far.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to wait for the select committee report on the matter, are you?
 
Dolph said:
Revealed: The inaccuracies that damned 'stitch-up' hospital http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...og-report-gave-lowest-score-patient-care.html

Let's see whether people engage with the content or attack the source.

My take, if this is true, it is a truely shocking example of politics before patients up there with north Stafford, driven by the same thing.
Click to expand...

Having had to go to Hinchingbrooke many times both before and after Circle took over, the improvement under Circle has been nothing short of outstanding.

It was a basket case before Circle but after they took over it was superb, everything improved.

I was there last week with my grandson and people were really upset that it could be going back to it's old ways.

When I heard about this report I thought it was some sort of joke but now it's looking more and more like an almighty political stitch up of the highest order.
 
Xordium said:
The stars were only aligned for the Daily Mail to get the story out this morning. If Jupiter was in Capricorn then the Tories would have ensured it was The Telegraph that got the article however because that was not the case, due to a hefty advertising contribution from HSBC, then were have to suffer the Daily Mail.
Click to expand...

Hehe I saw that story too (I loved how the Guardian mentioned that the MP was a Capricorn). I have this vision of the Tories introducing "Free Hospitals" like they introduced Free Schools, where anyone with an opinion can set up a new hospital, they don't have to employ qualified medical staff so are free to employ Derek Acora, and they're free from any pesky interference from central government - like quality and safety inspections.

Dolph said:
I'm willing to wait for the select committee report on the matter, are you?
Click to expand...

Sure, why not?
 
I'll have to dig up a funny debate we had years ago where I asked Dolph what would happen if healthcare was privatised and healthcare staff refused to work for anything less than lawyer type salaries. His answer was that there would have to be a negotiated "fair" pay for such work. Thereby, insinuating that potential pay would have to be removed by "force". Was a really funny thread.
 
Xordium said:
I'll have to dig up a funny debate we had years ago where I asked Dolph what would happen if healthcare was privatised and healthcare staff refused to work for anything less than lawyer type salaries. His answer was that there would have to be a negotiated "fair" pay for such work. Thereby, insinuating that potential pay would have to be removed by "force". Was a really funny thread.
Click to expand...

That was never the point, fair pay is determined by market value, the what if scenario where everyone refuses to work in their trained field is highly unlikely.
 
Dolph said:
That was never the point, fair pay is determined by market value, the what if scenario where everyone refuses to work in their trained field is highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

So if a group of surgeons who could perform a specific skill eg heart bypass decided they wouldn't work for less than £20000 per day you are okay with that?

Other surgeons would not be able to perform the job.
Said surgeons would not be training new people who would undercut them.

Dolph said:
Apart from the 215 errors the CQC have ALLEGEDLY acknowledged according to BIASED PARTIES in the article linked above and the known ALLEGED biased of some of the writers?
Click to expand...

Fixed that one for you.
 
Last edited:
Xordium said:
So if a group of surgeons who could perform a specific skill eg heart bypass decided they wouldn't work for less than £20000 per day you are okay with that?

Other surgeons would not be able to perform the job.
Said surgeons would not be training new people who would undercut them.
Click to expand...

Their choice in my view. However, unless you are going to start changing the immigration rules, not likely to be a showstopper as if pay is that far above the global average, skilled talent from elsewhere will come and do the job for less.
 
Dolph said:
Their choice in my view. However, unless you are going to start changing the immigration rules, not likely to be a showstopper as if pay is that far above the global average, skilled talent from elsewhere will come and do the job for less.
Click to expand...

But they would have to meet the criteria set out by body that represents the surgeons interests ...

But you have no problem with though that's interesting ...

Dolph happy for people to sell their houses and all their assets to get basic healthcare. It's a wonder he doesn't move to the US ... could go clubbin' with Sarah Palin then - seals that is.
 
Xordium said:
But they would have to meet the criteria set out by body that represents the surgeons interests ...

But you have no problem with though that's interesting ...

Dolph happy for people to sell their houses and all their assets to get basic healthcare. It's a wonder he doesn't move to the US ... could go clubbin' with Sarah Palin then - seals that is.
Click to expand...

If we have vested interests creating what effectively amounts to a closed shop, then reform is clearly needed.

I have no problem with people negotiating the terms of their employment, provided the market is free from unnecessary interference (for the avoidance of doubt, training requirements are not an unnecessary interference, but can be a problem if administered by vested interests)

However, I take this stance knowing that, in the vast majority of cases, this does not result in significant shortfalls or massively increased costs.

The US system is broken, I have said this many times.
 
Dolph said:
If we have vested interests creating what effectively amounts to a closed shop, then reform is clearly needed..
Click to expand...

So if people leverage their skillset at something you don't think is fair you use "force" to stop them. I am reading that correct aren't I.

And you don't think they US system is fair but you've openly posted that you are happy for a healthcare treatment to be priced so that 99.9% of the population would not be able to afford it.
 
Last edited:
Xordium said:
So if people leverage their skillset at something you don't think is fair you use "force" to stop them. I am reading that correct aren't I.

And you don't think they US system is fair but you've openly posted that you are happy for a healthcare treatment to be priced so that 99.9% of the population would not be able to afford it.
Click to expand...

a group should not be allowed to dominate their profession for their own benefit. What you are essentially suggesting is that a union gets to decide who can work in an industry, an idea long discredited as being bad for the consumer.

As for treatment, I advocate a European model of state funding/independent provision, not a us model. To see if your problems are a real concern, we can look to France and Germany to see if they suffer the issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom