Save the NHS!

Now, there IS a surprise - GPs display entrepreneurial initiative

scorza said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/mar/27/gps-private-health-firm-shares

Conflicts of interests ahoy!
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, I think that this risk was foreseen in the draft risk register you referenced earlier today.

Two GPs for whom I have done work in the past have told me that they are absolutely delighted with the Tories' NHS changes; they say that there will be no effective controls or guidance for a few years and they will have a chance to make am absolute fortune.

The Grauniad said:
The [report for the north of England] warns of a similarly high risk of "organisational and system instability" damaging management and governance, and uncertainty caused by the changes that could reduce the capacity and capability of staff and organisations.
Click to expand...
 
stockhausen said:
Funnily enough, I think that this risk was foreseen in the draft risk register you referenced earlier today.
Click to expand...

Of course it was. But you can not blame the GPs here. They are merely following the example exhibited by many parts of society and what the government seems happy to condone. Once one sector of society is seen to be benefiting from profiteering you have a choice either lag behind or join them. Strangely people will join them where possible. Like I have openly said once I am back in post I fully intend my services to be charged at the maximum possible because I really fail to see why I should take an altruistic stance when it seems no one else does.
 
Tories continue policy of secrecy and deceit over NHS privatisation

I see that ministers have decided to overrule the information commissioner's ruling that the NHS risk assessment must be published.

It would have course be very inconvenient for the Tories if people were to discover that privatising the NHS is not going to benefit the vast majority of patients. (BBC online & The Grauniad)
 
Before anyone feeds the troll, Andy Burnham (Labour) blocked the risk register in 2009 when he was Health Secretary.
 
Muffin` said:
Before anyone feeds the troll, Andy Burnham (Labour) blocked the risk register in 2009 when he was Health Secretary.
Click to expand...

So two wrongs make a right then? Besides, I don't recall the government Burnham served in vetoing a ruling by the Information Tribunal (or whatever it was called back then).
 
it has been ordered by the information commissioner they should publish it, but nooo, they know if they do the public will find out the real cost of reform
 
scorza said:
So two wrongs make a right then? Besides, I don't recall the government Burnham served in vetoing a ruling by the Information Tribunal (or whatever it was called back then).
Click to expand...

Why's it wrong? I'm not saying the decision anyone took is wrong, I'm just pointing out the facts.

Interest to the public and in the public interest are getting mixed up again...
 
Muffin` said:
Why's it wrong? I'm not saying the decision anyone took is wrong, I'm just pointing out the facts.

Interest to the public and in the public interest are getting mixed up again...
Click to expand...

It's wrong because the Information Tribunal says it should be released. Duh.
 
Muffin` said:
... Interest to the public and in the public interest are getting mixed up again...
Click to expand...
And are you sharing some interesting fact here or are you perhaps suggesting that releasing the NHS Risk Register is not in the public interest?

Coz, just to be absolutely clear, I am saying 100% categorically that I believe that the Tories' decision is 100% wrong and self-serving.
 
stockhausen said:
And are you sharing some interesting fact here or are you perhaps suggesting that releasing the NHS Risk Register is not in the public interest?

Coz, just to be absolutely clear, I am saying 100% categorically that I believe that the Tories' decision is 100% wrong and self-serving.
Click to expand...

Given your reputation for blatant misrepresentation, and the concerns around the use of the risk register for precisely that purpose, thereby undermining the whole process, I'd have thought, if you were actually being honest rather than partisan for the first time in your life, you'd have understood the concerns...

Strangely, I've searched for your objections to previous refusals to release the risk register by Labour ministers, but I can't find them anywhere...
 
Dolph said:
Given your reputation for blatant misrepresentation, and the concerns around the use of the risk register for precisely that purpose, thereby undermining the whole process, I'd have thought, if you were actually being honest rather than partisan for the first time in your life, you'd have understood the concerns...

Strangely, I've searched for your objections to previous refusals to release the risk register by Labour ministers, but I can't find them anywhere...
Click to expand...

and your reputation for sticking up for everything this god forsaken government do is so neutral?

how can publishing this be anything BUT in the public interest, we pay for it after all
 
MrMoonX said:
time to show the fat cat MPs who really hold power!
Click to expand...

You going to do anything?

My guess is you'll either ineffectually whine on the internet or maybe if you're really hardcore wave a placard.

You want to show them who has power you know what you have to do don't you?

Go start stabbing police officers till they have no power.

But that's a rather unpalatable thought isn't it?
 
MrMoonX said:
and your reputation for sticking up for everything this god forsaken government do is so neutral?

how can publishing this be anything BUT in the public interest, we pay for it after all
Click to expand...

If the public, the media and the opposition could be trusted to evaluate the information appropriately and in context, then I would agree.

However, the public, as a collective, are idiots, the media feed the idiots and Labour are completely dishonest, so there is no value in publishing information when the only reason the vast majority of people asking for it want is it to misrepresent it.

A risk register is not a prediction of what will happen or anything of the sort, and it's already clear that too many people simply do not understand that.

Information is worthless without the knowledge and will to interpret it correctly, after all.
 
Tom Dolphin of the British Medical Association (BMA) told the Junior Doctors Conference that medical students paying the new £9,000 tuition fees, which come into force in September, will have debts of up to £70,000 by the time they graduate. They will also face their salaries being eroded by inflation and increased pension contributions, which deter talented students from entering medicine, added Dolphin, chairman of the BMA's Junior Doctor Committee.
Click to expand...
So, where do the Tories think that all the doctors for their privatised NHS are going to come from I wonder :confused:

From India, Pakistan, Africa and Eastern Europe I guess . . .
 
lolstockhausen.

when these guys graduate they will be on so much they won't even NOTICE the 1% or whatever coming out of their paycheque!
 
Dolph said:
If the public, the media and the opposition could be trusted to evaluate the information appropriately and in context, then I would agree.

However, the public, as a collective, are idiots, the media feed the idiots and Labour are completely dishonest, so there is no value in publishing information when the only reason the vast majority of people asking for it want is it to misrepresent it.

A risk register is not a prediction of what will happen or anything of the sort, and it's already clear that too many people simply do not understand that.

Information is worthless without the knowledge and will to interpret it correctly, after all.
Click to expand...

Oh my god.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom