Please don't tell me you're shocked!
Save the NHS!
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
Please don't tell me you're shocked!
Sorry to ask you to retype things you've typed before, but what kind of system are you in favour of?
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 2,124
I've said it once and I will say it again, if company A can do it cheaper but at the same standard or better than company B why is this a bad thing? 
I've said it once and I will say it again, if company A can do it cheaper but at the same standard or better than company B why is this a bad thing?
Contracts?
And there is other factors that come into play. Such as reliability of the company, where they source materials from, relationship with the business etc. If a business has a better relationship/has dealt with company B for a long time they are more likely to get favourable finance terms.
I've said it once and I will say it again, if company A can do it cheaper but at the same standard or better than company B why is this a bad thing?
Because company A can't do it better and cheaper.
Company A will cut corners and **** it up. They will then lie about doing so to keep hitting targets. Providing healthcare isn't making widgets.
See: Declining cleaning standards in wards coinciding with MRSA; Rail privatisation; The crap standard of care homes for the elderly; The tender process for the west coast main line; etc.
edit
If people don't want the NHS dismantled then they should not vote Tory. It's pretty simple. Their philosophical starting point is that it should be rolled up. That they are fart arseing around and Bleeding The Beast first is because it is a sacred cow. However they go about it eventually that would be their end goal in an ideal world.
Last edited:
So pretty much business as usual for the NHS then?
I dont know how you come to the conclusion that labour were or would be any better for the NHS.
Waiting lists for waiting lists, MRSA, botched computer systems, PfI, record spending, closed A&E departments, record amount of management staff etc etc etc.
All under 13 years of labour control.
Waiting times and HAI funding was better, A+E closed in the main for quality reasons and the record spending only bought it closer to the level our European neighbours spend although they tend to not do the special treatments we do with a largely better demographic to deal with. The last part being consistently overlooked. We will treat the weird the wonderful and the costly here - it adds up - go to the OcUK lauded French system though and it's a case of palliative care.
They made plenty of mistakes and they were muppets but to say things were not better overall is untrue.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...6-000--Labour-says-crisis-worst-20-years.html
250% rise in patients waiting more than 4 hours in A&E - Conservative health reforms really working well then. Good opportunity for a tax haven resident corporation to open a private A&E clinic. Pain is an excellent motivator for people to open their pockets.
250% rise in patients waiting more than 4 hours in A&E - Conservative health reforms really working well then. Good opportunity for a tax haven resident corporation to open a private A&E clinic. Pain is an excellent motivator for people to open their pockets.
What impact has it had on outcomes? The article doesn't say. without this information, it is impossible to know whether there is causr for concern or not.
PHP:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
The article can't say, but what is clear, when you have an abundance of money through an economic high, and you spend all of it, and flog off the assets, and then spend even more money by borrowing loads, then you have truly totally messed up when the service you were still providing wasn't that much better than when you started out.
Accountability should have went up, the additional managers should have helped with this, but all they seem to do is get in the way of people actually working.
scorza, the health service wasn't any better under labour, they were just bunging money down a massive drain in an attempt to stop things splitting and leaking out sideways. It didn't work, and it doesn't work. I doubt the current changes will make anything better, but we can't keep wasting money the way we were.
As I said on other threads, and possibly this one, the public need to be told the NHS won't always be there to pay for absolutely everything. limits need to be set, and lines drawn on the ground, and then we work to those achievable and affordable targets. Anything above, ether won't be available, or will be with insurance or paying for it - for everyone, not means tested BS that they dump all over every other government department and service over time.
I doubt anyone in politics has the balls to even contemplate telling the public the truth, or setting up an overarching system that would. Damn shame, as they will keep lying and the service keep providing until it bursts everywhere in a fetid mess of e-coli covered corridors.
Accountability should have went up, the additional managers should have helped with this, but all they seem to do is get in the way of people actually working.
scorza, the health service wasn't any better under labour, they were just bunging money down a massive drain in an attempt to stop things splitting and leaking out sideways. It didn't work, and it doesn't work. I doubt the current changes will make anything better, but we can't keep wasting money the way we were.
As I said on other threads, and possibly this one, the public need to be told the NHS won't always be there to pay for absolutely everything. limits need to be set, and lines drawn on the ground, and then we work to those achievable and affordable targets. Anything above, ether won't be available, or will be with insurance or paying for it - for everyone, not means tested BS that they dump all over every other government department and service over time.
I doubt anyone in politics has the balls to even contemplate telling the public the truth, or setting up an overarching system that would. Damn shame, as they will keep lying and the service keep providing until it bursts everywhere in a fetid mess of e-coli covered corridors.
Agreed, we have two options.
1) all pay substantially more tax and hope they spend it sensibly.
2) a agree on a set of standards on what NHS does and doesn't cover and have a top up private health insurance.
I'm off the opinion, that it should be the second. Unlike several other countries, we just waste money in public companies and it just doesn't work for us. If we could solve the waste, then I would be up for paying more tax, but I would need to see those improvments first before supporting it.
No party will do what is needed with the NHS as it would be too unpopular which ever route you take, so they just struggle on, peeing billions up the wall.
This is down to our political system, parties are unable to actually do what is needed due to public opinion winning over any common sense.
1) all pay substantially more tax and hope they spend it sensibly.
2) a agree on a set of standards on what NHS does and doesn't cover and have a top up private health insurance.
I'm off the opinion, that it should be the second. Unlike several other countries, we just waste money in public companies and it just doesn't work for us. If we could solve the waste, then I would be up for paying more tax, but I would need to see those improvments first before supporting it.
No party will do what is needed with the NHS as it would be too unpopular which ever route you take, so they just struggle on, peeing billions up the wall.
This is down to our political system, parties are unable to actually do what is needed due to public opinion winning over any common sense.
I honestly don't know how you could say that with a straight face, sure Labour's stewardship of the NHS wasn't great - they introduced the private sector best practices that directly led to the Mid Staffs crimes against humanity. However at least they didn't introduce an unwanted, untested, massive top-down re-organisation of the NHS that has resulted in massive jumps in waiting times.
Did you know that in 1979 the All-Party Commons Select Committee on Health stated that their report found that the NHS provided excellent value for money and recommended that governments not make any changes to it?
yep thats cos A&E in my local hospital has actually cut nursing staff, less nurses, less HCA's, less senior doctors, tory NHS going well then
yep thats cos A&E in my local hospital has actually cut nursing staff, less nurses, less HCA's, less senior doctors, tory NHS going well then
But it's OK, because outcomes aren't affected - whether you wait 4 hours or 24 hours for your broken arm to get treated.
wow you really are blinkered by your love for the tory destruction of the NHS
4 hours is a key target for hospital A&E to meet, how would you like to wait 5, 8, 10, 24 hours in A&E to get that broken arm, leg, etc to be dealt with. The knock on effects of patients staying longer in A&E would mean a massive backlog, without patients either being discharged or moved onto medical/surgical assessment wards in a timely manner means A&E gets full and the system breaks. People have to wait in corridors on trolleys, exactly what the tories let happen to emergency medicine in the 1990s, people died in corridors FFS cos of an absence of investment and meaningful performance targets on wait times.
the current 4 hour targets means a patient has to be triaged, treated and discharged/referred on in that time, no excuses - with tory staffing cuts to frontline nursing this is going to suffer, so its no surprise this is happening right now! before the tories started messing with the NHS 98% of the time the target was met, I wonder in a few months what that target will look like, its ok they will probably massage the figures like everything else
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Did you know that in 1979 most of the treatments we have today simply didn't exist. The treatments didn't, the equipment didn't, the drugs didn't.
How could you not change a system when each and every single little thing within the entire service has changed.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 1,701
That has more to do unprecedented levels of hospital attendances than changes in staffing levels. We have had one of the busiest periods in nhs history, well above all expectations and predictions. My hospital hasn't had any changes in staffing and we are still struggling for bed capacity and 4 hour targets. But yep, sure it's all Tory changes....
