Save the NHS!

Depends on the details. More and more public money is filtered in through the NHS to private healthcare as waiting list initiatives/support services - I don't think them at chart would show that.
 
Dolph said:
They are trying to change the times when labour is expensive, reducing the incentive to have lower staffing and service levels during the evenings and weekends, and especially on Saturdays.

It isn't purely about cost neutrality, although there is dispute about whether the bma proposal was.
Click to expand...

Even that isn't true. The BMA offered a cut in basic pay to fund extra staffing at the weekend solving both weekend staffing and cost neutrality. It was a terrible offer for us and would have been rejected by junior doctors but interestingly the government rejected it despite giving them everything their manifesto wanted.

The government contract had Saturdays down to plain time but had a penalty clause for working more than 1 in 4 Saturdays that meant you had to be paid significantly more. Their contract achieved what they really want - plain time Saturdays to force on the rest of NHS staff, but discouraged what they said they wanted - extra doctors at weekends.

It was a good move by the BMA. It made it clear that all the government really want out of this whole debacle is to pay its staff plain time on the Saturdays to save money, rather than to change care.

This concerns me, they've used the smoke screen of 7 day care to try and sneak a pay cut in for all NHS staff. This has caused industrial action on a scale not seen for decades and there seems little or no concern for staff or patients in trying to force it through by contract imposition.
 
Last edited:
Bear said:
Just goes to show that the whining about the privatisation of the NHS is BS doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Really depends how they categorised the spending.

Compare the UK to France say (similar GDP and population), as a % of GDP and per-capita we're spending a lot less on the NHS than them. We don't put as much money into the health system as many other countries.

The thing about increased "marketisation" of the NHS is that of the money we do spend (less than we probably should) more of it is being wasted on the tendering process, billing, and finance (PFIs). The first of these alone costs between £4.5 billion and £30 billion a year. That's a big % of its budget and enough to cover the budget shortfall many times over. I'd hazard that slice is appearing under "public" in the above chart.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournh...ns-of-wasted-nhs-cash-no one-wants-to-mention

Privatisation has meant increasing admin costs in the NHS from 5% to 14% of the total budget. The opposite of what they said would happen. :rolleyes:

Edit: just to play devil's advocate a bit... If the actual work the private suppliers do can be done for 10% less than the NHS was doing it before then it could work out better for the NHS overall. In other words, the NHS might spend more money deciding how to spend the money, but if the people actually spending the money do it for less then there could be a saving. Problem is that seems unlikely - private providers don't have the economies of scale the NHS does (did), and they need to be able to turn a profit too.
 
Last edited:
danielanthony said:
Then surely they should be advocating an insurance based system like the ones they wish to work for overseas? If the conditions are so great in Aus/NZ/US then why wouldn't doctors advocate the same financial model be applied in the UK?
Click to expand...

Because Cameron/Osborne wouldn't get back handers from financial deals nor are any of their relatives directors in said companies. Or are they? ;)

The NHS will end up costing more in locum doctors from overseas with inadequate training which is what it seems the conservative want - the sooner the NHS fails, the sooner they can privatise it.

Sadly this is making UKIP a more probable candidate... we NEED someone like UKIP in to shake up conservatives/labour/lib dems to make the politicians try harder and realise they need to fill people with values rather than fill their own pockets...
 
It's no co-incidence that some of the best healthcare systems in the world are on the right of that chart (the sore-thumb exception being the United States). If you want quality then you have to pay for it - we accept this when we're buying houses and cars, why not healthcare?

My view is that the NHS is in palliative care now. Andrew (now Lord) Lansley's bill has ensured the NHS will become unsustainable and now we're seeing further assaults on the NHS to further diminish its capability. The intention is to make things so bad that the general public begs the government to fully privatise it and enable the middle-classes to "top-up" with expensive health insurance policies (who co-incidentally fund the Conservative Party). I feel really sorry for anyone who requires medical treatment in the next few years because they are the ones who will literally suffer in this period of transition.
 
Last edited:
danielanthony said:
Unfortunately only 60% of the British public are satisfied with the NHS http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35527318

If this was a business with this level of customer satisfaction, it would be on Watchdog or out of business completely. Fortunately for you, people don't have any other choice so have to keep using the NHS and on it goes. Just because it's been around for a long time, doesn't mean it's loved.
Click to expand...

If only Jeremy Hunt and Government were as honest as you on their position on private health versus NHS. I'd be interested to see the government willing to admit they'd like to dismantle the NHS and replace it with private health care.

P.S. Just because a growing percentage of people have recently become dissatisfied with the NHS according to the survey, doesn't say if those people are blaming government for the change in quality of service i.e. the NHS can still be loved as a principle whilst being dissatisfied with how it is run into the ground.
 
scorza said:
It's no co-incidence that some of the best healthcare systems in the world are on the right of that chart (the sore-thumb exception being the United States). If you want quality then you have to pay for it - we accept this when we're buying houses and cars, why not healthcare?

My view is that the NHS is in palliative care now. Andrew (now Lord) Lansley's bill has ensured the NHS will become unsustainable and now we're seeing further assaults on the NHS to further diminish its capability. The intention is to make things so bad that the general public begs the government to fully privatise it and enable the middle-classes to "top-up" with expensive health insurance policies (who co-incidentally fund the Conservative Party). I feel really sorry for anyone who requires medical treatment in the next few years because they are the ones who will literally suffer in this period of transition.
Click to expand...

If you liken ever-increasing public funding to the dosage on a morphine syringe driver, the NHS has been on the Liverpool Care Pathway for decades.
 
Caged said:
So what though? I've tried to make the point previously in the thread, but we as a bunch of citizens shouldn't be content with "well they aren't the worst off so **** em".

There seems to be a growing number of people who upon finding out that a colleague of theirs earned more for doing what they perceived to be the same job, would rather that colleague had a pay cut than a pay increase for themselves. This race to the bottom is just a distraction from wider issues.
Click to expand...

Agreed. A pet hate of mine is this British obession with a race to the bottom.

"Oh you don't work 80 hours a week licking toilets clean with your tongue for £10k a year? No sumpathy for you, join the real world, blah blah blah"
 
Correct me if I am wrong, isn't that forgery (regarding the letter)? If so, why would a minister be so stupid (ha that sounds stupid and funny saying it)?
 
Who is left to hold a minister caught lying to account? The press seem pretty keen to fall in line behind the Government, and if the BBC brought it up they'd get accused of having a "liberal lefty agenda" and risk further punitive attacks on their budgets.
 
Caged said:
Who is left to hold a minister caught lying to account? The press seem pretty keen to fall in line behind the Government, and if the BBC brought it up they'd get accused of having a "liberal lefty agenda" and risk further punitive attacks on their budgets.
Click to expand...

Eh? There is a link a few posts above yours linking to a story about how Hunt was not telling the truth.
 
xibinim said:
Correct me if I am wrong, isn't that forgery (regarding the letter)? If so, why would a minister be so stupid (ha that sounds stupid and funny saying it)?
Click to expand...

Misrepresenting data
Misquoting investigators public statements
Using a terrorist event to score political points
Colluding with NHS England (an independent organisation) to sex up communication with doctors
Negotiating in bad faith under the guise of a manifesto pledge
Inappropriate tweets during a murder trial

And now apparently using people's signatures that were supporting a different letter.

All fair game apparently.
 
Last edited:
platypus said:
Eh? There is a link a few posts above yours linking to a story about how Hunt was not telling the truth.
Click to expand...

It's a Guardian article and therefore will be instantly dismissed by many based on the source. Where's the noise coming from the opposition parties? Maybe they can stop in-fighting for a bit and hammer the "Jeremy Hunt is a liar" point home until people are sick of hearing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom