With no hoper Corbyn are Labour in for a serious hammering in the General election

[Inchy]

I am not a fan of Corbyn but I will be voting Labour. I agree with a lot of his ideas but I don't think he is a strong leader. He is trying to rewrite the political game by not using spin and being more open and honest about his more extreme polices. Thats commendable but not going to work. You don't hear the May saying "we will privatise the NHS as much as possible". No, the Tories say "the NHS is safe in our hands".

I have worked in the NHS for the past 6 years and in that time things have got a lot worse. More outsourcing, longer A and E waiting times, and more fudging of the numbers to make it look like it isn't doing that badly.

I don't trust the Tories with the NHS, school, police, prison, social care.

The only decent thing about Labour being thumped is that it will only be 5 more years until the next election and hopefully by that time Labour will have sorted themselves out

[Paul Waine]

I am not a fan of Corbyn but I will be voting Labour. I agree with a lot of his ideas but I don't think he is a strong leader. He is trying to rewrite the political game by not using spin and being more open and honest about his more extreme polices. Thats commendable but not going to work. You don't hear the May saying "we will privatise the NHS as much as possible". No, the Tories say "the NHS is safe in our hands".

I have worked in the NHS for the past 6 years and in that time things have got a lot worse. More outsourcing, longer A and E waiting times, and more fudging of the numbers to make it look like it isn't doing that badly.

I don't trust the Tories with the NHS, school, police, prison, social care.

The only decent thing about Labour being thumped is that it will only be 5 more years until the next election and hopefully by that time Labour will have sorted themselves out

Hi Inchy, JC "not using spin?" Did you not hear him say that the system is fixed by the "wealth extractors?" Only a communist could come out with that sort of nonsense and want people to believe it.

Of course, no one says "we will privatise the NHS." But, have you seen that I, and a few others on here, have posted that the UK health system needs reform. We should be looking at the health systems in Europe and copying their ideas. None of them operate a "free at the point of need" system, they all require everyone to have health insurance. The NHS is very good at emergencies, but non-urgent health issues are relegated to rationing and long drawn out waiting lists. All the European health care systems produce better outcomes for their patients. The NHS is much too political. We need our health care model changed. We need our health care taken away from all politicians.

[If it be your will]

.

[Inchy]

The NHS may be falling behind other systems in Europe (apart from infant mortality rates, life expectancy, and offering universal cover) but was it behind 7 years ago?

I don't think so. It's getting worse due to underfunding and silly restrictions. For example if trusts have waiting lists too long for elective surgery they get fined. It's cheaper to outsource to private companies than pay the fine. The system is set up to fail. The NHS is still cost effective and I would be willing to pay more NI to ensure it gets the funding it needs. That would be a dam site cheaper than private healthcare or even part private healthcare

[BabylonClaret]

Hi jurek,

Wasn't a lot of the "Investment" paid for by PPI - but the PPI deals are so bad that that's where a lot of the budgets are going now?

And, didn't Gordon Brown spend so much that he claimed "no more boom and bust" - just "bust" it turned out - and that's why the governments since 2010 have been more limited in what they have to spend?

I think you'll find that it was a GLOBAL CRASH (arrgrgh).

Largely down to the whole capitalistic system being based on a bunch of money that doesn't exist, being lent by people who don;t have it to people who can't pay it back, who then sell the right to said none-existent money/assets to other people who can;t afford to buy it but borrow more non existent money from others who also can't afford to lend it but porp it up wiht other non existent money from other non existent sources ...

The house of cards eventually collapsed.

It's a massive fraud that bizarrely actually has meant on average more people in the West have better standards than an hundred years ago - but it also means those at the top are far far far above the rest - more so than a hundred years ago. Nobody understands it. not even economists.

[Paul Waine]

And put in the hands of private insurance companies? Because they would have the Nation's health as their first priority? This, I have no doubt, is exactly what the Conservatives are planning. Introduce more and more outsourcing to profit making companies, conclude that the NHS doesn't work efficiently and therefore needs more market-driven reforms, and switch to an American style insurance based system. If this is what the electorate really want, that's fine, let's do it. But they don't..

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/category/nhs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

MORI asked people if they thought it was acceptable or unacceptable to increase funding for the NHS in various ways. The least popular method was – obviously – a move to an insurance model

Hi if it be your will, why do you think all the European countries health care systems deliver better health care system and better health outcomes? They all operate systems that require the population to have health insurance. I lived in Netherlands some years back; health insurance was compulsory. Premiums were set based on your earnings and family size. The premiums also included an "extra charge" that paid for the health insurance of those that weren't earning - so that the "wealthy" contributed towards the health insurance of the "less wealthy." You also had an annual excess, so you paid the first part of any annual health care costs. There's nothing "American" about the European health care services.

We have great doctors, nurses and paramedics in the UK, they respond brilliantly to an emergency. They also have great doctors/nurses in Netherlands. People I've spoken with also speak very highly of the emergency health care they have experienced in Spain.

Only the UK has a "only funded by taxation, free at the point of use" health care model. That's where our problems are: the budgets are always political, MPs always respond to their constituency if an organisational change is proposed by the doctors - even if the change is certain to provide better health care outcomes.

It's time the Government (whoever is in power) focussed on the best way to provide health care, rather than the best way "to win votes." Unfortunately, the NHS has not moved forward since July 1948.

[Clarets4me]

And put in the hands of private insurance companies? Because they would have the Nation's health as their first priority? This, I have no doubt, is exactly what the Conservatives are planning. Introduce more and more outsourcing to profit making companies, conclude that the NHS doesn't work efficiently and therefore needs more market-driven reforms, and switch to an American style insurance based system. If this is what the electorate really want, that's fine, let's do it. But they don't

Are you seriously suggesting that the NHS currently works efficiently ?

[Inchy]

It's cost effective but not efficient. It's not efficient because the government doesn't want it to be efficient. They want it to fail

[Paul Waine]

I think you'll find that it was a GLOBAL CRASH (arrgrgh).

Largely down to the whole capitalistic system being based on a bunch of money that doesn't exist, being lent by people who don;t have it to people who can't pay it back, who then sell the right to said none-existent money/assets to other people who can;t afford to buy it but borrow more non existent money from others who also can't afford to lend it but porp it up wiht other non existent money from other non existent sources ...

The house of cards eventually collapsed.

It's a massive fraud that bizarrely actually has meant on average more people in the West have better standards than an hundred years ago - but it also means those at the top are far far far above the rest - more so than a hundred years ago. Nobody understands it. not even economists.

Love your description of the "world financial crisis" Babylon. Also, loved the "Big Short."

Whether the "bunch of money" is non-existent or otherwise, it was Gordon Brown who committed the UK public sector to all the PPI deals. And, Gordon Brown who proclaimed "no more boom and bust." In 2009 Gordon Brown also claimed to have saved the world?G20 from the financial crisis - I think that's when the UK started quantitative easing - which, yes, is effectively non-existent funny money. Hey, ho, "endogenous growth theory, anyone?"

[Paul Waine]

It's cost effective but not efficient. It's not efficient because the government doesn't want it to be efficient. They want it to fail

I don't think any of the political parties want the NHS to fail. Equally, I don't think they understand the flaws in the NHS model that will always mean it will never, ever have enough money. But, that's the risk we all take with our health.

[Inchy]

Didn't Major start introducing PPI? I'm not blaming today's tories for that and I won't blame today's labour for what Brown did.


The Tories want the NHS to fail so they can privatise it as much as possible. To quote Stan "a blind man on a galloping horse can see that"

[Inchy]

I don't understand this thinking that the NHS will never have enough money, be a bottomless pit. It doesn't need all the money in the world, just enough to provide first class healthcare.

It doesn't even make sense. If healthcare was a bottomless pit then why are so many private companies interested in making a profit from it?

[cloughyclaret]

I don't think any of the political parties want the NHS to fail. Equally, I don't think they understand the flaws in the NHS model that will always mean it will never, ever have enough money. But, that's the risk we all take with our health.

'They' dont understand the flaws? Listen to the bloody STAFF!

[bluelabrador16]

Why do we have the private issuance of money/credit in our economy instead of public issuance?

"They have a monopoly over the creation of the medium of exchange, credit & currency. They produce these coupons from nothing, something our government could do itself, interest-and-debt-free. Alas, our "money" are chips in their digital casino."

Gosh!

Meet Goldman Sachs, the Vampire Squid

https://www.corbettreport.com/meet-gold ... ire-squid/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[If it be your will]

.

[taio]

Absolute fallacy that the Tories have outsourced healthcare to the independent sector but Labour didn't. In fact at a relatively recent point the growth was relatively steady irrespective of the party in government. As for PFI, my recollection is that this was far more prevalent under Labour and saddled Trusts with large and long term debts.

[If it be your will]

.

[If it be your will]

.

[Inchy]

Outsourcing has definitely increased in my experience. Certainly in the trust I work at and I imagine that mirrors elsewhere.

The Blair government and the Tories have mismanaged the NHS. However I still trust labour with the NHS more than the Tories

[taio]

Oh God, I agree. Blair was the main culprit. But Labour are now unequivocal on this: they will reverse it.

Fair point - under Corbyn's leadership there would be no doubt. But that won't happen.

[Inchy]

To give examples 6 years ago trusts outsourced some elective surgeries in winter to avoid the fines from long waiting times. They now outsource a lot because the bed crisis is all year round. Elective beds go to elderly patients who cannot be discharge because there is not the relivant social care available. Now the trust where I work has opened two privately run intermediate care wards to help sort this. Basically the trust is paying for a private community home.

Outpatient pharmacy is now run by boots

[Spiral]

It's cost effective but not efficient. It's not efficient because the government doesn't want it to be efficient. They want it to fail

It's depressing that more people don't realise this. Honestly, I can understand how seeing 'chavs popping out kids for fun, scrounging off the system' might drive people to vote for a party that pledges to give 'dossers' a bloody nose, but that pails into insignificance when the Tories finally get the insurance based system they've always wanted but your low wage means you can't afford insurance and you're faced with the choice of either chemotherapy and bankruptcy, or the realisation of your own mortality.

[taio]

Outsourcing has definitely increased in my experience. Certainly in the trust I work at and I imagine that mirrors elsewhere.

The Blair government and the Tories have mismanaged the NHS. However I still trust labour with the NHS more than the Tories

I'm not saying it hasn't increased. I'm saying it's steadily increased under governments led by different political parties, and Labour were as culpable as the Tories through PFI, practice based commissioning, PbR and fragmenting primary care.

[Lancasterclaret]

Outpatient pharmacy is now run by boots

The trust I worked in had to outsource the pharmacy because the staff and managers there thought that they somehow didn't have to abide by the rules of a hospital ie being available for use 24/7.

If the staff in the NHS actually accepted change rather than fighting it tooth and nail all the time, then a hell of a lot less would be outsourced out.

[taio]

To give examples 6 years ago my trust outsourced some elective surgeries in winter to avoid the fines from long waiting times. They now outsource a lot because the bed crisis is all year round. Elective beds go to elderly patients who cannot be discharge because there is not the relivant social care available. Now the trust where I work has opened two privately run intermediate care wards to help sort this. Basically the trust is paying for a private community home.

Outpatient pharmacy is now run by boots

I presume it's the clinical commissioning group that has procured these services not the Trust which is a provider of services not commissioner

[Inchy]

Surely all inpatient pharmacies has to be 24/7

[Lancasterclaret]

You'd think that wouldn't you? Too many issues with the on call service and a general reluctance to change stuff as the hospital changed. And a "can't do" attitude which if you are not in the NHS can come as a real shock.

The whole hospital trust thought that the pharmacy dept was the worst **** takers in the trust, and this was in a trust where **** taking was utterly rife.

Quick edit - front line staff generally ace and hard working, the support behind (pharmacy, porters etc) a disgrace.

Its all down to **** poor managers, and them being replaced by **** poor assistant managers, and then staff who've been doing the whole job for twenty years plus and are unwilling to change.

Bloke I worked with regularly left his post to run errands, and bought the union in when he was approached about it. I actually got into more trouble than he did when I called him a "useless ******"

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

Weird, I want a health service whose first and only priority is to patient care.

I don't care who has the best plan for that, but anyone who thinks thats what it was under Labour then, or the Conservatives now is living in cloud cuckoo land.

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

he hasn't got the skill set I'm afraid, and his "team" don't inspire confidence. All the good ones have left or won't work under him because they can't.

He has zero experience of running anything, and whether you like it or not, any govt has to provide some sort of financial plan these days.

I grant you that he's got some good ideas, but also some rank bad ones which will be exploited ruthlessly in the run up to this.

[boatshed bill]

he hasn't got the skill set I'm afraid, and his "team" don't inspire confidence. All the good ones have left or won't work under him because they can't.

He has zero experience of running anything, and whether you like it or not, any govt has to provide some sort of financial plan these days.

I grant you that he's got some good ideas, but also some rank bad ones which will be exploited ruthlessly in the run up to this.

Are you in any way suggesting that May has the abilities which (you say) Corbyn hasn't?

[Paul Waine]

First, Denmark, Sweden and Italy all have a funding structure essentially identical to the NHS. There is nothing inherently wrong with this structure. The real reason it appears starved of resources is simply because it is. As a proportion of GDP funding ranks 13th out 15 original EU members.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... d-research" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The NHS model prior the the reforms (c2000) was great. Despite the inefficiencies introduced since then, first by Blair, then by the Conservatives, it still performs admirably on a cost basis. I can only suppose your desire for a health insurance based model is ideologically driven. Interestingly, Labour's position is to effectively return to the NHS structure of 15 years ago - hardly an extreme position to take. (None of Labour's positions are extreme.)

Am I confused? I've taken a look at the description of Italy's and Sweden's health care systems on Wikipedia. Neither of them are "essentially identical" to the UK's NHS. A lot of the costs are funded by taxation, but not all. Patients pay something towards their needs in both countries. Private sector provision is included in the health care in both countries (i.e. the state doesn't own all the hospitals in the health care system). Denmark's system does appear very comprehensive, funded by taxation and free for all residents - of course, Denmark is similar in population to Scotland.

My ideology is that everyone has a right to very good health care, that there are a great number of excellent doctors, nurses and paramedics in the NHS, but the state isn't the best body to make all the health care decisions. The larger European countries require their residents to have health insurance, they require them to pay something towards their treatment when required, they ensure that all residents, regardless of means, have health insurance and can afford good health care. The UK can fail on some of these things. It should not be a "Labour v Conservative" discussion on how we ensure the best health care for everyone.

The "extreme" of the Labour Party is "we founded the NHS and it can never be changed." Somewhat ironic, when "conservative" is a desire for not changing. (There are also many things that the Conservative party clings to that I'd like to change).

[Lancasterclaret]

God no!

But whether we like it or not, they are going to win, and win big.

I think I said it on another thread, but you have to hope that May actually meant what she said on the steps of No 10 when she took over.

If she's actually going to let people like Bill Cash and John Redwood any sort of say in how the country is run, then we are in deep ****.

[Spiral]

Lancaster is a brilliant contributor to this forum but I'm disappointed that anyone could make the argument that an alleged absence of front-bench talent could be any more catastrophic than Hunt's management of the health service. Listening to front line staff would be a great start, something Labour seem willing to do.

[boatshed bill]

God no!

But whether we like it or not, they are going to win, and win big.

I think I said it on another thread, but you have to hope that May actually meant what she said on the steps of No 10 when she took over.

If she's actually going to let people like Bill Cash and John Redwood any sort of say in how the country is run, then we are in deep ****.

We're in it regardless.
Too much mismanagement over many years

[Paul Waine]

It's depressing that more people don't realise this. Honestly, I can understand how seeing 'chavs popping out kids for fun, scrounging off the system' might drive people to vote for a party that pledges to give 'dossers' a bloody nose, but that pails into insignificance when the Tories finally get the insurance based system they've always wanted but your low wage means you can't afford insurance and you're faced with the choice of either chemotherapy or bankruptcy.

Hi Spiral, I understand your concern re how do you afford insurance on low wages. Take a look at my posts how they tackled this when I lived in the Netherlands. It seemed to work.

I agree, that none of us who live in the UK want a USA type system where the unemployed have no health insurance and can be massively exposed to enormous costs.

[Lancasterclaret]

Spiral, you need to listen to front line staff, efficient, motivated managers and you need to listen to what the end user (the public) want.

I worked in the supply dept of our hospital, and the front line staff answer to everything was " we need this, just in case we need this, even though we haven't used one for ten years".

Whether anyone likes it or not, the NHS has a budget, and it is in everyone's interest for something, somehow to be sorted so that it works for EVERYBODY.

And in fairness to Hunt, he's just the monkey.

[Spiral]

He literally wrote the book on privatising the NHS. He's more than just the monkey.

[Inchy]

I presume it's the clinical commissioning group that has procured these services not the Trust which is a provider of services not commissioner

The information I have have seen from the CE does Mension CCJs

[Lancasterclaret]

And I went into the NHS determined to do my bit, and left after about five years completely disillusioned with the whole concept.

I've recovered a bit since then, but I'm still totally convinced that for it to survive, then it needs some sort of cross party agreement to let it run without constant changes, and some (ok, a lot! of)reality amongst both the staff and the public.

[taio]

The information I have received from the CE is these private wards have been opened by the trust to help free up acute beds

May I ask which Trust you work for?

[CrosspoolClarets]

Privatisation, whether you are for or against it, is 1% of the issue in the NHS.

It shouldn't even warrant debate.

Funding system, access, politics, structure, culture, aging population, rising expectation - all far more important. It is the hardest of all challenges, and all politicians have my sympathy (to a point).

Sweden does it well - they are one to look out for.

[Lancasterclaret]

I don't think the NHS is going to be privatised.

But it can't survive in its current form. If you want to call that privatisation you can if you want, but its always going to have to be some sort of private/public system from now on.

[Inchy]

Spiral, you need to listen to front line staff, efficient, motivated managers and you need to listen to what the end user (the public) want.

I worked in the supply dept of our hospital, and the front line staff answer to everything was " we need this, just in case we need this, even though we haven't used one for ten years".

Whether anyone likes it or not, the NHS has a budget, and it is in everyone's interest for something, somehow to be sorted so that it works for EVERYBODY.

And in fairness to Hunt, he's just the monkey.

No offence Lancaster but if a clinicians states they need a product, even if they only use it once a year (ten years is an exaggeration) then they need it. Two in case one is dropped is the only safe way. Hopefully the introduction of GS1 and PEPPOL standards should help that.

Also you would hope most expensive stock is on consignment agreements

[Inchy]

May I ask which Trust you work for?

Yes I work in Leeds. The beds have been opened at Wharfedale.

[Lancasterclaret]

No offence Inchy, but thats exactly the problem.

You are looking at it as front line staff, somebody else has to look at it as a cost.

[Inchy]

In my role I do have to look at the cost. I still
Hold the view that you need something's just In case

[Inchy]

Also when I put no offence I wasn't saying it flippently but I understand it may have come across that way


I have no idea where this is going now but it seems to have gone off topic so il leave it now

[Lancasterclaret]

But that is one of the reasons the future of the NHS needs to involve all stakeholders.

You have your requirements (fine), other depts have theirs etc etc etc etc

They is a finite amount to go around, and there needs to be some serious long term planning to make sure the NHS survives.