Politics

[spongebob toonpants 3845]

Are there any Liberal Democrat voters on here? If so I would like to hear what they think of the party and Clegg after this budget.

 

 

Proud I would imagine.

 

 

Sadly that made me

[NJS 4252]

The good thing for me is that there seems to be a lot going on behind the scenes to try and make sure these cuts are as well thought out as possible.

 

I'm certainly not averse to any kind of review of spending on its own terms - I just think there will be an idealogical element in there which I will object to - of course I also understand that's inherent in politics.

[NJS 4252]

October's squeaky bum time for me personally. I expected not to receive a pay rise for the next two years, I can live with that. Just so long as I actually have a job by the time the two years is up that is.

 

I haven't had a pay rise since 07 so you can get used to it.

 

On a personal level I'm only really affected by the cider change (sorry ) and I'd like to see what this Bank levy is - it may lead to more pressure on my job.

[NJS 4252]

Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess.

 

Thatcher and Clinton?

[PaddockLad 16505]

Are there any Liberal Democrat voters on here? If so I would like to hear what they think of the party and Clegg after this budget.

 

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele)

 

Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference..

 

 

What a load of drivel

 

Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess.

 

Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will.

[Tooj 17]

October's squeaky bum time for me personally. I expected not to receive a pay rise for the next two years, I can live with that. Just so long as I actually have a job by the time the two years is up that is.

 

I haven't had a pay rise since 07 so you can get used to it.

 

On a personal level I'm only really affected by the cider change (sorry ) and I'd like to see what this Bank levy is - it may lead to more pressure on my job.

I already have.

 

I recently moved into the public sector from the private sector where my wages had been frozen for the last few years anyway.

[Tooj 17]

Glad to see the Metro upgrade still going ahead btw.

[Craig 6576]

Well todays the day.

 

Big cuts expected in the services that most need them, I reckon hospitals will be untouched however emergency services pay could be cut. Things such as elderly care, disabled support, meals on wheels etc will all be slashed I reckon.

 

As for those of us in the Public sector it could be a massive day. Talk of 5% pay cuts plus an increase from 1.5 to 7% in the Pension contributions stacks up to a 10.5% drop in wages. For your average Admin staff thats going to be a drop of about £2.5k per year or £200 per month. All of that is before the austerity measures that everyone else has to go through also kick in so any increase in tax, NI, VAT, petrol etc could easily see many civil servants being £300 per month worse off. To many of us thats the difference between supporting your family or not.

 

Thousands will leave the Public sector and move to jobs in the private, that might sound like a win/win, reduce the costs of the Public sector even further without making any payouts but theres a downside of course, if they are entering the job market then there are less jobs available for others and therefore the dole queue increases. Thats on top of the reduction in service that an exodus will bring.

 

For everyone else, expect to see a number of stealth taxes being introduced in NI and PAYE as well as the obvious increases, yet at the same time the possibility of Labours 50% highest tax band (those earning £150k or more) being cut to 45%, no surprises there then from a Conservative government. The inclusion of NIC Holiday is another red-herring which, if as popular as last time it was introduced (1998?) will result in a deficit of millions between what it achieved and the cost to implement.

 

Depressing stuff Mr Pud.

 

The problem for me, and many others I suspect, is the lack of opportunity in the North East both in the public sector, but especially in the the private sector. If I wanted to get a suitable job in the latter I'd have to move to some god forsaken hole like Wellwyn Garden city, but even jobs there are in short supply during a recession. The North East will be fucked over by the tories yet again, of this can there really be any doubt?

 

Having lived there for several years I'm bemused with what issue you have with WGC like....

[Christmas Tree 4433]

The good thing for me is that there seems to be a lot going on behind the scenes to try and make sure these cuts are as well thought out as possible.

 

I'm certainly not averse to any kind of review of spending on its own terms - I just think there will be an idealogical element in there which I will object to - of course I also understand that's inherent in politics.

 

 

Lets be fair though, there hasnt been much sign of the "nasty" tory party so far.

 

Help for pensioners, low incomes, business growth incentives for the North East and other poorer regions.

 

Then theres capital gains tax up, a bank levy.

 

Even the political editor on Newsnight said all the labour MP's he had been talking too thought it was a pretty good budget.

[Park Life 71]

Does CT actually know anything about politics?

[Christmas Tree 4433]

Does CT actually know anything about politics?

 

 

Should contribute to this thread more often rather than your conspiracy theories then you would realise that I certainly do

[Christmas Tree 4433]

Budget Calculator

 

Take the test to see if you will be better off or poorer.

 

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Interactive-Gr...udgetcalculator

[Christmas Tree 4433]

Does anyone know which is the most independant newspaper on the go in the UK at the moment with regard to politics. (if there is truly such a thing).

[Christmas Tree 4433]

Commentary in todays Times Newspaper

 

 

We have the measure of this Government now. In only seven weeks, George Osborne has put together an emergency Budget that has restored some clarity and sanity to Britain’s finances. This was not a Budget of unavoidable cuts and inevitable tax rises. It was much better than that, and bolder. Mr Osborne has made some fundamental choices on tax and spending that were daring, but also sensitive to many of those who will feel the pain. There was no flicker of the ideological fervour for cuts of which Labour has been warning; only a sense of regret and realism, coupled with an apparent desire to tell the bad news straight, rather than hiding it in footnotes.

 

There will be those who will accuse Mr Osborne of recklessness, in cutting spending more than they would have liked and than he probably needed to. But they should not underestimate the parlous state of the British economy that he inherited, nor the prospects for the future. When the world is tilting east, to fleeter and hungrier countries, the answer is not to do less of the same for a while, in the hope of eventually resuming business as usual. It is to pare things back to their essential roots, and look afresh at how to boost growth.

 

There were both political and economic advantages to setting a target of going into structural surplus, and being at least in sight of balancing the books, by the end of this Parliament. There is a legitimate argument to be had about whether the Government has gone too far in emulating the Canadian model of making sharp, deep cuts to eliminate the deficit. The forecast that unemployment will peak this year seems optimistic. Yet Canada succeeded in turning a vicious circle into a broadly virtuous one relatively quickly. Important decisions about, for example, universality v targeted spending, will only be possible once borrowing is back under control. But he has set himself an undeniably stiff objective in trying to save an extra £40 billion a year over and above what his predecessor had aimed for.

 

The Chancellor was right to stick broadly to his announced intention of achieving an 80:20 ratio of tax rises to spending cuts. Tax rises are easier to implement, but are potentially more damaging to the economy. The rise in VAT to 20 per cent will have a significant effect on many lives. VAT is clearly a regressive tax. However, it is also a broad-based tax, the kind that spreads the burden and raises substantial amounts of revenue: a cool £11 billion on the Treasury’s estimates. On capital gains tax, Mr Osborne has deftly managed the expectations of those who feared that the rate would be even higher than 28 per cent. He threaded his way carefully through the hostility of his own side to reach a level lower than his Liberal Democrat partners had hoped for, but below that of France, Australia, Sweden and the US. This is a Chancellor who has studied the Laffer curve and is not above explaining that he has chosen the rate to maximise revenue.

 

The gradual but determined reduction in corporation tax, to 24p by the end of this Parliament, was an important signal of Mr Osborne’s philosophy and the direction he intends to take to boost economic growth. In fact, the whole package should go some considerable way towards reversing the damaging effects of the past few years, in which many businesses and wealthy individuals have come to feel that the British Government is prone to arbitrarily changing tax rates, employment law and other policies that affect investment decisions. Few businesses invest capital on a two-year cycle, or even a parliamentary one. Mr Osborne’s stated intention to demonstrate that Britain was “open for business”, coupled with five-year tax plans, sounded like a welcome recognition that trust has to be rebuilt. His decision to maintain capital spending was also sensible, in view of the importance of infrastructure projects to many businesses which are the lifeblood of the economy.

 

The banks levy was not helpful in that context. This newspaper has opposed a unilateral banking levy, arguing that it would put Britain at a serious competitive disadvantage. But the news that Paris and Frankfurt have been roped into a multilateral deal does remove some of the sting.

The most devastating consequences of this Budget have yet to come. In October the Comprehensive Spending Review will detail how the Government intends to make what will amount to 25 per cent cuts in unprotected departments (those outside the NHS and international aid). Public sector workers will start to feel the pain through a two-year pay freeze on all but the lowest paid. But the size of the public sector workforce made such a move imperative, because the wage bill is huge.

 

In the short term, the most unpopular element of this Budget will be the capping of housing benefit. This will have untold consequences for hard-up people living in London in particular. It will be a huge fight, but it is one that Mr Osborne was right to pick. Housing benefit has doubled in ten years to an astounding £21 billion, dwarfing spending on the police. The logic of the numbers dictates that it must be tackled, even though the cold numbers collide with the emotional prospect of families losing their homes, or falling into the grip of unsavoury landlords. The problem is that it was never going to be possible to ignore that the welfare state accounts for 28 per cent of all public expenditure. It was sensible to remove smaller credits that few people understood, and many failed to take up.

 

One of Mr Osborne’s priorities was to ensure that this Budget shared the pain as equally as possible, and was perceived to do so. The Treasury’s tables suggest that the richest 10 per cent of the population, those who could afford to pay more, will pay more than the others, as a proportion of their net income. That was the right thing to do. Yet it is not clear whether it will be seen that way, especially by those who had expected the rich to be squeezed more. The rise in the state pension will be larger than Mr Brown’s notorious 75p, but not much larger. It remains to be seen how reductions in spending on public services, some of them dramatic, will affect different groups. It is imperative that the coalition continues to be sensitive to the need to bring as many sections of the public with it, the wealth-generators and the most vulnerable.

 

There was a genuine fear, three months ago, that a coalition Government would bring compromise and indecision at a time of national crisis. Mr Osborne put that fear to rest yesterday. We have had the best of fiscal conservatism combined with no small measure of social justice. This Budget was not unavoidable; but it was unambiguous. Mr Osborne has proved himself a Chancellor with the mettle and judgment for the battles to come.

[Christmas Tree 4433]

NHS Targets on their way out.

 

First ones on their way seem to be the requirement for GPs to see people within 48 hours, the four-hour A&E target and the 18-week waiting target.

 

They form part of a drive to save money on management costs across the health service and reflect a major shift from how the NHS operated under Labour.

 

But in the lead up to the election the Tories claimed it was time to move away from the target culture and instead focus more on the quality of treatment.

 

Mr Lansley said: "I want to free the NHS from bureaucracy and targets that have no clinical justification and move to an NHS which measures its performance on patient outcomes.

 

"Doctors will be free to focus on the outcomes that matter - providing quality patient care."

 

Whats the word inside the NHS Renton about the general target culture?

 

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government.

 

Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo.

 

 

Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch.

 

Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness.

 

Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough.

 

 

If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances.

 

Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost.

 

Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

 

Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then.

 

Cough, Cough

[Renton 20414]

NHS Targets on their way out.

 

First ones on their way seem to be the requirement for GPs to see people within 48 hours, the four-hour A&E target and the 18-week waiting target.

 

They form part of a drive to save money on management costs across the health service and reflect a major shift from how the NHS operated under Labour.

 

But in the lead up to the election the Tories claimed it was time to move away from the target culture and instead focus more on the quality of treatment.

 

Mr Lansley said: "I want to free the NHS from bureaucracy and targets that have no clinical justification and move to an NHS which measures its performance on patient outcomes.

 

"Doctors will be free to focus on the outcomes that matter - providing quality patient care."

 

Whats the word inside the NHS Renton about the general target culture?

 

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government.

 

Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo.

 

 

Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch.

 

Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness.

 

Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough.

 

 

If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances.

 

Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost.

 

Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

 

Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then.

 

Cough, Cough

 

What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again!

 

I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion?

 

As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over.

[Billy Castell 0]

One thing that needs to be done is to sack 90% of the staff in jobcentreplus and to just sort out the whole unemployment system. It seems to be a never ending maze of unhelpful people, rules that exclude those who are seeking jobs, and inefficiency. From my experiences, it is all so convoluted and poorly run that those who seek jobs are penalised, yet those who 'play the game' find it easier to get some money for fags and Sky TV.

[Christmas Tree 4433]

NHS Targets on their way out.

 

First ones on their way seem to be the requirement for GPs to see people within 48 hours, the four-hour A&E target and the 18-week waiting target.

 

They form part of a drive to save money on management costs across the health service and reflect a major shift from how the NHS operated under Labour.

 

But in the lead up to the election the Tories claimed it was time to move away from the target culture and instead focus more on the quality of treatment.

 

Mr Lansley said: "I want to free the NHS from bureaucracy and targets that have no clinical justification and move to an NHS which measures its performance on patient outcomes.

 

"Doctors will be free to focus on the outcomes that matter - providing quality patient care."

 

Whats the word inside the NHS Renton about the general target culture?

 

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government.

 

Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo.

 

 

Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch.

 

Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness.

 

Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough.

 

 

If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances.

 

Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost.

 

Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

 

Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then.

 

Cough, Cough

 

What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again!

 

I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion?

 

As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over.

 

Amazing stuff, even by your standards

[Christmas Tree 4433]

One thing that needs to be done is to sack 90% of the staff in jobcentreplus and to just sort out the whole unemployment system. It seems to be a never ending maze of unhelpful people, rules that exclude those who are seeking jobs, and inefficiency. From my experiences, it is all so convoluted and poorly run that those who seek jobs are penalised, yet those who 'play the game' find it easier to get some money for fags and Sky TV.

 

 

Totally agree with this.

[Renton 20414]

NHS Targets on their way out.

 

First ones on their way seem to be the requirement for GPs to see people within 48 hours, the four-hour A&E target and the 18-week waiting target.

 

They form part of a drive to save money on management costs across the health service and reflect a major shift from how the NHS operated under Labour.

 

But in the lead up to the election the Tories claimed it was time to move away from the target culture and instead focus more on the quality of treatment.

 

Mr Lansley said: "I want to free the NHS from bureaucracy and targets that have no clinical justification and move to an NHS which measures its performance on patient outcomes.

 

"Doctors will be free to focus on the outcomes that matter - providing quality patient care."

 

Whats the word inside the NHS Renton about the general target culture?

 

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government.

 

Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo.

 

 

Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch.

 

Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness.

 

Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough.

 

 

If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances.

 

Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost.

 

Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

 

Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then.

 

Cough, Cough

 

What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again!

 

I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion?

 

As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over.

 

Amazing stuff, even by your standards

 

Care to elaborate what you mean?

[Renton 20414]

One thing that needs to be done is to sack 90% of the staff in jobcentreplus and to just sort out the whole unemployment system. It seems to be a never ending maze of unhelpful people, rules that exclude those who are seeking jobs, and inefficiency. From my experiences, it is all so convoluted and poorly run that those who seek jobs are penalised, yet those who 'play the game' find it easier to get some money for fags and Sky TV.

 

 

Totally agree with this.

 

Pretty much always been the case though.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3707]

It's no good just repeating the "we owe billions" mantra unless you compare it with other countries. We don't come off that bad and are a million miles away from Greece. Even mentioning them shows that you are just spouting Cameron's shit.

 

At the moment we have a triple a rating with credit agencies but if anything else bad happens that may change. Otr it may not. Dont confuse me with a Tory I detest the tories more than most but that has a lot to do with being from a mining family. Labour do have to take a huge share of the blame for where we are in relation to cuts and dont think they would not swing the axe too.

 

I didn't think you were a Tory - and as I consider that a grave insult please accept an apology.

 

The credit rating is pretty much what I was referring to - the way the UK's debt is structured compared with other countries is favourable so using a threat to that rating is particularly wrong imo.

 

I'm also not completely exonerating Labour from blame - they have embraced international financial capitalism so have to accept consequences of that approach even if the effects are global.

 

I also accept that the nonchalant approach to the deficit pre-crisis was a bit daft and some cuts were probably inevitible at some stage - savage cuts right now are still wrong imo for the reasons laid out in this thread.

 

Apology accepted.

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3707]

Are there any Liberal Democrat voters on here? If so I would like to hear what they think of the party and Clegg after this budget.

 

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele)

 

Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference..

 

 

What a load of drivel

 

Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess.

 

Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will.

 

But they didn't. The Labour government was the worst case of Orwell's animal farm syndrome ever. In the 13 years they were in power the gap between the richest and poorest rose. The amount of children in poverty grew and we decided to back the most right wing government in America in centuries. Added on top of that the absolute fuck up over bank regulation which gets despicable when you see that the head of RBS was whispering in Browns ear plus the corruption in Labour counvcils which I have proof of. The last 13 years saw the most un Labour Labour party in history.

[Christmas Tree 4433]

NHS Targets on their way out.

 

First ones on their way seem to be the requirement for GPs to see people within 48 hours, the four-hour A&E target and the 18-week waiting target.

 

They form part of a drive to save money on management costs across the health service and reflect a major shift from how the NHS operated under Labour.

 

But in the lead up to the election the Tories claimed it was time to move away from the target culture and instead focus more on the quality of treatment.

 

Mr Lansley said: "I want to free the NHS from bureaucracy and targets that have no clinical justification and move to an NHS which measures its performance on patient outcomes.

 

"Doctors will be free to focus on the outcomes that matter - providing quality patient care."

 

Whats the word inside the NHS Renton about the general target culture?

 

It's not really my concern but I fail to see how you can improve quality of care without having objective targets. The NHS is certain to decline under this government.

 

Of more interest to me from a personal point of view is what happens to NICE. Rumours are afoot big changes are coming, none of which will be good imo.

 

 

Fair enough I was mainly asking from an insiders point of view as to how the targets culture over the last few years had gone down. Thought it may have been the sort of stuff you discussed with the nurses and doctors in the canteen over lunch.

 

Naah, I'm quite detached from the clinical realities of the NHS really. I'm more involved with clinical effectivenss of interventions, and more recently cost effectiveness.

 

Seriously though, I'm not being partisan here when I say this government doesn't seem to have a clue what its doing regarding healthcare. For instance, before the election, Cameron promised a chest of money for the provision of cancer treatments. This just sounds like popularist bullshit to me. Early days still, we'll see soon enough.

 

 

If your not been partisan then you'll agree their decisions have being reduced somewhat by the state of the countries finances.

 

Have you also noted that Asda is to start selling all Cancer drugs at cost.

 

Just chatting about this at lunch. The clinicians are all agreed that the targets are being removed as a prelude to reducing the quality of service. Makes perfect sense if you think about it.

 

Btw CT, Cameron had promised the NHS would not be affected by his cuts. Looks like that was a lie then.

 

Cough, Cough

 

What on Earth are you talking about? This budget was never going to be about funding to the NHS, that will come later, no doubt when they've checked the books again and they're strangely in a worse state than anticipated - again!

 

I'll remind you though of what Cameron said before the election, which was basically that doctor's will be able to prescribe any anticancer drug they want regardless of whether NICE has deemed it cost effective or not. Now, that is either the most blatent example of electioneering I have ever heard - because that promise is clearly undeliverable at the best of times let alone now - or it means Cameron hasn't got a clue about the economics of the health service. So which is it in your opinion?

 

As for this budget, really its quite underwhelming isn't it? It's been built up to be something it's not, probably deliberately. However, as the COnservatives are fixing it so that they will have 5 years of power, even though they are a minority government, they have plenty of time to screw us over.

 

Amazing stuff, even by your standards

 

Care to elaborate what you mean?

 

 

Was it a lie... yes or no...Simples

[Christmas Tree 4433]

Are there any Liberal Democrat voters on here? If so I would like to hear what they think of the party and Clegg after this budget.

 

I voted for the cunts but I always have done, (Sort of in the family,Nan was a good friend of David Steele)

 

Osborne has made Thatcher look like a benevolent defender of the poorest members of society this afternoon...I hope Clegg and the rest of the bandwagon jumpers can look the grass roots in the face at the next party conference..

 

 

What a load of drivel

 

Wheres your vitriol for the fuckers who got us into this mess.

 

Labour fucked up big time, but they improved a lot of things in this country and what they did in comparison with certain bankers was fuckin childs play....no city fuck up= little or no current recession in my book. Then no need for Brown to be blamed for everything from the 10p tax rate to the crucifiction of christ and perhaps we'd still have a government that for the most part (and despite their many and glaring faults) actually wanted to make life better for ordinary people.This lot don't and never will.

 

But they didn't. The Labour government was the worst case of Orwell's animal farm syndrome ever. In the 13 years they were in power the gap between the richest and poorest rose. The amount of children in poverty grew and we decided to back the most right wing government in America in centuries. Added on top of that the absolute fuck up over bank regulation which gets despicable when you see that the head of RBS was whispering in Browns ear plus the corruption in Labour counvcils which I have proof of. The last 13 years saw the most un Labour Labour party in history.

 

 

Spot on and very sad for genuine Labour supporters who now have to bear the shame.