Politics

[Christmas Tree 4704]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

[Christmas Tree 4704]

It does irk me somewhat when people back a party 100%. I voted Tory, I stand by that decision and I agree with many things they are doing, but don't expect me to agree with everything. Much like I dont think everything labour did as wrong. Just A lot of it. Same as someone earlier saying they voted Lib Dem as the family always have. Thats something else I just don't get. It a bit of sheep mentality. My Dad is like that, always voted labour and always will.

 

As for the debate (some what of one) above. I don't really know that much about how the NHS works internally. However, my wife and a couple of family friends work or have worked for the NHS. The biggest complaint my wife had when she was there was that Doctors would push elderly out of hospital and back home much sooner than they should have been. This was because they were under pressure to meet targets for turning people around and keep them out of hospital. My wife was an OT and she basically assessed someone and their ability to live safely in their own home. Many times they went against their recommendations only to see the person back in hospital due to a fall in the home or something.

 

Point basically that there was too much red tape, admin & management taking up their budget rather than being spent where it was needed.

 

This forms my overall view of the NHS.

 

As for doctors being able to write a perscription (might as well say cheque) for any drug. Thats a pipe dream I'd think, no matter who says it.

 

Well it was in the Tory manifesto and is due to start April 2011. At PMQ's last week he was aked for an update and he said he was doing everything possible to bring it forward to this Autumn instead.

 

Dont know how they can be more straight or open than that.

[Christmas Tree 4704]

Newsnight tonight interviewed a Stockton family on benefits.

 

£36,000 a year, all from benefits.

 

Thanks Labour

 

and that does my head in. The system is clearly fucked if that can happen.

 

They even went on to tell the presenter how they borrow £2000 each December "so the kids can have all the right labels".

 

Im sure most reasonable people, regardless of political persuasion, realise that benefit pay outs like this are just perverse.

 

I take my hat off to the people who go out to work, even though they could get virtually the same staying at home on benefits.

[Monkeys Fist 42121]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

In response to that pearl of wisdom, I'd like to ask you to lick my ball bag.

In a non- partisan manner, of course.

( bevvied).

[Renton 21369]

Fair enough but its clear as day to the majority which one of us is so blinded by bias, they really are losing their grip on reality.

 

Is it? How do you know that then? I get the impression the majority of readers on this thread will come to a completely different conclusion given your sickening fawning over Cameron and Osborne, after what, a month of government? You are too blind to see your own bias though, as you have demonstrated several times.

[Christmas Tree 4704]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

In response to that pearl of wisdom, I'd like to ask you to lick my ball bag.

In a non- partisan manner, of course.

( bevvied).

 

Putting aside my belief that the task you refer to may actually be a physical impossibility, I would point my learned friend in the direction of posters much more qualified than myself in this matter.

[Christmas Tree 4704]

Fair enough but its clear as day to the majority which one of us is so blinded by bias, they really are losing their grip on reality.

 

Is it? How do you know that then? I get the impression the majority of readers on this thread will come to a completely different conclusion given your sickening fawning over Cameron and Osborne, after what, a month of government? You are too blind to see your own bias though, as you have demonstrated several times.

 

 

Nicely ignoring all the relevant bits of that post with your usual lets throw an insult in and change the subject.

 

Dear me Renty, dear me.

[The Fish 10755]

Want a way to prove you're not biased? tell us of a policy you disagree with strongly? No Government is perfect so this Coalition must be short changing you somewhere...

[Renton 21369]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

 

I'm not playing the cut and paste game I'm afraid, it's a waste of time. Any good article should provide you with the counter viewpoint, what value do I add by repeating it?

 

So far you have quoted people representing Doctor's unions, Nurse's unions, Royal Colleges, and Patient groups. Each have their own motives and agenda for saying what they say, and there is a spectrum of opinion in each group, which you have cherry picked to suit your own agenda (and misrepresented on a couple of quotes I might add).

 

The real point has been made by Chez though already. If you don't audit what you are doing, you have no way of knowing if what you are doing is useful or not. There are bad targets, certainly, but there are good ones too (waiting list times are certainly good ones). Removing targets is the easiest way to reduce quality of service, because no one will be able to show that services have been worsened. I don't see how that can be reasonably disputed.

[Renton 21369]

Fair enough but its clear as day to the majority which one of us is so blinded by bias, they really are losing their grip on reality.

 

Is it? How do you know that then? I get the impression the majority of readers on this thread will come to a completely different conclusion given your sickening fawning over Cameron and Osborne, after what, a month of government? You are too blind to see your own bias though, as you have demonstrated several times.

 

 

Nicely ignoring all the relevant bits of that post with your usual lets throw an insult in and change the subject.

 

Dear me Renty, dear me.

 

You ignored the points in mine though. And where's the insult? Pointing out you are also biased?

Edited June 24, 2010 by Renton

[Monkeys Fist 42121]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

In response to that pearl of wisdom, I'd like to ask you to lick my ball bag.

In a non- partisan manner, of course.

( bevvied).

 

Putting aside my belief that the task you refer to may actually be a physical impossibility, I would point my learned friend in the direction of posters much more qualified than myself in this matter.

Physically impossible how?

And who are you referring to here?

Tea bag me, you pretend Tory sack licker

[Christmas Tree 4704]

Want a way to prove you're not biased? tell us of a policy you disagree with strongly? No Government is perfect so this Coalition must be short changing you somewhere...

 

 

Once again Fish why dont you get involved with YOUR views?????????

 

But, once again, I'll do my bit

 

Off the top of my head I totally disagree that they refused to means test child benefit or pension credits. Both should have been abolished and redistributed through Tax credits and pension credits to those in need, not the rich.

 

Much better for you to list any policies that you "strongly" dont like (putting aside the budget) and I'll tell you why I agree or disagree with you.

[Renton 21369]

It does irk me somewhat when people back a party 100%. I voted Tory, I stand by that decision and I agree with many things they are doing, but don't expect me to agree with everything. Much like I dont think everything labour did as wrong. Just A lot of it. Same as someone earlier saying they voted Lib Dem as the family always have. Thats something else I just don't get. It a bit of sheep mentality. My Dad is like that, always voted labour and always will.

 

As for the debate (some what of one) above. I don't really know that much about how the NHS works internally. However, my wife and a couple of family friends work or have worked for the NHS. The biggest complaint my wife had when she was there was that Doctors would push elderly out of hospital and back home much sooner than they should have been. This was because they were under pressure to meet targets for turning people around and keep them out of hospital. My wife was an OT and she basically assessed someone and their ability to live safely in their own home. Many times they went against their recommendations only to see the person back in hospital due to a fall in the home or something.

 

Point basically that there was too much red tape, admin & management taking up their budget rather than being spent where it was needed.

 

This forms my overall view of the NHS.

 

As for doctors being able to write a perscription (might as well say cheque) for any drug. Thats a pipe dream I'd think, no matter who says it.

 

Well it was in the Tory manifesto and is due to start April 2011. At PMQ's last week he was aked for an update and he said he was doing everything possible to bring it forward to this Autumn instead.

 

Dont know how they can be more straight or open than that.

 

A bit more detail on how this can be achieved would be good like. Did he not say?

[Christmas Tree 4704]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

 

I'm not playing the cut and paste game I'm afraid, it's a waste of time. Any good article should provide you with the counter viewpoint, what value do I add by repeating it?

 

So far you have quoted people representing Doctor's unions, Nurse's unions, Royal Colleges, and Patient groups. Each have their own motives and agenda for saying what they say, and there is a spectrum of opinion in each group, which you have cherry picked to suit your own agenda (and misrepresented on a couple of quotes I might add).

 

The real point has been made by Chez though already. If you don't audit what you are doing, you have no way of knowing if what you are doing is useful or not. There are bad targets, certainly, but there are good ones too (waiting list times are certainly good ones). Removing targets is the easiest way to reduce quality of service, because no one will be able to show that services have been worsened. I don't see how that can be reasonably disputed.

 

See the quotes from....Doctor's unions, Nurse's unions, Royal Colleges, and Patient groups.

 

All you have done recently is type complete bullshit about Cameron and then cried off or changed the subject when you are proven incorrect. Surely you can see your bias is totally fogging your judgement. (Im sure you do btw, but it just makes your points look childish).

[Christmas Tree 4704]

It does irk me somewhat when people back a party 100%. I voted Tory, I stand by that decision and I agree with many things they are doing, but don't expect me to agree with everything. Much like I dont think everything labour did as wrong. Just A lot of it. Same as someone earlier saying they voted Lib Dem as the family always have. Thats something else I just don't get. It a bit of sheep mentality. My Dad is like that, always voted labour and always will.

 

As for the debate (some what of one) above. I don't really know that much about how the NHS works internally. However, my wife and a couple of family friends work or have worked for the NHS. The biggest complaint my wife had when she was there was that Doctors would push elderly out of hospital and back home much sooner than they should have been. This was because they were under pressure to meet targets for turning people around and keep them out of hospital. My wife was an OT and she basically assessed someone and their ability to live safely in their own home. Many times they went against their recommendations only to see the person back in hospital due to a fall in the home or something.

 

Point basically that there was too much red tape, admin & management taking up their budget rather than being spent where it was needed.

 

This forms my overall view of the NHS.

 

As for doctors being able to write a perscription (might as well say cheque) for any drug. Thats a pipe dream I'd think, no matter who says it.

 

Well it was in the Tory manifesto and is due to start April 2011. At PMQ's last week he was aked for an update and he said he was doing everything possible to bring it forward to this Autumn instead.

 

Dont know how they can be more straight or open than that.

 

A bit more detail on how this can be achieved would be good like. Did he not say?

 

Cant see to much on this other than the facts in policy, queens speech and pmq's of last week.

 

One report somewhere says it will cost an xtra £200 million, which if true is basically chicken feed for a government to find.

[Renton 21369]

CT, do you realise you're as guilty of ducking questions, obfuscating facts, dismissing evidence and displaying incredible bias as the characters you portray your counterparts to be?

 

 

Unfortunately Fish you only ever pop in here with the usual bias so your views are somewhat tainted and typical.

 

Feel free to take part in an actual debate rather than a bit of cat calling from the sidelines.

 

Get yer hands dirty.

 

Rentons arguments have left him up so many dead ends tonight its quite shocking for a seemingly intelligent bloke. But thats what happens when you let bias get in the way of real facts.

 

Shame

 

Your style of 'debate' is simply to trawl the internet cherry picking opinions that suit your views. For every quote you give, I could quote somebody else giving the contrary viewpoint if I chose to. I don't do it because I'd rather give my own opinion, and frankly its boring.

 

You still haven't answered how you feel that scrapping waiting list targets will be of benefit to you. I'd like your opinion please.

 

I did. You asked me if they were good or bad and I said....... I dont know

 

Thats why I did some research which included the opinions of the Royal college of Nursing, The BMA Consultants, The Royal college of surgeons and at the very start YOU.

 

Im interested in the facts of a discussion where you are just constantly biased and that clouds your judgement all the way through this thread.

 

If you can find equally authorative bodies with a counter opinion I would be delighted to hear them, before making my mind up. Thats because I am interested in the policy, not the party.

 

However when the Royal college of surgeons say things like this below, then it is apparent that some targets are causing a problem and their removal will benefit us all.

 

The survey by Bournemouth University – to which 549 general surgeons responded – found that surgeons were often expected to carry out complicated operations within tight timescales and many were operating on patients they hadn't seen before. Over a period of just two weeks, 40 per cent of surgeons said they had been involved in cases where a patient was nearly harmed and 19 per cent where patients had been harmed.

 

One surgeon said: "Don't be seduced by management into making do, thinking you are being heroic; you're not, you are being dangerous."

 

A spokesperson for the Patients Association said: "This study gives yet more weight to the idea that while the NHS may have been meeting its targets over the past few years, that doesn't mean those targets are always a benefit for patients."

 

I'm not playing the cut and paste game I'm afraid, it's a waste of time. Any good article should provide you with the counter viewpoint, what value do I add by repeating it?

 

So far you have quoted people representing Doctor's unions, Nurse's unions, Royal Colleges, and Patient groups. Each have their own motives and agenda for saying what they say, and there is a spectrum of opinion in each group, which you have cherry picked to suit your own agenda (and misrepresented on a couple of quotes I might add).

 

The real point has been made by Chez though already. If you don't audit what you are doing, you have no way of knowing if what you are doing is useful or not. There are bad targets, certainly, but there are good ones too (waiting list times are certainly good ones). Removing targets is the easiest way to reduce quality of service, because no one will be able to show that services have been worsened. I don't see how that can be reasonably disputed.

 

See the quotes from....Doctor's unions, Nurse's unions, Royal Colleges, and Patient groups.

 

All you have done recently is type complete bullshit about Cameron and then cried off or changed the subject when you are proven incorrect. Surely you can see your bias is totally fogging your judgement. (Im sure you do btw, but it just makes your points look childish).

 

No, none of those quotes has adressed this fundamental point about the importance of clinical auditing. It's in most of those groups interests to have targets relaxed or removed - they are certainly not unbiased viewpoints.

 

If you want to talk about childishness and bias, please, grow some self-awareness. You were the only poster on here practically squealing with delight on election night (boys are back in town etc), and then again during the budget (greatest budget of recent times etc). This has been pointed out to you time and again by many people but you can't see it.

 

Anyway, I've already admitted I am biased. I don't see how it is possible to be interested in politics and not be. It's not an objective subject, it purely value-based and subjective. At least I can see this.

[Renton 21369]

It does irk me somewhat when people back a party 100%. I voted Tory, I stand by that decision and I agree with many things they are doing, but don't expect me to agree with everything. Much like I dont think everything labour did as wrong. Just A lot of it. Same as someone earlier saying they voted Lib Dem as the family always have. Thats something else I just don't get. It a bit of sheep mentality. My Dad is like that, always voted labour and always will.

 

As for the debate (some what of one) above. I don't really know that much about how the NHS works internally. However, my wife and a couple of family friends work or have worked for the NHS. The biggest complaint my wife had when she was there was that Doctors would push elderly out of hospital and back home much sooner than they should have been. This was because they were under pressure to meet targets for turning people around and keep them out of hospital. My wife was an OT and she basically assessed someone and their ability to live safely in their own home. Many times they went against their recommendations only to see the person back in hospital due to a fall in the home or something.

 

Point basically that there was too much red tape, admin & management taking up their budget rather than being spent where it was needed.

 

This forms my overall view of the NHS.

 

As for doctors being able to write a perscription (might as well say cheque) for any drug. Thats a pipe dream I'd think, no matter who says it.

 

Well it was in the Tory manifesto and is due to start April 2011. At PMQ's last week he was aked for an update and he said he was doing everything possible to bring it forward to this Autumn instead.

 

Dont know how they can be more straight or open than that.

 

A bit more detail on how this can be achieved would be good like. Did he not say?

 

Cant see to much on this other than the facts in policy, queens speech and pmq's of last week.

 

One report somewhere says it will cost an xtra £200 million, which if true is basically chicken feed for a government to find.

 

I'd love to see how they came up with that valuation. About two magnitudes out I reckon, and that's just for the cancer treatments. As there is no rational reason cancer should be treated differently to other serious diseases, logically speaking you could spend a fair proportion of the GDP on drugs and other interventions if cost effectiveness is not an issue. Unfortunately Healthcare really is a bottomless pit - it has to be rationed.

[Monkeys Fist 42121]

Newsnight tonight interviewed a Stockton family on benefits.

 

£36,000 a year, all from benefits.

 

Thanks Labour

 

and that does my head in. The system is clearly fucked if that can happen.

 

They even went on to tell the presenter how they borrow £2000 each December "so the kids can have all the right labels".

 

Im sure most reasonable people, regardless of political persuasion, realise that benefit pay outs like this are just perverse.

 

I take my hat off to the people who go out to work, even though they could get virtually the same staying at home on benefits.

I agree whole heartedly on this.

For many years myself and Mrs. Fist grafted and brought in not much more than this.

Never did we even consider 'claiming' even though we could have.

Not for any reason other than simple self respect.

Not sure what my point is, but hey Ho, the booze is in charge.

 

I was once up in front of the Magistrates for missing one payment of a traffic fine. At the time I was grafting as a chef, the Mrs was studying for her Degree and working P/T in a call centre.

The case before me were a pair of Chavs, who hadn't paid their fines( for D.A.D and Breach of the Peace) for months.

They listed their income and expenses, income being benefits, expenses were payments on Tv, Sky, PS2, Hi Fi - all 'luxury' items. Their living expenses- rent, council tax etc were untouchable as they were all paid by the state.

After everything was accounted for, they were asked to pay £5:00 per month between them on an outstanding fine of £1500+.

Their solicitor got it down to £2:50 a month-£1:25 each.

I had missed 1 payment on a £650 fine.

I was given the option of settling the full amount or 28 days inside.

I paid, but said my piece and was told I could be fined for contempt.

The Magistrate gad the good grace to be thoroughly embarrassed as they said this.

 

Ohhh, still pissed.

[NJS 4373]

Newsnight tonight interviewed a Stockton family on benefits.

 

£36,000 a year, all from benefits.

 

Thanks Labour

 

Can you name the legislation that was passed since 1997 that allows that?

 

I'm getting sick of the people who keep talking about the benefits culture as some kind of deliberate ploy by Labour to get votes by looking after "their own" - have the days of 3.5 million unemployed been forgotten by the twats already?

 

Of course there may be an underlying capitalist need for a pool of unemployed and I'm not saying there isn't an impetus to incease incapaity benefit but to suggest its something new and wasn't happening under Thatcher is fucking ridiculous.

[ChezGiven 0]

CT what point are you making about targets by quoting those pressure groups? None of them back up the point of view that targets per se are bad or should be reduced, they only make the point that everyone has agreed to, some are bad and create bad incentives.

 

The fact that Docs, Nurses etc are critical of specific targets means that the target needs more thought. On the debate as to whether targets are required, i wouldnt canvass the opinion of frontline workers. Targets are about the 'accountable use of tax resources' to ensure that what we spend on healthcare is done in a rational, fair and efficient manner.

 

Asking frontline staff to decide on targets is like Sony telling retailers, price the PS3 how you would like to.

[Christmas Tree 4704]

Newsnight tonight interviewed a Stockton family on benefits.

 

£36,000 a year, all from benefits.

 

Thanks Labour

 

Can you name the legislation that was passed since 1997 that allows that?

 

I'm getting sick of the people who keep talking about the benefits culture as some kind of deliberate ploy by Labour to get votes by looking after "their own" - have the days of 3.5 million unemployed been forgotten by the twats already?

 

Of course there may be an underlying capitalist need for a pool of unemployed and I'm not saying there isn't an impetus to incease incapaity benefit but to suggest its something new and wasn't happening under Thatcher is fucking ridiculous.

 

 

The unemployed days of Thatcher were summed up in a lot minds by a program called "Boys from the Black Stuff" where a guy called Yosser would walk from site to site with the famous words "Gis a Job".

 

His equivalent today says "Gis a Handout".

 

The situation above regarding the Stockton family that can afford £2,000 a year to spend on their kids christmas presents is not unusual.

 

You seem to be in some sort of denial that the only blame for this situation is Labour. Labour have added the new benefits, increased them and increased them again.

 

If nothing else, surely you agree that £36,000 a year for a family on benefits is wrong and should be tackled?

[Christmas Tree 4704]

CT what point are you making about targets by quoting those pressure groups? None of them back up the point of view that targets per se are bad or should be reduced, they only make the point that everyone has agreed to, some are bad and create bad incentives.

 

Exactly the same as you in that some are good and some are bad. Rentons standpoint is that all are good and are only being removed as part of a sinister Tory plan to reduce services.

 

The fact that Docs, Nurses etc are critical of specific targets means that the target needs more thought.

 

Agreed, or removal

 

On the debate as to whether targets are required, i wouldnt canvass the opinion of frontline workers. Targets are about the 'accountable use of tax resources' to ensure that what we spend on healthcare is done in a rational, fair and efficient manner.

 

This contradicts your second point. You have to take into account the views of the frontline in the actual day to day reality of implementing targets whether this be in the NHS, Police or Schools.

 

As highlighted by a lot of these frontline Surgeons, Doctors and Nurses, trying to hit some of these targets has a detramental effect on patient care.

 

In any business or organisation there is a balance to be had between the wish list of the ivory tower pencil pusher and the reality of the situation on the frontline.

 

I think we are pretty much on song with this one.

Edited June 24, 2010 by Christmas Tree

[The Fish 10755]

I disagree with the raise in the VAT, I think the economy needs people to go out and start buying stuff and hiking the price of things will not encourage that in the long term. I believe that a higher taxation on corporations could have covered the sum received instead of a VAT increase.

 

I don't see believe that making it cheaper for corporations to operate in the UK will directly benefit the people as I believe the corporations' responsibilities are to their shareholders. They're not going to suddenly slash prices, they're just going to give out more dividends. I don't believe in the trickle down economy because I don't believe corporations are socially responsible entities.

 

I don't believe we need to be spending as much on the defence as we do.

 

I don't think the cost of living raises proportionately with your income, so I believe the top earners can afford to pay a little more towards the upkeep of this country now that we're struggling (this position is strengthened when you consider it was some reckless and selfish behaviour by big earners that got us into this mess in the first place).

 

There you go CT, some of my beliefs. The reason I don't post more, is because there are far more informed and eloquent people speaking on the same subject formt he same side of the aisle. I just pop a message now and again because I'm not a fan of hypocrisy.

 

I don't mind admitting I have a little bias, I'm not full on socialisma, but I am happy to admit a left wing leaning. I wonder why you trumpet the right wing cause, but insist you're "the most objective and least bias person" on here? Seems staggeringly out of step with the glaring evidence to the contrary.

[Renton 21369]

Newsnight tonight interviewed a Stockton family on benefits.

 

£36,000 a year, all from benefits.

 

Thanks Labour

 

Can you name the legislation that was passed since 1997 that allows that?

 

I'm getting sick of the people who keep talking about the benefits culture as some kind of deliberate ploy by Labour to get votes by looking after "their own" - have the days of 3.5 million unemployed been forgotten by the twats already?

 

Of course there may be an underlying capitalist need for a pool of unemployed and I'm not saying there isn't an impetus to incease incapaity benefit but to suggest its something new and wasn't happening under Thatcher is fucking ridiculous.

 

 

The unemployed days of Thatcher were summed up in a lot minds by a program called "Boys from the Black Stuff" where a guy called Yosser would walk from site to site with the famous words "Gis a Job".

 

His equivalent today says "Gis a Handout".

 

The situation above regarding the Stockton family that can afford £2,000 a year to spend on their kids christmas presents is not unusual.

 

You seem to be in some sort of denial that the only blame for this situation is Labour. Labour have added the new benefits, increased them and increased them again.

 

If nothing else, surely you agree that £36,000 a year for a family on benefits is wrong and should be tackled?

 

I would say that was wrong fwiw, whilst bearing in mind it is anecdotal and I'd imagine a fairly large amount of it is Housing Benefit or Council tax relief. I find it hard to believe the '£2000 for christmas presents' bit mind - I'd need to see a breakdow of how that was possible without criminal activity. It certainly contradicts your earlier poverty coments as well.

 

If the Conservatives can fix this then good. Problem is to incentivise people to work you need to supply actual jobs. That didn't happen in the 1980s and it is going to be hard for it to happen now. I think we should review this thread in 4 years by which time we will have some idea if the Conservative policies have worked or not - agree?

[Guest alex]

I don't think you'll ever have a 'perfect' benefits system in a country of 60-odd million people and I think in some ways the changes Labour have brought in have taken people out of poverty. I do think there is a culture of scrounging that is highlighted by that family though. At the same time I think you have to be careful about taking a fairly atypical example and using it as an excuse to reduce benefits across the board to people who need it most. It's about trying to strike a balance and I'd like to think the influence of the Lib-Dems will temper the Conservatives a bit and help them come close to achieving that balance.