Politics

[Christmas Tree 4679]

No it will fall on deaf ears with most biassed on here but he really does strike me as the best prime minister during my lifetime.

 

Love it when posters aren't self aware of the huge irony of their comments.

 

Should have known who would have been first in. Bet you havent watched it

 

You're calling him the [best prime minister of your life time and yet he has only been in power 6 months. None of the cut backs has even taken effect yet, how about waiting to see what the effects of these will be, particularly in areas like the North East? Will you still be saying he's the best prime minister ever when Newcastle has reverted back into a post-industrial wasteland as the South no doubt prospers? Actually yes, no doubt you will.

 

Talking about the man himself. But again you havent watched it

 

By the way, the BMA on Friday expressed major concerns that the NHS reforms put the enitre stability of the organisation at risk, as well as increasing the involvement of private for profit suppliers, and fundamentally damaging the GP-patient relationship. Many GPs are only waking up to the cold reality of it now, but it should have been obvious to anyone reading the white paper.

 

Its probably escaped your notice but every department is shouting about what "might" happen because they all want to keep the same scandalous budgets that were available during Browns spend spend spend years.

 

The truth is CT we are in for some scary times, and to proclaim Cameron a success on any level at this stage says more about your blatent manlove for him than any bias against him on here. He's already behind Ed milliband in the opinion polls, hardly a ringing endorsement, is it?

 

Didnt say he'd been a success! He's going to have a very tough time because of the shit he inherited, as everyone knows, apart from a few lefties.

 

Ed Milliband is a stop gap, surely you are bright enough to see that.

 

 

I suggest you watch the interview the post was about, but I guess you wont and will keep on with the biassed drivel.

 

So, basically you believe Cameron is the best prime minister during your lifetime based on one interview with Andrew Marr? Who said bromance was dead.....

 

Btw, the NHS reforms I am talking about are nothing to do with the NHS budget so I don't know what you're on about there. Tell you what, I'll watch the Andrew Marr interview if you read the NHS white paper and tell me what you think of it, deal? You can download it here.

 

Ok, so I got 7 pages in to the 61 page document and all seems great why dont you copy and paste the bit that offends you?

 

The foreward reads....

 

The NHS is a great national institution. The principles it was founded on are as important now as they were then: free at the point of use and available to everyone based on need, not ability to pay. But we believe that it can be so much better – for both patients and professionals.

That’s why we’ve set out a bold vision for the future of the NHS - rooted in the coalition’s core beliefs of freedom, fairness and responsibility.

We will make the NHS more accountable to patients. We will free staff from excessive bureaucracy and top-down control. We will increase real terms spending on the health service in every year of this Parliament.

 

Our ambition is to once again make the NHS the envy of the world. Liberating the NHS - a blend of Conservative and Liberal Democrat ideas - sets out our plans to do this.

First, patients will be at the heart of everything we do. So they will have more choice and control, helped by easy access to the information they need about the best GPs and hospitals. Patients will be in charge of making decisions about their care.

 

Second, there will be a relentless focus on clinical outcomes. Success will be measured, not through bureaucratic process targets, but against results that really matter to patients – such as improving cancer and stroke survival rates.

 

Third, we will empower health professionals. Doctors and nurses must to be able to use their professional judgement about what is right for patients. We will support this by giving frontline staff more control. Healthcare will be run from the bottom up, with ownership and decision-making in the hands of professionals and patients.

 

Of course, our massive deficit and growing debt means there are some difficult decisions to make. The NHS is not immune from those challenges. But far from that being reason to abandon reform, it demands that we accelerate it. Only by putting patients first and trusting professionals will we drive up standards, deliver better value for money and create a healthier nation.

 

All sounds fucking rosy in the garden to me

 

What would be the point of me copying and pasting, and then bolding bits, like you have done? You do realise this is a government document and is therefore framed in the most positive way possible, don't you?

 

I'm fundamentally against the reforms because I don't believe GPs are the best people to control the healthcare budget, simple as that. Most GPs want to practice medicine, not balance budgets, and by and large they're simply not qualified to do it. Furthermore, I think there is a dangerous possibility it will jeopardise the GP-patient relationship, because the GP will directly be making financial choices for the patient, rather than clinical ones.

 

Of course, in reality GPs will have to employ managers to balance the books for them. As there will be more than three times as much consortia as PCTs there are presently, this will inevitably increase beaureaucracy, not decrease it. It will also possibly lead to postcode lottery, which Labour spent years trying to abolish. On the other hand, if people can choose GPs regardless of the locality they live in, it will be absolutely disastrous for many samller, rural practices or practices that are underperforming and need help (rather than being made subject to market forces).

 

Another issue is the move towards 'value' based prescribing. What's important here is to recognise that patients are emphatically not the best people to choose their treatment. Expect millions more pounds to pissed up the wall treating the worried well with homeopathy and other batshit complementary therapies as a result.

 

Then there's the increased role of competition within the NHS which if not controlled may well be privatisation through the back door - this undoubtedly suits the tory ethos after all.

 

Finally, working in the NHS I think I can speak for nearly everyone when I say that the last thing anyone wants is another massive reorganisation for political reasons, especially one that is so potentially destabilising as this. The NHS is not broken as has been suggested, for the most part it is well run and has massive public satisfaction as a result. There's been almost no pilots for these reforms and the whole thing is happening at an alarming rate. And this is from a government that surely has little mandate for such huge changes, particularly since these reforms were not even mentioned in either the tories of Lib Dems manifestos?

 

Care to answer my points without cut and pasting then CT, or are you still feeling all dweamy about Cameron?

 

 

First of all the BMA seem quite happy with a lot of the proposals in the white paper and agree that GP's will make a better job of localised budgets / patient care.

 

Anyone who has any dealings with PCT's cant help but see the waste these bodys generate. Hundreds of pen pushers each building their own little empire and forever clogging up the day to day work of frontline health workers with pointless meetings, training etc etc.

 

I also think patients being able to choose their local practise will help raise standards for the majority. When ever I need to go to the docs I always go to the local walk in centre which is further away but far more customer friendly and quicker.

 

When you also here some of the talk about how far we are behind a lot of countries with regard to cancer / stroke / respiratory disease care then its clear that improvements are needed.

[Renton 21231]

First of all the BMA seem quite happy with a lot of the proposals in the white paper and agree that GP's will make a better job of localised budgets / patient care.

 

Anyone who has any dealings with PCT's cant help but see the waste these bodys generate. Hundreds of pen pushers each building their own little empire and forever clogging up the day to day work of frontline health workers with pointless meetings, training etc etc.

 

I also think patients being able to choose their local practise will help raise standards for the majority. When ever I need to go to the docs I always go to the local walk in centre which is further away but far more customer friendly and quicker.

 

When you also here some of the talk about how far we are behind a lot of countries with regard to cancer / stroke / respiratory disease care then its clear that improvements are needed.

 

1) The BMA are far from happy with the reforms. Mind, I'm surprised you are giving any credence to a union anyway.

2) Usual bollocks about pen pushers in PCTs from someone who knows nothing about it. There will be THREE times as many consortia which will mean more managers, not less, more duplication of roles, and more regional variation.

3) Interesting you mention walk in centres. They were created by Labour and face a very uncertain future now.

4) It's true you can cherry pick health outcomes that the UK fairs badly in. However, many if not most of these outcomes relate to other social factors, such as lifestyle, as much as they do the Health Service. Another explanation for it is that we spend much less on healthcare (as a proportion of GDP) than most our European neighbours. Labour successfully went a long way to rectify this by spending more and reducing the health gaps, I don't think anybody can reasonably expect this to continue under this government.

Edited October 4, 2010 by Renton

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Average middle class Dave has caved in to Liam Fox over defence cuts apparently, he can't even keep his party in line and he's the best prime minister in history. CT is as bad as Oasis fans when it comes to this. How the fuck do you work out he's the best in your lifetime unless you're 6 months old?

[Guest alex]

Cameron seems good at keeping out the public eye. That's all he's done so far, anyway.

[Park Life 71]

Average middle class Dave has caved in to Liam Fox over defence cuts apparently, he can't even keep his party in line and he's the best prime minister in history. CT is as bad as Oasis fans when it comes to this. How the fuck do you work out he's the best in your lifetime unless you're 6 months old?

 

[ChezGiven 0]

Boys from the Blackstuff is on BBC4 tonight.

Timely reminder of the fun to come under "the best PM of my lifetime"©CT.

Got me thinking about another Bleasdale comedy/drama with Robert Lindsay and Michael Palin called G.B.H. Would love to see that again.

 

Another interesting take on the state of British politics back then, done in 91 though so at the end of the Thatcher years.

 

Re: CT's usual tripe, you cant escape bureacracy in health care anyway, not if you want to be rational.

Edited October 4, 2010 by ChezGiven

[Guest alex]

Forgot about GBH. Lindsay was quality in that.

[ChezGiven 0]

He had the funniest twitch in his arm that got worse as the story/conspiracy unfolded. Sort of like that bloke with the mad twitch in the very old Carry On films (funny bloke, quite big, glasses?). Based on Derek Hatton supposedly.

[Park Life 71]

Boys from the Blackstuff is on BBC4 tonight.

Timely reminder of the fun to come under "the best PM of my lifetime"©CT.

Got me thinking about another Bleasdale comedy/drama with Robert Lindsay and Michael Palin called G.B.H. Would love to see that again.

 

Another interesting take on the state of British politics back then, done in 91 though so at the end of the Thatcher years.

 

Re: CT's usual tripe, you cant escape bureacracy in health care anyway, not if you want to be rational.

 

All very high quality those.

[Park Life 71]

He had the funniest twitch in his arm that got worse as the story/conspiracy unfolded. Sort of like that bloke with the mad twitch in the very old Carry On films (funny bloke, quite big, glasses?). Based on Derek Hatton supposedly.

 

Taxi for Hatton.

[Guest alex]

Derek Hatton alright. Very thinly veiled allusions to that cunt.

Edited October 4, 2010 by alex

[Christmas Tree 4679]

Your wrong about the BMA. Suggest you actually read what they are saying about most of the reforms.

 

Wrong again about my knowledge of PCT's

 

The fact a Labour government introduced walk in centres is irrelevant, unlike you there are lots of things Labour did that I appreciate not being so glimmered.

 

I had forgotten how childish you can be

[ChezGiven 0]

Derek Hatton alright. Very thinly veiled allusions to that cunt.

On the series wiki site it says that Hatton knew that Bleasdale was going to send him up but said he didnt mind as long as the actor was handsome

[Park Life 71]

Your wrong about the BMA. Suggest you actually read what they are saying about most of the reforms.

 

Wrong again about my knowledge of PCT's

 

The fact a Labour government introduced walk in centres is irrelevant, unlike you there are lots of things Labour did that I appreciate not being so glimmered.

 

I had forgotten how childish you can be

 

Uh oh!

[Park Life 71]

Derek Hatton alright. Very thinly veiled allusions to that cunt.

On the series wiki site it says that Hatton knew that Bleasdale was going to send him up but said he didnt mind as long as the actor was handsome

 

[Guest alex]

Your wrong about the BMA. Suggest you actually read what they are saying about most of the reforms.

 

Wrong again about my knowledge of PCT's

 

The fact a Labour government introduced walk in centres is irrelevant, unlike you there are lots of things Labour did that I appreciate not being so glimmered.

 

I had forgotten how childish you can be

Glimmered?

[shackbleep 0]

Massive fuck up by Gideon this morning IMO with regards Child Benefit.

 

A one income family earning £44K will no longer qualify for Child Benefit whereas 2 people each earning £43K a year therefore taking home £86K will?!?!

 

Makes fuck all sense that like...

[NJS 4365]

Massive fuck up by Gideon this morning IMO with regards Child Benefit.

 

A one income family earning £44K will no longer qualify for Child Benefit whereas 2 people each earning £43K a year therefore taking home £86K will?!?!

 

Makes fuck all sense that like...

 

The joint thing is stupid.

 

People in the office discussing this just won't be told that 45k is a huge salary to millions of people - it isn't "middle income" - the median is something like 24k which means millions earn that or less.

[Christmas Tree 4679]

Your wrong about the BMA. Suggest you actually read what they are saying about most of the reforms.

 

Wrong again about my knowledge of PCT's

 

The fact a Labour government introduced walk in centres is irrelevant, unlike you there are lots of things Labour did that I appreciate not being so glimmered.

 

I had forgotten how childish you can be

Glimmered?

 

 

How the fuck predictive testing turns blinkered into glimmered

[shackbleep 0]

The other thing I can't get my head around is the timing... 2013? Surely if this is part of the 'spending cuts' they should be implementing it now? Deferring it 3 years just makes it more obvious that they're using 'spending cuts' as an excuse to fuck people over.

[Christmas Tree 4679]

Massive fuck up by Gideon this morning IMO with regards Child Benefit.

 

A one income family earning £44K will no longer qualify for Child Benefit whereas 2 people each earning £43K a year therefore taking home £86K will?!?!

 

Makes fuck all sense that like...

 

Seems a very bizarre thing to do.

 

Must say I am pleased that at long last someone is starting to do something about these ridiculous universal benefits.

[Guest alex]

Your wrong about the BMA. Suggest you actually read what they are saying about most of the reforms.

 

Wrong again about my knowledge of PCT's

 

The fact a Labour government introduced walk in centres is irrelevant, unlike you there are lots of things Labour did that I appreciate not being so glimmered.

 

I had forgotten how childish you can be

Glimmered?

 

 

How the fuck predictive testing turns blinkered into glimmered

Testing?

[Christmas Tree 4679]

The other thing I can't get my head around is the timing... 2013? Surely if this is part of the 'spending cuts' they should be implementing it now? Deferring it 3 years just makes it more obvious that they're using 'spending cuts' as an excuse to fuck people over.

 

 

I would guess this is because it might be tied in with this universal benefit which is being introduced which will take time to get up and running.

[NJS 4365]

The other thing I can't get my head around is the timing... 2013? Surely if this is part of the 'spending cuts' they should be implementing it now? Deferring it 3 years just makes it more obvious that they're using 'spending cuts' as an excuse to fuck people over.

 

 

Its so the press will concentrate on that while the real cuts that hit the real poor start next Monday and will be ignored.

[Guest alex]

It's a headline grabber which will make no difference to the vast majority of people.

Edited October 4, 2010 by alex