labour only 2 points behind in polls

[User removed 4]

It wouldn't be so bad, but you're so quick to offer clueless statements yourself, such as sweeping generalisations on the state of the NHS.

Which particular sweeping generalisation on the stae of the nhs is that? i'm genuinely interested.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I think the sniping at the educational background the trories are supposed to have had tell you all you need to know at the Labour supporters on here.

 

[Simster]

I am only bitter.

You certainly are.

Try getting some sort of state help if you are single , british and skint.

I did. There isn't much in the way of handouts until you lose your house. I presume you still own a house, Gareth?

And incidentally, 'twas ever thus. There are always people who abuse the system, sadly. This isn't the fault of either major political party IMO.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

You certainly are.
I did. There isn't much in the way of handouts until you lose your house. I presume you still own a house, Gareth?

Only just.

 

[Simster]

Which particular sweeping generalisation on the stae of the nhs is that? i'm genuinely interested.

On this thread, someone suggested the NHS is one of the best health services around, you considered this laughable without putting up any reason for it.

I can tell you for a FACT that it is far better than the French version. But then what do I know, I've only got relatives who have lived there for 20 years and had the misfortune to need their health care fairly recently.

 

[Simster]

You certainly are.
I did. There isn't much in the way of handouts until you lose your house. I presume you still own a house, Gareth?

Only just.

I suspect you will find that if you do lose your house, you will receive more help. I feel your frustration here, I really do, because I've been there. But lets be clear about this, it really isn't as if this is new legislation brought in since Labour came to power. It's always been like this.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Bit late to get any help WHEN I lose my house.

 

[User removed 4]

Not really, no. Obviously.

Or to quote another of your often used phrases, "well that's driven a bus through my argument".

Its 'coach and horses' actually, so either its not that well used or you have a poor short term memory, which is it ?

 

[User removed 4]

On this thread, someone suggested the NHS is one of the best health services around, you considered this laughable without putting up any reason for it.

I can tell you for a FACT that it is far better than the French version. But then what do I know, I've only got relatives who have lived there for 20 years and had the misfortune to need their health care fairly recently.

I can tell you you are talking absolute bollocks, but what do i know, my sister lives there , is getting married to a frenchman, has used the french health sytem extensively in the last few years and hasnt got a bad word to say about it.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Labour didn't create this FFS! This has been the case for literally decades. I'd say the Tories first created this problem under Thatcher because nearly 4 million were out of work in the early '80s. I will say that no government has addressed this issue ever since, and this is the real problem - we need a cultural shift away from choosing handouts as a life choice and I'm not sure how that can be done without penalising the genuinely needy.

I saw an interesting interview about this on the AM show a couple of months back, I think it was Portillo talking about it.

I can't remember all of it but the basic gist was that if you have any benefits system in place there will always be a section of society who choose to be state dependant. The only way round it is to get rid of it altogether, if a persons only choice is to somehow earn money or starve then they will always help themselves and productivity in the economy goes up because everyone has to be productive.

He gave the victorians as an example but i'd guess there's comparisions in developing world at the moment.

Obvoiusly it will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting way of looking at things.

 

[beorhthelm]

There has been a huge exodus of east europeans in the last 2 years, says it as Poland and their economy is not a far more attractive proposition for them.

this is true, and the fact they were here and could find jobs shows how many there are in this country that are willing to sit on there arse and moan about their lot instead of getting on with things. if a Pole is willing to work 40 hrs on a site or a Portugese is willing to work late nights/early mornings as a cleaner, why cant those native british on the estates do the same?

It is an acknowledged FACT that the Tories recommended policies would have put us in Depression. They (the tories) really haven't got a clue, change their minds as they go along...

funny how you use the term "fact", then point out they change their minds. so which is it? how can there be any facts when there wasnt a coherent policy and, this is the killer point, they were not in power to execute any plan. the tory "policy" was jsut there to create the impression of difference, anyone can see that. if in power they'd have adopted the same approach as Brown/Darling did as all the advise/history told them that was the only thing to do - dont panic, dont do too much except promise to back the banks and pump a little money into the economy.

 

[Simster]

I can tell you you are talking absolute bollocks, but what do i know, my sister lives there , is getting married to a frenchman, has used the french health sytem extensively in the last few years and hasnt got a bad word to say about it.

That's you all over. I'm not "talking absolute bollocks", it's just that my relatives have a different experience of their healthcare system to yours.

My step mother lived in France for ten years, was married to a Frenchman for 8 years. She's had some shocking care as well as some very good care.
My wife lived in Paris for a year - she was unwhelmed by French healthcare pointing out that the lower grade ambulances in France wouldn't look out of place in India.
My step mum's sister has lived in Nice for 20 years. Five years ago her husband went in for an op for a week or two, and whilst the care was sufficient, in France you have to PAY up front for a lot of the care, then claim it back. This money is a nightmare to claim back in many cases, and often takes months, during which time you could easily be absolutely brassic.

So in a nutshell, it sounds like the health system is France is good and bad, depending on the individual experience. Not unlike our own really, and certainly not gone to the dogs under Labour, which is what you'd have us believe.

 

[User removed 4]

That's you all over. I'm not "talking absolute bollocks", it's just that my relatives have a different experience of their healthcare system to yours.

My step mother lived in France for ten years, was married to a Frenchman for 8 years. She's had some shocking care as well as some very good care.
My wife lived in Paris for a year - she was unwhelmed by French healthcare pointing out that the lower grade ambulances in France wouldn't look out of place in India.
My step mum's sister has lived in Nice for 20 years. Five years ago her husband went in for an op for a week or two, and whilst the care was sufficient, in France you have to PAY up front for a lot of the care, then claim it back. This money is a nightmare to claim back in many cases, and often takes months, during which time you could easily be absolutely brassic.

So in a nutshell, it sounds like the health system is France is good and bad, depending on the individual experience. Not unlike our own really, and certainly not gone to the dogs under Labour, which is what you'd have us believe.

Ah , the old 'thats you all over tactic'' when i've quite plainly driven a COACH AND HORSES through your argument, i havent claimed the NHS has gone to the dogs under labour at all, i would say there has been a mild improvement, which is nowhere near good enough considering the vast amount of money that has been poured into it, but labour seem to be pretty good at wasting other peoples money.

 

[Simster]

I saw an interesting interview about this on the AM show a couple of months back, I think it was Portillo talking about it.

I can't remember all of it but the basic gist was that if you have any benefits system in place there will always be a section of society who choose to be state dependant. The only way round it is to get rid of it altogether, if a persons only choice is to somehow earn money or starve then they will always help themselves and productivity in the economy goes up because everyone has to be productive.

He gave the victorians as an example but i'd guess there's comparisions in developing world at the moment.

Obvoiusly it will never happen, but I thought it was an interesting way of looking at things.

I'd agree with you, Billy. You either abandon the welfare state or accept that some people abuse the system. What we want from a government is to be able to control the abusers and come down hard on them.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

Haven't read the previous pages ( life is too short).

Like there parties neither Brown nor Cameron are electable. Brown is the man that took the tax relief away from the pension funds which effectively screwed them, as of two years ago the pension fund deficit was almost identical as the money taken in tax revenue from the Pension funds. F**k up of the highest order. He can’t handle his party, and his party have run out of ideas and have lost touch with the rest of the country. Thirty years ago they all thought they were Che Guevara (sp), now they have him locked up! Their solution to everything is have a f**king committee, clowns!

Cameron changes his mind faster than a women in a shoe shop, he is the emperor in new clothes, however the thing that scares me more than anything with the Tories is that moron Osbourne who takes cluelessness to a new level, he can’t debate issues and I have more grasp on Fiscical policy than he does. I am reliably informed that he considered a joke by many in the world of Economics but he has money and clout. The two of them are a joke. Ken Clarke must cry himself to sleep each night. The other problem is that party activists are still stuck in the 1950’s and think there’s a commie under the bed and that ‘darkies’ make good servants, mind you no different to the Labour lot that think that poltics is either ‘right on’ or that the USSR going to down the pan was bad thing.

I suppose I fall into the middle class bracket (scary thought!) and I expect to get screwed by the Tories as much as I did under labour because that’s where the tax money is, as for the super rich the only time they’ve been screwed was under the Callaghan Labour government and then Thatcher lot them off when she was elected.

In terms of policy I see no real difference between them so there isn’t much of a choice, we are in a nadir of British politics, both parties need a Fire brand to raise the banner …

As for the NHS is shit statement well that ranks with the Britsh fuel is the most expensive in Europe..... It's a non starter, French medical care varies greatly with where you live, if you lucky the care is excellent if your not you're f**ked. Friends of mine live in the US, there tax rate is very low their indirect tax's required for health care insurabce etc is shockingly high .... Fuel in Spain and Germany is higher than the UK and I believe that Holland is the same.


I’ll be spoiling my card!

 

[beorhthelm]

Haven't read the previous pages ( life is too short).

Like there parties neither Brown nor Cameron are electable.

actually thats a pretty good summary (though i think a tad far on the conservative ins the 50's - more like 80's.

the hopfully saving grace of Cameron is he knows that he is all show and devolves decision making to cabinet. except Osborne, i dont understand why he is still around, definatly a liability unless he too gets this and fronts up others decisions. That politics today, spin and presentation (see Obama)

 

[Norman Potting]

NO opposition party EVER presents its policies in terms other than "What we will give you is a bigger and better apple pie than the government is offering".

The electorate will believe this promise, only to the extent that they TRUST the people who are making it.

Support for the Tories is wobbling at the moment because - as the election draws nearer - more and more people are questioning whether or not they can be trusted. Elections are not fought on POLICIES. They are fought on TRUST.

A very sound and succinct political analysis Lord B. I will probably vote Lib Dem for the reason that they have never in recent times had the opportunity to demonstrate that they can screw things up as well as the other two parties.

 

[simonsimon]

Labour still ahead in random NSC poll.

Interesting.

 

[User removed 4]

Taken from a financial markets email i receive



Just what was the reason that between first and second editions of the Sunday Times newspaper yesterday – a space that is usually about two to three hours - the YouGov poll published in the first edition giving the Tories a reasonable 6% lead had suddenly dropped to just 2% in the second edition? Puzzled? Well, you are not alone! Indeed, had it not been for the extreme keenness of former BBC chief Greg Dyke who spotted the mysterious change and informing during his press review on the BBC1 Andrew Marr Show yesterday we may not have been any the wiser! True, the sudden change could just be that someone spotted a genuine mistake such as the figure being used to calculate the percentage change from the previous result was incorrect leading to a keen eyed late duty reporter to correcting the result but somehow, in this rather fastidious day and age for factual correctness, I think not!



Given that the guys at YouGov have been conducting political polls like this for very many years now and that as far as I know there are few if any precedents for mistakes turning up after results have been sent off to the final customer [in this case as with most other political opinion polls, for print or broadcast media] there is something very sinister looking about this particular poll. Perhaps we will never know what it is but I do believe that if Mr. Dyke was right and to avoid conspiracy theorists having a field day believing that this was perhaps aimed at scuppering the Conservative Party spring conference that YouGov President, Peter Kellner owes not only voters but also the Tory leaders to provide a very full explanation of what if anything went wrong.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Ah , the old 'thats you all over tactic'' when i've quite plainly driven a COACH AND HORSES through your argument, i havent claimed the NHS has gone to the dogs under labour at all, i would say there has been a mild improvement, which is nowhere near good enough considering the vast amount of money that has been poured into it, but labour seem to be pretty good at wasting other peoples money.

Deep breath.

What i will say specifically on the subject of the NHS is this:

I was an A&E Staff Nurse between 1992 and 1996 and previously to that had been a student Nurse trained in Brighton Hospitals and out of the Old School of Nursing in Kingsway, Hove and Sussex Uni.

In the years since I left Nursing and went into The Medical Industry I have continued to work closely with NHS Hospitals all over the UK and other Hospitals right around Europe. My current role means I work in the Intensive Care Medicine arena developing patient safety products.

For what its worth I have the following observations to make:

The NHS has improved massively in just about all critical care settings that is A&E, Coronary and Intensive Care. Facilities, equipment, morale and infrastructure have undergone a huge overhaul, the staff are better paid and the money that has been spent has, by and large, meant that your chance of leaving those areas alive has improved beyond measure.

A&E in particular is worth mentioning because, I think I speak the truth here when I say, not one of you lot with the self important opinions on here, has ever worked in a trauma unit so your opinions, really, count for nought.

When I worked in that area, under the last Conservative Government incidentally, it was collapsing under the weight of targets/patient charters/cost cutting initiatives. The equipment was antiquated and often still being used long past its redundancy, in fact we used to routinely use single patient use devices on multiple patients because of budgetary constraints. Morale was just in freefall after years of governmental neglect, pay-freezes and chronic underfunding generally. What was happening across the whole Health Service was bordering on Criminal. Does anyone remember the 24 hour waiting in A&E, people dying in corridors? 18 month waits for cancer patients? IT WAS ALL TRUE...I WAS THERE.

The Conservatives operated a "Value for Money" system that meant that managers who spent less than their budget got large bonusses based on the savings they made. This simply led to a slashing of spending on vital equipment and services and big bonusses for the, often non clinical, managers.

The Tory way was to just spend nothing on essential public services. It was lazy, route one, stuff.

Fast forward to 2010. The changes made have altered things beyond recognition. True there are still issues, there always will be. True there are still complaints from nurses about poor pay...but you know what? Nurses are often young women who leave the profession to have kids or go into other areas of life so they dont have the continuity of experience that is required to have an informed opinion.


What is true is that you very really hear Nurses with 20 odd years of service under their belts comparing the situation as it is today unfavourably with the situation under the last Tory Govt. In fact I have NEVER heard this from that group. To a one they loathe the Tories of that era for what they did to the NHS, although obviously some are prepared to put this in the past and trust Cameron and the Conservatives once again.

Perhaps they have short memories or perhaps they are now senior Nurses and Managers more interested in how much they are going to be taxed by labour. What is true is that they are typically earing almost 50% more in real terms to do those senior roles than they would have under the last Tory administration.


I can recall some of my colleagues in those days voting Tory much to the horror of their colleagues. BUT I also recall that these weirdos usually had a rich Doctor Husband or similar comfortable home situation so Nursing was almost a hobby for them where they got to dress up and move among the poor dispensing mercy. For those of us trying to pay our ridiculous Mortgages or surviving with a family on pittance wages this was never a voting choice.

Because of my considerable experience in European Hospitals, again in Critical Care I have the following observations:

Firstly France. France has an excellent public health system which consistently delivers some of the best outcomes for diseases such as Cancer and Coronary disease in Europe. France also has some of the most overblown socialist Hospitals with ridiculous bureauracies that stifle innovation and haemorrage money. Their Intensive care areas are poor in comparison with the UK.The Reanimátion Nurses lack autonomy and care suffers as a consequence. Medication errors are common because the staff are relatively poorly trained. France also has no national reporting structure for things like this so it often goes unreported. General dissatisfaction levels among French people with their Hospitals are far greater than in Britain, and in my view, rightly so. The French system is basically inferior to the UK in every way that I have seen.

Germany.

The German Healthcare system, once the envy of the world is now in utter crisis. They enjoy the highest ratio of Doctors to patients and Nurses to beds in Europe but this system is not sustainable long term, especially now.

German Hospitals again operater a "Doctor knows best" system which means that Nurses and other ancilliary staff are little more than operatives with very little ability to challenge on behalf of patients. Their High Dependancy areas offer excellent care levels but, interestingly, relatively poor survival rates in comparison with the UK the insurance based system there means that Hospitals compete with each other for trade so are reluctant to report issues related to patient harm caused in their institutions. They are also reluctant to allow clinical studies which highlight such concerns because it would be bad for trade. Again not a system that should be considered "better" than the NHS although you would certainly feel very well looked after with all the extra Nurses.

The "Best" healthcare system I have seen is in Scandinavia. The investment in Healthcare there is massive and the skills of the Nurses are comparable to the UK. They have clean, well resourced and FREE healthcare with no up-front charges. Patient safety is something that the authorities are keen to pay for and the systems they employ are state of the art. Their populations are small and relatively rich, but highly taxed, so can afford the very best.

The Karolinka in Sweden is just an amazing Hospital with highly skilled, well paid staff. Truly this is the way all Healthcare should be modelled.

Overall UK is behind the Nordics but ahead of the French and German systems. The mediterranean countries do not really have integrated healhcare systems in the way we understand them so really do not bear comparison.

Britain is just behind them and quite a way ahead of France and Germany in my opinion, which, in the absence of anyone else on here actually knowing what they are talking about experientially, is the only opinion that should matter.

The day I start pontificating about the Bond Market, derivitives trading or Share price futures is the day that you lot can give an opinion obn the relative merits of Tory or other management of the Health Service.

Shut the f*** up eh? you're just embarrassing yourselves.