Tories and the Nhs changes.

[Leekbrookgull]

Hopefully someone on here does work in the frontline of the Nhs. If so can you try to simply explain what it is all about ? I know that from the News there is much anger from various bodies within the Nhs,but without being political and taking sides,what does it mean to 'Joe Public' ?

 

[GreersElbow]

Don't need to work in the NHS.

Make GPs form consortiums and they control the budgets, private companies can bid for contracts to run services within the hospital, both of this, whilst adding yet another layer of bureaucracy to the NHS.

GPs are not accountants, neither should health professionals be doing such a job IMO.
Similar stuff has been tried by both Tories and Labour (Labour wanted this at practice level,)

 

[Bigbelly]

The changes are needed and the only reason people within the NHS object is because they are left wing Labour supporters. The country was brain washed under the Labour party.

 

[GreersElbow]

The changes are needed and the only reason people within the NHS object is because they are left wing Labour supporters. The country was brain washed under the Labour party.

Yes, damn those god damn health-care professionals who actually work within the system. Damn them to hell, because they're left wing.


Let me guess, you're the type to think Labour's actually socialist, right?

Oh, damn the British Medical Association, who once argued for a U.S Style private health insurance system now are against the said proposals. Do you even understand the proposals? You want more bureaucracy?

 

[GreersElbow]

NHS- The shake up explained The Mancunion

This is a pretty good article on the reforms.

 

[supaseagull]

The changes are needed and the only reason people within the NHS object is because they are left wing Labour supporters. The country was brain washed under the Labour party.

That's the comment of someone who doesn't actually know what they're talking about and you'll actually find that the swathe of main changes to the NHS and it's bearocracy was made in 2004 under the Labour government although Thatcher kicked it off in 83 in the Griffith report.

The history of all this is unfortunate because what this will ultimately mean with Lansley's proposals is that certain aspects of the healthcare system will be part funded by private companies whose sole aim will be to make money and this will mean that grassroots health care, will be cut back and damaged.

So, if you're happy with underpaid & under qualified junior doctors and staff running your local hospitals then thats what you're going to get...

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

That's the comment of someone who doesn't actually know what they're talking about and you'll actually find that the swathe of main changes to the NHS and it's bearocracy was made in 2004 under the Labour government although Thatcher kicked it off in 83 in the Griffith report.

The history of all this is unfortunate because what this will ultimately mean with Lansley's proposals is that certain aspects of the healthcare system will be part funded by private companies whose sole aim will be to make money and this will mean that grassroots health care, will be cut back and damaged.

So, if you're happy with underpaid & under qualified junior doctors and staff running your local hospitals then thats what you're going to get...

I don't agree with the changes at all, however your last sentence is incorrect and will not happen. My fear is that potentially the same people who are holding the purse strings could be part of a syndicate of a medical team bidding to provide them (e.g. diagnostic testiing)!!

 

[beorhthelm]

The changes are needed ...

change is indeed needed but are these right? what are they even, they've changed alot of the past year or two. i did read an analysis that seemed sensible but a little headline risky (for instance swaths of middle mangment gone, saves mony for front line but high number of reduncancies) a long time ago, but thats all gone now. diluted by Liberals and fear of a backlash, it seems we have change for the sake of change left, to little benefit. similar to MoD, losing soldiers while the office staff is untouched, whats the point of that? so much for radical Tories, too much view on the next election already.

 

[Bigbelly]

That's the comment of someone who doesn't actually know what they're talking about and you'll actually find that the swathe of main changes to the NHS and it's bearocracy was made in 2004 under the Labour government although Thatcher kicked it off in 83 in the Griffith report.

The history of all this is unfortunate because what this will ultimately mean with Lansley's proposals is that certain aspects of the healthcare system will be part funded by private companies whose sole aim will be to make money and this will mean that grassroots health care, will be cut back and damaged.

So, if you're happy with underpaid & under qualified junior doctors and staff running your local hospitals then thats what you're going to get...

Here we go again, Thatchers fault. f*** me, can see it in 40 years time, it was Thatchers fault, Jesus Christ on a bike.

 

[franks brother]

You can see the same feeble thinking here that made such a mess of the railways.

They don't need to go full-on into privatisation, because they realise if they adopt this organisation it will be inevitable.

This time though, it is being driven less by ideology but more by rewarding their supporters.

I think this is a fundamental mistake which they will pay for, for years. The support for the NHS is extremely wide, and while any organisation of its size needs improvement as it goes, this is nothing of the sort.

In the US they pay approx 14% of their GDP into healthcare, even though millions are not covered. Medical bills are a common cause of bankruptcy. We pay about 8% of our GDP, less than France and Germany. What we get for that is excellent, and admired around the world.

 

[clapham_gull]

The changes are needed and the only reason people within the NHS object is because they are left wing Labour supporters. The country was brain washed under the Labour party.

Brain cell out tonight ?

This was all started by the last Government.

This is all about one thing and one thing only. Your friend Dave trying to learn from Tony's apparent belief that he made a mistake in the early years of office not reforming hard enough. Dave hasn't got an original thought, idea, policy or mandate.

 

[beorhthelm]

That's the comment of someone who doesn't actually know what they're talking about and you'll actually find that the swathe of main changes to the NHS and it's bearocracy was made in 2004 under the Labour government although Thatcher kicked it off in 83 in the Griffith report.

i read the other day that since 2000 the NHS budget has doubled from ~£50Bn to over £100Bn. even accounting for inflation, thats a massive increase, 60-70% in real terms? so wheres all the money been spent if the junior doctors and nurses are still underpaid?

 

[wellquickwoody]

GP's are very intelligent and talented professionals and generally know what they are talking about. Unfortunately that doesn't mean that they tell you and I what they are really thinking about.

I am an asthmatic, or so I am told, like many others. I have not had an attack for 20 years but I still use inhalers on a daily basis. I have been 'summoned' to my GP's surgery over the last few years for an 'asthma check' every 12 months

In the last 18 months I have been 'summoned' 3 times despite there being no change in the condition I have. When I questioned the latest 'summons' I was told that if I did not attend then my GP may withdraw cover and I would need to find another practice.

Attending these checks means that I either use my holiday allowance or my employer is paying me for nothing, or I work extra hours to cover the time.

Imagine my dismay when I discovered that GP's are given targets for checks upon asthma and the like. The more checks they carry out the more they earn! These people are usually earning in excess of one hundred thousand pounds a year but can insist that I give up mine, or my employers time, for an unneccessarry check that earns them more money.

Meh, f*** 'em! Ignore their protestations, they are only worried about their salary.

Sent from Pippa Middleton's lingerie drawer.

 

[GreersElbow]

You can see the same feeble thinking here that made such a mess of the railways.

They don't need to go full-on into privatisation, because they realise if they adopt this organisation it will be inevitable.

This time though, it is being driven less by ideology but more by rewarding their supporters.

I think this is a fundamental mistake which they will pay for, for years. The support for the NHS is extremely wide, and while any organisation of its size needs improvement as it goes, this is nothing of the sort.

In the US they pay approx 14% of their GDP into healthcare, even though millions are not covered. Medical bills are a common cause of bankruptcy. We pay about 8% of our GDP, less than France and Germany. What we get for that is excellent, and admired around the world.

Absolutely correct, reports from international health organisations praise the NHS's efficiency, and etc. The right however, hate it because it "takes away their freedom", and all that absolute bullshit, yet masturbate over a powerful and large police force.

The British Medical Association which argued against the NHS being created, and did for many decades after, is against these proposals and has threatened strike action (which it has never done before) This must mean something isn't right.

 

[dingodan]

Lets abolish the NHS.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I don't think any of us know enough about the ins and outs of the NHS to make any sort of educated 'decision' either way. Cost cutting should not have an adverse effect on patient care.

One thing I would instigate is that people should be punished for missing appointments unless there is a good reason. Financially.

 

[GreersElbow]

Lets abolish the NHS.

You could try, don't think it'll go down too well.

 

[Bob!]

Lets abolish the NHS.

Yup, that's the plan

 

[GreersElbow]

I don't think any of us know enough about the ins and outs of the NHS to make any sort of educated 'decision' either way. Cost cutting should not have an adverse effect on patient care.

One thing I would instigate is that people should be punished for missing appointments unless there is a good reason. Financially.

I would have to agree, I think we should have a cap on maximum visits unless there's a genuine problem. I also think anyone with smoking, drink or obesity problems should contribute towards their treatment. (Obesity only if self-inflicted, there's people with genuine reasons why they're big)

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

NHS's efficiency

don't go there.