Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[News] Government to partly redress 13 years of chronic Tory underfunding of the NHS
- Thread starter Titanic
- Start date
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
About time, pity the amount of earnings they have lost thanks to years of below inflation pay rises. Inflation running at close to 3% immediately takes a big chunk out of this three year deal though.
Making nursing students pay tuition fees (came in last academic year I think) is even more stupid. Given the crap working conditions and crap pay, the incentive to qualify must be disappearing.
SweatyMexican
Well-known member
- Mar 31, 2013
- 4,155
That money doesn’t just disappear too. It comes back into the economy when they spend it.
Long overdue for the NHS.
Long overdue for the NHS.
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
It's the same thing. The reason why those tuition fees have to be paid is because the bursary was removed.
Buzzer
Languidly Clinical
- Oct 1, 2006
- 26,121
They should take the NHS out of the politician's control and into a panel of independent health care experts who understand what the Hippocratic oath means and given the power to make long-term strategic plans which is what it needs. Also give them the ability to audit their suppliers for value for money. The NHS is obliged at the moment to buy a lot of supplies for prices a lot higher than they could get just by going onto Amazon.
And PPF contracts to be subject to a public inquiry and the option for having Parliament pass a bill for them to be re-negotiated.
And PPF contracts to be subject to a public inquiry and the option for having Parliament pass a bill for them to be re-negotiated.
Indeed. Charging tuition fees to people who want to train as doctors or nurses (or for that matter physiotherapists, occupational therapists, etc, etc) is just so backward, it defies belief.
Provide the training completely free (they can borrow or fund their own maintenance costs) with nothing repayable in return for an obligation to work within the NHS for a specified number of years (10
). If they qualify at our cost and then look to bugger off to Saudi or something to get lucrative work in the private sector, then they can repay their training costs.
Anyone who votes Tory is by definition anti-NHS so trying to sound all smug now simply doesn't cut it. May is the queen of NHS cuts.
Theresa "The Razor" May.
Theresa "The Razor" May.
It’s ridiculous........the amount previously paid was more than just the fees and helped contribute to living costs. Now they nothing and end up with the same levels of debt as any other student........which is grossly unfair given the placement time they have to complete every term as well (whilst this is ‘learning’ it’s also unpaid labour - 2300 hours approx during a degree).
Scottish nursing students however pay no fees and get a bursary of nearly £7k a year (and since last year, English students studying at Uni in Scotland have to pay fees and don’t get the bursary).
Indeed. Charging tuition fees to people who want to train as doctors or nurses (or for that matter physiotherapists, occupational therapists, etc, etc) is just so backward, it defies belief.
Provide the training completely free (they can borrow or fund their own maintenance costs) with nothing repayable in return for an obligation to work within the NHS for a specified number of years (10
Agreed. They do this in Wales - it’s 3 years there.....it’s just English nursing students that are massively disincentivised.
- Thread starter
- #34
So you all believe that there are 33,000 fewer nurses working in NHS hospitals than last year? Really??
And yes, he clearly tried to suggest that was the case.
The facts about nursing numbers (and NHS staff in general), while still acknowledging the huge pressures our NHS is facing with a growing and aging population, are somewhat different.
"The full time equivalent (FTE) NHS Workforce total was 1,057,900 in December 2017. This is 18,835 (1.8 per cent) more than in December 2016 (1,039,065)."
https://digital.nhs.uk/catalogue/PUB30240
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
No he didn't. He said "Hopefully 33,000 nurses wont leave The NHS this year now as happened last year,". I think it's pretty obvious that he's implying that's how many nurses left the NHS last year, not the difference between those that left and those that joined.
If you want to see the difference between the leavers and joiners, you could just read the link he posted, where it says:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42653542
This is at a time where we desperately need joiners to outnumber leavers.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
What part of:
Is incorrect or is me suggesting that there are 33,000 fewer nurses working in hospitals than last year?
It's a well known figure, it's even contained in the article you used in your original post that you didn't read, yet somehow you're now erroneously suggesting that I 'clearly tried' to suggest something else ie there are 33,000 fewer nurses working in NHS hospital than last year, which I didn't.
Go away.
[emoji23]
Sirnormangall
Well-known member
- Sep 21, 2017
- 3,178
I know a few Tory voters and none of them are anti-NHS, in fact quite the opposite. It’s good to see the announcement today - well deserved for all the hard working NHS workers who we sometimes take for granted. But where does “13 years” come from?
The selfish commies on this board will public applaud this news in many ways including Dave’s example above but inside will be feeling a little sick that the government are doing something positive, pushing their beloved Momentum further to the peripheries