[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Bodian]

Neck and neck apparently - with Lib Dems not far behind. Could be interesting.

Labour and Tories neck and neck in byelection race for Mid Beds, poll says

Survey reveals Labour more likely than Lib Dems to overturn Conservatives’ 25,000 majority in Nadine Dorries’s former seat

www.theguardian.com

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

More melting down going on today.

Shambolically announced watering down of key net zero policies

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

"I tried to rear the pig, fatten the pig and slaughter the pig on the same day".

f*** me. That was the ill-fated prime minister of last year, Thick Lizzie, speaking recently.

The event horizon has been now crossed. We now have a rolling tory government of the talentless, cheerfully admitting that they are attempting to achieve the ludicrously impossible for shits and giggles, and are jolly well going to bash on regardless.

Shameless self-serving cretins. Fie upon them.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just listened to the 'Change' medley from Sunak's latest driveling, er, speech, on radio 5. What a chump. Repeatedly saying 'change' is a dog whistle to what? That the tories are shit and are going to change?

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Here is an example of how the Tories (and the Blairites) are f*cking over the NHS.

The NHS is currently employing Anaesthesia Associates - and this should serve as a major warning for where the NHS is going.

To become an Consultant Anaesthetist you need a medical degree (minimum five years) and up to ten years of training.

To become an Anaesthesia Associate you are required to have a 2.1 degree in biology/life sciences or biomedical science and then complete a 2 year post grad qualification.

Anaesthetists are members of the Royal College of Anaesthetists, are licensed, regulated and insured and have stringent supervision.

Anaesthesia Associates are not members of the RCA, are not licensed, are not regulated, are not insured and have far less supervision.

Anaesthesia Associates are not required to inform patients that they are not anaesthetists, that they do not hold a medical degree (and indeed if they hold a PhD - or are a qualified vet - they can actually call themselves 'doctor' in a medical environment). They are 'encouraged' but not required to maintain a 'presence' on the 'AA Managed Voluntary Register' - and they don't pay any fees to the RCA (Anaesthetists are required to pay up to £700 per year for RCA membership and trainging fees, insurance etc can top £2,500 per year).

Anaesthesia Associates are allowed to administer anaesthetic or sedation 'under the supervision of a consultant' (what they don't tell you is that the consultant still has to carry out their own work and may be supervision more than one AA). However, if anything goes wrong, and it can at any time when you are administering these drugs - the AA has zero training on how to resolve the problems.

Furthermore, if anything does go wrong, there is no statutory body to carry out an investigation, no regulations that must be adhered to, no consequences for the AA.

Currently, an AA with a four year non-medical degree and two years of post-grad training is paid more than an anaesthetist with a five year medical degree, and seven years of training and experience as a doctor.

There are currently approximately 130 Anaesthesia Associates in the NHS - the Tories are planning to increase the number of AAs more than ten-fold to bring their numbers up to 1,500. That is 1,500 people with two years post-grad training preparing patients for surgery, administering anaesthetic or sedation, caring for post-op patients - without any regulation, without any insurance, without any license of competence, and with less than appropriate supervision.

Why are the AAs paid more than anaesthetists with a five year medical degree and seven years of medical experience and training - and why are hospitals falling over themselves to hire AAs instead of anaesthetists ?

Because the hospitals act as independent trusts, with budgets, who get fined if they breach their budget limits - if a hospital hires an anaesthetist then the salary of that anaesthetist comes directly out of the hospital's budget. However, the anaestesia associates are paid from a central government fund - so the government is paying the AAs significantly more that they will pay an experienced anaesthetist - and the hospitals are hiring the AAs instead of an experienced anaesthetist because the salary does not come out of the hospital's budget.

And here is the problem - the government refuse to expand training for anaesthetists despite the fact that there are five applicants for every one place available for anaesthetist training (and that includes through all the stages of training up to consultant) - but are willing to expand significantly the much inferior training places given to anaesthesia associates. And - of course - the next step is to expand the work that an AA will be allowed to do in a hospital because there is a severe shortage of anaesthetists because of the lack of training places.

My advise to anyone undergoing surgery in the NHS of any kind that requires anaesthetic or sedation is to ask the following question - are you an anaesthetist or an anaesthesia associate - if they say they are an AA (and press them for an honest answer), tell them politely to f*ck-off, send over an properly trained anaesthetist and that you do not want them to come anywhere near you.

 

[Acker79]

"I tried to rear the pig, fatten the pig and slaughter the pig on the same day".

f*** me. That was the ill-fated prime minister of last year, Thick Lizzie, speaking recently.

The event horizon has been now crossed. We now have a rolling tory government of the talentless, cheerfully admitting that they are attempting to achieve the ludicrously impossible for shits and giggles, and are jolly well going to bash on regardless.

Shameless self-serving cretins. Fie upon them.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Neck and neck apparently - with Lib Dems not far behind. Could be interesting.

Labour and Tories neck and neck in byelection race for Mid Beds, poll says

Survey reveals Labour more likely than Lib Dems to overturn Conservatives’ 25,000 majority in Nadine Dorries’s former seat

www.theguardian.com

If there is tactical voting, the Tories will get slaughtered.

“A new constituency poll seen by the Observer suggests that the Tory vote share in the seat has collapsed, halving from the near 60%.”

But this is more evidence that first past the post is useless and ultimately disengages the voter. Up to 70% may want the Tories out in mid-beds but they could still win with 30% of the vote. The sooner Starmer announces a new preferential vote system that makes is difficult for these ****s to get elected, the better.

 

[WATFORD zero]

If there is tactical voting, the Tories will get slaughtered.

“A new constituency poll seen by the Observer suggests that the Tory vote share in the seat has collapsed, halving from the near 60%.”

But this is more evidence that first past the post is useless and ultimately disengages the voter. Up to 70% may want the Tories out in mid-beds but they could still win with 30% of the vote. The sooner Starmer announces a new preferential vote system that makes is difficult for these ****s to get elected, the better.

I'd happily settle for a system whereby the number of seats any party gets in parliament actually reflects the number of votes they get from the electorate

 

[A mex eyecan]

I'd happily settle for a system whereby the number of seats any party gets in parliament actually reflects the number of votes they get from the electorate

I wasn’t always a fan of the idea, but I certainly have been over the past 2 - 3 years.

 

[Machiavelli]

I'd happily settle for a system whereby the number of seats any party gets in parliament actually reflects the number of votes they get from the electorate

Would be interested in your explanation as to how this could work

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Would be interested in your explanation as to how this could work

Proportional Representation. As used by every country in Europe except us, and Belarus.
It’s how we elected the 75 MEPs that went to the European Parliamen.

 

[Peteinblack]

Would be interested in your explanation as to how this could work

Simples - 27% of votes cast = 27% of seats in the House of Commons.

Currently, under FPTP, a party can win a comfortable 66 seat majority in the House of Commons - and govern for the next 5 years - on just 36% of votes cast (as New Labour did in the 2005 general election).

 

[WATFORD zero]

Would be interested in your explanation as to how this could work

Personally, I'd probably go for Party List , although I believe that Mixed Member Proportional Representation and Single Transferrable vote would also give a far better reflection of what the Electorate want than the current FPTP, but these are details.

I believe the far wider impact would be the break up of the current two party system and the current 'unofficial coalitions' which uneasily exist in the major parties purely in the pursuit of power. All this does (as ably proven over the last few years) is take focus away from actual Governing and are certainly not to the benefit of those being governed, whilst giving the electorate a choice of Corbyn v Johnson

I also believe that in turn, as these coalitions break, it would allow people to vote for parties that more accurately reflect their views and force more grown up political coalitions moving us away from the current red/blue rosette farce.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one

 

[Machiavelli]

My point was that they wouldn't be 'seats' aka constituencies. Pedants frequent this thread, as well as dreamers.

 

[Peteinblack]

My point was that they wouldn't be 'seats' aka constituencies. Pedants frequent this thread, as well as dreamers.

Depends on which type of PR was adopted - PR being a principle rather than a specific electoral system. Additional Member System (used in Scottish and Welsh elections), and Single Transferable Vote (used in Northern Ireland), both blend proportionality with traditional constituencies/seats.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

My point was that they wouldn't be 'seats' aka constituencies. Pedants frequent this thread, as well as dreamers.

You're right, In the sense that having constituency MPs is clearly beneficial to voters, and also that the constituency system allows us to directly vote out dodgy individuals in a way that a party-list system does not.

I believe the current polarisation of our politics and the underlying support of minor parties means that implementing a PR system is a no brainer, but i don't know how to resolve those two issues above. I'm sure there are ways i haven't thought of though.

 

[Machiavelli]

Depends on which type of PR was adopted - PR being a principle rather than a specific electoral system. Additional Member System (used in Scottish and Welsh elections), and Single Transferable Vote (used in Northern Ireland), both blend proportionality with traditional constituencies/seats.

Yes, I ought to know about these things, but find it a little tricky to comprehend. I've just been searching wiki courtesy of WZ's suggestions. Cracking fun on Saturday nights, me.

 

[Randy McNob]

 

[Pevenseagull]

Grant Schapps on TV just now implied that the overspend and faliure of the HS2 network project is due to increased costs arising from environmental concerns.

It seems the new Tory 3 word slogan should be "f*** the environment".

 

[Hugo Rune]

Depends on which type of PR was adopted - PR being a principle rather than a specific electoral system. Additional Member System (used in Scottish and Welsh elections), and Single Transferable Vote (used in Northern Ireland), both blend proportionality with traditional constituencies/seats.

Indeed. I did the Math.

Operate PR on a local level and instead of this in 2019:

2019 Election results in East Sussex​

The general election results for East Sussex are on the BBC website:

1. Bexhill and Battle – Conservative hold
2. Brighton Kemptown (includes Peacehaven) – Labour hold
3. Eastbourne – Conservative gain from Liberal Democrat
4. Hastings and Rye – Conservative hold
5. Lewes – Conservative hold
6. Wealden – Conservative hold

East Sussex returns 3 Tories. Extrapolate across the Country and you get a much more representative parliament, one that does not have the division of this country in its interest. The last 13 years have proved beyond doubt that FPTP is done (unless you are Belorussian I guess).