Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

NHS vs. Red Cross - a humanitarian crisis?

2456710

Comments

  • Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.

    And I am not blaming foreign countries at all. My personal opinion is that money that is wasted is money that is wasted. We waste a LOT of money. Claims of £350 million a week are ridiculous when it comes to the EU, but we waste a lot of money that we needn't waste. A lot of money isn't going to blankets for Syrian migrants, or food for the starving, it is going to ridiculous vanity projects... Spending money for the sake of spending money (as we are commited to in our foreign aid budget as it is locked in at a percentage) is ridiculous.

    Huskaris said:

    As is always the case with the NHS, your opinion will be based entirely on your political leanings.

    My personal opinion is that you could quadruple the amount of money the NHS gets and it would still be demanding more. That is not *just* a criticism of how much they love pissing money up the wall but also a comment about the drug companies/equipment manufacturers who will base their prices on what they know the NHS can afford.

    It's the NHS though, so mustn't grumble... Labour good, Tories bad etc... Such an asinine argument.

    I've worked in the NHS under both labour and conservatives. Both equally bad.

    There are some fundamental issues regarding funding that are just not widely understood.

    The NHS of today is about as high tech as you can get and it gets more high tech year on year. It's a fact of life that leading edge medical equipment is expensive and whereas 20 years ago it could adequately perform for a good number of years these days it's more or less obsolete buy the time it's bought and installed. Patients demand the best and why shouldn't they. The level of training required to use the new generations of equipment is enormous. Bright young things are just not interested in doing the highly educated stress filled, target driven under paid jobs the NHS has to offer.

    Again. I could go on forever.

    My point exactly, but instead, any time a Conservative so much as stands for election, they want to privatise the NHS and throw everyones gran out onto the pavement to die, whilst lighting their cigars with crisp £50 notes they have stolen off some poor pensioner somewhere. Like I said it is ridiculous and the arguments about the NHS are much, much more complex than that, especially with regards to things like NHS inflation which you mention. Medical inflation runs at a much higher rate than general inflation, for obvious reasons such as tech and innovation which costs money.

    If you increase the value of the NHS budget year on year by the consumer prices index, in real terms for the NHS, it is getting poorer.
    HS2, for example?
    And Universal Credit - jeez, what a mess..
  • SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.
    I don't know what to do with this. But the words "massacre," "starving people while taking their crops" and "taking all natural resources in a country" spring to mind.

    Can someone else...?
    All I can say is "what did the Romans ever do for us." I know this is a really harsh thing to say, but a couple hundred years down the line, people remember infrastructure that has been left, not the disgusting massacres of innocent people. I am thinking of things like the road network in the UK, the settlements that were made etc as a result of the Romans. India has the biggest employer in the world, the Indian railway, as a consequence of harsh British imperialism and plundering. Like I said, hundreds of years down the line, the negatives fade out, and the positives, including things like rule of law, and creating the biggest democracy on Earth, start to shine through.

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.

    And I am not blaming foreign countries at all. My personal opinion is that money that is wasted is money that is wasted. We waste a LOT of money. Claims of £350 million a week are ridiculous when it comes to the EU, but we waste a lot of money that we needn't waste. A lot of money isn't going to blankets for Syrian migrants, or food for the starving, it is going to ridiculous vanity projects... Spending money for the sake of spending money (as we are commited to in our foreign aid budget as it is locked in at a percentage) is ridiculous.

    Huskaris said:

    As is always the case with the NHS, your opinion will be based entirely on your political leanings.

    My personal opinion is that you could quadruple the amount of money the NHS gets and it would still be demanding more. That is not *just* a criticism of how much they love pissing money up the wall but also a comment about the drug companies/equipment manufacturers who will base their prices on what they know the NHS can afford.

    It's the NHS though, so mustn't grumble... Labour good, Tories bad etc... Such an asinine argument.

    I've worked in the NHS under both labour and conservatives. Both equally bad.

    There are some fundamental issues regarding funding that are just not widely understood.

    The NHS of today is about as high tech as you can get and it gets more high tech year on year. It's a fact of life that leading edge medical equipment is expensive and whereas 20 years ago it could adequately perform for a good number of years these days it's more or less obsolete buy the time it's bought and installed. Patients demand the best and why shouldn't they. The level of training required to use the new generations of equipment is enormous. Bright young things are just not interested in doing the highly educated stress filled, target driven under paid jobs the NHS has to offer.

    Again. I could go on forever.

    My point exactly, but instead, any time a Conservative so much as stands for election, they want to privatise the NHS and throw everyones gran out onto the pavement to die, whilst lighting their cigars with crisp £50 notes they have stolen off some poor pensioner somewhere. Like I said it is ridiculous and the arguments about the NHS are much, much more complex than that, especially with regards to things like NHS inflation which you mention. Medical inflation runs at a much higher rate than general inflation, for obvious reasons such as tech and innovation which costs money.

    If you increase the value of the NHS budget year on year by the consumer prices index, in real terms for the NHS, it is getting poorer.
    HS2, for example?
    This can definitely be argued, wastage is wastage, but I would rather waste money on infrastructure projects in the UK, that on things abroad which are effectively sweeteners to try and get business, often with nations that are nuclear powers... And often we don't even get the trade deals.

    We are not the global international power we want to think we are anymore.
  • SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.
    I don't know what to do with this. But the words "massacre," "starving people while taking their crops" and "taking all natural resources in a country" spring to mind.

    Can someone else...?

    Next time I'm in London let's you and me go to the British Museum (and I mean that genuinely) because that place is basically one big crime scene.
    I would love to, and I mean that genuinely too. You seem like the kind of person I would enjoy having a discussion with, most of my friends have completely different political opinions to me, but that's what makes discussions fun, no fun in surrounding yourself with people who think the same as you...
  • Recently I had an x-ray followed up with physiotherapy .. both were undertaken by non NHS companies contracted to do the work .. and both services were carried out very efficiently (using NHS facilities and equipment) as have all the NHS treatments myself and a seriously ill family member have had in recent years.

    Private enterprise has been carrying out NHS work for a long long time.
    Many services in this region, Humber, East Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, are joint NHS/Private initiatives .. I suspect that without outside investment and enterprise, the NHS would be in a far worse state .. then again, one only hears about the 'terrible mess' that is the NHS .. the millions and millions of treatments and cures that are successful and done as a matter of course are never headline news .. only BAD news is real news nowadays so it seems
  • Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.

    And I am not blaming foreign countries at all. My personal opinion is that money that is wasted is money that is wasted. We waste a LOT of money. Claims of £350 million a week are ridiculous when it comes to the EU, but we waste a lot of money that we needn't waste. A lot of money isn't going to blankets for Syrian migrants, or food for the starving, it is going to ridiculous vanity projects... Spending money for the sake of spending money (as we are commited to in our foreign aid budget as it is locked in at a percentage) is ridiculous.

    Huskaris said:

    As is always the case with the NHS, your opinion will be based entirely on your political leanings.

    My personal opinion is that you could quadruple the amount of money the NHS gets and it would still be demanding more. That is not *just* a criticism of how much they love pissing money up the wall but also a comment about the drug companies/equipment manufacturers who will base their prices on what they know the NHS can afford.

    It's the NHS though, so mustn't grumble... Labour good, Tories bad etc... Such an asinine argument.

    I've worked in the NHS under both labour and conservatives. Both equally bad.

    There are some fundamental issues regarding funding that are just not widely understood.

    The NHS of today is about as high tech as you can get and it gets more high tech year on year. It's a fact of life that leading edge medical equipment is expensive and whereas 20 years ago it could adequately perform for a good number of years these days it's more or less obsolete buy the time it's bought and installed. Patients demand the best and why shouldn't they. The level of training required to use the new generations of equipment is enormous. Bright young things are just not interested in doing the highly educated stress filled, target driven under paid jobs the NHS has to offer.

    Again. I could go on forever.

    My point exactly, but instead, any time a Conservative so much as stands for election, they want to privatise the NHS and throw everyones gran out onto the pavement to die, whilst lighting their cigars with crisp £50 notes they have stolen off some poor pensioner somewhere. Like I said it is ridiculous and the arguments about the NHS are much, much more complex than that, especially with regards to things like NHS inflation which you mention. Medical inflation runs at a much higher rate than general inflation, for obvious reasons such as tech and innovation which costs money.

    If you increase the value of the NHS budget year on year by the consumer prices index, in real terms for the NHS, it is getting poorer.
    HS2, for example?
    Yes, another vanity project.
  • Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.
    I don't know what to do with this. But the words "massacre," "starving people while taking their crops" and "taking all natural resources in a country" spring to mind.

    Can someone else...?

    Next time I'm in London let's you and me go to the British Museum (and I mean that genuinely) because that place is basically one big crime scene.
    I would love to, and I mean that genuinely too. You seem like the kind of person I would enjoy having a discussion with, most of my friends have completely different political opinions to me, but that's what makes discussions fun, no fun in surrounding yourself with people who think the same as you...
    Deal, and I appreciate this comment contrasted with my original one as it shows that you seem to be a bright and open minded person.

    And for the record, I do love the British Museum :).
  • SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.
    I don't know what to do with this. But the words "massacre," "starving people while taking their crops" and "taking all natural resources in a country" spring to mind.

    Can someone else...?

    Next time I'm in London let's you and me go to the British Museum (and I mean that genuinely) because that place is basically one big crime scene.
    I would love to, and I mean that genuinely too. You seem like the kind of person I would enjoy having a discussion with, most of my friends have completely different political opinions to me, but that's what makes discussions fun, no fun in surrounding yourself with people who think the same as you...
    Deal, and I appreciate this comment contrasted with my original one as it shows that you seem to be a bright and open minded person.

    And for the record, I do love the British Museum :).
    The internet can be very deceptive ;)

    As do I, such an interesting place to walk around.
  • edited January 7
    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.
    Next time I'm in London let's you and me go to the British Museum (and I mean that genuinely) because that place is basically one big crime scene.

    That comment is meant somewhat tongue in cheek. I don't agree with you that the good the British Empire did outweighs the bad, but my original response was belittling and snarky, and that's not helping anything or anyone. @Huskaris even though we don't agree on much politically, I have found you to be open minded, and you deserve better than a smug response.

    There will be others who can speak better to the history and legacy of the British Empire than I can, and I'll let them tackle that one should they choose.
    The next time you're in London you'd be better off visiting an NHS hospital, rather than the British Museum.

    I'm sure you would get a better understanding. You would very quickly see the staff shortages.
  • I always find it amusing that if you were to stop and ask 1000 people in the street if nurses are underpaid 999 would say yes. This has been understood as true for decades. Yet ...........
  • Sponsored links:


  • We don't need to put up taxes to pay for the NHS, merely start collecting from the rich bastards that are squirelling away their money into tax havens. If someone has a contract of employment with holidays, pensions, bonuses and termination compensation, then they shouldn't be allowed to direct their pay to a company and on to a foreign bank without deduction of tax.

    When did this become legal and why has it not been legislated against?
  • Popcorn anyone? Salted or sweet?

    I'm ready ibs. And because I've been doing a lot of grassing recently the thread is relatively high up.
  • The NHS and health funding is a very complex issue. As mentioned above, Medical technology is always improving and is expensive. But the population increasing along with huge numbers of people home and abroad happily taking the piss out the system and going through life not contributing also puts a big strain in things. Along with an arguably weak education system or a lack of British people training and joining the NHS which leads to foreigners and agency staff having to be used to make up the numbers.

    Also if all NHS was fully funded and services kept in house, how would the politicians and their mates make loads of money from contracts and company shares? Like all Government and social services these days it's all about publicly running things down and forcing privatisation where possible. Not for the benefit of the public or the service itself but for the benefit of some peoples personal wealth. There have been huge funding cuts on the Police and a few years ago the government set up a team headed by some Lord doasthegovernmentwants looking into whether parts of the Police should/could be privatised. The Lord they put in charge was also a consultant at G4S! Yet the Government found that there was no conflict of interest there and surprise surprise he found that many aspects of the Police service should be privatised. The same thing is happening in the NHS and other sectors.

    It also doesn't help that business who provide work for public sectors, councils etc think it's ok to over quote their prices. Even small local companies or whatever see the public sector as a cash cow and a chance to over charge, 'cause you know, it's only tax payers money. They're are taking the p but don't seem to think there's anything wrong with it because it's always what's happened. Yet no doubt they're also complaining about services not being funded enough. Isn't helped by the fact that most "managers" in the public sector are incompetent and would never be given the same level of responsibility in any successful private sector.
  • Will Thuram be in goal ?
  • DRAddick said:

    The NHS and health funding is a very complex issue. As mentioned above, Medical technology is always improving and is expensive. But the population increasing along with huge numbers of people home and abroad happily taking the piss out the system and going through life not contributing also puts a big strain in things. Along with an arguably weak education system or a lack of British people training and joining the NHS which leads to foreigners and agency staff having to be used to make up the numbers.

    Also if all NHS was fully funded and services kept in house, how would the politicians and their mates make loads of money from contracts and company shares? Like all Government and social services these days it's all about publicly running things down and forcing privatisation where possible. Not for the benefit of the public or the service itself but for the benefit of some peoples personal wealth. There have been huge funding cuts on the Police and a few years ago the government set up a team headed by some Lord doasthegovernmentwants looking into whether parts of the Police should/could be privatised. The Lord they put in charge was also a consultant at G4S! Yet the Government found that there was no conflict of interest there and surprise surprise he found that many aspects of the Police service should be privatised. The same thing is happening in the NHS and other sectors.

    It also doesn't help that business who provide work for public sectors, councils etc think it's ok to over quote their prices. Even small local companies or whatever see the public sector as a cash cow and a chance to over charge, 'cause you know, it's only tax payers money. They're are taking the p but don't seem to think there's anything wrong with it because it's always what's happened. Yet no doubt they're also complaining about services not being funded enough. Isn't helped by the fact that most "managers" in the public sector are incompetent and would never be given the same level of responsibility in any successful private sector.

    I agree with all of that bar the last sentence. I think the public sector has its fair share of good and bad managers and there are plenty in the private sector that wouldn't have the competence/understanding of what it is to be a good manager in the public sector
  • How long before this thread is mentioned on the grass thread?
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited January 7

    http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38538637

    The NHS is disputing Red Cross' claims of a humanitarian crisis across hospitals in England.

    Should they be getting involved in the politics? Does the government need to be spending more on the NHS?

    I really don't think that the total funding amount is the issue. It's the gross incompetence of the management, the wanton wastage and dire organisation that is the problem.

    There are obvious examples of criminal waste going on. I remember a couple years ago there was a small outcry about the computer hardware contract that was across a number of hospitals. Thousands of computers plus industrial printers, scanners and much more. Anyone with any competence would strike a deal that involved a bulk buying discount. Instead the contract it turned out cost more than if they had walked into PC world and bought the stuff over the counter. And they weren't even getting the latest models.

    Get vaguely competent people in the right positions and you will get savings without really trying.

    I have huge respect for the medical staff in the NHS but the admin and middle management is chaos.

    There have been cases of businessmen going into hospitals and reorganising the management and admin (not touching the medical side) and suddenly huge savings were made.
  • IT_Andy said:

    seth plum said:

    One traditional stance of the Tories is that the voluntary sector and the charitable sector do a marvellous job and should be part of it.
    The problem is the extreme end of right wing politics who think charity ought to cover all the areas they don't fancy paying for. Some right wing thinking is that everything ought to be private, and taxes lower so people can pay for their own health service or street lighting or whatever.

    This has not just been an issue for the tories but every government over the last twenty or thirty years. PFI under labour has put a heavy strain on the NHS. Also sadly charities have played a large part for many years but I agree this has got worse recently. More money should be spent on the NHS, which becomes more expensive every year. The trouble is I don't think people want to pay extra money through taxation.
    Ahhh don't get me started on the criminal waste of PFI. Almost all of them signed off by a Mr Andy Burnham, who in my opinion should be charged with criminal waste of taxpayers money.
  • Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.

    And I am not blaming foreign countries at all. My personal opinion is that money that is wasted is money that is wasted. We waste a LOT of money. Claims of £350 million a week are ridiculous when it comes to the EU, but we waste a lot of money that we needn't waste. A lot of money isn't going to blankets for Syrian migrants, or food for the starving, it is going to ridiculous vanity projects... Spending money for the sake of spending money (as we are commited to in our foreign aid budget as it is locked in at a percentage) is ridiculous.

    Huskaris said:

    As is always the case with the NHS, your opinion will be based entirely on your political leanings.

    My personal opinion is that you could quadruple the amount of money the NHS gets and it would still be demanding more. That is not *just* a criticism of how much they love pissing money up the wall but also a comment about the drug companies/equipment manufacturers who will base their prices on what they know the NHS can afford.

    It's the NHS though, so mustn't grumble... Labour good, Tories bad etc... Such an asinine argument.

    I've worked in the NHS under both labour and conservatives. Both equally bad.

    There are some fundamental issues regarding funding that are just not widely understood.

    The NHS of today is about as high tech as you can get and it gets more high tech year on year. It's a fact of life that leading edge medical equipment is expensive and whereas 20 years ago it could adequately perform for a good number of years these days it's more or less obsolete buy the time it's bought and installed. Patients demand the best and why shouldn't they. The level of training required to use the new generations of equipment is enormous. Bright young things are just not interested in doing the highly educated stress filled, target driven under paid jobs the NHS has to offer.

    Again. I could go on forever.

    My point exactly, but instead, any time a Conservative so much as stands for election, they want to privatise the NHS and throw everyones gran out onto the pavement to die, whilst lighting their cigars with crisp £50 notes they have stolen off some poor pensioner somewhere. Like I said it is ridiculous and the arguments about the NHS are much, much more complex than that, especially with regards to things like NHS inflation which you mention. Medical inflation runs at a much higher rate than general inflation, for obvious reasons such as tech and innovation which costs money.

    If you increase the value of the NHS budget year on year by the consumer prices index, in real terms for the NHS, it is getting poorer.
    HS2, for example?
    And Universal Credit - jeez, what a mess..
    UC really isn't too bad. It was a mess 5 years ago but it is now back on track (well a 5 years delayed track) but is rolling out quickly. And is really making a difference. Once the previous system is no longer running there will be significant savings.. Yes money is being wasted all the time both systems run alongside each other but eventually there will be a huge net benefit.

    Studied it in detail for my Uni thesis this year if you're wondering how I know all about it.
  • edited January 7

    http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38538637

    The NHS is disputing Red Cross' claims of a humanitarian crisis across hospitals in England.

    Should they be getting involved in the politics? Does the government need to be spending more on the NHS?

    I really don't think that the total funding amount is the issue. It's the gross incompetence of the management, the wanton wastage and dire organisation that is the problem.

    There are obvious examples of criminal waste going on. I remember a couple years ago there was a small outcry about the computer hardware contract that was across a number of hospitals. Thousands of computers plus industrial printers, scanners and much more. Anyone with any competence would strike a deal that involved a bulk buying discount. Instead the contract it turned out cost more than if they had walked into PC world and bought the stuff over the counter. And they weren't even getting the latest models.

    Get vaguely competent people in the right positions and you will get savings without really trying.

    I have huge respect for the medical staff in the NHS but the admin and middle management is chaos.

    There have been cases of businessmen going into hospitals and reorganising the management and admin (not touching the medical side) and suddenly huge savings were made.
    Agree in part that management could be better but in recent years the admin staff have been decimated. Saving on salaries certainly but piling immense pressure onto their colleagues who in my experience finally have to give it up and leave. It has also meant that clinical staff have to do a lot of the jobs previously done by others thus leaving them free to concentrate on the patients.

    In my job I and my colleagues spent far to much time tracking down notes and sorting appointments. Completely necessary to the wellbeing of the patient but hardly good use of highly trained clinical staffs time.

    The NHS is an absolute mess. I'm convinced that most of it will be in private hands in 20 years. A lot of it is already.

    You don't know what you've got till its gone springs to mind. Still there are profits to be made and that's all that really matters.

  • edited January 7
    From an outsiders point of view, it seems to me the NHS spends far to much on medication that is not necessary - particularly to those that get it for free. It seems a lot of the time it's an easy option to dish out scripts, rather than deal with the underlining issues.

    The sheer amount of services that are now available that weren't even considered when the NHS was conceived is phenomenal. We need to have a serious debate about what we want from the NHS. Is it there to provide treatment for those that are sick, or does it need to provide a full social service covering all areas of health?

    If the former, then we need to remove services that are 'nice to have' or make people pay for them.

    If the latter, then we need to fund it properly from taxation.

    Finally the political nonsense being spouted by the Red Cross is a disgrace. They should be focussing their time and commitment to where it is really needed.
  • http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38538637

    The NHS is disputing Red Cross' claims of a humanitarian crisis across hospitals in England.

    Should they be getting involved in the politics? Does the government need to be spending more on the NHS?

    I really don't think that the total funding amount is the issue. It's the gross incompetence of the management, the wanton wastage and dire organisation that is the problem.

    There are obvious examples of criminal waste going on. I remember a couple years ago there was a small outcry about the computer hardware contract that was across a number of hospitals. Thousands of computers plus industrial printers, scanners and much more. Anyone with any competence would strike a deal that involved a bulk buying discount. Instead the contract it turned out cost more than if they had walked into PC world and bought the stuff over the counter. And they weren't even getting the latest models.

    Get vaguely competent people in the right positions and you will get savings without really trying.

    I have huge respect for the medical staff in the NHS but the admin and middle management is chaos.

    There have been cases of businessmen going into hospitals and reorganising the management and admin (not touching the medical side) and suddenly huge savings were made.
    Agree in part that management could be better but in recent years the admin staff have been decimated. Saving on salaries certainly but piling immense pressure onto their colleagues who in my experience finally have to give it up and leave. It has also meant that clinical staff have to do a lot of the jobs previously done by others thus leaving them free to concentrate on the patients.

    In my job I and my colleagues spent far to much time tracking down notes and sorting appointments. Completely necessary to the wellbeing of the patient but hardly good use of highly trained clinical staffs time.

    The NHS is an absolute mess. I'm convinced that most of it will be in private hands in 20 years. A lot of it is already.

    You don't know what you've got till its gone springs to mind. Still there are profits to be made and that's all that really matters.

    Agree with most of this. There are cases where the admin side has been slimmed down and it's gone really well and others where it's been a disaster. A lot depends on who is doing the advising and making the decisions. Often the people tasked with doing the slimming are those who have a vested interest in protecting certain roles/areas therefore others suffer.

    There is a skill to making things run better more efficiently. Going in and firing a load of low level admin staff isn't the answer. First you have to look at the work being done. Work out how that can be made more efficient (often this will need an initial investment in technology or something) then you get rid of staff as and when they are no longer needed. Obviously it's not quite that simple. It has to be done right and I suspect there is no desire to get it right, anyone who has seen Yes Minister will know what I mean here.
  • Addickted said:

    From an outsiders point of view, it seems to me the NHS spends far to much on medication that is not necessary - particularly to those that get it for free. It seems a lot of the time it's an easy option to dish out scripts, rather than deal with the underlining issues.

    The sheer amount of services that are now available that weren't even considered when the NHS was conceived is phenomenal. We need to have a serious debate about what we want from the NHS. Is it there to provide treatment for those that are sick, or does it need to provide a full social service covering all areas of health?

    If the former, then we need to remove services that are 'nice to have' or make people pay for them.

    If the latter, then we need to fund it properly from taxation.

    Finally the political nonsense being spouted by the Red Cross is a disgrace. They should be focussing their time and commitment to where it is really needed.

    As a matter of interest. Which services do you think should not be provided. Not a snarky comment.

  • Huskaris said:

    SDAddick said:

    Huskaris said:

    It's long overdue that we reduced the overseas aid budget and spent some of it on the NHS and other care services.

    £12.2 billion pounds per annum is a staggering sum and if only £0.5M was diverted away from foreign causes such as Ethiopian pop groups (it now has), it would make a massive difference.

    I'm all for foreign aid, but not in such massive sums, when our own services are in dire straits.

    Agreed, one thing is for sure, every penny that goes to someone from abroad in NHS services should come out of our foreign aid budget. It might mean that there is less Spice Girl groups in Ethiopia, and for that I can only apologise for being a cold hearted bastard, but sometimes, and this is a cliche, charity begins at home.
    If, as the sixth largest economy in the world, you cannot figure out how to provide proper care to your own citizens, it is ridiculous to blame people in foreign countries who desperately need help (some of which is the result of the empire). This is not a Labour or Toy thing, this is a human decency thing.
    First of all, I would completely disagree with the idea that empire has been a negative influence on these countries. I would argue, as an example, that India would be far, far worse today were it not for the Empire's influence, and don't get me wrong a lot of that was to exploit their natural resources, but no one would deny the Romans did a lot, and I am sure a few hundred years from now once all the self hating people have died away the British Empire will be viewed in a similar way.

    And I am not blaming foreign countries at all. My personal opinion is that money that is wasted is money that is wasted. We waste a LOT of money. Claims of £350 million a week are ridiculous when it comes to the EU, but we waste a lot of money that we needn't waste. A lot of money isn't going to blankets for Syrian migrants, or food for the starving, it is going to ridiculous vanity projects... Spending money for the sake of spending money (as we are commited to in our foreign aid budget as it is locked in at a percentage) is ridiculous.

    Huskaris said:

    As is always the case with the NHS, your opinion will be based entirely on your political leanings.

    My personal opinion is that you could quadruple the amount of money the NHS gets and it would still be demanding more. That is not *just* a criticism of how much they love pissing money up the wall but also a comment about the drug companies/equipment manufacturers who will base their prices on what they know the NHS can afford.

    It's the NHS though, so mustn't grumble... Labour good, Tories bad etc... Such an asinine argument.

    I've worked in the NHS under both labour and conservatives. Both equally bad.

    There are some fundamental issues regarding funding that are just not widely understood.

    The NHS of today is about as high tech as you can get and it gets more high tech year on year. It's a fact of life that leading edge medical equipment is expensive and whereas 20 years ago it could adequately perform for a good number of years these days it's more or less obsolete buy the time it's bought and installed. Patients demand the best and why shouldn't they. The level of training required to use the new generations of equipment is enormous. Bright young things are just not interested in doing the highly educated stress filled, target driven under paid jobs the NHS has to offer.

    Again. I could go on forever.

    My point exactly, but instead, any time a Conservative so much as stands for election, they want to privatise the NHS and throw everyones gran out onto the pavement to die, whilst lighting their cigars with crisp £50 notes they have stolen off some poor pensioner somewhere. Like I said it is ridiculous and the arguments about the NHS are much, much more complex than that, especially with regards to things like NHS inflation which you mention. Medical inflation runs at a much higher rate than general inflation, for obvious reasons such as tech and innovation which costs money.

    If you increase the value of the NHS budget year on year by the consumer prices index, in real terms for the NHS, it is getting poorer.
    HS2, for example?
    And Universal Credit - jeez, what a mess..
    UC really isn't too bad. It was a mess 5 years ago but it is now back on track (well a 5 years delayed track) but is rolling out quickly. And is really making a difference. Once the previous system is no longer running there will be significant savings.. Yes money is being wasted all the time both systems run alongside each other but eventually there will be a huge net benefit.

    Studied it in detail for my Uni thesis this year if you're wondering how I know all about it.
    @aliwibble not sure why this warranted a lol. I'm fairly well informed on this particular subject. If you have a counter point feel free to explain.
  • The NHS is an absolute mess in many sectors. I don't know the answer but in the past 12 months I have seen good and I have seen appalling service.

    My mother being disabled and usually in pain, living in sheltered type housing had to go to her GP as he refused to visit her. On her way to the surgery, she fell off the kerb and into the road trapped under her wheelchair.

    This led to a later undiagnosed stroke. Eventually she was taken to QE but couldn't be released because there are no care facilities in Greenwich for stroke patients. Although she was deemed fit to leave hospital, she wasn't fit to go home until a specialist care team could be organised.

    She later went back to QM and I discovered that at times there were no doctors in the whole hospital. It was being run by nurses. She got sepsis and was blue lighted to QE. The a&e was an utter nightmare with patients on trollies and ambulance crews packing corridors. This is no way to run a hospital.

    She never understood the food options being offered to her because the person tasked to take the order had very bad English.

    She deteriated and went on to a ventilator, communication was then very difficult. The doctors thought that she didn't understand what was being said. We made it clear that she did but they didn't believe us and they didn't have the time needed to find out for themselves.

    Eventually she made it clear that she had had enough and the doctor asked her if she wanted the ventilator removed, he was surprised that she understood and apologised for not believing us.

    I have made the story very brief.

    The NHS is close to breaking point and people, like my mother are dying everyday because of it. I don't know what the answer is but all politicians should be ashamed.

    We have one third of the beds per head then Germany and still they are closing wards and hospitals, telling us that it is for the good of the patients. Bullshit.

    In my village in north devon our nearest a&e is 25 miles away 50 minutes by road. The plan is to close it so our nearest will then be 45 miles away or 70 for the next. The car parks are already full, how will they cope with the extra vehicles? Three local facilities have closed before Christmas already.

    I have been in an Italian a&e the contrast couldn't be more stark as my friend was attended immediately and there was no evidence of a wait for triage.
Sign In or Register to comment.