The Politics Thread

[William the White]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18351323

An interesting read. Some would undoubtedly spot a right-wing smear campaign at the reactionary BBC.

Still, nice to see the comrades dabbling in capitalism.

In the late 1980s I used to live round the corner from 'Red Robbo' - Derek Robinson - former TGWU convenor at British Leyland, who was certainly not the monster painted by The Sun, but a patient, pleasant and caring man, who was also capable of totally deluding himself about the nature of that paradise-on-earth, the Soviet Union.

After being sacked by BL he was given the sinecure of West Midlands organiser of The Morning Star. He was a consistent 'tankie' - the orthodox strand within the Communist Party - and probably had his salary paid by wodges of used banknotes from Moscow.

[thebish]

just heard an argument bewteen some MPs on R5 about the vote in teh commons this afternoon and the LibDems' position..

anyway - the Tory MP declared that he thought that before long the Tories and Lib Dems should part company and the Tories should rule as a minority government...

I thought it was an interesting choice of word!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Still, nice to see the comrades dabbling in capitalism.

Always is...

I enjoyed seeing badges being sold on the steps of St. Pauls for 50p each by an offshoot of the 'Occupy' movement...

[William the White]

Still, nice to see the comrades dabbling in capitalism.

Always is...

I enjoyed seeing badges being sold on the steps of St. Pauls for 50p each by an offshoot of the 'Occupy' movement...

Those grabbing bastards the Tories sell em for £3.50...


http://shop.conservatives.com/product97 ... adges.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

after a solid decade of improving patient satisfaction in the NHS, in 2011 satisfaction levels dropped by a record amount from 70% to 58%

Satisfaction fell with GP services, hospital services and A&E departments but rose slightly with dentistry.

the gov. says that their own survey reveals that, in fact, 92% of people love the NHS and want its babies!

safe in their hands??? I think they may have some persuading to do still...

How are these measured, out of interest?

Are they actual users of these services or could it be a vague response to what's been in the news?

it could be either.. it's the British Social Attitudes Survey - which is measured every year - and includes simply a cross section of society. so they might be users of the service - or relatives of users - or friends of users - or doctors or nurses or (if there is such a person!!) people who have had no direct or indirect experience of the NHS at all in that year.

it's the measure that is usually accepted as the standard - probably because it is taken every year in pretty much the same way - and so there is a baseline for comparison.

The standard what?

Let's at least be clear be clear that it just shows a vague sense of public 'attitude' and is not a care metric or anything remotely attached to one.

It seems to me that the mere fact of the NHS being in the news (which it has been on large scale) would be enough to scare people into worrying about it and so affect this measure - it captures worries about the future just as much as it does present realities.

Ok, so people should be worried - I'm worried! Our NHS will come under more and more pressure as the population gets bigger (in every sense) and older and we can't afford to increase funding at the same rate as need is rising. We definitely need to do something about it and whilst I'm not at all convinced that what has been put forward is the answer, I have not heard many sensible alternatives from the most vocal opponents.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Those grabbing bastards the Tories sell em for £3.50...


http://shop.conservatives.com/product97 ... adges.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are certain costs to cover when you haven't secured a free pitch at one of the UK's most iconic tourist spots!

[thebish]

Let's at least be clear be clear that it just shows a vague sense of public 'attitude' and is not a care metric or anything remotely attached to one.

did I claim that it was anything else??

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Let's at least be clear be clear that it just shows a vague sense of public 'attitude' and is not a care metric or anything remotely attached to one.

did I claim that it was anything else??

Yes - you said that you were quoting "patient satisfaction" figures when you definitely were not.

[thebish]

Let's at least be clear be clear that it just shows a vague sense of public 'attitude' and is not a care metric or anything remotely attached to one.

did I claim that it was anything else??

Yes - you said that you were quoting "patient satisfaction" figures when you definitely were not.

ahh - sorry - that was just lazy shorthand.

my point was not really about the state of the NHS - but about the public perception of it - and that the Tories have clearly still got a lot of persuading to do if they want the general public to believe that the NHS is safe in their hands - which is nothing to do with any care metric - it's all about public perception which is what the survey measures.

I think that was fairly clearly the basic thrust of my original post, no?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

ahh - sorry - that was just lazy shorthand.

Apology accepted.

[thebish]

ahh - sorry - that was just lazy shorthand.

Apology accepted.

you're very generous!

what mistakes do you think the government's health plan embraces?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

what mistakes do you think the government's health plan embraces?

I don't know... I suppose I just don't understand it. Perhaps I haven't followed the detail closely enough (though this is difficult amongst the abstract and often self-interested shouting). Nobody has sat me down and explained why GP commissioning is likely to be the answer (or even why GPs are on such a pedestal generally) when the NHS is already run at their overpaid convenience.

[BWFC_Insane]

Mummy just to be clear the NHS were already on a "cost savings program" before the structural changes, which as I understand it, are not designed to "save money" but designed to give more "power" to GPs and eventually privatise large parts of the service.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Mummy just to be clear the NHS were already on a "cost savings program" before the structural changes, which as I understand it, are not designed to "save money" but designed to give more "power" to GPs and eventually privatise large parts of the service.

One hopes that the NHS has been looking at ways to cut costs for its entire existence. But anyway, it's not somehow contradictory to say that existing programme is not enough.

I'd suggest your understanding is deficient - the reform programme, even if it is thought wrongheaded and likely to fail, is surely designed to deliver efficiency and cost savings?

I don't think privatisation is the answer to everything and recognise there have been areas where it has failed, but I don't blame those who think that other areas of the NHS could benefit from the same sort of process that has transformed the provision of prescription glasses and contact lenses in the UK.

[BWFC_Insane]

Mummy just to be clear the NHS were already on a "cost savings program" before the structural changes, which as I understand it, are not designed to "save money" but designed to give more "power" to GPs and eventually privatise large parts of the service.

One hopes that the NHS has been looking at ways to cut costs for its entire existence. But anyway, it's not somehow contradictory to say that existing programme is not enough.

I'd suggest your understanding is deficient - the reform programme, even if it is thought wrongheaded and likely to fail, is surely designed to deliver efficiency and cost savings?

I don't think privatisation is the answer to everything and recognise there have been areas where it has failed, but I don't blame those who think that other areas of the NHS could benefit from the same sort of process that has transformed the provision of prescription glasses and contact lenses in the UK.

Labour had already brought in a huge savings program that was carried through and still is being as I understand it. These structural changes are on top of that, and whilst they may well bring efficiencies I don't think that was their primary aim. Perhaps more in the long term.

Anyway, they were a terrible idea whichever way you look at it.

[thebish]

I'd suggest your understanding is deficient - the reform programme, even if it is thought wrongheaded and likely to fail, is surely designed to deliver efficiency and cost savings?

y'see - that's one possible explanation... there's another one too - that it is purely ideological politicking...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I'd suggest your understanding is deficient - the reform programme, even if it is thought wrongheaded and likely to fail, is surely designed to deliver efficiency and cost savings?

y'see - that's one possible explanation... there's another one too - that it is purely ideological politicking...

So... you honestly both think it's just an ideological hatred of the NHS and central power?

I can understand people thinking that an ideological fanatacism for market forces and privatisation might result in certain people coming to the wrong conclusions about what is likely to deliver efficiency and savings, but I'm not sure where to start if you don't even believe that efficiency and savings are the ulitmate goal of those involved...

[thebish]

I'd suggest your understanding is deficient - the reform programme, even if it is thought wrongheaded and likely to fail, is surely designed to deliver efficiency and cost savings?

y'see - that's one possible explanation... there's another one too - that it is purely ideological politicking...

So... you honestly both think it's just an ideological hatred of the NHS and central power?

I can understand people thinking that an ideological fanatacism for market forces and privatisation might result in certain people coming to the wrong conclusions about what is likely to deliver efficiency and savings, but I'm not sure where to start if you don't even believe that efficiency and savings are the ulitmate goal of those involved...

simple - you start with the idea that it is possible that it is simply ideological politicking... the shrinking of "the state"

(and - note - I said it was another possible explanation. you seemed to be ruling out any other explanations)

[Worthy4England]

One hopes that the NHS has been looking at ways to cut costs for its entire existence. But anyway, it's not somehow contradictory to say that existing programme is not enough.

Why does one hope that the NHS looks at ways to cut costs? Do we want them to cut costs, of be cost efficient in the services they provide for the same total cost? (so, for example, they remove "waste" but can then re-use the saving to re-invest in better/other care initiatives?

Personally, I don't particularly want them to cut costs, I do want them to provide services efficiently.

[Prufrock]

I'd argue that is cutting costs. Having cut costs you have more room in the same budget for more 'costs'. Semantics.