The Politics Thread

[bobo the clown]

That or the fact that ocassionally a very sore eye, even one that's throbbing may well get punted down the list as heart attacks, car crash victims, knife wounded, and just battered wife's who were batterd because they didn't accomodate the whingy nature of their husbands who've got a bit of an eye ache, are treated first. 9 hours, you've still got an eye haven't you?

that's you told, Bobo!

He doesn't understand. Coz he wasn't there. He WASN'T THERE I tell you.

As it happened there was no major incident that night. I watched an old confused guy in a wheelchair. He'd had a fall and also suffered with alzheimers, made to wait longer than I was. I saw people triaged and then left to wait several hours for treatment which eventually took 10 minutes.

I was waiting for the Opthalmologist to be called in ....and despite asking 3 times if they'd made contact and being assured she was on her way eventually found she'd not actually been called. I watched people be told they were the person after next .... and then still be there 4 hours later. The staff (in three's in case it got nasty ... which it didn't) come out and say that there would be delays more or less inviting people to give up waiting & go home.

This A&E has twice recently actually closed. CLOSED. Sending people to other hospitals. One person recently died in the waiting room waiting between triage and action. It was recently declared the worst performing A&E in the UK.

[Worthy4England]

I'm really with Bobo in that the NHS is funding stuff that it shouldn't be anywhere near.

I'm stunned. No, really!

But seriously, I agree the NHS is funding things that it shouldn't. The question is - and will always be - where is the line drawn? Boob jobs that have a medical need to be reversed? Drinkers that need a new liver? Runners that have ligament problems? Dieters that have bulimia? They're all problems needing medical attention potentially - we'd all (maybe) take some moral high-ground on them. What's the answer? Insurance doesn't make the problem go away - it just pays the people treating them and increases the demand or leaves people by the wayside...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

that's you told, Bobo!

He doesn't understand. Coz he wasn't there. He WASN'T THERE I tell you.

As it happened there was no major incident that night... . It was recently declared the worst performing A&E in the UK.

Fair enough.

[BWFC_Insane]

What are the things the NHS shouldn't be doing? I mean it is easy to say, but often the things people cite aren't particularly those with the highest cost or biggest resources drain on the system.

[thebish]

they shouldn't be doing surrogate social-care for the elderly who have nowhere else safe to go but are otherwise in no need of direct medical intervention... but they kinda have to because no government of any political colour has seriously engaged with this...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

They shouldn't be doing IVF, for a start.

[Bruce Rioja]

What are the things the NHS shouldn't be doing? I mean it is easy to say, but often the things people cite aren't particularly those with the highest cost or biggest resources drain on the system.

"As many as one in seven hospital procedures are unnecessary due to the “over treatment” of patients that wastes billions of pounds a year, the NHS’s medical director has disclosed.
The country’s most senior doctor described the level of waste in the NHS as “profligate,” saying that there was no shame in admitting the problem and tackling it.
Sir Bruce Keogh, a former cardiac surgeon, said that “a substantial proportion” of spending in the NHS was wasted on ineffective care, and he estimated that ten to 15 per cent of medical and surgical treatments should not have been carried out on patients."

[thebish]

there is undoubtedly lots of waste - but with an organisation THAT big - you may find a way to make it less wasteful - but it will always be wasteful... every government since the rise of babylon has promised to cut waste! yet....

were the nation not gaining a reputation (often an urban myth - but still scary for medical practitioners) for being litigious - then maybe healthcare professionals wouldn't order un-necessary scans and tests just to cover themselves... but i don't see an easy way past that... if they miss summat - then the papers crucify them.

prescriptions... my missus has a non-life-threatening issue that's not massively serious that means long-term prescription.. because of this - she now gets life-time free prescriptions not just for those tablets - but for ANYTHING else she ever needs on prescription... she already several years free simply by dint of being pregnant (including fairly expensive dental treatment!) whereas me - never a free day on prescriptions since reaching adulthood have just had to shell out over £8 for my shingles meds - and another over £8 for fungal toenail tablets! (old man diseases!)

(apparently it is cheaper to give her a blanket free prescription service than to design and administer a targetted one...)

[Lord Kangana]

I see it as the lesser of two evils. Rather have a far-from-perfect system than an American style f*ck up where 50 million people have no adequate healthcare provision, or where if you're over 50 with a potentially life-threatening and/or terminal condition you will go bankrupt unless you're a multi millionaire. That isn't progress.

[Prufrock]

Outstanding again from Nick Cohen: http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/6361/full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[thebish]

Outstanding again from Nick Cohen: http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/6361/full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

feck me - that's not even the entire article!

he lost me at the smugly-smug "in the laboured English of an over-promoted middle manager."

[Lord Kangana]

Outstanding again from Nick Cohen: http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/6361/full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nonsense. It's the kind of "take sides you bastard or else" crap I've heard a thousand times.

[Prufrock]

Yes, it's "take the side of reason and liberty against those you oppose it, ALL those who oppose it, bastards".

[Hoboh]

In my experience the NHS is bloody good, I do appreciate there are variations in the service but suspect that might be due to local management who administer it and bloody politicians interfering!

[BWFC_Insane]

In my experience the NHS is bloody good, I do appreciate there are variations in the service but suspect that might be due to local management who administer it and bloody politicians interfering!

To do with local budgets, pressures in the system, local socio-economic factors etc etc

Sometimes bad management but usually a lot of external factors play a significant role.

I agree, the system is very good. People complain about things but having had some experience of modelling NHS efficiency, often the things that are seen as "waste" are far easier to highlight in hindsight than they are with foresight.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Anyway. It should be against the law that executives of charities are paid more than the average wage plus reasonable bonuses (again defined by law). I no longer give to charity after it was pointed out to me once that the entire amount I'd just donated wouldn't cover ONE minute's worth of pay for the CEO of the NSPCC - and it wasn't an inconsiderable sum I'd just coughed up.

[Bruce Rioja]

Anyway. It should be against the law that executives of charities are paid more than the average wage plus reasonable bonuses (again defined by law). I no longer give to charity after it was pointed out to me once that the entire amount I'd just donated wouldn't cover ONE minute's worth of pay for the CEO of the NSPCC - and it wasn't an inconsiderable sum I'd just coughed up.

Do we not get into the 'banking' argument here though, Spotster, and that the senior executives are hired on top Dollar because they're highly successful at what they do - chiefly driving the overall business on to be an increasingly profitable model?

Why would a proven CEO chose to work for charity that'll pay him less than he could earn in the open market?

I do hear what you say though. If you were to sign up with a Chugger today it'd take just over two years for any of your money to reach your intended cause.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Anyway. It should be against the law that executives of charities are paid more than the average wage plus reasonable bonuses (again defined by law). I no longer give to charity after it was pointed out to me once that the entire amount I'd just donated wouldn't cover ONE minute's worth of pay for the CEO of the NSPCC - and it wasn't an inconsiderable sum I'd just coughed up.

Do we not get into the 'banking' argument here though, Spotster, and that the senior executives are hired on top Dollar because they're highly successful at what they do - chiefly driving the overall business on to be an increasingly profitable model?

Why would a proven CEO chose to work for charity that'll pay him less than he could earn in the open market?

I do hear what you say though. If you were to sign up with a Chugger today it'd take just over two years for any of your money to reach your intended cause.

We may well get into that argument, but like bankers wages and footballer's remuneration I don't fully accept the argument as it stands.
But even if I did, are charities really striving to be cutting edge?
The people that literally man the lifeboats for RNLI don't really need some corporate ego the size of Donald Trump - they just need somebody as equally committed as they are with a little financial nous. That's a proper fxcking charity.
Medicine sans frontiers is another... Brain surgeons who earn hundreds of thousands give up a portion of their time, so why can't some 'chief executive' wanker do the same?????

[thebish]

Anyway. It should be against the law that executives of charities are paid more than the average wage

ditto for MPs...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Anyway. It should be against the law that executives of charities are paid more than the average wage

ditto for MPs...

Ditto your ditto, and town hall executives and councilors. ( and UEFA and FIFA executives - but I've obviously slipped into fantasyland there)