Some facts that have come my way. £2.5 billion - annual extra money promised by Ed for the NHS. £1.9 billion - current annual PFI bill for NHS deals signed by the last Labour administration £63 billion - total future PFI bill from 2015 for NHS deals signed under last Labour administration. Astonishing.
BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking 7m7 minutes ago Ex-Tory donor Arron Banks says he will donate £1m to UKIP after switching his allegiance to the party http://bbc.in/1rI0rOg
Wait until it's you or one of yours that needs a treatment or drug that is available and would help but is not "cost effective" and then come back to me.
As for proton beam therapy. It is not a modality that will save just a few lives. It is the future of radiotherapy and far superior to conventional photon treatment in every respect.
In the UK we are so far behind in radiotherapy compared to practically every other EU country including Greece and Portugal in terms of linear accelerator numbers and number of patient being offered the treatment. We are playing catch up and it's recognised as an issue by central government.
The cause ? Years of under investment by a succession of UK governments.
You've spectacularly missed the point of my post. It's not about being 'cost-effective', it's that with a limited budget (and yes, we must accept that no matter how much money you throw at the NHS, the budget will still be limited), you have to look at the effect on overall long-term public health of spending money on the most expensive and latest technology and treatments at the cost of cutting back on lots of other, cheaper treatments and programmes that save more lives, albeit from less fatal, more treatable illnesses and conditions.
The NHS doesn't exist to save every life, it exists to increase the quality of life and the general health of the overall population. This means having to make hard decisions such as accepting that we will be unable to save the lives of a few cancer patients because the money is better spent on resources which save more lives and improve more quality of life across the population.
Making spurious reasoning that unless you are in a situation where you cannot get life-saving treatment because it is not available on the NHS is ridiculous and those who use such reasoning to justify allowing the NHS budget to balloon are effectively using emotional blackmail to shut down any debate on the subject.
If you want to talk specifically about cancer, I've done some research into the subject and Cancer Research UK says that the reason the UK is behind Europe in terms of survival rates is because British people lead unhealthier lifestyles than those on the continent, as well as people not visiting a doctor until it is too late and not enough work is being done at the early stages (i.e. detection and diagnosis). I imagine this is how NICE sees the situation and thinks it is more prudent to improve catching cancer diagnoses as early as possible, when patients are far more likely to survive, rather than expensive machines needed to treat cancers that have been caught far too late.
Seriously, what are the Tory proposals that will mean an end to a free at the point of delivery health service?
I'm genuinely interested.
Me too! It's the 'carving up' myth I'm trying to get an answer to.
how much do you know about the infrastructure changes that have been made to the nhs during this parliament? the nhs has now been split into small units and they have removed some of the checks and tests about who is allowed to provide healthcare. it is still in an interim period which will end after next election.
once the new rules kick in then any private health organisation can bid to provide service. the big companies are waiting for this and will be aggressive in the bidding war. once they have wiped out the opposition they are then free to offer services at higher prices. healthcare in this country will then be driven by the profit that can be raised rather than providing best care for the patient. the path then is to a service which is paid for at point of delivery at worst or run by private companies where return to shareholder is overriding issues at best. that is 'carving up' and it is not a myth, it is already happening.
as i said earlier, check out how many of the cabinet have interests or sit on boards of health companies (most do). it is not a coincidence.
it is true that the nhs still needs significant reform and funding it is a major issue that is not going to go away. but the idea that the main priority for nhs is the profit line rather than the care to patient is going to be bad for us all.
The point is that a government (or coalition) is elected to make those choices. But the reality is that they analyse the polls and make policy statements to bribe (or not discourage) certain segments of the electorate. It was publicised that there are a large number of public sector workers considering voting Tory but wary about the NHS so Cameron makes a completely illogical pledge to ring fence funding. As opposed to finding better outcomes for the same funding (less inflation). Challenge NHS management to deliver more for less! Instead of management awarding themselves ever higher pay increases every time there is a change in structure. Find cheaper better ways than PFI etc. Look at best practice across the world in terms of structures and treatments rather than the horrific labour pledge to increase NHS spending to the EU average. And this goes the same for education and any other major government spend. So now we have the main coalition partner promising tax cuts, no spending cuts and a pre election boom - can someone explain how this gets the annual deficit under control...or do they actually care?! Perhaps they are just kicking the can down the road to try and stay in office?
Andy Burnham, shadow health secretary will face a tricky election, then. In 2009 he made the pledge that the NHS is not for sale. Not now not ever.
By Feb 2010 when the only public bidder for Hinchingbrooke dropped out, he went ahead and outsourced it. It was subsequently taken over by private equity owned Circle Health. This is where the divisions started - perhaps people should think of this as they peddle the myth that the future of the NHS is safe with Labour any more than the tories.
Circle will be seeking to take advantage of future competitions, especially if their mate Burnham gets into power.
Whatever changes to the law made by the next government, they will still face the prospect of EU law. Labour stated at their conference that they want to sign international trade agreements with the US (and probably the Tories will too), and that will see private healthcare companies seeking redress in European courts if they see the NHS being 'preferred' to them.
Labour are just as much a threat as the tories to the NHS. Some people need to take their blinkers off. See my post on Labour PFI figures, above.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?!
I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?!
I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
This! the Internet has gone from minor interest to car insurance quotes to social networks, blogs and interest groups like CL... Despite criticism and a slowish start the supporters Trust went from 1,000 contacts in Feb 2013 to 5,000 one year later! Any network can exchange stories, quotes and links to anything... Instantly! Which is why my emphasis is that centre left and right should sharpen up their core philosophies and deliver proposed solutions if they want to win confidence of the electorate and stop single issue nationalists gaining large minority shares of the vote. The trouble is when I ask myself why these parties don't do this and when I went to a variety of seminars on the euro two years ago I'm just not sure they sense the disconnect nor what to do about it.
Most of these were announced this week weren't they?
Any details of how they would be funded?
That's a very good point. And how are the Tories going to fund the £7bn cost of the tax cuts they've promised today?
I suspect the £25bn of planned spending cuts in the first two years of the next Government would make a sizeable hole in that.
"Somebody working a 30-hour week on the minimum wage would pay no income tax: nothing, zero, zilch."
"Increasing the personal allowance would take one million of the lowest-paid out of income tax and give a tax cut to 30 million more".
Can't see what's not to like with that.
Only that the give-away is totally unfunded; there is no indication exactly where the money's coming from, other than a mealy-mouthed reference to looking to make savings over the next five years.
What level of trust does he deserve? Nothing, zero, zilch.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?! I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Your ONLY row? Seriously? The suggestion of a wedding on a day Charlton are playing at home didn't spark a debate, at all..?
Most of these were announced this week weren't they?
Any details of how they would be funded?
That's a very good point. And how are the Tories going to fund the £7bn cost of the tax cuts they've promised today?
I suspect the £25bn of planned spending cuts in the first two years of the next Government would make a sizeable hole in that.
"Somebody working a 30-hour week on the minimum wage would pay no income tax: nothing, zero, zilch."
"Increasing the personal allowance would take one million of the lowest-paid out of income tax and give a tax cut to 30 million more".
Can't see what's not to like with that.
...maybe the cuts to our already struggling public services is a bit of a clue as to "what's not to like"? Great! Some people get a few more quid to put towards paying for rising fuel bills, housing costs, food, transport, etc...so what if it means our councils for example can't afford to run days centres for the elderly, repair our schools, look after our mentally ill, inspect our takeaways, clean our parks, repair our roads and the 1000's of other things large and small we take for granted until they're not there.
Andy Burnham, shadow health secretary will face a tricky election, then. In 2009 he made the pledge that the NHS is not for sale. Not now not ever.
By Feb 2010 when the only public bidder for Hinchingbrooke dropped out, he went ahead and outsourced it. It was subsequently taken over by private equity owned Circle Health. This is where the divisions started - perhaps people should think of this as they peddle the myth that the future of the NHS is safe with Labour any more than the tories.
Circle will be seeking to take advantage of future competitions, especially if their mate Burnham gets into power.
Whatever changes to the law made by the next government, they will still face the prospect of EU law. Labour stated at their conference that they want to sign international trade agreements with the US (and probably the Tories will too), and that will see private healthcare companies seeking redress in European courts if they see the NHS being 'preferred' to them.
Labour are just as much a threat as the tories to the NHS. Some people need to take their blinkers off. See my post on Labour PFI figures, above.
you seem to be obsessed with 'tories are right, labour are wrong' argument. when it comes to the nhs (or the economy or that matter) neither party come out with much glory in recent years. the main difference is probably that the tories are more blatant about selling things off.
the reality is that the nhs has a huge funding hole that needs to be resolved. the question is how? do you go for the privatised, capitalist model, keep the existing model and look for efficiency or something in between. a number of health trusts are now community interest companies which gives them access to other funding.
whatever happens, there will be a different funding model for the nhs in the future. but what do we put as the main priority? the patient or the shareholder?
Most of these were announced this week weren't they?
Any details of how they would be funded?
That's a very good point. And how are the Tories going to fund the £7bn cost of the tax cuts they've promised today?
I suspect the £25bn of planned spending cuts in the first two years of the next Government would make a sizeable hole in that.
"Somebody working a 30-hour week on the minimum wage would pay no income tax: nothing, zero, zilch."
"Increasing the personal allowance would take one million of the lowest-paid out of income tax and give a tax cut to 30 million more".
Can't see what's not to like with that.
...maybe the cuts to our already struggling public services is a bit if clue as to "what's not to like"? Great! Some people get a few more quid to put towards paying for rising fuel bills, housing costs, food, transport, etc...so what if it means our councils for example can't afford to run days centres for the elderly, repair our schools, look after our mentally ill, inspect our takeaways, clean our parks, repair our roads and the 1000's of other things large and small we take for granted until they're not there.
the cuts outlined today won't be happening. they have no idea where to get the money for it. unless osbourne increases the debt. given that in the last 4 years he has increased the debt further than labour did in 13 as well as overseeing the slowest recovery in europe and the biggest fall in wages since the last war, he might think it ok.
I imagine it's to match with the benefit freeze - rather than the ludicrous situation we're currently in where the lowest paid face relatively high marginal tax rates then rely on the gyro to make ends meet. Makes sense to let them keep more of their money, reducing the amount the taxman robs from them and reducing the number of people relying on benefits, reducing admin costs.
Wait until it's you or one of yours that needs a treatment or drug that is available and would help but is not "cost effective" and then come back to me.
As for proton beam therapy. It is not a modality that will save just a few lives. It is the future of radiotherapy and far superior to conventional photon treatment in every respect.
In the UK we are so far behind in radiotherapy compared to practically every other EU country including Greece and Portugal in terms of linear accelerator numbers and number of patient being offered the treatment. We are playing catch up and it's recognised as an issue by central government.
The cause ? Years of under investment by a succession of UK governments.
You've spectacularly missed the point of my post. It's not about being 'cost-effective', it's that with a limited budget (and yes, we must accept that no matter how much money you throw at the NHS, the budget will still be limited), you have to look at the effect on overall long-term public health of spending money on the most expensive and latest technology and treatments at the cost of cutting back on lots of other, cheaper treatments and programmes that save more lives, albeit from less fatal, more treatable illnesses and conditions.
The NHS doesn't exist to save every life, it exists to increase the quality of life and the general health of the overall population. This means having to make hard decisions such as accepting that we will be unable to save the lives of a few cancer patients because the money is better spent on resources which save more lives and improve more quality of life across the population.
Making spurious reasoning that unless you are in a situation where you cannot get life-saving treatment because it is not available on the NHS is ridiculous and those who use such reasoning to justify allowing the NHS budget to balloon are effectively using emotional blackmail to shut down any debate on the subject.
If you want to talk specifically about cancer, I've done some research into the subject and Cancer Research UK says that the reason the UK is behind Europe in terms of survival rates is because British people lead unhealthier lifestyles than those on the continent, as well as people not visiting a doctor until it is too late and not enough work is being done at the early stages (i.e. detection and diagnosis). I imagine this is how NICE sees the situation and thinks it is more prudent to improve catching cancer diagnoses as early as possible, when patients are far more likely to survive, rather than expensive machines needed to treat cancers that have been caught far too late.
I am a senior radiographer planning cancer treatment.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?! I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Your ONLY row? Seriously? The suggestion of a wedding on a day Charlton are playing at home didn't spark a debate, at all..?
Seriously, Chizz. She's the absolute bollocks. A couple of other lifers know her. We couldn't row if we tried. She love's coming to the games and a beer in The Lib afterwards.
If I had a penny for every time she said "What you up to. On Charlton Life again?". I'd be a millionaire.
I'm currently unemployed and can't afford to get to The Valley at the moment.
Anyhow, I don't want to take the thread off topic. I'm just really enjoying what everyone is saying and trying to learn.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?! I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Your ONLY row? Seriously? The suggestion of a wedding on a day Charlton are playing at home didn't spark a debate, at all..?
Seriously, Chizz. She's the absolute bollocks. A couple of other lifers know her. We couldn't row if we tried. She love's coming to the games and a beer in The Lib afterwards.
If I had a penny for every time she said "What you up to. On Charlton Life again?". I'd be a millionaire.
I'm currently unemployed and can't afford to get to The Valley at the moment.
Anyhow, I don't want to take the thread off topic. I'm just really enjoying what everyone is saying and trying to learn.
Many, many congratulations to you and her. Hope everything goes brilliantly for you. And we get three points!
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?! I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Your ONLY row? Seriously? The suggestion of a wedding on a day Charlton are playing at home didn't spark a debate, at all..?
Seriously, Chizz. She's the absolute bollocks. A couple of other lifers know her. We couldn't row if we tried. She love's coming to the games and a beer in The Lib afterwards.
If I had a penny for every time she said "What you up to. On Charlton Life again?". I'd be a millionaire.
I'm currently unemployed and can't afford to get to The Valley at the moment.
Anyhow, I don't want to take the thread off topic. I'm just really enjoying what everyone is saying and trying to learn.
Many, many congratulations to you and her. Hope everything goes brilliantly for you. And we get three points!
Thanks fella. There will be at least ten other proper Addicks in attendence. We'll all be wishing Big Bob and the boys on and checking the score at regular intervals
Andy Burnham, shadow health secretary will face a tricky election, then. In 2009 he made the pledge that the NHS is not for sale. Not now not ever.
By Feb 2010 when the only public bidder for Hinchingbrooke dropped out, he went ahead and outsourced it. It was subsequently taken over by private equity owned Circle Health. This is where the divisions started - perhaps people should think of this as they peddle the myth that the future of the NHS is safe with Labour any more than the tories.
Circle will be seeking to take advantage of future competitions, especially if their mate Burnham gets into power.
Whatever changes to the law made by the next government, they will still face the prospect of EU law. Labour stated at their conference that they want to sign international trade agreements with the US (and probably the Tories will too), and that will see private healthcare companies seeking redress in European courts if they see the NHS being 'preferred' to them.
Labour are just as much a threat as the tories to the NHS. Some people need to take their blinkers off. See my post on Labour PFI figures, above.
you seem to be obsessed with 'tories are right, labour are wrong' argument. when it comes to the nhs (or the economy or that matter) neither party come out with much glory in recent years. the main difference is probably that the tories are more blatant about selling things off.
the reality is that the nhs has a huge funding hole that needs to be resolved. the question is how? do you go for the privatised, capitalist model, keep the existing model and look for efficiency or something in between. a number of health trusts are now community interest companies which gives them access to other funding.
whatever happens, there will be a different funding model for the nhs in the future. but what do we put as the main priority? the patient or the shareholder?
Not at all Henry. I'm merely countering the 'Tories carve up the nhs' crap on here when, as I have tried to show, is not the whole story. You can't ignore the 63 billion PFI burden handed to the nhs by labour can you? And if you read my posts you will see I am equally sceptical about the Tories. Only on here it is a very one sided dismissal of one bunch of self servers whilst the people the critics support are just as bad, in fact worse.
Surely the biggest problem about politics and the future election is that I learn more from this thread on Charlton Life than I ever would from any other channel of media (and I mean that in a good way for CL).
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?! I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
Your ONLY row? Seriously? The suggestion of a wedding on a day Charlton are playing at home didn't spark a debate, at all..?
Seriously, Chizz. She's the absolute bollocks. A couple of other lifers know her. We couldn't row if we tried. She love's coming to the games and a beer in The Lib afterwards.
If I had a penny for every time she said "What you up to. On Charlton Life again?". I'd be a millionaire.
I'm currently unemployed and can't afford to get to The Valley at the moment.
Anyhow, I don't want to take the thread off topic. I'm just really enjoying what everyone is saying and trying to learn.
She is a good girl Murph, you have done well. Revved for Saturday pal.
And rumour has it kinnock and Bliar's sons are to be parachuted into safe labour seats. Which is nice. Bliar's gets Bootle, Labour's safest seat in the last election. May just be ukip bluff of course
And rumour has it kinnock and Bliar's sons are to be parachuted into safe labour seats. Which is nice. Bliar's gets Bootle, Labour's safest seat in the last election. May just be ukip bluff of course
And rumour has it kinnock and Bliar's sons are to be parachuted into safe labour seats. Which is nice. Bliar's gets Bootle, Labour's safest seat in the last election. May just be ukip bluff of course
Don't forget Jack Straw's son, he is being lined up too - and Labour wonder why they have lost so much of their working class constituency and their activist base.
Most of these were announced this week weren't they?
Any details of how they would be funded?
That's a very good point. And how are the Tories going to fund the £7bn cost of the tax cuts they've promised today?
I suspect the £25bn of planned spending cuts in the first two years of the next Government would make a sizeable hole in that.
"Somebody working a 30-hour week on the minimum wage would pay no income tax: nothing, zero, zilch."
"Increasing the personal allowance would take one million of the lowest-paid out of income tax and give a tax cut to 30 million more".
Can't see what's not to like with that.
so what if it means our councils for example can't afford to run days centres for the elderly, repair our schools, look after our mentally ill, inspect our takeaways, clean our parks, repair our roads and the 1000's of other things large and small we take for granted until they're not there.
I must have missed all these things happening? Will I get a refund on my council tax? Just checked what those Tory bastards at KCC were getting rid of in 2014/15. This does't include Medway, or what you Local Council spends either
Day Centres for the elderly? Nope, still there. £95m Repairing schools? No, they're still doing that. £28.7m Mentally ill? Thought that was the NHS, but guess what? £224.1m on Nursing and residential care Dodgy takeaways? £57.1m on Public Health No dog shit in the park? Nope that's gone when the grass was cut. £16.2m Potholes - God how we Charlton fans hate pot holes. Nope. another £46.4 on our Highways
You need to be more specific about the other 1,000s of things those evil facists have got rid of.
Or are you just scaremongering? Or is it just Dorset where this has all happened?
Comments
Arron Banks has just donated £1 million to UKIP. An ex-Conservative donor.
£2.5 billion - annual extra money promised by Ed for the NHS.
£1.9 billion - current annual PFI bill for NHS deals signed by the last Labour administration
£63 billion - total future PFI bill from 2015 for NHS deals signed under last Labour administration.
Astonishing.
Ex-Tory donor Arron Banks says he will donate £1m to UKIP after switching his allegiance to the party http://bbc.in/1rI0rOg
www.nhsca.org.uk/docs/cliveprivate.pdf
Right ho.
The NHS doesn't exist to save every life, it exists to increase the quality of life and the general health of the overall population. This means having to make hard decisions such as accepting that we will be unable to save the lives of a few cancer patients because the money is better spent on resources which save more lives and improve more quality of life across the population.
Making spurious reasoning that unless you are in a situation where you cannot get life-saving treatment because it is not available on the NHS is ridiculous and those who use such reasoning to justify allowing the NHS budget to balloon are effectively using emotional blackmail to shut down any debate on the subject.
If you want to talk specifically about cancer, I've done some research into the subject and Cancer Research UK says that the reason the UK is behind Europe in terms of survival rates is because British people lead unhealthier lifestyles than those on the continent, as well as people not visiting a doctor until it is too late and not enough work is being done at the early stages (i.e. detection and diagnosis). I imagine this is how NICE sees the situation and thinks it is more prudent to improve catching cancer diagnoses as early as possible, when patients are far more likely to survive, rather than expensive machines needed to treat cancers that have been caught far too late.
once the new rules kick in then any private health organisation can bid to provide service. the big companies are waiting for this and will be aggressive in the bidding war. once they have wiped out the opposition they are then free to offer services at higher prices. healthcare in this country will then be driven by the profit that can be raised rather than providing best care for the patient. the path then is to a service which is paid for at point of delivery at worst or run by private companies where return to shareholder is overriding issues at best. that is 'carving up' and it is not a myth, it is already happening.
as i said earlier, check out how many of the cabinet have interests or sit on boards of health companies (most do). it is not a coincidence.
it is true that the nhs still needs significant reform and funding it is a major issue that is not going to go away. but the idea that the main priority for nhs is the profit line rather than the care to patient is going to be bad for us all.
And this goes the same for education and any other major government spend.
So now we have the main coalition partner promising tax cuts, no spending cuts and a pre election boom - can someone explain how this gets the annual deficit under control...or do they actually care?! Perhaps they are just kicking the can down the road to try and stay in office?
In 2009 he made the pledge that the NHS is not for sale. Not now not ever.
By Feb 2010 when the only public bidder for Hinchingbrooke dropped out, he went ahead and outsourced it. It was subsequently taken over by private equity owned Circle Health. This is where the divisions started - perhaps people should think of this as they peddle the myth that the future of the NHS is safe with Labour any more than the tories.
Circle will be seeking to take advantage of future competitions, especially if their mate Burnham gets into power.
Whatever changes to the law made by the next government, they will still face the prospect of EU law. Labour stated at their conference that they want to sign international trade agreements with the US (and probably the Tories will too), and that will see private healthcare companies seeking redress in European courts if they see the NHS being 'preferred' to them.
Labour are just as much a threat as the tories to the NHS. Some people need to take their blinkers off. See my post on Labour PFI figures, above.
The Scottish vote has heightened my awareness and I stayed up until the early hours as I was so intrigued by it all.
I haven't voted in the last two elections as the 'debates' which are meant to help me decide, turn into slanging matches and one up manship. I have no trust in anything I hear and would dry slap most of them. Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could answer a straight question?
Like it not, all parties have to realise that the public persona of their leaders are paramount. Would I ever vote for Labour whilst Ed is in charge, almost certainly not. A very sad indictment on me I know, but I think a lot of the country will think the same. He looks and sounds completely insincere. How was David not elected over him?!
I get married this Saturday and after five years together the only conversation on politics we've ever had came about after I read this thread late last night following our magic win at Carrow Road. Turns out we are miles apart in our views and had a bit of a row about it. Our only row ever.
Hoping to learn a lot more as the months go on and enjoying everyone's input.
"Somebody working a 30-hour week on the minimum wage would pay no income tax: nothing, zero, zilch."
"Increasing the personal allowance would take one million of the lowest-paid out of income tax and give a tax cut to 30 million more".
Can't see what's not to like with that.
the Internet has gone from minor interest to car insurance quotes to social networks, blogs and interest groups like CL... Despite criticism and a slowish start the supporters Trust went from 1,000 contacts in Feb 2013 to 5,000 one year later!
Any network can exchange stories, quotes and links to anything... Instantly!
Which is why my emphasis is that centre left and right should sharpen up their core philosophies and deliver proposed solutions if they want to win confidence of the electorate and stop single issue nationalists gaining large minority shares of the vote.
The trouble is when I ask myself why these parties don't do this and when I went to a variety of seminars on the euro two years ago I'm just not sure they sense the disconnect nor what to do about it.
What level of trust does he deserve? Nothing, zero, zilch.
the reality is that the nhs has a huge funding hole that needs to be resolved. the question is how? do you go for the privatised, capitalist model, keep the existing model and look for efficiency or something in between. a number of health trusts are now community interest companies which gives them access to other funding.
whatever happens, there will be a different funding model for the nhs in the future. but what do we put as the main priority? the patient or the shareholder?
If I had a penny for every time she said "What you up to. On Charlton Life again?". I'd be a millionaire.
I'm currently unemployed and can't afford to get to The Valley at the moment.
Anyhow, I don't want to take the thread off topic. I'm just really enjoying what everyone is saying and trying to learn.
I'm merely countering the 'Tories carve up the nhs' crap on here when, as I have tried to show, is not the whole story. You can't ignore the 63 billion PFI burden handed to the nhs by labour can you?
And if you read my posts you will see I am equally sceptical about the Tories. Only on here it is a very one sided dismissal of one bunch of self servers whilst the people the critics support are just as bad, in fact worse.
Bliar's gets Bootle, Labour's safest seat in the last election.
May just be ukip bluff of course
I must have missed all these things happening? Will I get a refund on my council tax?
Just checked what those Tory bastards at KCC were getting rid of in 2014/15. This does't include Medway, or what you Local Council spends either
Day Centres for the elderly? Nope, still there. £95m
Repairing schools? No, they're still doing that. £28.7m
Mentally ill? Thought that was the NHS, but guess what? £224.1m on Nursing and residential care
Dodgy takeaways? £57.1m on Public Health
No dog shit in the park? Nope that's gone when the grass was cut. £16.2m
Potholes - God how we Charlton fans hate pot holes. Nope. another £46.4 on our Highways
You need to be more specific about the other 1,000s of things those evil facists have got rid of.
Or are you just scaremongering? Or is it just Dorset where this has all happened?
http://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/excel_doc/0011/7958/Budget-summary-2014-15.xls