Lang Buisson: Spending on outsourced services increased from 4.8 per cent in 2009 to 7 per cent in 2014
So on average 0.44% of services each year. A lot of Labour campaigners claimed in 2010 that by 2015 the NHS would no longer be free at the point of use. Yet at the rate you have quoted it will take until 2226 for the NHS to be fully privatised. If your lie that David Cameron is trying to privatise the NHS had any basis, do you also have the knowledge of how he intends to keep himself alive for more than 200 years in order to finish the job as clearly you're hiding some kind of medical or scientific miracle of longevity.
You've called me a liar. I'm calling you a prick. Shall we call it quits ?
I'm not calling you a liar but you have believe a claim that is based on a lie and are repeating it here. I am telling you now it is a lie, much like the claim that Labour caused the global financial crash is a lie. You can call me a prick but I don't think that helps you in any way.
As for the NHS performing well. I'm not at all sure what measure you are using. Certainly not the same one that noted that A&E in NHS England has not hit its targets for what is it now 27 consecutive weeks.
It has performed well though - between 91.5% and 93.3% in the last six weeks alone. That's pretty efficient if you ask me. Current year to date performance is 92.4%. 100% would be lovely, but surely even you realise you need to be realistic with 'targets'?
The biggest issue to me in the current stats on A&E attendance is the significant increase in numbers attending A&E - up an average 30,000 a week from just five years ago. Those increases are frightening.
One of the first acts of the coalition was to lower the existing target from 98% under Labour. The cynic in me might suggest that goalposts were moved because they anticipated their programme of walk in centre closures, etc might have an effect on waiting times.
I don't mean uni or once 18, I meant the those wanting 16 yr olds, there was some woman from one of the parties saying they should be allowed
It's in the Labour manifesto. But they want kids to still be learning English until they are 18 - go figure. Not old enough to understand your native language but old enough to vote?
I think the voting age was 16 in the recent Scottish referendum.
Lang Buisson: Spending on outsourced services increased from 4.8 per cent in 2009 to 7 per cent in 2014
So on average 0.44% of services each year. A lot of Labour campaigners claimed in 2010 that by 2015 the NHS would no longer be free at the point of use. Yet at the rate you have quoted it will take until 2226 for the NHS to be fully privatised. If your lie that David Cameron is trying to privatise the NHS had any basis, do you also have the knowledge of how he intends to keep himself alive for more than 200 years in order to finish the job as clearly you're hiding some kind of medical or scientific miracle of longevity.
You've called me a liar. I'm calling you a prick. Shall we call it quits ?
I'm not calling you a liar but you have believe a claim that is based on a lie and are repeating it here. I am telling you now it is a lie, much like the claim that Labour caused the global financial crash is a lie. You can call me a prick but I don't think that helps you in any way.
As for the NHS performing well. I'm not at all sure what measure you are using. Certainly not the same one that noted that A&E in NHS England has not hit its targets for what is it now 27 consecutive weeks.
It has performed well though - between 91.5% and 93.3% in the last six weeks alone. That's pretty efficient if you ask me. Current year to date performance is 92.4%. 100% would be lovely, but surely even you realise you need to be realistic with 'targets'?
The biggest issue to me in the current stats on A&E attendance is the significant increase in numbers attending A&E - up an average 30,000 a week from just five years ago. Those increases are frightening.
One of the first acts of the coalition was to lower the existing target from 98% under Labour. The cynic in me might suggest that goalposts were moved because they anticipated their programme of walk in centre closures, etc might have an effect on waiting times.
Targets are and always have been a disaster when applied to anything. It's something the NHS in particular seems to suffer from. Politicians of all parties need to learn the difference between targets and measures and act accordingly. Google Goodhart's Law for more information. "Rational Expectations" are a good read too.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
I'm sure it doesn't help in your locality but it doesn't account for it all. A far, far bigger issue is the flow of patients through A&E imo.
Ambulances are queuing outside unable to 'off load', patients are waiting inside for A&E beds to become available, those out of immediate danger but requiring further treatment or monitoring are waiting to go up to a ward, those on the wards not requiring 24 hours a day hospital care any more are unable to go home because there's increasingly little post hospital care available from the local authority who have faced massive cuts to their budgets.
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
So IF I have understood correctly, if cons and labour don't get the vote, then Cameron can speak to his old mucka Clegg and they can agree to just continue
Is that a real possibility or can he only do it with a party that would get him over the 50%
Yes, though its s real unknown on just how many seats LIb Dem will lose from last time. Personally I have doubts whether a Con / LD coalition would have enough seats as things currently stand, though I'm sure the bookies odd will give a clearer picture.
The line that UKIP will effectively put Labour in power is I think going to prove a very high probability
I think that is true in about of 80% cases . Farage's intervention in Thanet actually could make it winnable for Labour again . Ashcroft's polling suggests all three parties are around the 30% mark . However there are other areas where this is not true . For example UKIP want to take Grimsby off Labour so you might even get Tories voting tactically for them there as it means Labour loses a seat .
This could also have some relevance north of the border . If it wasn't for the SNP I think Labour would be within touching distance of a slender working majority ,so every SNP victory makes this less likely and could mean that the Tories are the largest single party . The L/D's have said their first discussion will be with whoever has the most seats . Also remember that there are around 9 Unionist MPs in Northern Ireland who are more likely to fall in behind a Conservative led coalition.
in terms of the L/D's it is just as nuanced . If for example Simon Hughes loses Bermondsey that will not affect the Tories reaching 323 but it could harm Labour . The reverse calculation is at play with someone like Ed Davey in Surbiton .
Is it OK to admit that each party has at least one policy to agree with. Obviously some much more than others. Saying that, a parliamentary situation where things proceed on a vote by vote basis has some appeal, unless there is a glaring problem arising from that which I haven't thought of. Alternatively we might take the 'Prague' option and vote for the individual candidate according to one's response to the cut of their jib. Personally 'no overall control' does not appear to be that frightening, but I suspect most people will vote for the party with the largest number of things they agree with, or the least number they dislike.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
There's been a lot of talk about the NHS here which I'm not really qualified to comment on, but having read the UKIP manifesto last night something's been bothering me and this is about the only place that I feel I can admit having spent 15 minutes reading UKIP literature without it costing me my job/friends/family !
So, one of their proposals is to build a 500 bed hospital for soldiers injured in war - which sounds lovely. However, surely soldiers come back from war with completely different types of injuries (both physical and phsycological) and they should be sent to the hospitals that are most able to treat the injury they've sustained. If that's the case then the new UKIP hospital will presumably offer a lower standard of care for returning soldiers than if it didn't exist ?
I know this is a small thing, and ultimately doesn't matter, but I just want to know if I'm making sense ?
There's been a lot of talk about the NHS here which I'm not really qualified to comment on, but having read the UKIP manifesto last night something's been bothering me and this is about the only place that I feel I can admit having spent 15 minutes reading UKIP literature without it costing me my job/friends/family !
So, one of their proposals is to build a 500 bed hospital for soldiers injured in war - which sounds lovely. However, surely soldiers come back from war with completely different types of injuries (both physical and phsycological) and they should be sent to the hospitals that are most able to treat the injury they've sustained. If that's the case then the new UKIP hospital will presumably offer a lower standard of care for returning soldiers than if it didn't exist ?
I know this is a small thing, and ultimately doesn't matter, but I just want to know if I'm making sense ?
You are making perfect sense to me. It is clearly in their manifesto as yet another populist apple pie statement - that panders to their 'Put Britain (British) First'. Look at us - we support our loyal and brave British forces. Of course that should be a given for any political party but the way UKIP use it is for propaganda.
Lang Buisson: Spending on outsourced services increased from 4.8 per cent in 2009 to 7 per cent in 2014
So on average 0.44% of services each year. A lot of Labour campaigners claimed in 2010 that by 2015 the NHS would no longer be free at the point of use. Yet at the rate you have quoted it will take until 2226 for the NHS to be fully privatised. If your lie that David Cameron is trying to privatise the NHS had any basis, do you also have the knowledge of how he intends to keep himself alive for more than 200 years in order to finish the job as clearly you're hiding some kind of medical or scientific miracle of longevity.
You've called me a liar. I'm calling you a prick. Shall we call it quits ?
I'm not calling you a liar but you have believe a claim that is based on a lie and are repeating it here. I am telling you now it is a lie, much like the claim that Labour caused the global financial crash is a lie. You can call me a prick but I don't think that helps you in any way.
As for the NHS performing well. I'm not at all sure what measure you are using. Certainly not the same one that noted that A&E in NHS England has not hit its targets for what is it now 27 consecutive weeks.
It has performed well though - between 91.5% and 93.3% in the last six weeks alone. That's pretty efficient if you ask me. Current year to date performance is 92.4%. 100% would be lovely, but surely even you realise you need to be realistic with 'targets'?
The biggest issue to me in the current stats on A&E attendance is the significant increase in numbers attending A&E - up an average 30,000 a week from just five years ago. Those increases are frightening.
One of the first acts of the coalition was to lower the existing target from 98% under Labour. The cynic in me might suggest that goalposts were moved because they anticipated their programme of walk in centre closures, etc might have an effect on waiting times.
And what are the targets in the current Labour Party manifesto?
My whole point is that 30,000 more people a week are visiting A&E. And certainly in the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS, this significant increase in visitors to A&E is made up almost exclusively of migrants - the vast majority from the EU.
This is direct from a ward and A&E nurse who has been working at Maidstone Hospital for six years.
If only we had a poster whose partner was a senior nurse in another local NHS trust who could confirm if it is different there.
There's been a lot of talk about the NHS here which I'm not really qualified to comment on, but having read the UKIP manifesto last night something's been bothering me and this is about the only place that I feel I can admit having spent 15 minutes reading UKIP literature without it costing me my job/friends/family !
So, one of their proposals is to build a 500 bed hospital for soldiers injured in war - which sounds lovely. However, surely soldiers come back from war with completely different types of injuries (both physical and phsycological) and they should be sent to the hospitals that are most able to treat the injury they've sustained. If that's the case then the new UKIP hospital will presumably offer a lower standard of care for returning soldiers than if it didn't exist ?
I know this is a small thing, and ultimately doesn't matter, but I just want to know if I'm making sense ?
Specialism is important. So, for example, for years and maybe still so, Northern Ireland was THE best place to go for complex knee surgery. Their expertise over there having been gained through the IRA's penchant for shooting people's kneecaps off.
There's a particular surgeon and his record shows how it would still be possible for the NHS to be more efficient:
DAVID BEVERLAND
Musgrave Park Hospital, Belfast
He does no private work, works six days a week doing eight operations a day while other surgeons struggle to do five.
He manages to achieve this result by running three operating theatres simultaneously, staggering operations so by the time he has finished one operation, the next patient is waiting.
He can devote extra time to complex cases and revisions. All his patients are followed up meticulously.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
My Aunt is a teaching assistant at a state school in Lewisham.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
My Aunt is a teaching assistant at a state school in Lewisham.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
maybe leave out the insults about decent, middle class people as well? As if an 11 year old should be blamed for going to a private school.
The fact is there will always be those arguing for more public spending. If we raised taxes to 90% across the board, you could guarantee every citizen 3 hot meals a day, better public transport coverage, 24 hour hospitals/libraries/universities, and various other wonderful innovations. The problem is there's no guarantee any of these ideas will be executed very well if it is orchestrated by the government and there is no guarantee that the money raised from taxes won't go into the pockets of the powerful and the oligarchs. We already tried the high tax/high public spending route and it didn't work - poverty increased, public services were no better and public disorder manifested in the forms of strikes and civil disobedience. Meanwhile the politicians and the oligarchs got richer and more corrupt.
The most natural protection we have against public sector waste and corruption is a low tax policy where public spending is no higher than it needs to be, with the acceptance of provision of public services by the private sector to allow the natural innovation and efficiency that competition and, yes, profiteering introduces to any sector. Profit isn't a dirty word. People complain that profit should have no place in public services, but frankly I don't that it is any better to allow public sector barons to pay themselves several times what the Prime Minister earns out of taxpayers money when the job could be done a lot better by a third party who would make a small profit but would be cheaper for the taxpayer.
The fact is there will always be those arguing for more public spending. If we raised taxes to 90% across the board, you could guarantee every citizen 3 hot meals a day, better public transport coverage, 24 hour hospitals/libraries/universities, and various other wonderful innovations. The problem is there's no guarantee any of these ideas will be executed very well if it is orchestrated by the government and there is no guarantee that the money raised from taxes won't go into the pockets of the powerful and the oligarchs. We already tried the high tax/high public spending route and it didn't work - poverty increased, public services were no better and public disorder manifested in the forms of strikes and civil disobedience. Meanwhile the politicians and the oligarchs got richer and more corrupt.
The most natural protection we have against public sector waste and corruption is a low tax policy where public spending is no higher than it needs to be, with the acceptance of provision of public services by the private sector to allow the natural innovation and efficiency that competition and, yes, profiteering introduces to any sector. Profit isn't a dirty word. People complain that profit should have no place in public services, but frankly I don't that it is any better to allow public sector barons to pay themselves several times what the Prime Minister earns out of taxpayers money when the job could be done a lot better by a third party who would make a small profit but would be cheaper for the taxpayer.
The fact is there will always be those arguing for more public spending. If we raised taxes to 90% across the board, you could guarantee every citizen 3 hot meals a day, better public transport coverage, 24 hour hospitals/libraries/universities, and various other wonderful innovations. The problem is there's no guarantee any of these ideas will be executed very well if it is orchestrated by the government and there is no guarantee that the money raised from taxes won't go into the pockets of the powerful and the oligarchs. We already tried the high tax/high public spending route and it didn't work - poverty increased, public services were no better and public disorder manifested in the forms of strikes and civil disobedience. Meanwhile the politicians and the oligarchs got richer and more corrupt.
The most natural protection we have against public sector waste and corruption is a low tax policy where public spending is no higher than it needs to be, with the acceptance of provision of public services by the private sector to allow the natural innovation and efficiency that competition and, yes, profiteering introduces to any sector. Profit isn't a dirty word. People complain that profit should have no place in public services, but frankly I don't that it is any better to allow public sector barons to pay themselves several times what the Prime Minister earns out of taxpayers money when the job could be done a lot better by a third party who would make a small profit but would be cheaper for the taxpayer.
This is why taxes shouldn't be raised too high, especially on the rich.
I made the assumption that everyone would pay the tax and not leave the country. Of course we only have to look at France to know that this is clearly isn't true.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
My Aunt is a teaching assistant at a state school in Lewisham.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
What insults? I'm merely asking what they do.
Figures, admittedly published by The Telegraph, (although I think they are quite good on education aren't they?) say that primary school class sizes average 25 (or 26 if you strip out private schools) and 21 (compared with 18 for private schools) in secondary education. When I was at school, so many years ago, my primary classes always had in excess of 30 pupils and so did my grammar school classes. Teachers managed perfectly well by themselves. So what's changed over the years that means that a teacher needs an assistant? Because it seems class sizes haven't really or have actually got better. Is it that my secondary school's "teacher's assistant" was a blackboard rubber hurled at you at great speed and they're not allowed to do that any more?
I genuinely don't know what they achieve or when they became a routine fixture at schools. (If it's to provide meals for kids that haven't had them at home, I wonder whether those kids would be better served by being taken into care rather than relying on handouts from a caring individual.)
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
My Aunt is a teaching assistant at a state school in Lewisham.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
Why the attack on the middle classes?
I have never understood why the phrase 'decent working class' is bandied around so often - but if somebody said 'decent middle / upper class' it would be classed as snobbery.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
My Aunt is a teaching assistant at a state school in Lewisham.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
Why the attack on the middle classes?
I have never understood why the phrase 'decent working class' is bandied around so often - but if somebody said 'decent middle / upper class' it would be classed as snobbery.
we live in a world of reverse snobbery, led by owen jones and the vice magazine journos. It's just as sickening to me as snobbery.
I have never understood why the phrase 'decent working class' is bandied around so often - but if somebody said 'decent middle / upper class' it would be classed as snobbery.
I'm not sure the old 'class' classifications apply anymore. It's now pretty much purely about money, so something like:
- Benefit income - Low earned income - Middle earned income - High earned income - Super rich
That's a fairly crude scale and sort-of fits in with the A, B, C1, C2, D, E model.
In my opinion 'decency' is a completely different construct.
So IF I have understood correctly, if cons and labour don't get the vote, then Cameron can speak to his old mucka Clegg and they can agree to just continue
Is that a real possibility or can he only do it with a party that would get him over the 50%
Yes, though its s real unknown on just how many seats LIb Dem will lose from last time. Personally I have doubts whether a Con / LD coalition would have enough seats as things currently stand, though I'm sure the bookies odd will give a clearer picture.
The line that UKIP will effectively put Labour in power is I think going to prove a very high probability
I think that is true in about of 80% cases . Farage's intervention in Thanet actually could make it winnable for Labour again . Ashcroft's polling suggests all three parties are around the 30% mark . However there are other areas where this is not true . For example UKIP want to take Grimsby off Labour so you might even get Tories voting tactically for them there as it means Labour loses a seat .
This could also have some relevance north of the border . If it wasn't for the SNP I think Labour would be within touching distance of a slender working majority ,so every SNP victory makes this less likely and could mean that the Tories are the largest single party . The L/D's have said their first discussion will be with whoever has the most seats . Also remember that there are around 9 Unionist MPs in Northern Ireland who are more likely to fall in behind a Conservative led coalition.
in terms of the L/D's it is just as nuanced . If for example Simon Hughes loses Bermondsey that will not affect the Tories reaching 323 but it could harm Labour . The reverse calculation is at play with someone like Ed Davey in Surbiton .
There is an argument that North of, say, Birmingham a vote for the Tories means you get Labour. One hopes that the non Labour supporting members of the electorate might therefore vote tactically for UKIP.
In reality I doubt it and despite all the froth it will be the usual pig in a red rosette in urban areas pig in a blue rosette in rural areas with the odd exception where special localised factors come into play.
Lang Buisson: Spending on outsourced services increased from 4.8 per cent in 2009 to 7 per cent in 2014
So on average 0.44% of services each year. A lot of Labour campaigners claimed in 2010 that by 2015 the NHS would no longer be free at the point of use. Yet at the rate you have quoted it will take until 2226 for the NHS to be fully privatised. If your lie that David Cameron is trying to privatise the NHS had any basis, do you also have the knowledge of how he intends to keep himself alive for more than 200 years in order to finish the job as clearly you're hiding some kind of medical or scientific miracle of longevity.
You've called me a liar. I'm calling you a prick. Shall we call it quits ?
I'm not calling you a liar but you have believe a claim that is based on a lie and are repeating it here. I am telling you now it is a lie, much like the claim that Labour caused the global financial crash is a lie. You can call me a prick but I don't think that helps you in any way.
As for the NHS performing well. I'm not at all sure what measure you are using. Certainly not the same one that noted that A&E in NHS England has not hit its targets for what is it now 27 consecutive weeks.
It has performed well though - between 91.5% and 93.3% in the last six weeks alone. That's pretty efficient if you ask me. Current year to date performance is 92.4%. 100% would be lovely, but surely even you realise you need to be realistic with 'targets'?
The biggest issue to me in the current stats on A&E attendance is the significant increase in numbers attending A&E - up an average 30,000 a week from just five years ago. Those increases are frightening.
One of the first acts of the coalition was to lower the existing target from 98% under Labour. The cynic in me might suggest that goalposts were moved because they anticipated their programme of walk in centre closures, etc might have an effect on waiting times.
And what are the targets in the current Labour Party manifesto?
My whole point is that 30,000 more people a week are visiting A&E. And certainly in the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS, this significant increase in visitors to A&E is made up almost exclusively of migrants - the vast majority from the EU.
This is direct from a ward and A&E nurse who has been working at Maidstone Hospital for six years.
If only we had a poster whose partner was a senior nurse in another local NHS trust who could confirm if it is different there.
But I wonder how many of those are going to A&E because of closures to walk in centres or not being able to access a GP?
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity
For the sake of clarity, I just want the country's most talented individuals running the country. That precludes numskulls of any persuasion. In fact my personal preference is likely to lead me away from Etonites (is that a word?) because it's an all boys school, and I think women tend to make better politicians than men.
Also for clarity, one third of the pupils at Eton are there on a bursary, not because their parents are rich - so why are you so keen on tarring them with the same brush as the wealthy you so obviously hate and despise? Do you really think it's the rich who are at fault because some feckless idiots in Lewisham have children with nary a thought to their well-being?
What do teaching assistants do? I can't speak for primary, but in secondary they provide support for a child or group of children within the classroom to help keep them focussed on their work if they have attention issues, break the instructions down into simpler language, sometimes provide translation for kids with ESL, and provide assistance to kids with physical disabilities.
The reasons why they have grown in number is due to a multitude of different factors. The chief one is the move to get as many kids as possible out of special schools and into mainstream education, because it's considered socially beneficial [and of course the fact that it's a lot cheaper has NOTHING to do with it :-) ]. While pre-natal screening may mean there's less kids with Downs, Spina Bifida etc these days, the improved survival rates for premature babies mean that different developmental issues may be becoming more prevalent instead, which they need support for once they get into school. Also schools are better at recognising issues like dyslexia etc than they used to be. There's also the issue of kids with english as a second language needing more support, but if I remember the stats correctly, that's the minority of cases.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
Oh right, so my opinion is nothing to do with witnessing first hand the results of the "efficiencies" enforced on local authorities over the last five year then? Or the many years I worked in the pubic sector under the previous Tory government…
It's because I'm too thick to evaluate properly the content of articles in left leaning newspapers (that I've never read) or understand the frequent messages relating to the (dire) budget situation that the Chief Exec of my employer or the LGA more generally put out? Maybe I'm being naive and those desks that no longer have anybody sitting at them but did a few years ago are there because the public didn't need anyone to do that job in the first place? Maybe I'll just explain 'squeal' to the next person that turns up expecting the same level of service they got 7/8 years ago that we've all been "put back in our box" so go away please?
I'm glad you haven't had need of your local authorities services and found them missing, many people who do though are in a pretty bad place tbf. But I'm pretty sure if I had walked into your office when you were working and took 60, 70, 80% of the staff out (and THAT is what I am personally aware of in some cases but EVERY service will have been effected) then your clients would have noticed a difference in the service provided, no matter how much wastage you believe was in the system.
The a and e that I have the misfortune to have to visit normally when one of the kids has a cut or it looks like a busted bone are always full of non English speaking people, who delay the process by having to get people to translate the info, do you think that would make a difference to the 4 hrs rule
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure. Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you. Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
Oh right, so my opinion is nothing to do with witnessing first hand the results of the "efficiencies" enforced on local authorities over the last five year then? Or the many years I worked in the pubic sector under the previous Tory government…
It's because I'm too thick to evaluate properly the content of articles in left leaning newspapers (that I've never read) or understand the frequent messages relating the (dire) budget situation that the Chief Exec of my employer or the LGA puts out? Maybe I'm being naive and those desks that no longer have anybody sitting at them but did a few years ago are there because the public didn't need anyone to do that job in the first place? Maybe I'll just explain 'squeal' to the next person that turns up expecting the same level of service they got 7/8 years ago that we've all been "put back in our box" so go away please?
I'm glad you haven't had need of your local authorities services and found them missing, many people who do though are in a pretty bad place tbf. But I'm pretty sure if I had walked into your office when you were working and took 60, 70, 80% of the staff out (and THAT is what I am personally aware of in some cases but EVERY service will have been effected) then your clients would have noticed a difference in the service provided, no matter how much wastage you believe was in the system.
I was doing the equivelant of 3 blokes graft when I worked at Rentokil including 1 day a week spent at the BBC Television Centre and then went in for the odd out of hours call out without even battering an eyelid. Result? I was fast tracked onto getting me BPCA Level 2 and made a senior technician, leepfrogging the whinging sicknotes I was covering for and who subsequently got pumped down the road. This is the song I'd play at full volume when I use embark on me 2 and a half hour drive across London before I even started work....
Comments
Ambulances are queuing outside unable to 'off load', patients are waiting inside for A&E beds to become available, those out of immediate danger but requiring further treatment or monitoring are waiting to go up to a ward, those on the wards not requiring 24 hours a day hospital care any more are unable to go home because there's increasingly little post hospital care available from the local authority who have faced massive cuts to their budgets.
Again I make no apology for raising the issue of the knock on impact of this governments austerity policies on local authorities and people need to know that it means more than just a few less books in the libraries (if there's any still open in your area).
I think that is true in about of 80% cases . Farage's intervention in Thanet actually could make it winnable for Labour again . Ashcroft's polling suggests all three parties are around the 30% mark . However there are other areas where this is not true . For example UKIP want to take Grimsby off Labour so you might even get Tories voting tactically for them there as it means Labour loses a seat .
This could also have some relevance north of the border . If it wasn't for the SNP I think Labour would be within touching distance of a slender working majority ,so every SNP victory makes this less likely and could mean that the Tories are the largest single party . The L/D's have said their first discussion will be with whoever has the most seats . Also remember that there are around 9 Unionist MPs in Northern Ireland who are more likely to fall in behind a Conservative led coalition.
in terms of the L/D's it is just as nuanced . If for example Simon Hughes loses Bermondsey that will not affect the Tories reaching 323 but it could harm Labour . The reverse calculation is at play with someone like Ed Davey in Surbiton .
Alternatively we might take the 'Prague' option and vote for the individual candidate according to one's response to the cut of their jib. Personally 'no overall control' does not appear to be that frightening, but I suspect most people will vote for the party with the largest number of things they agree with, or the least number they dislike.
Well, sure, shed loads of public sector jobs have gone away. But then the million jobs alluded to by The Mirror equate, almost exactlty to the EXTRA 1mn public sector jobs created by the last Labour administration.
So, in large part, while local government might squeal, in round terms they are only being put back in their box and back to where they should be. Now, of course, it is true to say that central Government's control over how much extra money local authorities can raise from hard-pressed council tax payers is adding extra pressure.
Some of the more astute councils are finding ways of dealing with this. If yours isn't, I'd vote off your local councillors if I were you.
Personally, yes, I do still have libraries. (I can even pre-order books on-line using ELAN - Essex Libraries Automated Network.) But I don't have street lights between the hours of 1:00 am and 5:00 am except on major thoroughfares. Otherwise I've not noticed a diminution of services. If anything there may have been an improvement but I'm still not sure I get value for money. While the left love to scream about "cuts" as if the discipline of good budgetary management is in some way a bad thing, I'm not sure that stuff like making the plod work for a full career before getting their gold-plated pension and swanning off to a rewarding job in the private sector (or back to their old job but as a civilian as many did for double the bubble), is actually a bad thing. Then there's stuff like teaching assistants - what the hell are they for? Being a parent is just too much trouble for some people these days I guess?
So, one of their proposals is to build a 500 bed hospital for soldiers injured in war - which sounds lovely. However, surely soldiers come back from war with completely different types of injuries (both physical and phsycological) and they should be sent to the hospitals that are most able to treat the injury they've sustained. If that's the case then the new UKIP hospital will presumably offer a lower standard of care for returning soldiers than if it didn't exist ?
I know this is a small thing, and ultimately doesn't matter, but I just want to know if I'm making sense ?
My whole point is that 30,000 more people a week are visiting A&E. And certainly in the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS, this significant increase in visitors to A&E is made up almost exclusively of migrants - the vast majority from the EU.
This is direct from a ward and A&E nurse who has been working at Maidstone Hospital for six years.
If only we had a poster whose partner was a senior nurse in another local NHS trust who could confirm if it is different there.
There's a particular surgeon and his record shows how it would still be possible for the NHS to be more efficient:
DAVID BEVERLAND
Musgrave Park Hospital, Belfast
He does no private work, works six days a week doing eight operations a day while other surgeons struggle to do five.
He manages to achieve this result by running three operating theatres simultaneously, staggering operations so by the time he has finished one operation, the next patient is waiting.
He can devote extra time to complex cases and revisions. All his patients are followed up meticulously.
What does she do? Wow, there's a question. Well, unlike the Elysian Fields of Eton - you know, the place where those clever, privileged kids go - the ones you'd like to see running the country in perpetuity - they have a few problems at her school.
Some kids dont get breakfast at home so she dips into her own meagre salary to make sure they get something inside of them before school starts.
They have plenty of kids there - unlike your favored Eton and Harrow where Mummy and Daddy stay together for the sake of appearances - who come from broken homes, often violent ones at that, so she spends a lot of time dealing with traumatised kids.
When she's not doing that she is trying to help under resourced teachers cope with over sized classes and trying to give kids the best start she can - all for the kind of money most would not get out of bed for.
You can hold whatever political views you want but it would be very much appreciated if you wouldn't mind leaving out the insults towards decent working class people - and we already know your thoughts about them - who are working their arses off doing their best for others for very little reward.
The most natural protection we have against public sector waste and corruption is a low tax policy where public spending is no higher than it needs to be, with the acceptance of provision of public services by the private sector to allow the natural innovation and efficiency that competition and, yes, profiteering introduces to any sector. Profit isn't a dirty word. People complain that profit should have no place in public services, but frankly I don't that it is any better to allow public sector barons to pay themselves several times what the Prime Minister earns out of taxpayers money when the job could be done a lot better by a third party who would make a small profit but would be cheaper for the taxpayer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
This is why taxes shouldn't be raised too high, especially on the rich.
I admit I'm biased towards him rather than Ed, but I honestly thought he came across really well.
Evan Davis did his very best to intimidate Cameron, but I thought Cameron did excellently and made him look a little silly.
An interview of a very competent PM in my opinion.
Much better than the Paxman interview & the cross party debates.
Figures, admittedly published by The Telegraph, (although I think they are quite good on education aren't they?) say that primary school class sizes average 25 (or 26 if you strip out private schools) and 21 (compared with 18 for private schools) in secondary education.
When I was at school, so many years ago, my primary classes always had in excess of 30 pupils and so did my grammar school classes. Teachers managed perfectly well by themselves. So what's changed over the years that means that a teacher needs an assistant? Because it seems class sizes haven't really or have actually got better. Is it that my secondary school's "teacher's assistant" was a blackboard rubber hurled at you at great speed and they're not allowed to do that any more?
I genuinely don't know what they achieve or when they became a routine fixture at schools. (If it's to provide meals for kids that haven't had them at home, I wonder whether those kids would be better served by being taken into care rather than relying on handouts from a caring individual.)
I have never understood why the phrase 'decent working class' is bandied around so often - but if somebody said 'decent middle / upper class' it would be classed as snobbery.
- Benefit income
- Low earned income
- Middle earned income
- High earned income
- Super rich
That's a fairly crude scale and sort-of fits in with the A, B, C1, C2, D, E model.
In my opinion 'decency' is a completely different construct.
In reality I doubt it and despite all the froth it will be the usual pig in a red rosette in urban areas pig in a blue rosette in rural areas with the odd exception where special localised factors come into play.
Also for clarity, one third of the pupils at Eton are there on a bursary, not because their parents are rich - so why are you so keen on tarring them with the same brush as the wealthy you so obviously hate and despise? Do you really think it's the rich who are at fault because some feckless idiots in Lewisham have children with nary a thought to their well-being?
The reasons why they have grown in number is due to a multitude of different factors. The chief one is the move to get as many kids as possible out of special schools and into mainstream education, because it's considered socially beneficial [and of course the fact that it's a lot cheaper has NOTHING to do with it :-) ]. While pre-natal screening may mean there's less kids with Downs, Spina Bifida etc these days, the improved survival rates for premature babies mean that different developmental issues may be becoming more prevalent instead, which they need support for once they get into school. Also schools are better at recognising issues like dyslexia etc than they used to be. There's also the issue of kids with english as a second language needing more support, but if I remember the stats correctly, that's the minority of cases.
It's because I'm too thick to evaluate properly the content of articles in left leaning newspapers (that I've never read) or understand the frequent messages relating to the (dire) budget situation that the Chief Exec of my employer or the LGA more generally put out? Maybe I'm being naive and those desks that no longer have anybody sitting at them but did a few years ago are there because the public didn't need anyone to do that job in the first place? Maybe I'll just
explain'squeal' to the next person that turns up expecting the same level of service they got 7/8 years ago that we've all been "put back in our box" so go away please?I'm glad you haven't had need of your local authorities services and found them missing, many people who do though are in a pretty bad place tbf. But I'm pretty sure if I had walked into your office when you were working and took 60, 70, 80% of the staff out (and THAT is what I am personally aware of in some cases but EVERY service will have been effected) then your clients would have noticed a difference in the service provided, no matter how much wastage you believe was in the system.