Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Political deception and the NHS
Topic Started: Jan 6 2015, 11:16 AM (2,172 Views)
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
FIrst of all, the very phrase "National Health Service" has always conjoured up the idea of "National" joined up, connected, interlocking service, and one which has served the vast majority of us very well over several generations since its conception almost 70 years ago.

The "Health & Social Care Act 2012" has changed everything, the future of the NHS is now one of many different providors, many of them private companies, the future is no longer as a single, connected, joined up "National" service.

Deception number 1 - that the NHS will be better after the Tory reforms and mass privatization, how on earth can a splintered, fragmented NHS be better than a truly "National" health service.

When the data for Winter waiting times are released for A&E departments across the country, they will show the worst performance since such records began in 2004.

The lame excuses will start to come out, it is because of increased demand, it is because of unprecedented illness, its because of an aeging population, its the fault of immigrants, its because of the man in the moon, bad weather, leaves on the line.

The real reason, and there is only One reason, is because of a lack of funds, or to put it in other ways, a lack of resources, cuts, not enough money.

The real reason why this Winters A&E figures will be the worst on record, is because (1) people cannot get to see their GP, waiting times to see a doctor have risen, thousands of worried people dont want to wait 10 days or a fortnight to visit a GP, instead they go to A&E; (2) Doctors are under unprecedented strain, their workloads have reached breaking point, they are been asked to do more with less, treat more patients in less time for less money, more and more doctors are leaving for Australia and America.

Reason number (3) the cuts elsewhere are having a knock-on effect, in particular the cuts to social care is resulting in beds been blocked because frail or vulnerable patients cannot be released, as there is no one to care for them, or insufficient care.

Deception number 2 - I will cut the deficit, not the NHS

The current funding of the NHS was laid out in the Spending Review of October 2010, in which the NHS was given a promised increase, or at least thats how it looked on paper, and a real terms increase is what the government want you to believe happened.

So the actual real terms increase amounted to a staggering and monumental sum of 0.1%, it is an increase, but only just, and about the lowest figure that the government could get away with.

But wauit a minute, lets look at the small print of the Spending Review of October 2010, the NHS Budget will contribute to the "Social Care" budget by handing over £1 Billion each year, oh dear, there goes the 0.1% increase, and as Professor John Appleby, chief economist of the King's Fund think-tank said at the time "I think this is a case of double counting".

In the final years and months of the last Tory government we saw the annual "Winter Bed Crisis", with patients lying on trolleys in corridors, unacceptable waiting times - and rising, the term "Deja Vu" comes to mind, here we are again.

The Health and Social Care Bill 2012 has been a broken promise, the promise of "no top down reorganisation of the NHS", it is deeply unpopular, it was unwanted by every professional body within the NHS, the general public are overwhelmingly opposed to the splintering and privatization of the NHS.

Worst of all - the massive reorganisation has cost billions of pounds, money that should have gone into the front line services, into easing the presures of A&E departments which are in crisis through lack of sufficient resources.

We must save the NHS - we must get rid of the Tories





Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 7 2015, 08:32 AM
ACH1967
Jan 6 2015, 04:21 PM
When asked why several NHS trsuts were declaring major incidents the person responsible said that it was not lack of money but lack of doctors and nurses, especially A & E. If there are not enough of these in the country, in the short term, where would you like us to magic these critical staff from?
Apparently NHS trusts froze recruitment of staff in 2010/2011, there is some indication of recruitment beginning to take place again. In the meantime the requirement of NHS staff numbers has been ignored and the numbers of staff that have left have not been replaced.
This was not what the man being interviewed said. It was on Radio four on my drive to work yesterday. He clearly stated that they had 30 vancancies and could not fill them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Despite all the too and throw of who is to blame and what is the cause there are some very simple and telling facts readily available from here (Affa originally posted the link).
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS

Simply put spend on health care as a proportion of GDP is as follows:
France 11.7 %
Germany 11.2 %
UK 9.2%
I too felt that all the NHS ever did was complain about one crisis and then the next in a hope of getting more funding, and then I checked the numbers. As you can see the UK spends 2% less of its GDP on health care than its two most comparable European counter parts. The conclusion is simple our NHS is health care on the cheap. That is not to say that there aren’t improvements in organisation and purchasing to be had but even as it stands we are getting it cheap. It’s an uncomfortable fact. Yes there are savings to be made but if we want a healthcare service comparable to France and Germany then we need to fund it like France and Germany and stop coming up with excuses and scape goats.
I don’t like this conclusion. It is going to cost me more. But at least I am trying to be honest about it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 7 2015, 12:09 AM
I suspect you have false teeth. ;D

Simple solution to the NHS problems, stop treating whiney, sickly and unproductive over seventy fives and concentrate the care on those who are younger and offer a more productive future.



And the latest Tory wheeze after they "win" the next election is to slash the education budget! Remove these vermin who only care about themselves and the pointless silver rinse Nazi's who support them.

Someone had to say it didn't they? ;-)
A crown or two, but not a false tooth in my head. You should stop treating age as suggesting it has to be accompanied by physical failure or mental decline. Always remember your time will come , if you survive long enough. All your posts revolve around party politics, which inhibits your ability to see things in the round, and with a truly open mind.
Perhaps we should ask what the numbers are who are attending A&E compared with five years ago, or just a month ago, and why there has been a surge in the numbers seeking medical attention and having been taken to the hospitals by ambulances after being assessed by the ambulance crews.
Is it possible, for example, that having had a dispute over pay crews are deliberately taken people to hospitals who would normally have been left at home to create congestion and increase waiting times. I'm not saying it is so, just looking at all possibilities.

There has to be reasons, other just a lack of funding. Facts re so much more revealing that prejudiced assumptions and negative speculations. Incidentally figures show that up to 94% of patients are seen within four hours, and as it is an average many must be seen well before that time. Patients attending are assessed by a nurse and are prioritised accordingly, meaning that those with severe life threatening problems are dealt with immediately, and those with slight problems will be seen in order of need, or should be seen by their GP. or the GP on duty for out of hours contact.
The real problem could be an inability to get treatment from GPs, not the ability of the A&E to treat the numbers of sick or injured who need to be seen in a hospital.
Does anyone on this board know why there was a sudden surge of demand at A7E departments or for hospital admissions in recent times?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 7 2015, 12:12 AM
Tytoalba
Jan 7 2015, 12:03 AM
Tigger
Jan 6 2015, 08:40 PM
RJD
Jan 6 2015, 02:05 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
You once again along with other right wingers see the NHS as a business proposition, it is not and every time it is referred to in such terms the right haemorrhages votes, good.

People are not units or quantifiable in time and motion studies, needs by definition are tailored to the individuals that use the service, by all means effect savings and improve the service with better management of resources but loading it down with accountants, business managers and money men has proved to be a disaster in much of the private sector so why thing the same ethos will actually work for a public service?

All I'm seeing on this thread from certain individuals is the politics of envy right wing style and a heap of I'm all right Jack stuff the NHS.
Your NHS is akin to the sacred cows wandering the streets of India, making a mess of the streets and blocking real progress for pedestrians and cars Only when that concept is destroyed will we get real progress..
There are too many believers in the NHS as a sacred cow.
The only shit blocking this street is coming from your keyboard." "My NHS" has served me and my family well you selfish waste of space!

Oh, and I've almost certainly paid more than my share into it's coffers.........
Reverting to personal derogatory comments and abuse shows a lack of ability to address the post in a reasonable manner.
Address the post not the poster is just good manners. Attacking a poster on a personal level is against the forum rules.

For some reason it is a tendency of many on the left of politics when they meet opposition to their Utopian dreams.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Isn't attacking the poster agaisnt forum rules?

(BTW I agree with a lot of what tigger says but not necessarily the manner in which he says it...maybe I'm just too sensitive for this cruel hard world)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Primeministers questions ( 7th January 2015 )

Leader of the opposition: "does the primeminister not accept that cuts to social care has had a direct affect on what is happening to our A&E departments"

Primeminister: Fails to answer the question

Leader of the opposition: "Does the primeminister not accept that a top-down reorganisation of the NHS costing Billions, has had a direct effect on what is happening to our A&E departments.

Primeminister: fails to answer the question

Honourable member for Wigan: "a survey of nurses has found that only 4% of nurses have any faith in David Cameron, why does he think this is"

Primeminster: Fails to answer the question
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Jan 7 2015, 11:54 AM
Despite all the too and throw of who is to blame and what is the cause there are some very simple and telling facts readily available from here (Affa originally posted the link).
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS

Simply put spend on health care as a proportion of GDP is as follows:
France 11.7 %
Germany 11.2 %
UK 9.2%
I too felt that all the NHS ever did was complain about one crisis and then the next in a hope of getting more funding, and then I checked the numbers. As you can see the UK spends 2% less of its GDP on health care than its two most comparable European counter parts. The conclusion is simple our NHS is health care on the cheap.

Thank for the recognition ACH, not of me, but of the record.
And to add that on taking office the Coalition invited US based Health Care Experts/Advisers to do the analysis and report on how the NHS can best be reformed - Health Care Costs in the USA are 17,9% of GDP.

How barmy was that?
I can only conclude that the term 'Best' in this instance does not refer to either treatments (improving the service), or for the Tax Payer (reduced costs), but everything to with with what is 'Best' for the Conservative Party (ideological resentments), and the very wealthy that would see a privatised HS as a treasure chest full of tax payer pennies.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 08:44 AM
krugerman
Jan 6 2015, 04:51 PM
The idea that the current crisis in the NHS has something to do with immigration is utterly ridiculous.
The idea that immigration has no effect on the current crisis is utterly ridiculous.

Immigration is not the major cause of the current crisis, but it is a significant contributory factor.

Most GP surgeries are significantly over-subscribed, and the largest driver of that over-subscription is immigration.

I was at my GP's on Monday (I have a chest infection), the waiting rooms were busy (above average levels) but not full to bursting as they can sometimes be on a Monday morning. Lots of people there with the same problem as me - a long lingering cold that has turned into a respiratory infection, in fact two of my work colleagues were also there with that exact issue. Judging by the conversations people were having with the reception staff a lot of people (esp the elderly and children) were being sent for chest scans as well as being prescribed drugs. It took one receptionist just 90 seconds to explain the outpatient booking process to one mother and child; three minutes later it then took her 5+ minutes to explain the same process to a (judging by the accent) Lithuanian mother and child.

Are you saying this threefold increase in "face time" to explain a simple process is having no impact on GPs' surgeries ability to cope with the number of people they are seeing?

Because that is what you do need to be saying for your earlier statement to be true.

Between my immediate family we use three different GP surgeries in the local town, all of them have been severely impacted by immigration. To get an appointment at my father's GP surgery you need to book 2 weeks in advance or get a referral from the 111 service. How many people are aware that they will be ill in two weeks time? That's right none - and the people who then can't get an appointment trundle off to A&E.

This morning's news had a statement from a senior A&E manager saying that the current swathe of "internal major incidents" are pretty much ALL caused by people using A&E when they can't get the assistance they need at other points in the care-chain - mainly their GP.

This IS an issue where Immigration has an impact; and you pretending otherwise is very dishonest.

Immigration may not be the "root cause" but it is 100% without doubt a contributory causal factor.

To remedy a problem one must first correctly identify the problem; by deliberately muddying the water on identifying the problem you make it less likely for a remedy to be forthcoming.

That you do so simply to preserve your chosen ideology rather than accepting the facts of the matter is deeply concerning.

All The Best
I don't have any figures for it but surely the closure of walk in health centres will have had a big effect on the local GP?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
In regard to the UK having what the OECD (did) rate as the Best and most efficient Health Care provider (the NHS), my curiosity causes me to ask why is this sort of praiseworthy recognition is not made as public by the press and TV Presenters as it could be? People are not generally aware that the NHS is considered highly efficient by International standards. Lots of people do believe it is too expensive, and is in constant financial crisis.
These are the beliefs that the media present -
The Debate is politically driven - J Hunt never fails to say how proud he is of the NHS, and yet never tires of saying it needs to be reformed.

How many people when they hear there is a 'bed shortage' actually realise that this term is a synonym for 'Staff Shortages'?



Edited by Affa, Jan 7 2015, 02:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Jan 7 2015, 02:27 PM
In regard to the UK having what the OECD (did) rate as the Best and most efficient Health Care provider (the NHS), my curiosity causes me to ask why is this sort of praiseworthy recognition is not made as public by the press and TV Presenters as it could be? People are not generally aware that the NHS is considered highly efficient by International standards. Lots of people do believe it is too expensive, and is in constant financial crisis.
These are the beliefs that the media present -
The Debate is politically driven - J Hunt never fails to say how proud he is of the NHS, and yet never tires of saying it needs to be reformed.

How many people when they hear there is a 'bed shortage' actually realise that this term is a synonym for 'Staff Shortages'?



Good point. Link to the OECD thing?

All organisations, especially one as large and changing (in terms of medical technology and knowledge) needs pretty much constant or at least regular reform.

Maybe the word Evolve would be more accurate and pleasing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Jan 7 2015, 09:07 AM
PV, as I have said already of course immigration is a contributing factor anyone who says otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land imo.

However anyone who says that it's the biggest or sole cause of all of the NHS problems is the prime minister of cloud cuckoo land.

Now I appreciate that this does not apply to you, but when people cite immigration as the main or sole cause of the problem when it clearly isn't do you not see how this can be viewed as people simply advancing their own agenda and derailing a desperately needed debate on this subject?

I agree entirely.

I can think of no major issue with the British socio-economic landscape where immigration is the only cause.

I can think of some where it is a major factor; and many more where it is a smaller contributory factor.

People who either blame it all on immigration, or who say immigration is blameless are being very dishonest IMO, and yes they are advancing their own agenda and preventing real debate, because real debate requires the freedom to examine all contributory factors.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 11:39 AM
If those areas of the country which have seen huge influxes of migrant workers / immigrants, such as Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire, then surely the normal thing to do would be to provide more services, more teachers, more doctors, after all, the rise in population means more people are paying income tax, council tax, VAT, petrol duty, alcohol duty, tobacco duty.

It isn't rocket science.

The vast majority of immigrants coming to the UK are coming either unskilled or semi-skilled; the jobs these people find do not pay enough taxes for them to have the net benefit required to fund the service provision increase needed to meet rise in population numbers.

In fact once you factor in the cost of paying benefits to a Brit kept out of job 90% of immigrants are a net drain on the economy.

That is why I am opposed to the current immigration paradigm, and to that promoted by Labour.

It has nothing to do with race, religion etc and everything to do with basic economics: we can't afford this kind of immigration.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 04:04 PM
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 11:39 AM
If those areas of the country which have seen huge influxes of migrant workers / immigrants, such as Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire, then surely the normal thing to do would be to provide more services, more teachers, more doctors, after all, the rise in population means more people are paying income tax, council tax, VAT, petrol duty, alcohol duty, tobacco duty.

It isn't rocket science.

The vast majority of immigrants coming to the UK are coming either unskilled or semi-skilled; the jobs these people find do not pay enough taxes for them to have the net benefit required to fund the service provision increase needed to meet rise in population numbers.

In fact once you factor in the cost of paying benefits to a Brit kept out of job 90% of immigrants are a net drain on the economy.

That is why I am opposed to the current immigration paradigm, and to that promoted by Labour.

It has nothing to do with race, religion etc and everything to do with basic economics: we can't afford this kind of immigration.

All The Best
I agree.

So why is it that all these reports keep telling us that migration is a net imporvement for our economy?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cymru
Alt-Right
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Jan 7 2015, 04:07 PM
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 04:04 PM
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 11:39 AM
If those areas of the country which have seen huge influxes of migrant workers / immigrants, such as Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire, then surely the normal thing to do would be to provide more services, more teachers, more doctors, after all, the rise in population means more people are paying income tax, council tax, VAT, petrol duty, alcohol duty, tobacco duty.

It isn't rocket science.

The vast majority of immigrants coming to the UK are coming either unskilled or semi-skilled; the jobs these people find do not pay enough taxes for them to have the net benefit required to fund the service provision increase needed to meet rise in population numbers.

In fact once you factor in the cost of paying benefits to a Brit kept out of job 90% of immigrants are a net drain on the economy.

That is why I am opposed to the current immigration paradigm, and to that promoted by Labour.

It has nothing to do with race, religion etc and everything to do with basic economics: we can't afford this kind of immigration.

All The Best
I agree.

So why is it that all these reports keep telling us that migration is a net imporvement for our economy?
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Jan 7 2015, 03:29 PM
Good point. Link to the OECD thing?

All organisations, especially one as large and changing (in terms of medical technology and knowledge) needs pretty much constant or at least regular reform.

Maybe the word Evolve would be more accurate and pleasing.
There is an OECD reference in this Guardian article, which some will scoff at.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/nov/23/health-bill-nhs-oecd-report

It addresses some of the other points re reforms you also need further clarification on ....... the term 'evolve' is a better word imo.

This is an American's view >>
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2011/06/06/the-nhs-a-stunningly-cost-effective-supplier-of-high-quality-healthcare/

Posted Image

Overall Ranking = Top. Efficiency = 1st (top)

A more detailed analysis of the report here >>
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uks-healthcare-ranked-the-best-out-of-11-western-countries-with-us-coming-last-9542833.html

Edited by Affa, Jan 7 2015, 04:39 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 04:04 PM
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 11:39 AM
If those areas of the country which have seen huge influxes of migrant workers / immigrants, such as Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire, then surely the normal thing to do would be to provide more services, more teachers, more doctors, after all, the rise in population means more people are paying income tax, council tax, VAT, petrol duty, alcohol duty, tobacco duty.

It isn't rocket science.

The vast majority of immigrants coming to the UK are coming either unskilled or semi-skilled; the jobs these people find do not pay enough taxes for them to have the net benefit required to fund the service provision increase needed to meet rise in population numbers.

In fact once you factor in the cost of paying benefits to a Brit kept out of job 90% of immigrants are a net drain on the economy.

That is why I am opposed to the current immigration paradigm, and to that promoted by Labour.

It has nothing to do with race, religion etc and everything to do with basic economics: we can't afford this kind of immigration.

All The Best
You are likely to be correct in saying "the vast majority of immigrants coming to the UK are coming either unskilled or semi skilled". I wonder if anyone has a breakdown of the proportions of those immigrants who come who have nothing more than their unskilled or semi skilled labour to offer and those who have more to offer?

Can you explain what it is that is "promoted" by Labour?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
ACH1967
Jan 7 2015, 11:46 AM
C-too
Jan 7 2015, 08:32 AM
ACH1967
Jan 6 2015, 04:21 PM
When asked why several NHS trsuts were declaring major incidents the person responsible said that it was not lack of money but lack of doctors and nurses, especially A & E. If there are not enough of these in the country, in the short term, where would you like us to magic these critical staff from?
Apparently NHS trusts froze recruitment of staff in 2010/2011, there is some indication of recruitment beginning to take place again. In the meantime the requirement of NHS staff numbers has been ignored and the numbers of staff that have left have not been replaced.
This was not what the man being interviewed said. It was on Radio four on my drive to work yesterday. He clearly stated that they had 30 vancancies and could not fill them.
I believe him, AFAIA hundreds of nurses have left the NHS over the last 3 or 4 years.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
The main point of my argument been that immigration is not a contributing factor to the current Tory A&E crisis.

I have allready pointed out that hospitals in crisis are in areas of very low proportions of migrants, immigrants and ethnic minorities, like Scarborough for example, which has an ethnic population rate of less than half the national average, and the population increase between 2001 and 2011 increased by just 2000.

You lot are like Farage, immigrants are blamed for everything, and on one of the very few ocassions that I agree with Mr Cameron, he was correct in describing UKIP members as "fruitcakes, looneys and closet racists"

Furthermore all evidence has so far thus concluded that migrants have made a nett contribution to the economy, putting in more than they take out, and even more worrying for the LIttle Englanders, is the fact that an indigenous British person is more likely to claim benefits than an easter European migrant worker.

n 2011, migrants paid 37% more in taxes than was spent on the public services that they received.

Migrant workers pay income tax and National Insurance contributions. According to the Home Office, migrants and refugees made a net contribution of about £3billion to the UK economy – that’s worth 1p on income tax.

The UK has an ageing population as a result of declining birth rates and the fact that people are living longer. Migrant workers are almost entirely younger, fit people with little or no health issues, the vast majority are here working, they are on average much less of a strain on services as compared to native British people.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
The latest figures for Nationality of migrants to the UK

Posted Image

Former Commonwealth countries, and the USA being the main source of 'skilled' immigrants.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tables-for-immigration-statistics-january-to-march-2014
Edited by Affa, Jan 7 2015, 05:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
avagrumble
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Not meant as an insult SteveyK just a jokey chide, I still stand by what I said about

more people are using hospitals than say five years ago. Hospitals were built to

provide for a certain catchment area when they were first built, that catchment

area has swollen by building so many homes that now the hospitals cannot cope. Its

the same with prisons, so many wrongdoers are being let off with suspended

sentences because the jails are full, simply because of the equation of population

over prisons. Simple solution is we will have to build more or bigger hospitals.
The NHS is not all bad news, I have just come back from Ireland where you are

charged fifty euros to see your GP, unless you are on benefits, and that does'nt

seem fair.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 12:46 PM
Primeministers questions ( 7th January 2015 )

Leader of the opposition: "does the primeminister not accept that cuts to social care has had a direct affect on what is happening to our A&E departments"

Primeminister: Fails to answer the question

Leader of the opposition: "Does the primeminister not accept that a top-down reorganisation of the NHS costing Billions, has had a direct effect on what is happening to our A&E departments.

Primeminister: fails to answer the question

Honourable member for Wigan: "a survey of nurses has found that only 4% of nurses have any faith in David Cameron, why does he think this is"

Primeminster: Fails to answer the question
It could be that the wont give them the pay rise they demand.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Its pretty obvious that if we have immigrants coming into this country some of them will use the NHS and nearly all of them who settle will sign up with a GP. However most of them are young so they shouldnt take up as much NHS resources.
Immigrants might increase the need for schools, housing and maybe benefits but I doubt that they are a main factor in the NHS crisis.
Old people may take up a lot of resources but the government knew this would happen .They cant use that as an excuse.
The other people being blamed are the time wasters.
Well there may be a few people who go to the A&E for silly things but I doubt that it is a relevant factor, just an opportunity to demonise the great unwashed...just as the person who has 20 kids and a house worth millions on benefits is used to demonise the unemployed.
I cannot get an appointment with my GP unless I wait 14 days OR phone at designated times, manage to get through and are deemed to be worthy of an appointment by a receptionist. If I fail to get an appointment and still think I need to see a doctor I would have no other choice but to go to my local hospital, have I?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 05:13 PM
The main point of my argument been that immigration is not a contributing factor to the current Tory A&E crisis.

I have allready pointed out that hospitals in crisis are in areas of very low proportions of migrants, immigrants and ethnic minorities, like Scarborough for example, which has an ethnic population rate of less than half the national average, and the population increase between 2001 and 2011 increased by just 2000.
Peterborough A&E declared a major internal incident Monday.

Peterborough has see a truly massive immigrant influx in recent years; add in that Pet Hospital catchment area covers places like Wisbech and impact of immigrants is even greater.

Anyone who claims immigration is not a contributory factor to the current A&E crisis is deluding themselves.

Sure the prime cause of the A&E crisis is one of funding, especially relating to staffing costs, but other contributory factors have to be acknowledged as well and - whether you like it or not - immigration is such a factor.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Jan 7 2015, 04:54 PM
Can you explain what it is that is "promoted" by Labour?
Open door immigration specifically targeting low-skilled worker from poverty stricken nations; a policy designed to skew the socio-economic balance in Labour's favour.

Even now Labour are only just at the point of admitting they got immigration wrong, but still seem hell-bent of little to no real immigration control.

NuLab did more harm to the socio-economic prospects of the "working class" than Thatcher; and in due course they will be held accountable.


All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 06:07 PM
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 05:13 PM
The main point of my argument been that immigration is not a contributing factor to the current Tory A&E crisis.

I have allready pointed out that hospitals in crisis are in areas of very low proportions of migrants, immigrants and ethnic minorities, like Scarborough for example, which has an ethnic population rate of less than half the national average, and the population increase between 2001 and 2011 increased by just 2000.
Peterborough A&E declared a major internal incident Monday.

Peterborough has see a truly massive immigrant influx in recent years; add in that Pet Hospital catchment area covers places like Wisbech and impact of immigrants is even greater.

Anyone who claims immigration is not a contributory factor to the current A&E crisis is deluding themselves.

Sure the prime cause of the A&E crisis is one of funding, especially relating to staffing costs, but other contributory factors have to be acknowledged as well and - whether you like it or not - immigration is such a factor.

All The Best


I suppose a truly massive immigrant influx of sick immigrants would case a truly massive NHS crisis. I am not sure about a truly massive influx of young ,healthy East Europeans though.
I assume that the NHS crisis is is widespread across all areas of the UK and not only in the areas of high immigrant population but I could be wrong.
AFAIK NHS facilities are being closed and cut. As you say, the prime cause of the A&E as well as most of the other problems within the NHS is funding.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Jan 7 2015, 08:49 AM
According to the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, more than £2 billion a year is wasted on needless treatments. Billions more go on pointless layers of poor managers, red tape and shoddy computers that impede rather than improve work.


Reports show that at least £1b PA can be saved from smarter purchasing.

As for A&E overloads where ~30% are not considered to be an "emergency" unravel the cack-handed contracts awarded to GPs by NL which gave them a lot more money for a lot less out of normal hours working.
And how many more millions are wasted on interest repayments due on dodgy PFI deals forced on the NHS by both the Tories and Labour?

These deals are little more that corrupt politicians allowing the City to leach off of the taxpayer.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 08:48 AM
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 12:52 AM
For those that blame immigration and migration (and yes both have been excessive) I suggest you go look at your nearest hospital. They would completely collapse without migrants.
This is dishonest in the extreme. . .
No it's not and you are just throwing a foul insult because you cannot articulate a proper reply. In fact is seems like you couldn't even read what I posted you went on to so misrepresent it.

Now what would you deliberately misrepresenting another's post be? Oh yes: dishonest in the extreme.





Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
For those who want a serious debate about the impact of migration on the NHS then here are a few facts to ponder

- the BMA (that knows thing or two about the NHS) says that "without the contribution of non-British staff, "many NHS services would struggle to provide effective care to their patients".
- 26% of NHS doctors are foreign link
- the number of foreign citizens in the UK is less than 10%

So without the foreigners we'd have 26% less doctors and 10% less demand. Do the maths. That's an 18% cut in the critical limiting resource per patient. That equals a collapse

And why have we that need? - because our doctors increasingly go to Oz

Edited by Steve K, Jan 8 2015, 12:27 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
And why have we that need?


Quote:
 
The number of UK medical graduates working in Australian emergency departments has risen - from 251 in 2008 to 407 in 2012, according to the Australian College of Emergency Medicine.


So hardly any reason at all for the thousands of foreign born doctors recruited by the NHS - look for another reason I suggest.

Edited by Affa, Jan 8 2015, 03:30 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 7 2015, 05:13 PM
The main point of my argument been that immigration is not a contributing factor to the current Tory A&E crisis.

I have allready pointed out that hospitals in crisis are in areas of very low proportions of migrants, immigrants and ethnic minorities, like Scarborough for example, which has an ethnic population rate of less than half the national average, and the population increase between 2001 and 2011 increased by just 2000.

You lot are like Farage, immigrants are blamed for everything, and on one of the very few ocassions that I agree with Mr Cameron, he was correct in describing UKIP members as "fruitcakes, looneys and closet racists"

Furthermore all evidence has so far thus concluded that migrants have made a nett contribution to the economy, putting in more than they take out, and even more worrying for the LIttle Englanders, is the fact that an indigenous British person is more likely to claim benefits than an easter European migrant worker.

n 2011, migrants paid 37% more in taxes than was spent on the public services that they received.

Migrant workers pay income tax and National Insurance contributions. According to the Home Office, migrants and refugees made a net contribution of about £3billion to the UK economy – that’s worth 1p on income tax.

The UK has an ageing population as a result of declining birth rates and the fact that people are living longer. Migrant workers are almost entirely younger, fit people with little or no health issues, the vast majority are here working, they are on average much less of a strain on services as compared to native British people.



Before I start I don’t have a problem with immigrants. So far I haven’t been impacted by them. BUT most of the budgets for services are frozen or reduced. You yourself constantly like to make the point that the NHS has effectively taken a cut in funding. Migrants may make a net contribution to the economy but there are two factors to consider:

1 This contribution is going into reducing the deficit and borrowing it is not flowing through into increased spending on services. Population is going up spending is remaining the same = strain.

2 The contribution immigrants make goes to central government and the issues of migration are localised and there is not increased spending in this local areas to allow them to deal with this increased demand.

I agree with the point Steve K makes about the number of “foreigners in the NHS”. But this is a different point as it is about us getting a health service on the cheap and not adequately resourcing training for health posts.

PV gave an illustration of his local surgery. Although this is anecdotal it does not make it any less factual. You did not address this in any meaningful manner.

Furthermore PV also makes a relevant point which I doubt the home office figures address. If an immigrant takes a job that indigenous person could/should take then the state still ends up having to support that indigenous person.

Immigration is an issue and denying it is as distasteful as the closet racism displayed by UKIP. That said with our treaties immigration isn’t something we can do anything about hence all the dishonesty when the issue is discussed. To regain control over our border we would have to leave the EU and that is indeed a whole other debate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Jan 8 2015, 03:27 AM
Quote:
 
And why have we that need?


Quote:
 
The number of UK medical graduates working in Australian emergency departments has risen - from 251 in 2008 to 407 in 2012, according to the Australian College of Emergency Medicine.


So hardly any reason at all for the thousands of foreign born doctors recruited by the NHS - look for another reason I suggest.

Ah but that was just in A&E and was higher then the shortage of doctors we have in A&E. And then there's the Brit doctors in LA, New York etc

There is a bonkers food chain in the worldwide health services where each first world country steals resources from countries that can't pay the doctors as much as they can. We are somewhere in the middle losing our best home grown to Oz, Canada and the USA and taking in the best from the far East and the lesser paying EU

Bloody daft isn't it, it means we get treated by so many whose first language is not English and we burden the country with the long term burden of their old age, their children and their children's children.

Until we step off this idiot international health service conveyor belt, we will have to keep taking in migrants to keep the NHS going - don't take my word for it, as I already posted the BMA says so. So we should start stepping off now: anyone taking a medical training place in the UK should have to pay back every penny of the training cost if you leave the UK within 10 years of qualifying and no one coming to the UK for work gets anything other than residency for that duration, no citizenship, no citizenship for any children born here - they remain foreigners and only stay while we are getting their work.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
The shortages of home grown medical professionals began in the 1960s, and since that time the UK has not been able to fill medical posts using British born doctors, and we still cant.

After 1997 the new Labour government realized that they were never going to expand the number of doctors and nurses using British people, they attempted to make the posts more attractive, but it was always going to be foreign medical professionals who would come to the rescue, and thank goodness they did.

The present government is driving down terms and conditions, and driving down pay, the result will be even greater relliance on foreign doctors and nurses, its called "a race to the bottom".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 8 2015, 10:22 AM
The shortages of home grown medical professionals began in the 1960s, and since that time the UK has not been able to fill medical posts using British born doctors, and we still cant.

After 1997 the new Labour government realized that they were never going to expand the number of doctors and nurses using British people, they attempted to make the posts more attractive, but it was always going to be foreign medical professionals who would come to the rescue, and thank goodness they did.

The present government is driving down terms and conditions, and driving down pay, the result will be even greater relliance on foreign doctors and nurses, its called "a race to the bottom".

Exactly - the false economy of short termism

Here's a sobering read 4,700 doctors a year applying to take their expertise abroad

Quote:
 
GP leaders have said it is ‘alarming’ that taxpayers’ money is being invested in training graduates to become GPs, only for them to leave the NHS and have warned that the numbers could be higher, with many coming to train in the UK and returning to their country of origin to practice.

Last year Pulse reported that the number of CGS applications had risen by over 12% since 2008. The latest GMC figures show that the numbers are still increasing, although at a slower rate, with a a total of 4,741 UK-trained doctors obtained CGSs in 2013 - up from 4,726 in 2012.

Pulse has also found that a further 2,485 doctors have received CGSs in the first six months of 2014 alone, compared with 2,479 for the same period in 2013.

Figures from overseas medical regulators also indicate that the level of migration of British doctors to other countries has remained constant. Australia is one of the most popular destinations for UK doctors, with 729 granted the certificates of Advanced Standing that allow them to practice in Australia in 2013, and 945 in 2012.


Make them pay every penny back
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 11:52 PM
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 08:48 AM
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 12:52 AM
For those that blame immigration and migration (and yes both have been excessive) I suggest you go look at your nearest hospital. They would completely collapse without migrants.
This is dishonest in the extreme. . .
No it's not and you are just throwing a foul insult because you cannot articulate a proper reply. In fact is seems like you couldn't even read what I posted you went on to so misrepresent it.

Now what would you deliberately misrepresenting another's post be? Oh yes: dishonest in the extreme.





We managed very well in the past to the point of envy,and we will manage again. To claim today that we do not have the resourses and skills to train our own citizens is just left wing propaganda to justify their mistakes in having an open door policy.

There is no reason at all why those that are needed in the short term cannot be recruited and accepted by the vetting and issuing of work permits, and with a reassessment programme every few years to the point of granting citizenship to those who prove themselves as worthy of it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Jan 8 2015, 10:47 AM
We managed very well in the past to the point of envy,and we will manage again. To claim today that we do not have the resourses and skills to train our own citizens is just left wing propaganda to justify their mistakes in having an open door policy.

There is no reason at all why those that are needed in the short term cannot be recruited and accepted by the vetting and issuing of work permits, and with a reassessment programme every few years to the point of granting citizenship to those who prove themselves as worthy of it.
OK but can we manage if we do all that training and allow the medically trained to just leave to take better paid jobs overseas?

Two other points for the NHS debate

- is it a coincidence that the years when "we managed very well" were those when it was legal to pay female staff very low wages and treat them like dirt?
- the years when "we managed very well" were also those when life expectancy was significantly lower than today and very few had long post working lives requiring high levels of medical support.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 8 2015, 10:22 AM
After 1997 the new Labour government realized that they were never going to expand the number of doctors and nurses using British people, they attempted to make the posts more attractive, but it was always going to be foreign medical professionals who would come to the rescue, and thank goodness they did.


Why were we never going to expand the number of doctors and nurses using British people?

As Steve says rather than increasing wages amend the terms such that if they wish to emmigrate they have to pay back the trainign costs
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 8 2015, 10:29 AM
Exactly - the false economy of short termism
But immigration used, allegedly, to fill skills gaps in whatever sector is about short-termism.

If you really want to see an end to the dangerous addiction to short-termism seen in British business leadership you'd oppose immigration most strenuously - which is precisely what I do, and why I do it.

How many nations that we send development aid to are represented as immigrant workers in our NHS?

It is illogical to be sending that aid money for development purposes if we then turn around and take trained professionals from those nations.

And the claim that 26% of NHS workers are immigrants but only 10% of the population is immigrant so claiming immigration is part of the problem is false is, frankly, retarded.

That looks at the impact of immigration from one narrow angle of a one-dimensional view; so yes you are being dishonest again, as well you know.

You are very fond of calling others out about their (perceived by you) dishonesty but very happy to continue peddling your own dishonesties - that's called hypocrisy.

All The Best
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
krugerman
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Jan 8 2015, 10:47 AM
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 11:52 PM
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 08:48 AM
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 12:52 AM
For those that blame immigration and migration (and yes both have been excessive) I suggest you go look at your nearest hospital. They would completely collapse without migrants.
This is dishonest in the extreme. . .
No it's not and you are just throwing a foul insult because you cannot articulate a proper reply. In fact is seems like you couldn't even read what I posted you went on to so misrepresent it.

Now what would you deliberately misrepresenting another's post be? Oh yes: dishonest in the extreme.





We managed very well in the past to the point of envy,and we will manage again. To claim today that we do not have the resourses and skills to train our own citizens is just left wing propaganda to justify their mistakes in having an open door policy.

There is no reason at all why those that are needed in the short term cannot be recruited and accepted by the vetting and issuing of work permits, and with a reassessment programme every few years to the point of granting citizenship to those who prove themselves as worthy of it.
The "Little Englanders" confront facts with accusations of "left wing propoganda" because quite often the facts do not fit in with their warped agenda.

The first serious shortage of doctors in the NHS was in the early 1960s, and the then health minister under Harold Macmillan put out an appeal to the Indian sub continent for recruits, in all, nearly 20,000 medical professionals came to this country mainly from India and Pakistan.

And who was this health minister ( you might ask ) ?

His name was E N O C H P O W E L L

No one on these boards has claimed that we neither have the resources or the skills to train our own home grown people, the point is that if medical graduates dont want the cinderella jobs, then you cannot force them to take up the empty posts.

Even now, there are certain fields within the NHS which have shortages, yet other specialities are over-subscribed, the medical graduates scrambble for the popular specialities, the best posts, the ones in better areas, and the posts which offer the best opportunities of moving on to Australia if the going gets tough, or if we have too many Conservative governments which always drive down the terms and conditions.

The only way to stop the reliance on foreign doctors is to make working in the NHS more attractive, and that will never happen under a Tory government.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Well Prov V your more offensive points have been responded to in this thread.

Pro Veritas
Jan 8 2015, 11:44 AM
Steve K
Jan 8 2015, 10:29 AM
Exactly - the false economy of short termism
But immigration used, allegedly, to fill skills gaps in whatever sector is about short-termism.

If you really want to see an end to the dangerous addiction to short-termism seen in British business leadership you'd oppose immigration most strenuously - which is precisely what I do, and why I do it. . .

I do, perhaps you can't read or remember and yes it does affect all across the employment spectrum. We give citizenship where all is needed is work permits, we give work permits where we should think twice and twice again and we've signed up to free movement of labour with non convergent nations. As i've posted before, all that has to stop.

To the specifics of impact on the NHS then across the piece migrants are a short term positive impact BUT (and it's a big BUT) there are the longer terms costs and migrants do not tidily geographically settle in proportions aligned with their NHS roles. They create serious anomalies as they do in schools etc.

Pro Veritas
Jan 8 2015, 11:44 AM
. . . How many nations that we send development aid to are represented as immigrant workers in our NHS?

It is illogical to be sending that aid money for development purposes if we then turn around and take trained professionals from those nations. . .

Yes but I suggest that aid issue is exaggerated. Aid to India ends in April this year and a lot of the migrants in the NHS are EU based.

Pro Veritas
Jan 8 2015, 11:44 AM
. . . And the claim that 26% of NHS workers are immigrants but only 10% of the population is immigrant so claiming immigration is part of the problem is false is, frankly, retarded.

That looks at the impact of immigration from one narrow angle of a one-dimensional view; so yes you are being dishonest again, as well you know.

You are very fond of calling others out about their (perceived by you) dishonesty but very happy to continue peddling your own dishonesties - that's called hypocrisy.

All The Best
[/small] so dishonest a claim it has been responded to in the Dungeon.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ACH1967
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
krugerman
Jan 8 2015, 01:13 PM
Tytoalba
Jan 8 2015, 10:47 AM
Steve K
Jan 7 2015, 11:52 PM
Pro Veritas
Jan 7 2015, 08:48 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
No it's not and you are just throwing a foul insult because you cannot articulate a proper reply. In fact is seems like you couldn't even read what I posted you went on to so misrepresent it.

Now what would you deliberately misrepresenting another's post be? Oh yes: dishonest in the extreme.





We managed very well in the past to the point of envy,and we will manage again. To claim today that we do not have the resourses and skills to train our own citizens is just left wing propaganda to justify their mistakes in having an open door policy.

There is no reason at all why those that are needed in the short term cannot be recruited and accepted by the vetting and issuing of work permits, and with a reassessment programme every few years to the point of granting citizenship to those who prove themselves as worthy of it.
The "Little Englanders" confront facts with accusations of "left wing propoganda" because quite often the facts do not fit in with their warped agenda.

The first serious shortage of doctors in the NHS was in the early 1960s, and the then health minister under Harold Macmillan put out an appeal to the Indian sub continent for recruits, in all, nearly 20,000 medical professionals came to this country mainly from India and Pakistan.

And who was this health minister ( you might ask ) ?

His name was E N O C H P O W E L L

No one on these boards has claimed that we neither have the resources or the skills to train our own home grown people, the point is that if medical graduates dont want the cinderella jobs, then you cannot force them to take up the empty posts.

Even now, there are certain fields within the NHS which have shortages, yet other specialities are over-subscribed, the medical graduates scrambble for the popular specialities, the best posts, the ones in better areas, and the posts which offer the best opportunities of moving on to Australia if the going gets tough, or if we have too many Conservative governments which always drive down the terms and conditions.

The only way to stop the reliance on foreign doctors is to make working in the NHS more attractive, and that will never happen under a Tory government.
And on what basis do you conclude that "making the NHS more attractive" is the only way to stop our reliance on foreign doctors given that Steve has already made decent suggestions about making those who want to jump ship (as is their right) pay for the subsidised training they received (as is the tax payers right).

All of this is perfectly reasonable and deosn't necessarily cost a penny more.

That said if you have seen my previous posts I have acknowledged that the UK is probably 2% of GDP underfunding the NHS in comparison to the Frecnh and Germans I am just not sure that improving the wages is where the money should be spent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply