Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#81
ross'
no rose tinted glasses matey
if you read my posts you may choose to note that i have said the NHS needs reform, but the idea to totaly dismantle it is the wrong road
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#82
Not sure why you think what is proposed is dismantling it. I think the rose tinted specs may have a little dust on them as well.............
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#83
while we have been talking about the proposed reforms and the ideologies of right and left stamp their feet in unison dave has been quietly instigating major changes in the public sector including the n.h.s.
just briefly scrutinised it but came to the conclusion that the ideas are workable.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-seeks-to-push-one-million-workers-out-of-the-public-sector-6261605.htmlKeith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#84
bern;
this reorganisation is nothing short of dismanting OUR NHS no rose timnted glasses
howard;
workable proposals?
you obviously didnt read yesterdays evening standard who have got a freedom of information gain forcing the govt to publish the failings of there propsals, a secret paper attempted to be kept away from the public. bu tory health ministers
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#85
No solution is going to be challenge-free, but change is not dismantling in the same way that growing is not dying, and if there are no radical changes the NHS will, without doubt, die.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#86
bern;l
change no problem
review no problem
radical change no problem
whats best for patients no problem
dismantling NHS no way
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#87
ARGH! What dismantling? The NHS has to change to survive - unless we do it now it will end up being dismantled because people, like you, refuse to look at it realistically.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#88
keith
i am in shock - you reading a newspaper after all you have said about them.
what did you not like about the ideas in the article?
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#89
bern
you realy should read my postings
howard
not sure what your on about matey on articles
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#90
keith you comented on the link in post 83, that is the article i was referring to.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#91
no not the same article howard
the evening standard has won a freedom of information request where the tory minister has letters stating how it wont work, but tried for over a year to keep these out of the public eye
but the evening standard won the case
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#92
well worth a read keith, helps form an opinion and start a debate.
so far we have just had blue barry and bern wanting privatisation and yourself and others wanting thing to stay as they are.
#93
Hang on! Privatisation is one option, but in fact the organisation who tendered successfully for the most recent hospital are technically a social enterprise as they are 49% owned by the staffers. But that's not the point - the point is that it matters that we look at all the options, not just ideologically acceptable ones. Clearly things have to change, and we need to have an open mind and a bit of creativity about how that happens.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#94
that was the point i was making, this new one from dave appears to break the mould.
seems more in line with a workers co-operative than anything else.
#95
Indeed, it is a bit of a hybrid - innovation and creativity really can make a difference.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#96
getting back to the original post on the thread this all looks rather different to the initial story.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/nov/12/care-private-company-nhs-hospital#97
A couple of things: using the emotive terms "plans to expand its empire and seek profit from the health service." will not assist calm and reasoned debate, neither will a comparison with an entirely different model of company such as Southern Cross, which incidentally many people realised was in trouble for some time. I also challenge the idea that patients are currently as safe as they could be!!!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#98
the company seem to be saying that care will be worse than it presently is.
#99
Part of the Southern Cross problem was the public sector refuses to pay the realistic cost of care it no longer provides . The ammount councils will pay for elderly care is derisory considering the 24 hour needs of the clients , meals , care heating , lighting, food , washing , building upkeep ,activities etc 24 hour a day for £400 a week is £ 2.50 ish an hour , could any of us provide these services for that ammount ? I couldnt
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
#100
I totally agree Sarah, it is crazy to suggest that you can off care and a decent quality of life for that amount. Nobody could.
How much did the state used to provide the provision for?
But this is the worry surely? The state will not offer up anymore money than they do currently and the NHS restructuring does nothing to address this fundamental point. The people concerned (in Southern Cross case the elderly) cannot give anymore, who is going to offer up the money then?
So in the case of Southern Cross, if it is impossible for the public sector to offer decent care for £2.50 and a private company can't do it, where does that leave the people in need!
We could carry on looking for people to take on these going concerns or ACTUALLY do something about it. It is absolutely true that reform is needed but this is 'reform' it is no better than 'shopping around' for you energy supplier, knowing that they will all only act in their own interests first.
Let the private sector work out how much it costs before profit, then we set this as the premium and we let management consultants etc advise/run such services for us. Profit then could be payed straight back in to make things even better...Barry is right, profit is good.
