Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[SkipRat]

By his laws Boris was wrong.
I agree and I can see why he could have been cut some slack, however how he handled it was totally wrong.
What in my view is worse is the way every party jumped on it to score points, even when each and every one of them knew that they too were flaunting, bending or just down right breaking the rules.
In a time of national crisis they could not put aside party politics and played it for all it was worth.

Wasn't defending Boris, but agree with everything you say.

Parliament is a cesspit.

And now you have Dawn Buttler and her tweet about Kemi Badenoch, that is nothing but disgusting and racist, labelling her a blackfaced white supremastist.

Is amazing how so many people have ignored how disgusting the left have become. Just as bad as the right, in some cases even worse, seeing as they like to consider themselves morally superior.

 

[thfcsteff]

I think this is a big thing. The NHS has had huge amounts poured into it. It's had eye-watering funding uplifts in the last 5 years particularly. It has been claiming it is on its knees financially for probably the last 30 years. I invite anyone to go on NHS jobs and scroll through the vacancies....yes there are some substantive medical posts and some obviously key support roles, but there are far far too many *WTF* roles paying over £40-50K a year.

'Eye-watering funding uplifts'?
Are you simply talking about the money invested in it?
Feel free to provide an alternate source of information, but this should get the conversation going. What possible reason -beyond greed- is there for THAT level of profit from private contractors?

https://weownit.org.uk/blog/analysis-nhs-has-lost-10-million-week-private-profits-2012


There's an 'eye-watering' figure in the next story, which once again has experts and professionals arguing against private sector providers. I'ver said it many times; they will cut costs in order to maximise profit and services suffer. This line is repeated here.

https://www.bigissue.com/life/health/nhs-mental-health-private-beds-spend-everydoctor/

As for your frankly flippantly dismissive reference to far too many 'WTF roles paying over 40-50K a year', I looked up listings for one specific Reading post code, and in 130 listings found very few of these positions of which you speak. What I DID find were plenty of posts for, say, a Community Midwife for which the offer was between 24-25k a year, a registred nurse for 17-28 quid an hour on 'flexible hours', and an Occupation Therapy Assistant (elderly care) for 23, 615k a year.

Meanwhile, a finance officer position at the University College London offers between 43,124 and 51,620k a year, a data analyst position at the Lloyds Banking Group in Bristol offers 57,546 - 63,940K a year, and a Finance Analyst position at GitHub, Inc (!!!) which is part of Microsoft apparently (and a remote position) offers between 52,200 - 96,900 a year.

I suppose it all comes down to perspectives on what is actually of true value to society.
I don't dispute that modern times require financial sector employment and experts, but would we really venture to say that a 'Finance Analyst' at 'GitHub, Inc (for the record, I find the term 'financial analyst to personally be a little vague?!) is TWICE as valuable to society as someone caring for our elderly people?

I accept that of the 13 pages of NHS jhobs available for the Reading post code I chose, I honed in on those specifically, and accept there might be a few jobs to question, but what I will NOT accept is that the vast majority of jobs I DID look at over those pages were 'WTF' positions, whereas I found myself repeatedly pondring what, exactly, the various 'financial office/analyst' type roles broke down to being versus the money being paid. It is, of course, a sector that can afford to pay wages like that for positions which are perhaps not vital to the daily grind in the numbers they appear.

Meanwhile, most of the waste in NHS spending appears to be in the private contract sector...once again, I'd liike to thank the Tories for fudging the NHS quietly whilst claiming they've been supporting it with 'spending'. And again, we need a better breakdown of what these 'eye-watering' sums have been spent on. IMO...

Would be both interested and happy to read a counter argument which perhaps teaches me some things I don't know (and there's plenty of those).

 

[thfcsteff]

The big problem with the NHS is that it is rigged to leak all its money out to the private sector - big pharma and a thousand other suppliers. Let it be exempt from tendering and competition laws, and suddenly it becomes well funded at current levels.

Exactly.

 

[glasgowspur]

The big problem with the NHS is that it is rigged to leak all its money out to the private sector - big pharma and a thousand other suppliers. Let it be exempt from tendering and competition laws, and suddenly it becomes well funded at current levels.

I'm at an age now where the body is feeling the effects of the years, as are many of my friends and family.
It's scary how many are all on the same meds, and sometimes for different "illnesses".
Now, I'm not one for taking meds, never have been, never will be. Even when I have toothache or a migraine I ride it out.
Unfortunately in the last three years I have been diagnosed with a disorder that means I know take one tablet three times a day. I don't like it, but I have to.
Sorry for the long pre amble, just setting the scene.
I've always been wary drugs, what I've seen in the last 5 years has made me even more so.

You MUST take this largely untested drug.
We (big pharma) are not responsible for any ill effects.
It protects others. Lie.
It stops the spread. Lie.
15 million jags to freedom, didn't tell us it was 15 million each.

I am in no way a conspiracy theory nut, there is no hard data to back up that the covid jab has caused any real amount of deaths(I know this, it's my job to track this), that isn't the point I am making.
The point is how very, very quickly we turned to big pharma for the remedy, and for me that is because a lot of people made a lot of money from it, and continue to make a lot of money from it.

The NHS is fudged, I don't think anyone can say otherwise, but we (the public) have this emotional attachment that won't allow us to tear it down and start again.

 

[Gutter Boy]

There are some very good drugs. But a lot of what big pharma does is skew to their (expensive, controlled) chemical-based drugs over (cheaper, open) herb-based ones.

Social prescribing is also the best medicine for the vast majority of patients.

The tendering issues cover all areas. Departments cant just go to Office World and buy say 20 pens that they need for £5. They are forced to to go on an EU tendering framework and end up with 10,000 shipped over from the Far East, which are hugely expensive and dont actually work.

 

[Grays_1890]

The argument is and has always been what role should the state play and do you want to pay higher taxes for better public services and benefits. UK parties always promise more for less because they know the public won't vote for personal tax rises. I don't think many other countries have a similar setup to the NHS, don't most also have extra taxes for health? I wouldn't mind paying a separate extra tax for it - £20-£30 a month or something like that would raise a fair amount but I'd like to see some proper reform alongside it.

Yeah I have advocated this for years TBH, I would happily pay an extra £30 a month to a fun specifically set aside to the NHS IF AND BIG IF it came with reform to the NHS that came with a clear plan that money was not just swallowed up by large contractors for IT etc

 

[Muttley]

Yeah I have advocated this for years TBH, I would happily pay an extra £30 a month to a fun specifically set aside to the NHS IF AND BIG IF it came with reform to the NHS that came with a clear plan that money was not just swallowed up by large contractors for IT etc

I have a dilemma with this. I do see this unnecessary administrative overhead with the NHS. However, what I also see is a huge opportunity for interoperability with medical data, and integration with systems that I think will massively improve the entire process.

When you think of the normal scenario. You need a doctor's appointment and struggle to get one. You jump on the switchboard at 8am and perhaps 30 mins later you have an appointment in 2 weeks time, if they haven't lowered you priority and sent you to a locum. When you finally get to the medical facility, the clinician has no access to your history and starts the diagnosis all over again. You probability of being diagnosed corrected and treated correctly is massively reduced. So you end up back again costing even more money to the NHS.

I know my depiction might be a little outdated, but it's directionally correct about what we experience today.

What it should like is us having all of our medical data in one single place, and accessible in any facility. The logic of booking an appointment is driven in a way that you get to see the same clinician if at all possible so you get continuity. That clinician has all of their training to call upon and an intelligent system that is helping them to make sure you get the right diagnosis and treatment.

I've personally been put in positions where I've had to tell yet another GP my own medical history. I've had to tell them what prescriptions I've had previously and I've had to lead the conversation on myself and my data to get their support. Without my context, I just wouldn't have been treated correctly.

My instinct is that the NHS need to plough on with their technology transformation. They are making progress, and it is definitely costing a lot, but it is directionally correct. It should drive a massive change from admin staff to health professionals eventually.

 

[Kompakted]

'Eye-watering funding uplifts'?
Are you simply talking about the money invested in it?
Feel free to provide an alternate source of information, but this should get the conversation going. What possible reason -beyond greed- is there for THAT level of profit from private contractors?

https://weownit.org.uk/blog/analysis-nhs-has-lost-10-million-week-private-profits-2012


There's an 'eye-watering' figure in the next story, which once again has experts and professionals arguing against private sector providers. I'ver said it many times; they will cut costs in order to maximise profit and services suffer. This line is repeated here.

https://www.bigissue.com/life/health/nhs-mental-health-private-beds-spend-everydoctor/

As for your frankly flippantly dismissive reference to far too many 'WTF roles paying over 40-50K a year', I looked up listings for one specific Reading post code, and in 130 listings found very few of these positions of which you speak. What I DID find were plenty of posts for, say, a Community Midwife for which the offer was between 24-25k a year, a registred nurse for 17-28 quid an hour on 'flexible hours', and an Occupation Therapy Assistant (elderly care) for 23, 615k a year.

Meanwhile, a finance officer position at the University College London offers between 43,124 and 51,620k a year, a data analyst position at the Lloyds Banking Group in Bristol offers 57,546 - 63,940K a year, and a Finance Analyst position at GitHub, Inc (!!!) which is part of Microsoft apparently (and a remote position) offers between 52,200 - 96,900 a year.

I suppose it all comes down to perspectives on what is actually of true value to society.
I don't dispute that modern times require financial sector employment and experts, but would we really venture to say that a 'Finance Analyst' at 'GitHub, Inc (for the record, I find the term 'financial analyst to personally be a little vague?!) is TWICE as valuable to society as someone caring for our elderly people?

I accept that of the 13 pages of NHS jhobs available for the Reading post code I chose, I honed in on those specifically, and accept there might be a few jobs to question, but what I will NOT accept is that the vast majority of jobs I DID look at over those pages were 'WTF' positions, whereas I found myself repeatedly pondring what, exactly, the various 'financial office/analyst' type roles broke down to being versus the money being paid. It is, of course, a sector that can afford to pay wages like that for positions which are perhaps not vital to the daily grind in the numbers they appear.

Meanwhile, most of the waste in NHS spending appears to be in the private contract sector...once again, I'd liike to thank the Tories for fudging the NHS quietly whilst claiming they've been supporting it with 'spending'. And again, we need a better breakdown of what these 'eye-watering' sums have been spent on. IMO...

Would be both interested and happy to read a counter argument which perhaps teaches me some things I don't know (and there's plenty of those).

So I don't think you can isolate the NHS from the private sector. And therefore you can't isolate it from profit generation. Profit margins for private companies are necessary to safeguard against future uncertainty. Recommended "safe" net profit margin is towards the 10-20% mark depending on the type of business for it to be regarded as safe and sustainable and be able to absorb shocks in future years. A profit margin of below 5% means the business is unlikely to be sustainable and a minor hit to profits in a single year could put it into financial difficulty. Based on the analysis you've provided actually there appears to be very little waste in NHS private contracts with the NHS seemingly able to leverage its scale (and the likliy desirabilty of public sector contracts) in a similar manner to Tesco to negotiate border-line sustainable contracts with contractors given the average profit margin quoted for contracts over £1 million is just over 5% average.

 

[Grays_1890]

I have a dilemma with this. I do see this unnecessary administrative overhead with the NHS. However, what I also see is a huge opportunity for interoperability with medical data, and integration with systems that I think will massively improve the entire process.

When you think of the normal scenario. You need a doctor's appointment and struggle to get one. You jump on the switchboard at 8am and perhaps 30 mins later you have an appointment in 2 weeks time, if they haven't lowered you priority and sent you to a locum. When you finally get to the medical facility, the clinician has no access to your history and starts the diagnosis all over again. You probability of being diagnosed corrected and treated correctly is massively reduced. So you end up back again costing even more money to the NHS.

I know my depiction might be a little outdated, but it's directionally correct about what we experience today.

What it should like is us having all of our medical data in one single place, and accessible in any facility. The logic of booking an appointment is driven in a way that you get to see the same clinician if at all possible so you get continuity. That clinician has all of their training to call upon and an intelligent system that is helping them to make sure you get the right diagnosis and treatment.

I've personally been put in positions where I've had to tell yet another GP my own medical history. I've had to tell them what prescriptions I've had previously and I've had to lead the conversation on myself and my data to get their support. Without my context, I just wouldn't have been treated correctly.

My instinct is that the NHS need to plough on with their technology transformation. They are making progress, and it is definitely costing a lot, but it is directionally correct. It should drive a massive change from admin staff to health professionals eventually.

Sorry I was not clear, I used that as an example of bloated contractor stuff to fix things like routers. The contracts out there (not just IT was just an example) are what are suffocating the NHS (not wage increases as being labelled on here). The answer to outsourcing in the NHS is to award a really bad appointed and over paid contract, there are people also make really bad decisions on things like procurement that needs to change.

I agree on modernisation BTW

 

[SkipRat]

Sorry I was not clear, I used that as an example of bloated contractor stuff to fix things like routers. The contracts out there (not just IT was just an example) are what are suffocating the NHS (not wage increases as being labelled on here). The answer to outsourcing in the NHS is to award a really bad appointed and over paid contract, there are people also make really bad decisions on things like procurement that needs to change.

I agree on modernisation BTW

Negotiated by Labour. £300 to change a plug socket.

For £71 billion of assests, those PPI contrac6s are going to be costing us £200-£300 billion

It's not all the Tories doing. The state of the nhs is down to both parties.

And whilst yes modernisation would be a step in the right direction and would solve some of the problems. And yes, get rid of bloated contractor stuff...

Adding nearly 10 million (80% migrants + children) people to put population in 20 has placed enourmous pressure on services.

Where people like it or not, rapid population growth is a huge problem.

 

[SkipRat]

I'm at an age now where the body is feeling the effects of the years, as are many of my friends and family.
It's scary how many are all on the same meds, and sometimes for different "illnesses".
Now, I'm not one for taking meds, never have been, never will be. Even when I have toothache or a migraine I ride it out.
Unfortunately in the last three years I have been diagnosed with a disorder that means I know take one tablet three times a day. I don't like it, but I have to.
Sorry for the long pre amble, just setting the scene.
I've always been wary drugs, what I've seen in the last 5 years has made me even more so.

You MUST take this largely untested drug.
We (big pharma) are not responsible for any ill effects.
It protects others. Lie.
It stops the spread. Lie.
15 million jags to freedom, didn't tell us it was 15 million each.

I am in no way a conspiracy theory nut, there is no hard data to back up that the covid jab has caused any real amount of deaths(I know this, it's my job to track this), that isn't the point I am making.
The point is how very, very quickly we turned to big pharma for the remedy, and for me that is because a lot of people made a lot of money from it, and continue to make a lot of money from it.

The NHS is fudged, I don't think anyone can say otherwise, but we (the public) have this emotional attachment that won't allow us to tear it down and start again.

The jab (phizer, IIRC) did cause deaths, but it was tracked down to an insanely rare bit of genetic code, that when factored in, was still worth taking the JaB, as it would still save way more lives than it took.

This rare bit of code was so rare, that it wouldn't have shown up in full trials of the drug. According to some medical professionals.

And yeah, private companies view the NHS ad a licence to print money.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I have a dilemma with this. I do see this unnecessary administrative overhead with the NHS. However, what I also see is a huge opportunity for interoperability with medical data, and integration with systems that I think will massively improve the entire process.

When you think of the normal scenario. You need a doctor's appointment and struggle to get one. You jump on the switchboard at 8am and perhaps 30 mins later you have an appointment in 2 weeks time, if they haven't lowered you priority and sent you to a locum. When you finally get to the medical facility, the clinician has no access to your history and starts the diagnosis all over again. You probability of being diagnosed corrected and treated correctly is massively reduced. So you end up back again costing even more money to the NHS.

I know my depiction might be a little outdated, but it's directionally correct about what we experience today.

What it should like is us having all of our medical data in one single place, and accessible in any facility. The logic of booking an appointment is driven in a way that you get to see the same clinician if at all possible so you get continuity. That clinician has all of their training to call upon and an intelligent system that is helping them to make sure you get the right diagnosis and treatment.

I've personally been put in positions where I've had to tell yet another GP my own medical history. I've had to tell them what prescriptions I've had previously and I've had to lead the conversation on myself and my data to get their support. Without my context, I just wouldn't have been treated correctly.

My instinct is that the NHS need to plough on with their technology transformation. They are making progress, and it is definitely costing a lot, but it is directionally correct. It should drive a massive change from admin staff to health professionals eventually.

Wasn't this the plan a while back iirc? (10 years?) And the IT contracts dished out were enormous £££ and a total disaster on the delivery front. Sure it was widely reported

I do agree with your experience story

 

[Kompakted]

The jab (phizer, IIRC) did cause deaths, but it was tracked down to an insanely rare bit of genetic code, that when factored in, was still worth taking the JaB, as it would still save way more lives than it took.

This rare bit of code was so rare, that it wouldn't have shown up in full trials of the drug. According to some medical professionals.

And yeah, private companies view the NHS ad a licence to print money.

Paracetamol causes deaths and actually if you look up the potential side effects of paracetamol it is pretty horrific in terms of potential. What we don't have normally though is billions of people all over the world taking a drug at the same time with 24/7 news analysis of the results.

 

[Muttley]

Wasn't this the plan a while back iirc? (10 years?) And the IT contracts dished out were enormous £££ and a total disaster on the delivery front. Sure it was widely reported

I do agree with your experience story

I'm sure you do remember correctly. Unfortunately, it doesn't make the NHS the exception. They wouldn't be the first or last big entity to misfire on delivery of IT systems.

I think what I'm getting at is to stay focused and now get some of this heavy lifting complete. The adoption of the NHS app for COVID passports delivery was remarkable. It took adoption of the NHS app into the 10s of millions and it stands at 34 million citizens today. It made people like me see how close they are to having centralised medical records, the ability to book appointments, and interaction with the medical community. That was years and years of back-end IT work. I then went to Patients Know Best and offered the NHS access to all of my Fitbit health data like heart rate in a few clicks.

I do feel they're close now to having the basic building blocks in place to move use from totally reactive to way more proactive. It's only after this heavy lifting, can we see the magic happen. Saying that, another 5 years is probably realistic before we start feeling like we can take the technology for granted like we do with everything else in our lives.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I think this is a big thing. The NHS has had huge amounts poured into it. It's had eye-watering funding uplifts in the last 5 years particularly. It has been claiming it is on its knees financially for probably the last 30 years. I invite anyone to go on NHS jobs and scroll through the vacancies....yes there are some substantive medical posts and some obviously key support roles, but there are far far too many *WTF* roles paying over £40-50K a year.

Spot on.

 

[glasgowspur]

The jab (phizer, IIRC) did cause deaths, but it was tracked down to an insanely rare bit of genetic code, that when factored in, was still worth taking the JaB, as it would still save way more lives than it took.

This rare bit of code was so rare, that it wouldn't have shown up in full trials of the drug. According to some medical professionals.

And yeah, private companies view the NHS ad a licence to print money.

Everything causes death.
There was no unusual up tick in deaths due to the jab, certainly not anything akin to what some nutters would have us believe.
I would actually say lock down caused more deaths than the jab, and possibly even than covid itself tbh.

 

[SkipRat]

Well, well, well.

Beth Winter: Former Cynon Valley MP quits the Labour party

Beth Winter has accused the Labour Party of pursuing an "authoritarian political agenda".

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[SkipRat]

Everything causes death.
There was no unusual up tick in deaths due to the jab, certainly not anything akin to what some nutters would have us believe.
I would actually say lock down caused more deaths than the jab, and possibly even than covid itself tbh.

Of course there wouldnt be an uptick... it was so insanely rare as i stated.

And im not saying people shouldn't have taken the jab either. The good insanely out weighed the bad.

I hate anti-vaxxors more than anyone else. Vile vile people.

 

[markysimmo]

2020 Starmer said he will scrap tuition fees should he get in power
2024, 4 months into a Labour government and he has raised them

Yet another total lie from the Reds, big list starting to take shape already

 

[SkipRat]

2020 Starmer said he will scrap tuition fees should he get in power
2024, 4 months into a Labour government and he has raised them

Yet another total lie from the Reds, big list starting to take shape already

He doesn't care for the people.

He is two faced lying scumbag who won't get a second term.

He called most of the people far right, sentenced people to jail for claiming the stabbings of 3 girls was a terror attack... turns out it was, now people are in jail for being factually correct... the sort of thing China and Russia do.

Still not a peep from the left regarding Dawn Butlers tweets regarding Kemi Badenoch being a whiye supremisist in blackskin, a coconut.

A budget that just helped the government, not the people at the bottom.

blowing 75 million on dealing with the traffickers, that is waste of time, just like the war in terror.

The government is a joke.