Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by blueinsa, 8 Jan 2018.
When did you last go through passport control when you left the UK.? It doesn't happen.
So why don't you answer the other parts of the argument posted? The fact that spire just drop you back into the NHS when things go wrong and you need an intensive care bed and long term critical care. Or the fact that spire or other private providers pay nothing towards the cost of training doctors surgeons nurses etc.
There's nothing to reply to really. These are non-arguments.
If the cost to the NHS of doing a procedure is higher than getting someone else to do the same work to the same or better standard, then in principle it makes sense to get someone to do it.
If they need NHS intensive care afterwards then that's no different to if the NHS did it and then they needed NHS intensive care afterwards. Not that 3rd parties don't have their own intensive care facilities mind you. So all of that can be catered for in the outsource contract.
Training is also irrelevant. The NHS has people to train either way. In fact their training costs would come down (or at least be lower than they otherwise would be) if some of the outsourced work is done by people who were trained elsewhere. The NHS would need fewer qualified staff if more work is done by third parties. So they'd save money on the procedures and reduced training costs as well.
There is a mechanism of tracking people because airlines have to submit who is on their flights. Before you fly you need to add your passport details which is trackable against arrest warrants for example. That is how plod always turn up if you are a criminal on the run trying to leave.
The question is, should we or can we be bothered to do this for someone who hasn't paid their medical bills? And also if someone refuses to pay do we chuck them in prison at more cost until they do and what if they can't? I don't think health migrants or whatever are really that big of a deal to warrant any action. We are perhaps talking of solving a problem that costs £100M at a cost of £99m.
In non-emergency treatment this could all be solved by asking for a deposit refundable or contributed towards payment for treatment or obviously proof of insurance. That is what happens in the US.
Where do you think spire get their surgeons from? There’s a reason all the private hospitals are in the same towns as the nhs ones.
you have to have your passport scanned at the gate, and the police look at passenger lists to go and arrest other suspects anyway, would just be added on.
Just added onI Hah. to improve the systems to do what you want is proibably hundreds of millions of pounds to install and christ knows how much to run yearly. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the systems dont even time stamp peoples time/date of entry/exit.
And when one of your family requires urgent medical care ?
you pay it back in income assessed contributions
I don't agree at all that the two are mutually incompatible.
In fact quite the opposite. Private enterprise brings a sense of commercial imperative to do more for less, which EXACTLY what the NHS needs. The trick is to make sure the outsource contracts are framed in such a way that the private companies actually deliver what is required of them and not seek to maximise profits (which is fine) whilst not doing what they are supposed to be doing (which is clearly not).