Keir Starmer

It's very odd, because it's at odds with reality, like your post.
Wait, so you're saying spending on the NHS didn't increase during Blair's years in power? He didn't cut waiting times? He didn't increase spending in state education?

I'm not sure what they're telling you at the Momentum rallies, but it's a matter of public record, mate.
 
Nailed it.

That reflects a huge proportion of the electorate and appeal to it like Blair did and you will win GE's.

It’s why Blair won every time he tried.

People saw at least some of their own views in his manifesto, add to that he was very polished and charismatic and bingo, you’ve got a vote winner.
 
It's extraordinary times we're in, many cancer patients are being denied treatment to free up capacity. I don't really think that's the long term answer - to "gut" all health service bar A&E.

Waiting times were at their lowest level ever under Blair. There was proper funding and proper management in place to help the thing run properly.

Cameron came in and completely gutted the management structure, cut funding and put more nurses in place of managers. But in the 20th century it's not a model that works. Nursing staff are busy enough without having to manage the thing as well.

It's was cuts and restructure for idealogical reasons, which has continued for 10 years. I don't want to see poor kids turned away from hospital for cancer treatment because their parents didn't pay for insurance.

To clarify, in case it was missed, I said it was my view for the blueprint of every department. Each department has its function and helps provides a service within the NHS to patients, i.e. cancer departments, but the focus, resources and funding should be on front line, pro-active care with the most efficient support structure possible. I don't want nurses doing anything other than nursing but the other tasks need to be completed as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible because the resources need to be devoted to patient care.
 
Wait, so you're saying spending on the NHS didn't increase during Blair's years in power? He didn't cut waiting times? He didn't increase spending in state education?

I'm not sure what they're telling you at the Momentum rallies, but it's a matter of public record, mate.

For the last thirty years, with the possible exception of Brexit, politics has been a combination of reacting to events, political necessity and triangulation, in order to maintain the status quo.
 
To clarify, in case it was missed, I said it was my view for the blueprint of every department. Each department has its function and helps provides a service within the NHS to patients, i.e. cancer departments, but the focus, resources and funding should be on front line, pro-active care with the most efficient support structure possible. I don't want nurses doing anything other than nursing but the other tasks need to be completed as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible because the resources need to be devoted to patient care.
I totally get where you're coming from.

My Mrs works for one of the Big 4 and her firm get contracted to the NHS to come in and implement management strategies because management is in such a monumental mess. These consultants are getting charged at thousands of pounds a day to try to sort out flaws in the management process.

If there was full time managers running the wards as opposed to nurses / matrons, it will actually run far more effectively and would be cheaper in the long run because they wouldn't need consultants to come and sort out the mess.

It's a headline grabber when Cameron comes in and says he's "cutting the red tape" by doing away with huge swathes of management and bringing in nurses to run it. But the knock on is you get a more inefficient service and you end up paying through the nose to fix it. Cutting management from the NHS is a complete false economy imo.
 
This might help.

political-spectrum.png
Why, in that graph, is libertarianism on the "right" when it's neither on the left nor right scale of politics?
 
Why, in that graph, is libertarianism on the "right" when it's neither on the left nor right scale of politics?
I didn't draw it, but it's an American graph, so I guess it's on the right because of American Libertarian view of doing away with the welfare state.
 
This might help.

political-spectrum.png


The overton window drifted to the right during the late 70s early 80s, liberalism was seen as moderate not left wing, though such liberals as paddy ashdown and the SDP had more soft left leanings and what was called centrist, new labour fall near if not into that area.

What we equate as the above is seen in many parts of the word differently socialism would be more where liberalism is on the scale and liberalism where moderate.
 
The overton window drifted to the right during the late 70s early 80s, liberalism was seen as moderate not left wing, though such liberals as paddy ashdown and the SDP had more soft left leanings and what was called centrist, new labour fall near if not into that area.

What we equate as the above is seen in many parts of the word differently socialism would be more where liberalism is on the scale and liberalism where moderate.
It's obviously a simplified graph, but I would say it makes sense to put "moderate" dead centre of any political spectrum.

I would say Blair was left of centre, Liberal on social issues and Moderate economically using the graph.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top