The NHS

[Rascal]

But really I digress. This is not about whether you should or should not "defend the NHS". The issue is whether we can have a sensible debate about how we could do things better, without people getting all defensive and shouting down the debate.

Maybe the way its structured at the moment is perfect (barring your point 2 above) and all it needs is more money. But personally, I very much doubt that and I think all options should be on the table for NHS 2.0, so long as the fundamental principle of "free" healthcare for all is maintained.

I have tried to be sensible and offered to go through your concerns point by point, you have refused. I will reiterate, if you want a debate go ahead and I will answer your every point. I don't think you do though, I think your aim is to make a narrow political point.

I will say again, as you appear to be ignoring anything I have posted, the NHS is not perfect, no organisation is. It is however striving to be better and make more of the money available. Yes it could do with more money and yes political interference from the Government has caused major issues. Money is not the main issue though, it is the changing nature of the demographic and the problems that brings. No government is prepared to fund Social care properly, this government has made some stupid decisions yet the NHS still strives to make the best it can out of what it receives.

What options would you like on the table? and how do you think they would work? How will these options make sure that the staffing issues are solved? How will they ensure research stays a vital part of the NHS? How would you solve the shortage of GPs? How would you reintegrate the services fragmented by Lansleys reforms? Do you think centres of excellence are worth pursuing? What is the future for local service provision? How do you propose further devolution of health services works?

Like it or loath it Blair's PPI intiative led to the modernisation of loads of the creaking infrastructure that the NHS relies on. Look at the MRI, SRFT, Wythenshawe hospitals and they are vastly improved, how do you propose future improvements in infrastructure are funded?

Come on, debate if that is what you want, don't be shy.

 

[Rascal]

NHS has some right pieces of shit at the top level who over pay for certain services ect. A chronic waste of money that should be funding other parts of the service.

Could you expand on this point please.

 

[Rascal]

1 in 3 public pounds goes into the NHS yet people cry 'underfunded'. It's poorly run with a frontline team left to piece it together and cover the cracks.
Everyone I know who has worked in the NHS mentions the amount of money wasted. It's an absolute shambles.

Could you ask the people you know where exactly the money is being wasted. I am a huge advocate of those on the front line having more of a say on decision making regarding funding and spending.

 

[stonerblue]

I'm sure that's true and privitisation is certainly no panacea and if done badly would I am sure make things worse. Even if done well, I suspect there's services for which we shouldn't even be considering it. What cannot be allowed to happen is that private companies pick off the "profitable" work and then leave the NHS to pick up the pieces (and cost) with the difficult stuff. And I think that is a bit of an issue at the moment.

But the level of privatisation at the moment is low - IIRC it's 7% or 8% of NHS spend - something like that, and yet the objectors to privatisation - mainly those on the left of the political spectrum as far as I can make out - think even this is too much and that 100% of activity should be state-owned and run. I do not subscribe to that view at all.

People compare us to the US and suggest what a disaster a privately-run health service would be, but the US is the very worst of the lot and no-one would aspire to that. Fewer objectors consider comparisons with the Netherlands, or perhaps Singapore. In Singapore they have a government run universal healthcare system which is subsidised through taxation but funded by compulsory saving, insurance, and optional individual contributions, depending on the level of cover you decide you want. I am not advocating the Singaporean system - merely describing it. But it works incredibly well - the hospitals are spectacular; the service ranked amongst the highest in the world and the clinical outcomes ditto. The government system competes with private providers as well, so you have more choice, yet still without getting a bill at the end.

We should be looking at all sorts of options like this IMO.

Your thoughts on the privatisation of elderly care?

 

[SilverFox2]

What areas are doing badly?

Do you read any of my posts of what is happening in Manchester?

I don't know except the waste that has been reported on this thread and my knowledge of private sector business where waste is aggressively controlled and hounded out.
Integrated computer systems would highlight this for you and as far as your posts are concerned allow investment to go in the areas that would benefit.
Incidentally, are you totally happy that all current investment is targeted correctly in all areas of nhs?
If so then producing a business plan for each area should be no problem at all.to their individual managers. Let them compete for money and show how they can improve rather than just say they are underfunded.
A budget should be something to save from rather than a target to spend.
Just an opinion from someone who knows nothing about the public sector but knows what happens when big organisations get out of control.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Do you know how many drs and nurses etc that are hands on and get emotionally affected by it?
You would say blue was white rather than accept what people who know tell you
It's like talking to a wall

Ditto Karen, ditto.

And by the way, were you press-ganged into working for the NHS, or is it like conscription / military service?

It's not that I am ungrateful to the people who work in the NHS. What bugs me is the hard-done-by martyrdom many of you seem obsessed with, when in fact you voluntarily signed up for it. Did you not expect to have to treat ill people?

 

[Chippy_boy]

I have tried to be sensible and offered to go through your concerns point by point, you have refused.

Oh I see. I hadn't realised I had refused. I must have said so whist asleep. Thanks for helping me understand my own position.

To be honest pal, I've no clue what post you're even referring to.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Oh I see. I hadn't realised I had refused. I must have said so whist asleep. Thanks for helping me understand my own position.

To be honest pal, I've no clue what post you're even referring to.

In this grown up conversation, that you crave, are you going to suggest anything constructive, or just demean people that ask you to put forward your points, whilst backing theirs up with first hand experiences.

If not, this thread will become as pointless as the other political threads on here.

 

[Chippy_boy]

In this grown up conversation, that you crave, are you going to suggest anything constructive, or just demean people that ask you to put forward your points, whilst backing theirs up with first hand experiences.

If not, this thread will become as pointless as the other political threads on here.

To be perfectly honest mate, I made my opening post based on how I feel about the whole thing. I think the NHS is dysfunctional as it stands, arguably unfit for purpose and we need a thorough and total review of how we wish to provide excellent health care for our 65m citizens for the next 50 years.

And yet any such debate is stiffled by disgruntled NHS workers banging on on the one hand about how bloody wonderful it is and that we mustn't mess with it, and in the same breath, how terrible it is and what awful conditions they have to put up with. And half the population chiming in with how marvellous it is on the basis that their sister/aunt/uncle/mother/neighbour works there and how hard done by they are. On page 2, I had Karen's first response - the very constructive, "Oh do one".

What's pretty clear is that half the employees (figuratively - it's probably more) are pretty pisssed off and something needs changing. And yet for most of them, the answer seems to be "don't change anything", with the added caveat, "just give us a shed load more funding".

That's about all I have to say on the matter really. I'm no expert on healthcare reform, but even from my lay position, I can see something needs to be changed and we cannot carry on with it as it is. It's not up to me to get into a point by point, blow by blow, line by line debate on how excellent or not NHS gynaecological services are in Bolton. My position is looking at it somewhat more strategically than that.

 

[SilverFox2]

To be perfectly honest mate, I made my opening post based on how I feel about the whole thing. I think the NHS is dysfunctional as it stands, arguably unfit for purpose and we need a thorough and total review of how we wish to provide excellent health care for our 65m citizens for the next 50 years.

And yet any such debate is stiffled by disgruntled NHS workers banging on on the one hand about how bloody wonderful it is and that we mustn't mess with it, and in the same breath, how terrible it is and what awful conditions they have to put up with. And half the population chiming in with how marvellous it is on the basis that their sister/aunt/uncle/mother/neighbour works there and how hard done by they are. On page 2, I had Karen's first response, "Oh do one".

What's pretty clear is that half the employees (figuratively - it's probably more) are pretty pisssed off and something needs changing. And yet for most of them, the answer seems to be "don't change anything", with the added caveat, "just give us a shed load more funding".

That's about all I have to say on the matter really. I'm no expert on healthcare reform, but even from my lay position, I can see something needs to be changed and we cannot carry on with it as it is. It's not up to me to get into a point by point, blow by blow, line by line debate on how excellent or not NHS gynaecological services are in Bolton. My position is looking at it somewhat more strategically than that.

Thats a fair post I think because if we all pay in as well as benefit from its services we must be allowed a say as to how it is run and functions irrespective of our working backgrounds.
My own experiences as a customer go from excellent at one Manchester Trust to disappointingly incompetent at another. We all want improvements when some areas lead the way but others lag behind and change is difficult.