UKIP - The Future - Volume 4
Discussion
eccles said:
AJS- said:
eccles said:
What happens to immigrants who are found to be positive for TB?
As Scuffers said, I presume their visas are refused. Fortunately never had any direct experience of it. The point is that it is deemed acceptable to discriminate at that stage on the basis of an illness. So why not for HIV?Ok, so you don't actually know then?
I don't know what happens if a would be migrant has tuberculosis or why it's ok to discriminate against one disease but not another.
I know that a negative test is required so presumably failing to present one means the application is rejected.
As to why it's ok to screen for tuberculosis ans not HIV, I believe there is a certain group of people who are essentially pro HIV, and they blur the line between "reducing stigma" and taking it up as a cause célèbre.
Edited by AJS- on Wednesday 17th June 08:36
968 said:
My pay is a matter of public record, don't accuse me of telling lies, you still haven't apologised for your previous outburst.
My pay is £77k per year approx before tax including additional hours pay and banding.
http://m.bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/pay-...
Not that this has anything to do with the thread but if that is a consultant's only income, it does not seem so much for the level of training, knowledge and responsibility involved. The GP scale is higher, is it not?My pay is £77k per year approx before tax including additional hours pay and banding.
http://m.bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/pay-...
However (and don't jump down my throat if this doesn't apply to you) I thought there was huge amount of private work by NHS consultants that boosts income.
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
NicD said:
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
The point is why should this not be something to discuss when it has a much greater impact on NHS expenditure than foreign nationals.How do you change this failure to attend behaviour? Some will be for a genuine reason many won't. My dentist has a sign up that NHS patients who miss two appointments without 24hr notice of a cancellation will get de-listed (or something I can't remember the wording). Presumably private patients who miss an appointment without 24hr notice have to pay up for the treatment they would have received. If this is a major cause of wasted expenditure there should be something done to address it.
NicD said:
Not that this has anything to do with the thread but if that is a consultant's only income, it does not seem so much for the level of training, knowledge and responsibility involved. The GP scale is higher, is it not?
However (and don't jump down my throat if this doesn't apply to you) I thought there was huge amount of private work by NHS consultants that boosts income.
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
Arguably we should be paid more but I'm not complaint about my pay. With regards to private work, there isn't 'huge amounts' and anything private work is done on weekends and evenings ie in free time. As I'm contracted to work a whole week for the NHS and weekends on call, opportunities are limited. Also it is dependent on speciality, in my area (eyes) there is a reasonable amount of private work, whereas orthopaedics there's a lot but paediatrics there's very little indeed. Working my balls off doing an additional 1.5 days in a week (evening working and Saturdays) earned me an additional 35k last year.However (and don't jump down my throat if this doesn't apply to you) I thought there was huge amount of private work by NHS consultants that boosts income.
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
However this is all a red herring because the real issue is that the scale of waste in the NHS dwarfs any expenditure on foreign nationals providing hiv treatment or TB, many times over. The continuing fixation on these areas is bizarre. It's because they are an easy target. However, in getting so irate about that issue fails to address much worse health economy issues here like no attendance of appointments or smoking/obesity related illness. But hey let's pick on a few thousand people with hiv rather than millions who are obese or fail to attend appointments?
968 said:
However this is all a red herring because the real issue is that the scale of waste in the NHS dwarfs any expenditure on foreign nationals providing hiv treatment or TB, many times over. The continuing fixation on these areas is bizarre. It's because they are an easy target. However, in getting so irate about that issue fails to address much worse health economy issues here like no attendance of appointments or smoking/obesity related illness. But hey let's pick on a few thousand people with hiv rather than millions who are obese or fail to attend appointments?
But is that not missing the point of why the NHS was set up?If you look on it as an insurance type system, you pay in and if you need treatment it is there for you, should people who have not contributed be allowed to claim, yes I know we have a lot of people in the UK who are not contributing but is there any reason to make the costs even higher, your point about waste in the NHS is valid, my wife worked for them and regularly came in from work complaining about it, but why cannot the waste be looked at along with health tourism ? After all both are costs that could be reduced.
Greg66 said:
I'd love to know what goes inside your head, because it's nothing like normal people.
The second article you cited says:
"Mabanda admitted a charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm on the unnamed woman, who lived in the Walsall area.
He had unprotected sex with her despite knowing he was infected with the virus, Wolverhampton Crown Court heard.
The full extent of Mabanda's actions and their consequences have not yet been made public despite the defendant making numerous appearances in court since he was first charged in 2009.
Although the charge is rare, there have been several high-profile cases of someone passing on the virus without informing their partner's of their condition. Among them is Sarah Jane Porter, a receptionist from an upmarket hair salon in London."
She's being referred to an a comparative example. Not the victim. And she's named, unlike the victim. And doesn't live in Walsall, where the victim does.
As for him, the best I can find is here: http://roguesgallery666.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/blo...
that he "tested positive for HIV shortly after moving here with his wife".
So the material suggests:
- he could have acquired HIV in Zimbabwe, or here (eg from a prostitute)
- she is not his victim
- she - a non-immigrant white woman - has infected some men with HIV.
Your thought process:
- she got HIV from a black
- he's black and had HIV
- therefore she got it from him (all blacks are the same)
- he brought HIV into our country
- he's the reason she infected lots of men (blacks destroy the minds of our otherwise sane white women).
You are, you realise, quite mad. And severely prejudiced in many unpleasant ways.
The second article you cited says:
"Mabanda admitted a charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm on the unnamed woman, who lived in the Walsall area.
He had unprotected sex with her despite knowing he was infected with the virus, Wolverhampton Crown Court heard.
The full extent of Mabanda's actions and their consequences have not yet been made public despite the defendant making numerous appearances in court since he was first charged in 2009.
Although the charge is rare, there have been several high-profile cases of someone passing on the virus without informing their partner's of their condition. Among them is Sarah Jane Porter, a receptionist from an upmarket hair salon in London."
She's being referred to an a comparative example. Not the victim. And she's named, unlike the victim. And doesn't live in Walsall, where the victim does.
As for him, the best I can find is here: http://roguesgallery666.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/blo...
that he "tested positive for HIV shortly after moving here with his wife".
So the material suggests:
- he could have acquired HIV in Zimbabwe, or here (eg from a prostitute)
- she is not his victim
- she - a non-immigrant white woman - has infected some men with HIV.
Your thought process:
- she got HIV from a black
- he's black and had HIV
- therefore she got it from him (all blacks are the same)
- he brought HIV into our country
- he's the reason she infected lots of men (blacks destroy the minds of our otherwise sane white women).
You are, you realise, quite mad. And severely prejudiced in many unpleasant ways.
968 said:
However this is all a red herring because the real issue is that the scale of waste in the NHS dwarfs any expenditure on foreign nationals providing hiv treatment or TB, many times over. The continuing fixation on these areas is bizarre. It's because they are an easy target. However, in getting so irate about that issue fails to address much worse health economy issues here like no attendance of appointments or smoking/obesity related illness. But hey let's pick on a few thousand people with hiv rather than millions who are obese or fail to attend appointments?
I don't think any one issue is going to solve all the problems of the NHS. The point about giving free treatment to foreign HIV sufferers is more one of principle, to me anyway. It's also broader than the NHS because what he suggested wasn't actually a change to the way we run the health service so much as better controlling who we admit into the country in the first place.AJS- said:
I don't think any one issue is going to solve all the problems of the NHS. The point about giving free treatment to foreign HIV sufferers is more one of principle, to me anyway. It's also broader than the NHS because what he suggested wasn't actually a change to the way we run the health service so much as better controlling who we admit into the country in the first place.
Perhaps, but it is rather ignoring the mammoth in the room whilst concentrating on the ant on the floor. If Farage was truly bothered about the NHS or public expenditure for that matter, he'd identify that the colossal waste that is incurred because of missed appointments requires addressing. Of course, it wouldn't be politically expedient to suggest charging patients who missed appointments, so he won't say it and neither will anyone else. However, picking on a very small minority of foreigners is an easy target, but misses the point massively and frustratingly for people who work within the NHS.Guam said:
I for one would wholly support a charge for a missed appointment, as a regular heavy user it pisses me off no end, that these resources are wasted in this way!
Agreed and in a broader point, I think the debate about the NHS works/funds itself needs to be more open and mature, because currently there is no possibility of this. What annoys me is the fixation on very minor issues, which are easy targets because they happen to be immigrants, rather than the massive fundamental problems which exist. 968 said:
Perhaps, but it is rather ignoring the mammoth in the room whilst concentrating on the ant on the floor. If Farage was truly bothered about the NHS or public expenditure for that matter, he'd identify that the colossal waste that is incurred because of missed appointments requires addressing. Of course, it wouldn't be politically expedient to suggest charging patients who missed appointments, so he won't say it and neither will anyone else. However, picking on a very small minority of foreigners is an easy target, but misses the point massively and frustratingly for people who work within the NHS.
I think every major party at every election in my lifetime has promised to tackle "waste" in the NHS and indeed the whole of the public sector. It's an ongoing battle. But I don't think Farage was saying this was his key to saving the NHS so much as one example of waste, however small they do add up, which could be tackled through a sensible immigration policy.968 said:
Agreed and in a broader point, I think the debate about the NHS works/funds itself needs to be more open and mature, because currently there is no possibility of this. What annoys me is the fixation on very minor issues, which are easy targets because they happen to be immigrants, rather than the massive fundamental problems which exist.
You are right on the figures and the scale, but I would add a couple of other points. The waste in running the NHS is always going to be there and always has been. It's a monster and whatever you do you will always be chasing waste in the system. Regarding people using the NHS who shouldn't be, this should be a simple step to at least limit the numbers on the NHS while working to improve efficiency, it's not one or the other.
A politician saying the NHS should be more efficient and chase wasteful operating is a bit of a given really. If there is a disproportionate focus on immigrants, then there is also a disproportionate reaction to any mention of removing people who have or should have no right to use it.
If I were running any business, alongside of looking at the large scale efficiency savings that would be forever ongoing, I would be looking to limit those using it with no entitlement and capping the numbers and loss as containment. Why would you not do that or pretend it's one of the other and why focus on this first when there is no reason you couldn't do efficiency savings and this alongside each other ?
If you wanted to be critical of Ukip and say there focus is wrong, I think you'd do better to highlight the political areas of the NHS waste where politicians need to be brave and take tough decisions. But given when they mentioned that maybe in the future that we may have to look at some kinda insurance based scheme and got massive flack for it, I'm not hopeful anyone is going to talk a lot of sense on the NHS as it's always sainted as a sacred cow and national institution, but just one that's always in crisis and riddled with massive inefficiency.
You seem far better placed than I to comment, so what would you say are the top 5 political parts of the NHS politicians should be talking about ?
968 said:
Guam said:
I for one would wholly support a charge for a missed appointment, as a regular heavy user it pisses me off no end, that these resources are wasted in this way!
Agreed and in a broader point, I think the debate about the NHS works/funds itself needs to be more open and mature, because currently there is no possibility of this. What annoys me is the fixation on very minor issues, which are easy targets because they happen to be immigrants, rather than the massive fundamental problems which exist. 968 said:
Agreed and in a broader point, I think the debate about the NHS works/funds itself needs to be more open and mature, because currently there is no possibility of this. What annoys me is the fixation on very minor issues, which are easy targets because they happen to be immigrants, rather than the massive fundamental problems which exist.
Just because something annoys you, this doesn't make your view any more important than any other.I get (very) annoyed about the same things as you, and in addition, the undeserving immigrant thing.
Any 'free' system will be abused unless the participants are mature and trustworthy, so that rules out most.
I have given up any notion that my ideas of fairness will be translated into action but I support those who articulate it.
NicD said:
Just because something annoys you, this doesn't make your view any more important than any other.
I get (very) annoyed about the same things as you, and in addition, the undeserving immigrant thing.
Any 'free' system will be abused unless the participants are mature and trustworthy, so that rules out most.
I have given up any notion that my ideas of fairness will be translated into action but I support those who articulate it.
No everyone is entitled to their view but this is a case of arguing about the number of deckchairs on the titanic whilst it sinks. I get (very) annoyed about the same things as you, and in addition, the undeserving immigrant thing.
Any 'free' system will be abused unless the participants are mature and trustworthy, so that rules out most.
I have given up any notion that my ideas of fairness will be translated into action but I support those who articulate it.
The numbers of patients with HIV who are foreigners seeking treatment is minute compared to other issues. Why fixate on this and not the others? Is it because they are foreigners and therefore fair game? Your sense of injustice is commendable however incredibly misplaced as you seem less bothered about much greater injustice that have a massive impact on NHS funding.
I've seen quite a few patients with HIV in my clinics, some are foreign nationals though a minority and all of them work and having treatment enables them to maintain jobs, some are professionals. All are tax payers. Making them able to contribute, I think that's a good thing but is my opinion of course.
It's perhaps worth pointing out amongst this that in Australia, a diagnosis with HIV does no preclude you from getting a visa. You have to prove you won't put particular strain on local health resource and don't pose a public health danger but a diagnosis in itself wouldn't stop you. How it works in practice I don't know.
The US used to have entry controls on those with HIV but abandoned that in 2010.
Also-in the UK although there were 6-7,000 new people diagnosed with HIV, only 4,000 more people were receiving treatment. Again I'm not sure how this works in practice-whether people go private, or without-but there aren't 7,000 more people accessing treatment each year.
The US used to have entry controls on those with HIV but abandoned that in 2010.
Also-in the UK although there were 6-7,000 new people diagnosed with HIV, only 4,000 more people were receiving treatment. Again I'm not sure how this works in practice-whether people go private, or without-but there aren't 7,000 more people accessing treatment each year.
968 said:
don4l said:
You only get paid £62,400 a year?
I don't believe it.
Tell us the truth.
My pay is a matter of public record, don't accuse me of telling lies, you still haven't apologised for your previous outburst.I don't believe it.
Tell us the truth.
My pay is £77k per year approx before tax including additional hours pay and banding.
http://m.bma.org.uk/practical-support-at-work/pay-...
May I ask if £77K is your total income... or do you manage to earn some extra on top of this?
968 said:
...I usually have at least 30% of patients not turn up for their appointments. Those appointments cost the NHS £120, that adds up to around £5000 per week wasted. Multiply that for the numbers of weeks worked and it's around £200k per year. That is for 1 clinician. This is the average rate of non-attendence for most clinicians (I believe) if you multiply that nationally, you'll begin to see where the money is disappearing...
Apologies for the selective quoting & off-topic question. I wondered how well setup we are to deal with non-attendance? Can you plan for it with reasonable certainty so that the whole booking isn't wasted? I ask because I wonder how difficult it would be to actually realise any savings if everyone did turn up for appointments, could we have fewer staff, less equipment and smaller premises?Slightly more on-topic, my mother-in-law is a non-EU foreign national, last time she was here on holiday she ran out of some drugs that needed a prescription and paid £30 for a 10 minute NHS GP appointment. It was all very easy, the receptionist immediately knew what to do when I phoned and I paid on my debit card over the phone when making the appointment. Drugs then at retail price from the pharmacy. I presumed this is how it worked for all non-emergency treatment where the patient is not a UK resident or from a reciprocal country?
968 said:
NicD said:
Not that this has anything to do with the thread but if that is a consultant's only income, it does not seem so much for the level of training, knowledge and responsibility involved. The GP scale is higher, is it not?
However (and don't jump down my throat if this doesn't apply to you) I thought there was huge amount of private work by NHS consultants that boosts income.
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
Arguably we should be paid more but I'm not complaint about my pay. With regards to private work, there isn't 'huge amounts' and anything private work is done on weekends and evenings ie in free time. As I'm contracted to work a whole week for the NHS and weekends on call, opportunities are limited. Also it is dependent on speciality, in my area (eyes) there is a reasonable amount of private work, whereas orthopaedics there's a lot but paediatrics there's very little indeed. Working my balls off doing an additional 1.5 days in a week (evening working and Saturdays) earned me an additional 35k last year.However (and don't jump down my throat if this doesn't apply to you) I thought there was huge amount of private work by NHS consultants that boosts income.
Of course, the costly issue of so many customers not turning up for 'free' appointments has no bearing on whether we should be offering free treatment to all those who arrive on our shores. And yes, I know there is the theory that some are supposed to be charged.
grantone said:
Apologies for the selective quoting & off-topic question. I wondered how well setup we are to deal with non-attendance? Can you plan for it with reasonable certainty so that the whole booking isn't wasted? I ask because I wonder how difficult it would be to actually realise any savings if everyone did turn up for appointments, could we have fewer staff, less equipment and smaller premises?
Slightly more on-topic, my mother-in-law is a non-EU foreign national, last time she was here on holiday she ran out of some drugs that needed a prescription and paid £30 for a 10 minute NHS GP appointment. It was all very easy, the receptionist immediately knew what to do when I phoned and I paid on my debit card over the phone when making the appointment. Drugs then at retail price from the pharmacy. I presumed this is how it worked for all non-emergency treatment where the patient is not a UK resident or from a reciprocal country?
It's an interesting question. We aren't set up at all to deal with last minute DNAs (non-attendance). Indeed the rudimentary way clinics are booked is that they are overfilled usually as there is often non-attendence, though when everyone does turn up, it's very busy! I think the possibility of reducing staff/equipment is not possible due, mainly due to the inertia of the organisation, but also the unpredictability of patient non-attendence. Slightly more on-topic, my mother-in-law is a non-EU foreign national, last time she was here on holiday she ran out of some drugs that needed a prescription and paid £30 for a 10 minute NHS GP appointment. It was all very easy, the receptionist immediately knew what to do when I phoned and I paid on my debit card over the phone when making the appointment. Drugs then at retail price from the pharmacy. I presumed this is how it worked for all non-emergency treatment where the patient is not a UK resident or from a reciprocal country?
My experience of non-reciprocal country patients is that they are billed for their visits and treatment. This has happened every time I have seen such a patient. I am sure, however, that some staff don't realise they are required to get management to bill the patient, but in my (anecdotal) experience, each non-reciprocal patient is billed and they don't make a fuss.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff