UKIP - The Future - Volume 3

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

TKF

6,232 posts

234 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
From June


brenflys777

2,678 posts

176 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
TKF said:
From June

I'd agree with every point he makes there. If accurate, the 2nd largest employer should send some alarm bells off, the number of managers per frontline staff is too high, there is a clear need for change but it is a 'sacred cow'. The current UKIP policy seems to be to try and rescue the NHS and I also agree with that. If population increase and wasteful excess are not capped the NHS will fail, and it will be because of the Conservatives and Labours policy of kicking the can down the road with PFI.

Glad you posted that, dammed good advert for UKIPs deputy IMO.

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
TKF said:
From June

Fascinating, isn't it? Because in January 2015 he now says the NHS should be 'free at the point of use and in public hands'.

http://youtu.be/OByC6aqWgDo

Quite a turnaround in 6 months.

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
brenflys777 said:
I'd agree with every point he makes there. If accurate, the 2nd largest employer should send some alarm bells off, the number of managers per frontline staff is too high, there is a clear need for change but it is a 'sacred cow'. The current UKIP policy seems to be to try and rescue the NHS and I also agree with that. If population increase and wasteful excess are not capped the NHS will fail, and it will be because of the Conservatives and Labours policy of kicking the can down the road with PFI.

Glad you posted that, dammed good advert for UKIPs deputy IMO.
It's such a damned good advert that he appears to have removed that poat from his website as it entirely contradicts UKIPs latest position on the NHS.

JustAnotherLogin

1,127 posts

120 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
And that is my point. I wish any of the major (or significant minor) parties would present a coherent plan for what we should do with the NHS. I know 968 is a doctor (or something in the NHS), and I know there is usually none so resistant to change as those involved, so he may disagree. But the NHS as we have it now (or have had it in the recent past) is doomed to fail. Demand is rising exponentially, whilst available funds are rising geometrically (at best).

At the moment all the parties are kicking the can down the road. I would actually have more respect for UKIP if they did present a coherent policy to address this problem. However the one policy they did have they seem to have shoved under their seat and pretended it never existed. At least 2 Kippers on here are trying to deny there has been a policy change, if indeed their ever was a policy, or is one now, or whether 1=2.

A nettle too painful to grasp, but rarely one that needed grasping so much

brenflys777

2,678 posts

176 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
968 said:
It's such a damned good advert that he appears to have removed that poat from his website as it entirely contradicts UKIPs latest position on the NHS.
Does it entirely contradict the UKIP position? I don't think it does. It was certainly misrepresented though. He congratulated them (Cons and Labour) for introducing a 'whiff of privatisation' - how you interpret that is debatable. I think the UKIP position on the PFI contracts that Labour and the Cons have supported has always been negative, but that using outside private contractors helps to reduce cost. That seems consistent with free at point of delivery and publicly owned.

I could be wrong but rather than show inconsistencies, that seems like an indication of trying to debate what we do about fixing the NHS. It was probably naive to talk so bluntly whilst Labour and the Conservatives continue to PFI the NHS and use private contractors whilst publicly claiming to be its protectors!

I'm not a particular fan of Paul Nuttall, and it might be you are right and this was his own viewpoint and not a considered party one, but I don't find anything disagreeable about what he said in that statement.

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
brenflys777 said:
Does it entirely contradict the UKIP position? I don't think it does. It was certainly misrepresented though. He congratulated them (Cons and Labour) for introducing a 'whiff of privatisation' - how you interpret that is debatable. I think the UKIP position on the PFI contracts that Labour and the Cons have supported has always been negative, but that using outside private contractors helps to reduce cost. That seems consistent with free at point of delivery and publicly owned.

I could be wrong but rather than show inconsistencies, that seems like an indication of trying to debate what we do about fixing the NHS. It was probably naive to talk so bluntly whilst Labour and the Conservatives continue to PFI the NHS and use private contractors whilst publicly claiming to be its protectors!

I'm not a particular fan of Paul Nuttall, and it might be you are right and this was his own viewpoint and not a considered party one, but I don't find anything disagreeable about what he said in that statement.
If it's so agreeable, why has he taken it down? He's done so because ukip have targeted labour votes and any mention or even whiff of privatisation is contrary to that.

He said "in public hands". That is a complete contradiction to that letter which suggests public hands reduces competition and delivers a second rate service.

My thoughts on the NHS are not what you'd expect at all but this shows the opportunistic politics of ukip.

don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
s2art said:
Just for clarification, was Farage talking about number per year or total numbers after several years?
As far as I can see, farage didn't specify any numbers at all. He passed comment on Migrationwatch predictions, but didn't disagree with them.

They predicted 250,000 over five years.

We have had about 50,000 in the first year.

don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
968 said:
TKF said:
From June

Fascinating, isn't it? Because in January 2015 he now says the NHS should be 'free at the point of use and in public hands'.

http://youtu.be/OByC6aqWgDo

Quite a turnaround in 6 months.
What on Earth are you smoking?

There is no "turnaround".

He never said that the NHS shouldn't be free at the point of delivery.

All bodies that are in "public hands" utilise the private sector.

My company is a private limited company. We do loads of work for the MOD, and have done for 22 years. Does this mean that the MOD has been privatised?







TKF

6,232 posts

234 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
None so blinkered as a purple kipper.

Any thoughts on why he removed it from the website?

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
don4l said:
What on Earth are you smoking?

There is no "turnaround".

He never said that the NHS shouldn't be free at the point of delivery.

All bodies that are in "public hands" utilise the private sector.

My company is a private limited company. We do loads of work for the MOD, and have done for 22 years. Does this mean that the MOD has been privatised?
Obviously I'm smoking whatever Nuttall was when he removed that post from his site. I wonder why?

don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
968 said:
don4l said:
What on Earth are you smoking?

There is no "turnaround".

He never said that the NHS shouldn't be free at the point of delivery.

All bodies that are in "public hands" utilise the private sector.

My company is a private limited company. We do loads of work for the MOD, and have done for 22 years. Does this mean that the MOD has been privatised?
Obviously I'm smoking whatever Nuttall was when he removed that post from his site. I wonder why?
Did he say that the NHS should not be free at the point of delivery?

If he did, then provide some evidence.

Otherwise, stop making baseless allegations.



don4l

10,058 posts

175 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
JustAnotherLogin said:
don4l said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
don4l said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
Now you have lost me.

You asserted that UKIP has only ever had one policy on the NHS
I pointed out that in 2010 the UKIP policy included privatisation
You suggest that is still UKIP policy
I pointed out that it is nowhere in the UKIP policy documents

Are you suggesting that privatisation is or is not current UKIP policy? Can you do a straight yes no answer to a simple question?
Because your last response looks like that of someone who has been caught talking crap and is trying to bluff their way out with twaddle
I'm not aware of UKIP's policy on privatisation within the NHS. As long as it is free at the point of delivery, then it really doesn't matter very much.

You think that you have discovered a major change in UKIP's policy. You probably also believe that you have furnished us with evidence to back up your position. However, "Cognitative Bias" means that you can see that you are right, while we don't see any evidence at all (our cognitive bias??).

If you want to demonstrate that UKIP's stance has undergone a substantial shift, then you need to provide irrefutable evidence. Your failure to do this, despite repeated invitations, suggests to me that you are talking ste.

Furthermore, do you really think that a party should never change its policy on any subject?

Your beloved Labour believed in nationalising all major industries in the 1970's. Under Tony Blair they privatised loads of industries, including most of Britain's military research.

Your equally beloved Conservatives believed in increasing Police spending in the 1980's, and yet they made substantial cuts in the last five years.

Were Labour and the Conservatives any less deserving of office because they changed their minds?

So, prove to us that UKIP have changed their policy... and then tell us why this would be a bad thing.

Alternatively, you could do what I expect you to do... you could ignore this post.
Well the UKIP 2010 manifesto section 6 states

Encourage County Health Boards to put out
to tender key NHS services ranging from Long
Term Care to local hospitals and GP surgeries.
This will be done by franchising key services
- run on a fixed budget - to charitable associations,
not-for-profit and profit-making private
companies, partnerships and individuals. This
will bring in private sector efficiency and innovation,
while fixed assets, responsibility and
direction remain firmly in public hands

You say that you are not aware of UKIP proposing privatisation of the NHS. Nor am I. That seems a significant change from 2010. [b]Is that a problem? No. I never said it was[b]. I just said Scuffers statement was untrue. Something that he and you seem to be going all around the houses to avoid admitting
You still haven't told us what has changed.

You have told us what they said in 2010, but you haven't told us how they have contradicted this recently. Furthermore, You have failed to explain why a party should not allow its policies to evolve with time.

Your viewpoint is not only unsubstantiated, it is also foolish.

All major parties reassess their policies on a continuous basis.
Has it changed? Well that is what I am asking, certainly any mention of it is gone from the UKIP "policies for people" website" and the "100 reasons to vote UKIP" page

Should they not evolve? Do you want to look at the bit I've highlighted in bold from my post that you've quoted. I'd say for the 3rd time that its not an issue, but you would probably still be incapable of parsing and understanding it.

You may want to read the bit after that too. Are you in some way scared to admit what UKIP policy on the NHS is? Or was?
I cannot see any bit that you have highlighted.

UKIP policy on the NHS is that it should be free at the point of delivery.

They are having discussions about how this can be best achieved.

What is it that you disapprove of?

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
don4l said:
Did he say that the NHS should not be free at the point of delivery?

If he did, then provide some evidence.

Otherwise, stop making baseless allegations.
Laughable. Any criticism are baseless allegations. So why did he remove that letter?

brenflys777

2,678 posts

176 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
968 said:
If it's so agreeable, why has he taken it down? He's done so because ukip have targeted labour votes and any mention or even whiff of privatisation is contrary to that.

He said "in public hands". That is a complete contradiction to that letter which suggests public hands reduces competition and delivers a second rate service.

My thoughts on the NHS are not what you'd expect at all but this shows the opportunistic politics of ukip.
I'd say he's probably taken it down because it was being misrepresented.

The Middleton by election was Labour won by 600 votes, with the NHS being a big factor. I grew up there, my mum died of MRSA in North Manchester General and having an NHS with appropriate resources and methods is a big issue for me. The UKIP policy was grossly misrepresented by Labour in that election, several relatives of mine gave the NHS as the reason they continued to vote Labour... The NHS is a sacred cow at the moment and produces a cow like expulsion of gas whenever anyone tries to talk about significant change.

Nuttall mentioned that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition and like all monopolies results in a poorer product. None of those opinions are IMO incompatible with the UKIP policy of trying to keep a free at point of service NHS and one where the NHS itself is publicly owned.

I don't think this is inconsistent, but unfortunately Labour and the Conservatives can do serious harm to UKIP in the North by misrepresenting policy. I think that's why the simpler, extra funding, publicly owned NHS rhetoric from UKIP has appeared to clearly show the intention to keep it. The debate on how it's achieved will have to wait until the public/politicians are prepared for grown up debate without the petty points scoring that often appears on PH as well as the campaigns. IMO.


JustAnotherLogin

1,127 posts

120 months

Monday 2nd February 2015
quotequote all
don4l said:
I cannot see any bit that you have highlighted.

UKIP policy on the NHS is that it should be free at the point of delivery.

They are having discussions about how this can be best achieved.

What is it that you disapprove of?
Apologies, missed the "/", try below

JustAnotherLogin said:
You say that you are not aware of UKIP proposing privatisation of the NHS. Nor am I. That seems a significant change from 2010. Is that a problem? No. I never said it was. I just said Scuffers statement was untrue. Something that he and you seem to be going all around the houses to avoid admitting
Has it changed? That is what I am asking. Certainly nothing close to that manifesto commitment in the UK policies for people or 100 reasons to vote UKIP web pages.

So is that (putting UKIP policy or not?

To save you another round of avoidance whilst you query what "that" is, here is the extract from the 2010 manifestio, again

Encourage County Health Boards to put out
to tender key NHS services ranging from Long
Term Care to local hospitals and GP surgeries.
This will be done by franchising key services
- run on a fixed budget - to charitable associations,
not-for-profit and profit-making private
companies, partnerships and individuals. This
will bring in private sector efficiency and innovation,
while fixed assets, responsibility and
direction remain firmly in public hands

Is that current UKIP policy?

zygalski

7,759 posts

144 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2015
quotequote all
968 said:
TKF said:
From June

Fascinating, isn't it? Because in January 2015 he now says the NHS should be 'free at the point of use and in public hands'.

http://youtu.be/OByC6aqWgDo

Quite a turnaround in 6 months.
You sure know what you're getting when you follow the cat herder.

FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2015
quotequote all
brenflys777 said:

The debate on how it's achieved will have to wait until the public/politicians are prepared for grown up debate without the petty points scoring that often appears on PH as well as the campaigns. IMO.

Abso-bloody-lutely spot on.

Pointless posturing beyond parody at times. At least the people on here are doing it for free. For the same level of attrition loop bickering for which politicians have over the years arranged themselves quite generous remuneration in comparison to the lack of worth provided by the majority.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

273 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2015
quotequote all
Yup, well said.

Being free at the point of delivery is irrelevant to the discussion about privatisation.

(Please not i am not suggesting this is UKIP or anybody else's policy)

How the NHS is funded is something that needs to be looked at, we as a country cannot carry on the way we have, its simply affordable.

Its a shame the privately run (and cooperative model) was sabotaged, as it appeared to have been working well with good patient feedback etc.

Now suggesting all of the NHS could be run like this, but it was a good stab at another model.

FiF

43,960 posts

250 months

Tuesday 3rd February 2015
quotequote all
The NHS debate is another in the series where UKIP asked, or at least tried to ask, awkward questions that need to be asked and debated in honest fashion.

On the NHS they've been brow beaten into conforming such is the huge guff of hot air and invective that farts out as soon as anyone questions whether more and more of the same is the answer.

Bit like the debate about the EU and ever greater integration. X isn't working, so the answer must be greater integration and unity. Later but X still isn't working, more unity, that's the answer.

Clearly some of UKIP proposals are, like all parties, of the don't agree with that, or the not sure how that would work in practise categories.

It just seems that the tribalists are completely unable to think anything beyond, my lot says y, their lot says z. Stupid z.

Tribalism has been partly to blame for us being where we are. Public is splitting and saying we don't like your two tribes anymore. The two tribes don't like it sticking up them but don't have answers. Well get out then.
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED