Junior Doctor's contracts petition
Discussion
VolvoT5 said:
Health cost inflation greater than standard rate of inflation, an ageing (but not healthier) population plus expensive reorganisations means effectively real cuts. Even the government reckon 22bn 'efficiency savings' are required to make their figures work..... 22bn is total fantasy. They are slowly starving the NHS of cash and when it all falls down they will throw their hands up in the air and argue it is 'proof' the NHS is 'unfit for purpose'.
So increasing funding counts as 'aggressive cuts'? Really?!'Starving the NHS of cash'
If only we hadn't borrowed so much in the past and weren't paying £50n in interest alone.
Given a £90bn deficit, where do you think that ever increasing NHS funding will come from?
williamp said:
The BMA dont like to admit it, but they are a trade union. Just like unite, unison etc . Alaigned with Comrade Corbyn
Being a trade union doesn't necessarily make them wrong..... and doctors are not exactly known as a trouble making group that like to go on demos and strikes at the drop of a hat are they? They are generally hard working middle class folk that have a huge amount of responsibility on their shoulders. sidicks said:
jjlynn27 said:
So with waiting times targets being missed mostly due to lack of staff, and one of the lowest costs per capita, you think that solution is to cut it back aggressively?
In what world is increasing funding above the rate of inflation equal to 'aggressive cutbacks' ??
Stevanos said:
IanA2 said:
There are 1.3 M folks employed by the NHS. Individual negotiations might eat up a fair bit of time.
But doctors are quite senior? They seriously don't have the option to negotiate their contracts on their own?all Health Professionals are what might be seen as 'Senior' in ordinary business ( excepot other professional services businesses)...
sidicks said:
Given a £90bn deficit, where do you think that ever increasing NHS funding will come from?
Well I believe we already have an efficient health service, not perfect but good value for what we pay and what we get. Cost of healthcare is not predicted to go down any time soon.......... So if we want to maintain a comprehensive free at the point of use system we will inevitably have to increase in taxation one way or another. Either that or just euthanise everyone over 75?
VolvoT5 said:
Well I believe we already have an efficient health service, not perfect but good value for what we pay and what we get. Cost of healthcare is not predicted to go down any time soon.......... So if we want to maintain a comprehensive free at the point of use system we will inevitably have to increase in taxation one way or another.
Either that or just euthanise everyone over 75?
I think there is massive scope for saving, both in terms of efficiencies and simply in re-definng what the NHS should and should not provide.Either that or just euthanise everyone over 75?
sidicks said:
I think there is massive scope for saving, both in terms of efficiencies and simply in re-definng what the NHS should and should not provide.
We spent below average per head of population for heath care compared to other similar countries..... less than half of USA..... and yet you still believe there is 'massive scope for saving', really? Sure there is room for cutting out questionable services like homeopathy and boob jobs... but that is saving pennies really. The other problem is you start cutting services in one area and it dumps work onto another part of the system, for example cuts in social care services result in grannies bed blocking in hospital.
The idea that there is a huge amount of waste just waiting to be cut is fantasy IMO.
VolvoT5 said:
We spent below average per head of population for heath care compared to other similar countries..... less than half of USA..... and yet you still believe there is 'massive scope for saving', really?
Sure there is room for cutting out questionable services like homeopathy and boob jobs... but that is saving pennies really. The other problem is you start cutting services in one area and it dumps work onto another part of the system, for example cuts in social care services result in grannies bed blocking in hospital.
The idea that there is a huge amount of waste just waiting to be cut is fantasy IMO.
You are obviously wrong. JH is right, more money for homeopathy and alternative medicine, to hell with those uneducated quacks calling themselves doctors. This is the guy giving him advice on how to prioritize spending on NHS;Sure there is room for cutting out questionable services like homeopathy and boob jobs... but that is saving pennies really. The other problem is you start cutting services in one area and it dumps work onto another part of the system, for example cuts in social care services result in grannies bed blocking in hospital.
The idea that there is a huge amount of waste just waiting to be cut is fantasy IMO.
Conservative MP David Tredinnick said:
DT criticised the BBC and TV scientist Professor Brian Cox for taking a “dismissive” approach to astrology, and accused opponents of being “racially prejudiced”.
The MP for Bosworth, in Leicestershire, who is a Capricorn and in 2010 paid back £755 he had claimed in expenses for software that used astrology to diagnose medical conditions, told Astrological Journal: “I do believe that astrology and complementary medicine would help take the huge pressure off doctors.
“Ninety per cent of pregnant French women use homeopathy. Astrology is a useful diagnostic tool enabling us to see strengths and weaknesses via the birth chart."
I did vote Cons as I do believe that they are better than the other bunch of muppets. And local MP is ok. The MP for Bosworth, in Leicestershire, who is a Capricorn and in 2010 paid back £755 he had claimed in expenses for software that used astrology to diagnose medical conditions, told Astrological Journal: “I do believe that astrology and complementary medicine would help take the huge pressure off doctors.
“Ninety per cent of pregnant French women use homeopathy. Astrology is a useful diagnostic tool enabling us to see strengths and weaknesses via the birth chart."
VolvoT5 said:
We spent below average per head of population for heath care compared to other similar countries..... less than half of USA..... and yet you still believe there is 'massive scope for saving', really?
Sure there is room for cutting out questionable services like homeopathy and boob jobs... but that is saving pennies really. The other problem is you start cutting services in one area and it dumps work onto another part of the system, for example cuts in social care services result in grannies bed blocking in hospital.
The idea that there is a huge amount of waste just waiting to be cut is fantasy IMO.
Fair enough, in which case in what areas do we spend so much more than average, leading to our massive deficit? Which of those areas are you proposing to cut?Sure there is room for cutting out questionable services like homeopathy and boob jobs... but that is saving pennies really. The other problem is you start cutting services in one area and it dumps work onto another part of the system, for example cuts in social care services result in grannies bed blocking in hospital.
The idea that there is a huge amount of waste just waiting to be cut is fantasy IMO.
I don't know much about NHS finances, but do know that by protecting Health, Education and Pensions, headline national levels of cuts that seem "OK" become pretty punative when applied to a smaller block of government departments - approx. 10% p.a. reductions.
I also know that areas that do have financial protection (ok: relative protection) tend to have a lot of inertia in how they operate, as they've lacked the stimulus to really review things.
Relative protection: yes, there are real term cuts, but I'd hardly term these as aggresive cut backs. But nor would I say Hunt is trying to "shut the NHS down" or that the Doctor's union is in bed with Comrade Corbyn. As usual, the lazy soundbites are easier to trot out than actually understanding the issue.
Other observations:
Private Finance Initiave - awarding a small bit of a public service typically needing investment to be provided by the private sector after a business case has determined it will be better value. It was designed to get much needed public sector investment off the government's balance sheet to massage fiscal rules. (The method no longer works due to new accounting standards, and those rules are pretty irrelevant now anyway).
Privatisation - transferring an entire service out of public control into private ownership.
They're different, apart from both starting with the letters "Privat". I think people might be mixing "oustsourcing" up with either PFI or Privatisation, which is where a business case demonstrates a specific, defined service can be delivered at better value than the public sector.
Individually negotiating contracts? Are you mad? Who would that benefit? (unless you're an HR consultant looking for work?)
Jeremy Hunt greedy? It's not like he's going to be sitting in his parlour counting huge stacks of gold coins he's stolen from Junior doctors. He - like all other Ministers - is under intense pressure by the PM and Treasury to get spending down, in order to meet the governemnt's manifesto commitment on public spending. What is he going to say: "actually, no Gideon, you can ignore my department actually, as there's not a single thing we can do to save money."
Hardly. He'd just be replaced by someone who did say what the PM wants to hear.
Euthansia at 75..? Well, that's one way to get rid of the Lords.
As an Accountant, the country wants a better level of Health care than it wants to pay for (politically, that is). Health spending is already protected, and MPs fall over themselves to defend the entity that is the NHS.
I recall talk in the USA about "death panels" a few years ago, when Obama was trying to push medicare through (this role is being filled quite happily by the US insurance companies at present)
But who in the UK says "enough is enough" and decide prolonging the life of a 89 year old cancer sufferer is not the most effective way of using the health budget?
Whilst Dcotros have extensive knowledge about how the inside of people work, I do think they're not always the best people to make these judgements. Also, that as a country, we're happy just not talking about this part of the the NHS, and assuming that someone will be doing it properly somewhere. (Happy to be corrected on how this actually works in the UK)
My point is: Hunt has found a rare and precious thing: a "cost saving" vein, or fracture in the NHS (which allows him to whip money out of a service whilst on the face of things protecting it) regarding junior doctors' conditions, and he is going to pursue, follow, exploite, mine it for all its worth.
If there were other such cost saving veins the NHS could offer up themselves...then maybe he wouldn't have to go after this one so badly..?
Just sayin'
Ian
ps- I reckon the 2015-16 in-year over-spends are the symptom of unrealistic savings agreed to without any idea how to deliver them. I predict £2bn o/spend this year will climb in sucessive years in line with the £22bn efficiencies "agreed" to. So don't expect Junior Doctors to be the last large dispute by NHS staff and Government.
I also know that areas that do have financial protection (ok: relative protection) tend to have a lot of inertia in how they operate, as they've lacked the stimulus to really review things.
Relative protection: yes, there are real term cuts, but I'd hardly term these as aggresive cut backs. But nor would I say Hunt is trying to "shut the NHS down" or that the Doctor's union is in bed with Comrade Corbyn. As usual, the lazy soundbites are easier to trot out than actually understanding the issue.
Other observations:
Private Finance Initiave - awarding a small bit of a public service typically needing investment to be provided by the private sector after a business case has determined it will be better value. It was designed to get much needed public sector investment off the government's balance sheet to massage fiscal rules. (The method no longer works due to new accounting standards, and those rules are pretty irrelevant now anyway).
Privatisation - transferring an entire service out of public control into private ownership.
They're different, apart from both starting with the letters "Privat". I think people might be mixing "oustsourcing" up with either PFI or Privatisation, which is where a business case demonstrates a specific, defined service can be delivered at better value than the public sector.
Individually negotiating contracts? Are you mad? Who would that benefit? (unless you're an HR consultant looking for work?)
Jeremy Hunt greedy? It's not like he's going to be sitting in his parlour counting huge stacks of gold coins he's stolen from Junior doctors. He - like all other Ministers - is under intense pressure by the PM and Treasury to get spending down, in order to meet the governemnt's manifesto commitment on public spending. What is he going to say: "actually, no Gideon, you can ignore my department actually, as there's not a single thing we can do to save money."
Hardly. He'd just be replaced by someone who did say what the PM wants to hear.
Euthansia at 75..? Well, that's one way to get rid of the Lords.
As an Accountant, the country wants a better level of Health care than it wants to pay for (politically, that is). Health spending is already protected, and MPs fall over themselves to defend the entity that is the NHS.
I recall talk in the USA about "death panels" a few years ago, when Obama was trying to push medicare through (this role is being filled quite happily by the US insurance companies at present)
But who in the UK says "enough is enough" and decide prolonging the life of a 89 year old cancer sufferer is not the most effective way of using the health budget?
Whilst Dcotros have extensive knowledge about how the inside of people work, I do think they're not always the best people to make these judgements. Also, that as a country, we're happy just not talking about this part of the the NHS, and assuming that someone will be doing it properly somewhere. (Happy to be corrected on how this actually works in the UK)
My point is: Hunt has found a rare and precious thing: a "cost saving" vein, or fracture in the NHS (which allows him to whip money out of a service whilst on the face of things protecting it) regarding junior doctors' conditions, and he is going to pursue, follow, exploite, mine it for all its worth.
If there were other such cost saving veins the NHS could offer up themselves...then maybe he wouldn't have to go after this one so badly..?
Just sayin'
Ian
ps- I reckon the 2015-16 in-year over-spends are the symptom of unrealistic savings agreed to without any idea how to deliver them. I predict £2bn o/spend this year will climb in sucessive years in line with the £22bn efficiencies "agreed" to. So don't expect Junior Doctors to be the last large dispute by NHS staff and Government.
loafer123 said:
I do not know who is fibbing, but one side must be as the BMA allege more hours for less pay whilst the government say less hours for the same pay.
Which is it?
When I saw Hunt on TV earlier, followed by the Union? guy. I couldn't understand what the problem was. Now inevitably ministers are suspicious. But the Union guy didn't exactly help their corner.Which is it?
Loads of Hyperbole, but no facts.
Conservative MP David Tredinnick said:
DT criticised the BBC and TV scientist Professor Brian Cox for taking a “dismissive” approach to astrology, and accused opponents of being “racially prejudiced”.
The MP for Bosworth, in Leicestershire, who is a Capricorn and in 2010 paid back £755 he had claimed in expenses for software that used astrology to diagnose medical conditions, told Astrological Journal: “I do believe that astrology and complementary medicine would help take the huge pressure off doctors.
“Ninety per cent of pregnant French women use homeopathy. Astrology is a useful diagnostic tool enabling us to see strengths and weaknesses via the birth chart."
I just read the Wikipedia page on this guy. It makes me weep. He's on the Health Select Cttee and the Science and Technology Ctte. No science qualifications mentioned and dubious expense claim history. The MP for Bosworth, in Leicestershire, who is a Capricorn and in 2010 paid back £755 he had claimed in expenses for software that used astrology to diagnose medical conditions, told Astrological Journal: “I do believe that astrology and complementary medicine would help take the huge pressure off doctors.
“Ninety per cent of pregnant French women use homeopathy. Astrology is a useful diagnostic tool enabling us to see strengths and weaknesses via the birth chart."
Complete muppet.
sidicks said:
What % of NHS services are outsourced?
How has this changed under the current government?
What was in the Tory manifesto regarding NHS privatisation?
Oh I see. I thought you had something concrete.How has this changed under the current government?
What was in the Tory manifesto regarding NHS privatisation?
The way I see it is that the Govt are taking steps so that they can privatise certain areas of the NHS. Simple as that. They are targetting a few areas so that when the privatisation kicks in it will be "better" and thus a "success".
Just the cynic in me really.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff