Taxpayers will no longer 'bail out' failing NHS hospitals

[Prof Prolapse]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/martin-beck...

Am I on the only one who finds this title troubling?

Someone in an office decides an organisation is "failing", based on subjective criteria decided by some suit to measure standard of care.

Yet, historically, banks fail based on objective outcomes, like ability to sustain a profit or manage risk, and we bail them out.

Capitalism eh? Swings and roundabouts...

[Hooli]

Having met a lot of NHS managers it won't help as they'll transfer their utter incompetence elsewhere.

[Shuvi Tupya]

Isn't this just one of the first steps towards selling our medical services to private sector?

[Prof Prolapse]

I don't object to getting rid of crap management and efficiency savings, even if that comes at the cost of some of my colleagues. I don't even mind them fking around with my pension (within reason) but it's the assertion that a hospital is failing based on arbitrary criteria that gets my back up.

When you read the title of the article you can't help but think back to those who were responsible for these problems to begin with, who are currently enjoying their bonuses, whilst we hospital workers enjoy another pay freeze.

All seems a little... Cold? Still no point in worrying. I'm sure we can guarantee a better standard of medical care when we pay them buttons and tell them they're ste.

[Prof Prolapse]

Shuvi Tupya said:

Isn't this just one of the first steps towards selling our medical services to private sector?

Sounds about right.

Like our North American cousins, we too can also look forward to smuggling medications across borders from third world countries to avoid hospital mark ups.

Hospitals not bothering to research cures for diseases of low incidence, because it doesn't represent good market value.... And 1 in 3 of us will be bankrupted because of the medical care costs associated with treating a loved ones illness.

Still. At least I'll get paid more.

[Sway]

Prof, please do two things:

Google the size of.the national debt and the current yearly deficit.
Google the amount paid in bank bailout.

Then come back and tell me how the last figure, which is a tiny percentage of the deficit, and an even tinier percentage of the debt, caused the cuts that are currently imposed.

Especially when the bank bailout has absolutely nothing to do with this.years deficit....

Unfortunately, the use of language causes the connection in the mind of two unrelated things - the banks were 'bailed out', hospitals won't be 'bailed out'.

Problem is, the two events/decisions have bugger all to do with each other....

[derestrictor]

There must be a way Satanco can be called upon to save us from this fiscal abyss?

In F Ripley's next appearance, the family will be delighted that whilst her ageing mother was denied some life saving treatment, Satanco's Club points for body parts meant that with their busy lives, not only was the bereavement hassle free but the excellent cremation service was cheap, speedy and automatic thanks to the latest design of self check out terminal.

[J Horrocks] "We know how inconvenient mortality is but at least with Satancos when The Reaper calls you'll still be saving time and money - don't let the deceased stop you racking up points: every little helps." [/J Horrocks]

[andymadmak]

Shuvi Tupya said:

Isn't this just one of the first steps towards selling our medical services to private sector?

I hope so. Sincerely, I do bloody hope so.
Having, in the past 3 months, had first hand experience of both the public and private health care sectors I can only say that removing the State from the rancid, wasteful, festering mess that is the NHS cannot come a day too soon.
My illness has been a total eye opener for me.
A brand new PFI financed, state of the art NHS hospital that was already filthy and neglected, staffed by slovenly, lacksadaisical, negligent medical staff who seemed to think that THEIR having a job represented the only important thing, and that anything else - patient care, diligence, good practice, pride in the job, washing hands etc - could take a hike, very nearly did for me.
Compare and contrast with the 35 year old hospital down the road, in a first class state of cleanliness, staffed by medical and auxiliary staff for whom pride in the job and dedication was a way of life. And before anyone starts spouting crap about pay differentials, most of the nursing staff at the private hospital that I spoke to could earn more in the NHS, but simply refuse to lower their professional standards to a level that would allow them so to do.
The sooner the NHS is run by clinicians, for the benefit 100% of the patients then nothing is going to change.

[Hooli]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I think a lot of the notes these days are done directly on to PCs, rather than stood at the bottom of the patient's bed.

[Shuvi Tupya]

andymadmak said:

The sooner the NHS is run by clinicians, for the benefit 100% of the patients then nothing is going to change.

But, do you think we would see a decrease in taxes, just because the government no longer provided our health care?

I don't. We would still pay the same taxes AND have to find money for our healthcare

[mattviatura]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Absolutely right. The other day I saw an ambulance racing through town followed thirty seconds later by a rapid response paramedic. The paramedics are dispatched to meet target times but don't always get there before the ambulance. They aren't recalled though, there are targets to be met.

The NHS is awash with cash, they just choose to spend it unwisely.

[andymadmak]

Shuvi Tupya said:

andymadmak said:

The sooner the NHS is run by clinicians, for the benefit 100% of the patients then nothing is going to change.

But, do you think we would see a decrease in taxes, just because the government no longer provided our health care?

I don't. We would still pay the same taxes AND have to find money for our healthcare

Neither. I would pay the same taxes and still have free healthcare. The difference would be that it would be high quality health care. Give the contract to the private sector. For £110 BILLION pa you can do alot better than we are currently getting.

[Shuvi Tupya]

andymadmak said:

Neither. I would pay the same taxes and still have free healthcare. The difference would be that it would be high quality health care. Give the contract to the private sector. For £110 BILLION pa you can do alot better than we are currently getting.

I hope you are right, But everything else that has been sold off has certainly ended up costing us more to use.

[bobbylondonuk]

andymadmak said:

Neither. I would pay the same taxes and still have free healthcare. The difference would be that it would be high quality health care. Give the contract to the private sector. For £110 BILLION pa you can do alot better than we are currently getting.

This is what the common man does not GET!!!!

If the state pays the bills and the citizen is provided free healthcare out of general taxation....what does it matter who provides the service? £110bn for a population of approx 65m..... the state just needs to oversee the service and be the enforcer of standards of care. The private sector which is profit driven will essentially provide the service at the highest efficiency. The only way the private sector will survive is profitability and reputation. Both are non existant in the public sector.

[Prof Prolapse]

Sway said:

Problem is, the two events/decisions have bugger all to do with each other....

That certainly may be the case. I agree sentimentality may have got the better of me.

[Sheets Tabuer]

What worries me about the article is:

Article said:

Under the revised failure regime, it is expected that ministers will be given more power to make “ad hoc” decisions on which services to save based on public reaction

Does that mean if you have something quite rare you're fked while at the same time keeping chav "Those green things you see at the greengrocers are food too" classes?

Then there is this lot.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershir...

[andymadmak]

Sheets Tabuer said:

What worries me about the article is:

Article said:

Under the revised failure regime, it is expected that ministers will be given more power to make “ad hoc” decisions on which services to save based on public reaction

Does that mean if you have something quite rare you're fked while at the same time keeping chav "Those green things you see at the greengrocers are food too" classes?

Then there is this lot.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershir...

All this nonsense has to go. Agree a clear set of clinical deliverables for the population (what gets treated, who gets treated, how quickly it all has to happen, the levels of in-patient care, community services etc ) and then award contracts to those who are legally obliged to deliver on them.
Waste will disappear. Hospitals will be clean. Staff will take responsibility. Patients WILL be cared for. And all the while we won't have tiers of expensive, wasteful, (mis)management and a political culture that essentially sees the NHS used as football by New Labour and the Tories.
I genuinely think the Tories want the NHS to succeed. Ditto most Labour bods. The trouble is Labour simply cannot help but use the NHS as a stick to beat the Tories with. And the NHS is almost like racism.- the debate you can never have in reality because people are just too emotive about it all and won't listen to the facts as a result.

[shed driver]

Meanwhile, at the coalface, waiting times are increasing.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/h...

SD

[Prof Prolapse]

Shuvi Tupya said:

andymadmak said:

The sooner the NHS is run by clinicians, for the benefit 100% of the patients then nothing is going to change.

But, do you think we would see a decrease in taxes, just because the government no longer provided our health care?

I don't. We would still pay the same taxes AND have to find money for our healthcare

Even if clinicians did run the NHS, their hands will always be tied by the latest government "incentive", to capture the voters interest.

There's always a new target, agenda, pointless building, uniform, policy, training course etc. Why not set some basic uniform targets, let the NHS trusts manage themselves with the budget they're given and see what happens? Sod central policies and the whims of politicians.

Some will fail under the inevitable postcode lottery. But at least steps can then be taken to remove the offenders.

[andymadmak]

shed driver said:

Meanwhile, at the coalface, waiting times are increasing.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/h...

SD

And why do you think this is? Especially given that the NHS budget has not been cut this year....

It's P O L I T I C S!!!

Health Authorities love you to focus all the blame for their failings on those nasty Tories. So the PM "axed" the 18 week target ( in favour of a clinically driven one) and all of a sudden 800 people are waiting for operations, despite there being no budget reduction over the period? Really?