Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

The Tories and the NHS - yet again


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,723 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 05:51 PM

Even the Daily Mail is critical of this...

 

So... let me get this right:  A hospital, trust or CCG can be saddled with unfair levels of debt caused by government maladminstration, e.g. PFI debts or just seriously idiotic budget allocations, OR a hospital is given a random fine or budget cut and then the government minister responsible can unilaterally decide to close hospital wards, or even entire hospitals, to cut costs?

 

I'd like to see the Labour Party start a list of laws they'd repeal immediately if elected... this one would get on there.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#2 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,831 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:11 PM

Well, since Labour saddled the NHS with huge PFI debts and introduced the private sector into so many areas of the NHS, they  are hardly in a position to object. Nor do they have the power, authority. capability or intellect to do anything about it. 

 

Strange also, to trust or believe anything the Mail reports...not something you normally come across on the TRL Daily Herald.



#3 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,723 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:21 PM

Well, since Labour saddled the NHS with huge PFI debts and introduced the private sector into so many areas of the NHS, they  are hardly in a position to object. Nor do they have the power, authority. capability or intellect to do anything about it. 

 

Strange also, to trust or believe anything the Mail reports...not something you normally come across on the TRL Daily Herald.

The last Labour government's love for PFI has saddled the NHS and other public bodies with massive debts for the next few decades.  I'm in no way defending them.  What I am grumbling about is that the government is bringing in powers to penalise those very same hospitals if they find they've been given too little money to run it.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#4 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:30 PM

My bag of a fag packet estimate of the proportion of the NHS budget taken up by PFI schemes is about 3%. The NHS simply isn't been driven into the ground by PFI schemes.

When you consider that includes the capital expenditure to build a bunch of new hospitals, the cost of that capital over 25 or 30 years and, crucially and almost always forgotten, the maintenance of those buildings (which is actually the bulk of the cost) then PFIs aren't actually that bad a deal. It might be possible to do the same things cheaper by structuring the finance in different ways, but the saving won't be anywhere near what people think.

There are valid criticisms of PFI schemes, but they are rarely aired and are actually more to do with poor management on the buyer side.

That's me.  I'm done.


#5 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,723 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 06:37 PM

My bag of a fag packet estimate of the proportion of the NHS budget taken up by PFI schemes is about 3%. The NHS simply isn't been driven into the ground by PFI schemes.

When you consider that includes the capital expenditure to build a bunch of new hospitals, the cost of that capital over 25 or 30 years and, crucially and almost always forgotten, the maintenance of those buildings (which is actually the bulk of the cost) then PFIs aren't actually that bad a deal. It might be possible to do the same things cheaper by structuring the finance in different ways, but the saving won't be anywhere near what people think.

There are valid criticisms of PFI schemes, but they are rarely aired and are actually more to do with poor management on the buyer side.

Normally I'd agree with you but I saw one example of two CCGs where each was allocated their budget but one had a PFI debt to repay meaning their effective budget was lower.  Also, that 3% could mean the difference between a hospital meeting its commitments and being forced to cut service.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#6 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:10 PM

Normally I'd agree with you but I saw one example of two CCGs where each was allocated their budget but one had a PFI debt to repay meaning their effective budget was lower. Also, that 3% could mean the difference between a hospital meeting its commitments and being forced to cut service.


It's certainly true that individual Trusts may have higher outlays of course.

But it seems fine to me that a CCG that has to service a commitment to a PFI should just get on with it. If it didn't have the PFI it would, presumably, have similar scale commitments to FM/building maintenance and debt financing for the capital invested. It just wouldn't have the dirty words "PFI" attached so no one would care.

I have a mortgage I'm committed to for the next twenty years. Is that an outrageous commitment to have made? I could have chosen not to have a mortgage I suppose, but then I'd have been paying rent all my life. My expenditure on a house wouldn't have gone away.

That's me.  I'm done.


#7 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:21 PM

How to close a hospital
put its services out to tender
quietly sell the profitable ones
claim it is inefficient
show the figures to prove your point
show sympathy
have a review
close it
show regret
get a well paid job in private health
smile, discreetly of course


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#8 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:42 PM

Well, since Labour saddled the NHS with huge PFI debts and introduced the private sector into so many areas of the NHS, they  are hardly in a position to object. Nor do they have the power, authority. capability or intellect to do anything about it. 

 

Strange also, to trust or believe anything the Mail reports...not something you normally come across on the TRL Daily Herald.

If the PFI deals are as bad as you say and Osborne said, why are this government continuing to use them to finance public projects?


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#9 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,018 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:47 PM

The current pay offer of course is provocative, with an election looming what better than to provoke a strike in the NHS?  An offer of 1% - a pay cut, or nothing if you've received an increment for improving your skills level is an insult. Cameron says it's so the NHS can continue to employ more nurses. Surely this offer will lead to more nurses joining agencies and then being re-employed in the NHS at a higher rate. Never mind they won't show up on the unemployment figures and that's what it's all about, isn't it? Machiavelli should take lessons from Cameron.  I daren't post my opinion of him,l I'd get banned "sine die" as the RFL have it.


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#10 WearyRhino

WearyRhino
  • Coach
  • 3,150 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:50 PM

I think Cameron is a berk!

LUNEW.jpg


#11 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:52 PM

I think Cameron is a berk!

 

I think you're being "squishy soft" on him


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#12 WearyRhino

WearyRhino
  • Coach
  • 3,150 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:02 PM

I think you're being "squishy soft" on him


You're correct, he's a complete berk!

LUNEW.jpg


#13 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,302 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:17 PM

Anyone ever imagine a time when it might be possible for people to appreciate that pay rises cost money?  In the private sector that is a concept easily grasped but it would appear that some people think there is a bottomless pit of public money to spend on the NHS when there just isn't and nor should there be.  The pit does actually have a bottom and if people are demanding over and above what is in their contract (which apparently amounts to a 3% pay rise, although over what period I don't know) then they have to know that in meeting that demand, there is inevitably going to be loss elsewhere. 



#14 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:24 PM

Anyone ever imagine a time when it might be possible for people to appreciate that pay rises cost money? In the private sector that is a concept easily grasped but it would appear that some people think there is a bottomless pit of public money to spend on the NHS when there just isn't and nor should there be. The pit does actually have a bottom and if people are demanding over and above what is in their contract (which apparently amounts to a 3% pay rise, although over what period I don't know) then they have to know that in meeting that demand, there is inevitably going to be loss elsewhere.


How very gracious of you, you obviously turn up to work for no pay since wages cost money and have to be paid for somehow.

#15 Phil

Phil
  • Coach
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:35 PM

How very gracious of you, you obviously turn up to work for no pay since wages cost money and have to be paid for somehow.

 

 

Actually she still works for the pay and conditions of Victorian times because she wouldn't want anything to do with benefits which were won by those horrible unions.


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

#16 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:40 PM

Oh and only last week the Tories were talking about tax cuts.

#17 WearyRhino

WearyRhino
  • Coach
  • 3,150 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:10 PM

Anyone ever imagine a time when it might be possible for people to appreciate that pay rises cost money? In the private sector that is a concept easily grasped but it would appear that some people think there is a bottomless pit of public money to spend on the NHS when there just isn't and nor should there be. The pit does actually have a bottom and if people are demanding over and above what is in their contract (which apparently amounts to a 3% pay rise, although over what period I don't know) then they have to know that in meeting that demand, there is inevitably going to be loss elsewhere.


Tell you what, when the bankers, bosses and other assorted exploitative capitalists limit their theft of the fruits of worker's labour then opinions like yours might gain some consideration. In the meantime, the "bottomless pit" remains the empty compassionless souls of the lot of you.

LUNEW.jpg


#18 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,302 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:23 PM

How very gracious of you, you obviously turn up to work for no pay since wages cost money and have to be paid for somehow.

I'm unemployed.

 

When I have been employed it has generally been in the public sector, mostly for local councils.  I know about wastage in the public sector, I've seen it, and the NHS is no different (yes, I've worked for them, but in the past).  No good coming at me with suggestions that I lack grace or compassion or any of that bull.  I've seen too much to be anything other than realistic about the NHS rather than sentimental.

 

Nurses work hard and I'd pay the good ones (ie the ones who actually care as well as really work hard) more than soft sod footballers, for example (who strangely enough are never used as examples of obscene grasping wealth, only bankers seem to get that levelled at them and yet there are a lot of low paid employees in the banking industry).  However, the country can't afford that kind of generosity.  That's simply a fact, regardless of who is in power.

 

And if memory serves, the last Labour government didn't give nurses massive pay rises either.  However, they did give already very well paid GPs a humungous 50% pay rise AND they took away the requirement to provide out of hours care and stuff like home visits.  Yet the Tories get blasted for actually acting in a responsible fiscal fashion towards what is a massive financial black hole.


Edited by Saintslass, 13 March 2014 - 09:24 PM.


#19 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,723 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:41 PM

Even taking into consideration the nice benefits that the NHS staff get, they're paid substantially less than a private sector equivalent. Even contractors get far less. For example I get way less than half of what I did in the private sector now that I'm doing NHS work. Luckily I can afford it relatively easily. In fact, at my last place I had an admin assistant working for me earning more than I am now. I now have field engineers working for me earning daily rates that I thought must have been mistakes as who in their right mind would work for that little for such a responsible job.

Anyone in it for the money wouldn't go near the NHS with a barge pole.

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#20 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,723 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:44 PM

Even those doctors you're talking about earn far more in the private sector. I know the charging rates quite well of those doctors as I've had to pay them for the last few years for my wife. £200 for a 15 minute appointment isn't unheard of, and some charge even more than that, despite being out in Suffolk rather than expensive London.

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users