[Closed] If you want to save your NHS...

Signed!

miss it when its gone, i bloody doubt that.

i recommend total avoidance of the NHS, from the very bottom to the very top its running like a bag of rusty spanners thrown into a jet engine.

whatever is done to it, it cant possibly be worse.

Now there's an informed opinion! 🙄

It's that sort of thinking that voted Cameron and his ****s into power in the first place!

Already signed, but another bump.

it cant possibly be worse

Utter pish. It can get a lot worse.

Id like to opt out but don't have the option so instead I pay for private and pay for the ****less & workshy.

whatever is done to it, it cant possibly be worse.

Yep. You're bang on! They're going to privatise it. And thats has been a rip-roaring success in every area of the public sector its been applied to. The Railways? Energy generators? BT?

All, I'm sure you'll agree, the envy of the world!

I'm liking the opt out version!

Good luck opting out of A&E and ITU.

Id like to opt out but don't have the option so instead I pay for private and pay for the ****less & workshy.

EDIT: You can opt out if you want. Emigrate.

We can sign many petitions, but plans are already afoot to privatise the NHS, the start was made with so called care homes , supplying nursing care, followed by mental handicap nad mental illness, lots of bits can easily be split off and sold cheaply,like physio, OT,Audiology,xray and cat scan, along with Gp surgeries.

Laundry, catering grounds maintance, payroll have already gone private and work, for the private comapnies, producing a nice little earner.

Then we have PFI hospitals etc.

Is it true the NHS are the worlds 3rd largest employer after the Chinese army and the Indian railways?

Signed ,other half is a Headof Midwifery and Gynogology and no one she works with wants these changes!

Rich

The NHS is already privatised, you just haven't realised it yet!

The NHS is already privatised

NuLav did indeed lay the foundations for all this - which is why the likes of Circle & McKinsey are salivating, and [url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/08/nhs-professional-service-ripe-reengineering?INTCMP=SRCH ]Ali Parsa[/url] writes dribble about how healthcare can be just like the telecomms industry.

It's a yardsale.

Signed. I'd like to support the right wingers right to opt out, as long as they opt out of every thing, ambulances, intensive care, rare disease treatment etc. should whittle their numbers down nicely and improve this country a whole lot.

Signed.

Signed. I'd like to support the right wingers right to opt out, as long as they opt out of every thing, ambulances, intensive care, rare disease treatment etc. should whittle their numbers down nicely and improve this country a whole lot.

+100,000.

While I'm certainly central with a right hand leaning, I have to say privatisation of these key public features (like rail etc) really isn't the bright option. Public services are things that are generally best done by someone with no vested interest in profit, but with a bent towards efficiency.

other half is a Headof Midwifery

ahhh, you married a girl from the Valleys

[i]no vested interest in profit, but with a bent towards efficiency[/i]

[Conservative market delusion]but the drive for profit is the only way to derive efficiency![/Conservative market delusion]

Signed. I'd like to support the right wingers right to opt out, as long as they opt out of every thing, ambulances, intensive care, rare disease treatment etc. should whittle their numbers down nicely and improve this country a whole lot.

Haha, I love this 'opt-out' nonsense - lets see how much it costs your precious private care when you're properly ill, or it means you have to sell your Audi to pay for cancer treatment for your loved one. Just take a look at America to see how private health care only works for the well off.

Grow up - and realise our NHS is the envy of many countries around the world.

GPs don't want this responsibility because it's not their area if expertise and it would detract from their ability to see and treat their patients.

The government knows full well that GPs are unable and lack the expertise to commision services; they are deliberately setting them up to fail so that they can then bring in private health companies to pick the bones of the NHS clean.

I think you'll find that right from the start the private firms will provide the actual administrative expertise for GPs who have studied medicine rather than business, and lack both the skill and the desire to get involved.

And we the taxpayers will of course pay these private firms to provide administrative and clinical functions to GPs.

I'm sure private healthcare provider Care UK feels that the thousands of pounds which it has donated personally to Health Minister Andrew Lansley was money well spent.

Haha, I love this 'opt-out' nonsense - lets see how much it costs your precious private care when you're properly ill, or it means you have to sell your Audi to pay for cancer treatment for your loved one. Just take a look at America to see how private health care only works for the well off.

Signed. I'd like to support the right wingers right to opt out, as long as they opt out of every thing, ambulances, intensive care, rare disease treatment etc. should whittle their numbers down nicely and improve this country a whole lot.

LOL, without the taxes from these right wingers you'd struggle to get your methadone prescription.

Just take a look at America to see how private health care only works for the well off.

I'm not so sure that it always works for the relatively well off, I guess it depends on the medical condition and how long the costs persist.

[url= http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090604095123.htm ]Over 60 Percent Of All US Bankruptcies Attributable To Medical Problems[/url]

[i]"According to the study, a number of circumstances propelled many middle-class, insured Americans into bankruptcy. For 92% of the medically bankrupt, high medical bills directly contributed to their bankruptcy."[/i]

I suspect that included in the bankruptcies are people who would be considered to be pretty well off.

The NHS is the envy of the world - lol
thats why the rest of the world flies here to be treated for free.

were very good at delivering foreign babies, and treating the sick and dying from all over the world at the same time giving them translators and then we cant afford to fix the hip of an old war served veteran.

Sorry unless the NHS is massively reformed and ring fenced then its a cash black hole that we cant afford despite its efficiencies. etc

I happened to be in the reception of a Bupa hospital a few weeks ago

an elderly gent had passed out so the staff called an ambulance to come and attend to him

wrecker - Member

LOL, without the taxes from these right wingers you'd struggle to get your methadone prescription.

Bazz is a heroine addict wrecker ?

Should you be discussing someone personal medical conditions on a public forum ?

Sancho - You are Paul Dacre and I claim my [s]£5[/s] five [i]English[/i] pounds!

Sancho - Member

The NHS is the envy of the world - lol
thats why the rest of the world flies here to be treated for free.

Really? they are not entitled to free treatment under those circumstances

Sorry unless the NHS is massively reformed and ring fenced then its a cash black hole that we cant afford despite its efficiencies. etc

Sorry unless the NHS is massively reformed and ring fenced then its a cash black hole that we cant afford despite its efficiencies. etc

So we cannot afford a healthcare system that is one of the cheapest and most efficient in the world?

The money needs to be spent not on more NHS but on defining better what it is for and the stopping the spread of treatment to people who are not privvy to that treatment. we cant afford to just keep handing out free treatment to people not eligible,
and TJ youre right they are not entitled but they are treated and then the money they owe is written off in 98% of cases so effectively they are all getting away with it.

Who is Paul Dacre?

Really? they are not entitled to free treatment under those circumstances

no we cant afford it TJ, thats why all parties are trying to reform it.
or am I missing something, its also why we cant afford the benefits we are paying out, and the army etc, we are not as rich as we would like to be.

I absolutely agree, I can afford to opt out and hopefully this reduces the queueing time for other.

Opted out are you? hmmm. So it would be a private ambulance that comes to pick you up should you have an MI/CVA/RTC/Fall of your MTB, that would of course take you to a private hospital, to be assessed by private Doctors and Nurses, then be tranferd to a private ITU should you need it? Oh, and of course you'd pay the going rate for any gucci drugs that you may need for the rest of your life, rather than get a NHS subsidised prescription I imagine.

No?

Get real. Paying 'to go private' in this country is tantamount to bribing your way to the front of the queue for treatments. Quite often provided at NHS facilities, almost ALWAYS treated and cared for by NHS trained staff.

The money needs to be spent not on more NHS but on defining better what it is for

were very good at delivering foreign babies, and treating the sick and dying from all over the world at the same time giving them translators and then we cant afford to fix the hip of an old war served veteran.

I have nothing to add. That is so perfect, I thought it should be posted twice.

I couldn't have thought of that little beauty if I'd tried. 10/10

an elderly gent had passed out so the staff called an ambulance to come and attend to him

A private ambulance, surely? 😉

no not more focus groups but a step back from where we are and a clear definition of what the NHS is for, and to then put in place the processes to keep the NHS reserved for those who qualify foreign nationals taking the piss will only get worse and its already costing millions and taking up time, but its a debate that never gets a clear answer as hysteria takes over every time.

Ernie - I've studied Sancho's statement and run it through the Daily Mail-o-meter. It says it can only be improved thus:

were very good at delivering foreign babies [i]to single mothers[/i], and treating the sick and dying [i]gypsy benefit scroungers[/i] from all over the world at the same time giving them [i]lesbian lefty[/i] translators and then we cant afford to fix the hip of an old war served veteran.

and its already costing millions

go on then, let's see your maths on this

Sancho - Member

no we cant afford it TJ, thats why all parties are trying to reform it.

So what are you going to do. bear in mind the NHS is cheaper that almost every other comparable system and more efficient.

hysteria takes over every time.

I've studied Sancho's statement and run it through the Daily Mail-o-meter.

You'd probably find a better match in The Voice of Freedom

binners, no terrorists in there - daily mail fail

Very good STW responses right on cue 🙂

sorry my reading of the Guardian must be ill informed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/sep/14/nhs.health

TJ on what are you basing your statement of cheaper and more efficient?

Get real. Paying 'to go private' in this country is tantamount to bribing your way to the front of the queue for treatments. Quite often provided at NHS facilities, almost ALWAYS treated and cared for by NHS trained staff.

I get Bupa through work, last year I had to see a consultant with an eye problem I had, I went through Bupa. I could only see the consultant on a Wednesday as the rest of the time he was contracted to the NHS. Got seen quicker, yes. Jumped the queue, no. And to be honest if work didn't pay for the Bupa, i wouldn't have it and don't think i'd miss it.

In the past 2 weeks I have had to take my son to hospital to be monitored for a potential problem, not private through NHS. I couldn't have asked for better treatment, staff were efficient.

My Sister in law has just had a major operation over the weekend, again NHS. My wife was there with her and again, she said the staff, Doctors etc were brilliant.

We should be proud of the NHS.

as hysteria takes over every time

At the moment, hysteria is largely a problem for the Gov, as they realise that nobody trusts 'em on this - not the frontline, and not the public.

As for private care: I have nothing against the private sector, but it boils my pish when I see the likes of Ali Parsa (boss of nicely-timed health venture Circle) slagging off the NHS - and then profiting off the back of NHS workforce training, infrastructure and acute capacity! 🙄

i neither know nor care why the nhs is on its knees.

what i do know is that every element of the NHS to which i have been exposed over the last twenty years is poor and getting progressively worse.

If it just costs more to make it right, great, but i suspect we tried that with the previous government.

Paying 'to go private' in this country is tantamount to bribing your way to the front of the queue for treatments

Tantamount to?
That's EXACTLY what it is.

what i do know is that every element of the NHS to which i have been exposed over the last twenty years is poor and getting progressively worse.

I've been a fairly regular user over the last couple of years and a helper to my wife who's extensively used it for over 20 years and I simply don't recognised that statement as relating to the NHS

I can't see anything about "the hip of an old war served veteran" in that link Sancho - I'm worried about him.

And you do realise that the "Health and Social Care Bill" has nothing to do with that issue don't you ?

Fraud is a separate issue altogether, and officially sanctioned fraud is not part of the healthcare policies of this or any previous government.

Sancho - Member

TJ on what are you basing your statement of cheaper and more efficient?

Teh facts.

Most of the similar countries pay more as a% of GDP for healthcare.
2009 numbers - a few samples
UK 9.8%
Germany 11.6%
France 11.8%
US 17.4%
Netherlands 12%
http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,3343,en_2649_34631_2085200_1_1_1_1,00.html
Productivity - from that well know lefty rag the telegraph

Improvements in care and falling waiting lists show as decreased efficiency in crude measures

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9074733/Falling-productivity-in-the-NHS-is-a-myth.html

I do understand that the bill is not addressing the issues that I mentioned, and old war veterans hips are just an example, i think he'll be ok, just may have a limp for a bit, but with a limited budget if we are being ripped off we are going to lose out somewhere along the line and its just an exmple of the NHS not being protected against itself.

It's success is also causing its downfall, every government is trying to reform it, but every time they tinker and mess about, instead of addressing the big issue which is how far does the service go.

Sancho; #hips get fastracked through A&E these days, never heard of someone waiting due to no money in the pot.

However, the health tourist problem is very real, (if maybe prone to headline grabbing overstatement) I've had plenty of first hand experience of it. For what its worth, I have some sympathy for them, It certainly isn't their fault that they were born in one of the MANY countries of the world where the health care system fails the population AND IS FAR FAR WORSE THAN THE NHS. I would do the same for myself or my family in the situation.

People come from all over the world to (ab)use the NHS. Surely evidence that its doing something right, actually...

signed

TJ, you have provided some statistics but no definition of cheaper and more efficient, those stats would need a lot of research to make a claim that we are cheaper and more efficient.
The fact we spend less per GDP is no proof that we are cheaper and more efficient than say Denmark.
You will have to review all the stats to see which country is getting the most value out of its money, in returns like no. of doctors, treatments carried out, etc, etc, there are a host of measures but not answer from yourself.
i certainly wont be reviewing those stats tonight.

Cheaper - smaller % of GDP seems reasonable - efficient - well read the lancet article if you want to question the methodology. Another measure is we do more with less money and / or we spend less on management costs thanother systems.

Still - don't let your prejudices get in the way of the facts will you

what facts TJ
the only fact you have is the fact we spend a lower % of GDP on health care.
but please explain how that equates to a more efficient health care than say Denmark.
and one article is not a definition of the efficiency of the NHS.
If you come back and say that the NHS gets a return on the money spent resulting in xyz versus the rest of the world that gets a lower return baed on spend then Im happy to accept that the NHS is more efficient than health provision in other countries but you are not stating anything like that.

v8ninety - Member

an elderly gent had passed out so the staff called an ambulance to come and attend to him

A private ambulance, surely?

That wiould be a black transit then.

To be fair v8ninety, a #hip does go through a&e. But someone with chronic arthritis or cartiledge probs doesnt..
Know 2 folk in work that are in similar situations but have been told they'd need to wait..

This thread has gone in exactly the direction I expected, but with a bit more vigour.

Personally- I owe the NHS my leg. So I'll use my nationalised leg to kick anyone who tries to destroy it squa in tha nuts.

I've been a fairly regular user over the last couple of years and a helper to my wife who's extensively used it for over 20 years and I simply don't recognised that statement as relating to the NHS

+1.

And to my eternal joy, I'm married to a foreign national who's definitely had more in benefits than she's paid in tax. And have a foreign baby with lactose intolerance, meaning a £150 weekly prescription. Stick that up yer arse Sancho 😆

She had to marry you to get it though! Hardly cheap! 😀

The NHS is far from being the most efficient or cost effective.

By most comparisons, the NHS is now one of the most expensive care systems in the world - and quite possibly a lot more expensive than the States.

What the NHS "headline" budget of £118B fails to include is pension liability - figures for other systems typically include all costs including the employer contributions to cover all future pension liabilities. This is variously estimated at 30-40% of salary cost for NHS staff.

Running the numbers, the NHS spends around 75-80% of its budget on staff, meaning that the annual staff cost is around £88B on staff costs. Add on the 30% for pensions, and the £31B it spends on other things, and the real cost of healthcare provided by the NHS is somewhere in the region of £146B - that's pretty close to 20% of GDP, and heading towards 25% if less conservative figures are used.

As for the NHS being the envy of other countries, I've yet to see the constant stream of bad care headlines abroad that we're used to seeing week in week out in the UK.

The comprehensive OECD data source that TJ's post links to also has a variety of reports and data that people may/may not be interested in. As always with data, the stats can be used to support various views but interestingly the OECD finds it difficult to draw difficult conclusions:

OECD countries vary enormously in how much they spend on health and the rate at which health spending grows. This reflects a wide array of market and social factors, as well as countries’ diverse financing and organisational structures of their health systems.

Some OECD countries rely heavily on centralised command-and-control systems to steer the demand and supply of health care services while in a few countries regulated market mechanisms, such as fee-for-services, competition driven by user choice and private insurance, play a dominant role. But more and more countries rely on a mix of the two.

..and perhaps the least surprising of any conclusion that they do reach is:

[b]There is no health care system that performs systematically better in delivering cost-effective health care.[/b] It may thus be less the type of system that matters but rather [b]how it is managed[/b]. Both market-based and more centralised command-and-control systems show strengths and weaknesses.

God forbid they let GP's run it!!! i was mis- diagnosed 3 times last year for different ailments by 3 of my local dr's. My family has had some very good treatment by the NHS but just last Fri. my 88 yr old mum had to get to Royal Berks Hospital(20miles away) for 7.30AM! for an eye op. that they did'nt do till after 12.30PM. Not great organisation in my book.

Farmer John - that is just so much nonsense.

Lets see some sources for this.

The US system is nealry twice as much as % of GDP as much as the entite cost of the NHS.

It is of course complete dribble - the NHS pensions are in surplus - more is paid in each year than is taken out. You cannot put a theoretical future deficit as todays spending - economically illiterate.

Lets see some sources for this please 31 billion it spends on other things? what?

sources!

Simple question (for the simples..) What do you want in place ofthe NHS?

Do try to keep your answer straightforward, brief, sensible...

What the NHS "headline" budget of £118B fails to include is pension liability

neither of which matter - you do not put future potential laibilities all in this years sums.

[b]FJ[/b]

as TJ points out that is rubbish, In fact the US government pays close to what the UK government pays per person. for the minority of US Health care which is government funded... and then the private element in the US more than doubles that.

The over-servicing and non-evidence based unnecessary operating and treating practices of the US private sector, along with its high admin and profit costs are well documented.

In the UK we have actually the second best computerised primary care sector in the world (after Holland) In the US they are experts at... billing...

I used to be enthusiastic about the changes that were coming, as someone who might have been leading some of them locally, until about a year ago when it became clear that they were an unholy clusterf***. Now we have the best managers leaving, the worst jockeying to keep their fiefdoms obstructing change inefficiently.

Lots of research work recently has shown the NHS is relatively efficient, that satisfaction was - despite the Daily Hate headlines - at an all time high, waiting lists falling, and more research in the last few days showing the Conservatives have been ignoring this, and understating the efficiency of the way money entering the system in the last few years has been spent.

Yes there does need to be some competition and some consequences visited upon obstructive and poor managers and clinicians, and sometimes the private sector can provide chunks of the answer. But not this, not what is happening now.

Hello?

What do you naysayers want in place of the NHS?

Come on, tell us.

Then we can down to costing it, and working out exactly how much you dimwitted fools will be paying...

wrecker - Member
LOL, without the taxes from these right wingers you'd struggle to get your methadone prescription.

Bazz is a heroine addict wrecker ?

Should you be discussing someone personal medical conditions on a public forum ?

Just for clarification, i'm am definitely not a heroin addict!

Thankfully i rarely have to use the NHS, but on the few occasions i have the care has been excellent and i am happy to pay my tax money into it.

Bazz, it's quite trendy these days fella, no need to be shy!