not enough bickering about politics on the forum of late..

I reckon it’s time they ditched the left versus right charade and let everyone scrabble for popularity based on having real principles and sticking to them.

For starters they should remove everything but the names from ballot papers – if you can’t impress or upset your constituents enough that they remember you name you have no place representing them.

Would you reject the idea tha there was a post war left wing consenus re beveridge, nationalisation, NHS, cradle to grave etc?

It seems to me there is still a consensus as regards the NHS and cradle to grave welfare. All three main parties are in favor of free at the point of use healthcare and the provision of a social safety net.

Yes, there is debate around the questions of to what extent the NHS should be privatized and the level of benefits welfare recipients should receive, but in big picture terms this is marginal stuff.

There is also broad agreement on the question of how the above should be paid for – though an asset tax would open a new front there!

but yeah mostly people just fear change.

Personally (and speaking in more general terms, not in relation to the vote for PR), I think this fear is engendered not just by opponents of change but also by its proponents. Talk of ‘smashing the state’ is scary if you have no conception of what would replace it, of what it would mean in practical terms. Take tazzymtb’s song above – what would the practicalities of the society dreamt (spellcheck says that’s not a word – it is, isn’t it?) of by its author be?

there area a lot of self sufficient communities totally outside of mainstream society and taking nothing from the state. If you think of a big society as a herd animal then it’s a more difficult concept.

Hats of to his PR department for hiding what he is truly like and creating this friendly, sensible father figure image.

Why bother to praise him/symapthise when all you have is scorn for him?
Sometimes I get the feeling you just wont say what you really think and try and be balanced and it falls down somewhat.
You clearly dislike him and have no respect for him. Just run with it and explain why rather than do this- it comes over as a bit false [ not the right word and not meant as an attack but hopefully you get the point]and I have to read between the lines.

in big picture terms this is marginal stuff.

Do you really not thtink they are trying to get to a tipping point and change it so it is nothing like it is now? They support it because they have to electorally but their policies undermine it constantly with creeping privatisation for whihc they have no electoral mandate and indeed did not even say they would do this- as i say this only further raises suspicions that they are duplicitous with thier intentions

C’mon JY, surely I don’t need a smiley every time I use sarcasm?!?! Hiding what he is truly like, is hardy praise now is it? I dont trust him, I don’t like the way he plays his politics (like bullies, it’s very snide and underhand), his economics is outdated and misguided and his disruptive behaviour is irresponsible for a senior member of government. I hope that is clear!!!

What about the monarchy…?

Can good ol’ Queen Liz save us from this untouchable gang of organised criminals..?

There’s plenty of anger, IME… but also utter contempt. Hunt might well be leading the charge for the backdoor privatisation of the NHS, but judging by his fatuous speeches, I don’t think he really grasps what is happening on the ground. Oh, he might well envisage (in his received PPE wisdom terms) how a fragmented NHS makes a yardsale that much easier, but I doubt he (even as SOS for Health) would be able to explain exactly how these godawful, muddleheaded reforms will be improving patient care and clinical outcomes. It’s why he should be very careful about his rhetoric on Mid.Staffs and ‘coasting’ hospitals.

I heard the lib dems say they were the sand in the political oyster. So that’s the bit of sh@t nobody wants then. Its a shame as they made the best sense before the election then sold out completely to grub their way into power. They are all appalling but I still vote but it’s a very depressing situation.

they should remove everything but the names from ballot papers

Yep. Would cause total chaos and change the way politics is done. I like it.

“I don’t want being in government, to be a blip for the Liberal Democrats. I want it to become a habit.”

He added: “You can’t change a country overnight. You can’t deliver on the liberal promise in just one government. It takes time.

Paddy ashdown today

They cannot deliver on their own promises FULL STOP

It is odd the party is clearly left of centre but Clegg is right of centre
Its a shame they were so keen to show they could govern that they forgot the important bit of showing that they would do what they said when not in the government

Hard to trust them tbh and in a coalition situation a vote for the lib dems is like a game of chance tbh- economic cuts they opposed, NHS reforms no one suggested, a pledge on education broken.
At least you know what you get with the rest whether you like it or not

As a general rule just avoid anyone who describes themselves a right or left. All extremists are tedious.

We are not likely to vote in a comedian led party at the next election now are we Eddie Izzard for PM?

Actually, he’s now talking about running for London Mayor in 2020.
And we’ve voted in bigger clowns for that post.
With one of them using it as a stepping stone position, for a future leadership challenge.
Maybe it’s not as far fetched as you think?

Although some might say he’s no comedian these days.

I love all the fuss about the Italian comedian when you have Reagan and Scwarzenegger in the USA. So yes, why not Izzard too? 😀

THM you were so busy damning Cable back there ^^ that you forgot to comment on whether you thought Cameron’s current stance on health ringfencing might have had a teeny tiny bit to do with section 75 or not.

I wouldn’t have bothered mentioning it again, only you brought it up in the first place, and your post was so soon after mine it looks as though you were only replying to the half of it you could retain the high ground about. 😉

I’ve come to the conclusion that actually we’re pretty lucky in this country with the politicians we have. Go meet your MP, they might not be your own personal cup of tea but chances are they’ll be decent and hard working and genuinely do want to do the right thing. Two Eds, Cameron, Clegg, Hague, Cable I think they’re all pretty good people. Even Hattie is probable quite a laugh when she’s had a couple of drinks.

Flame away, none of that is going to be popular in the echo chamber that is STW………just a lot of hate.

Do you really not thtink they are trying to get to a tipping point and change it so it is nothing like it is now?

No. I don’t see any moves away from a free at the point of use NHS or the provision of welfare based on need. I think universal benefits could well go, but whether it will be Labour or the Conservatives who finally do for them is up in the air!

Go meet your MP, they might not be your own personal cup of tea but chances are they’ll be decent and hard working and genuinely do want to do the right thing.

Mcboo, my MP:
-was a lib dem concillor but stood for parliamnent under a different party so hge could be in a better position to do the Lord’s work. (think Gladstone!)
-when he doesn’t vote along strict party lines, he votes like a southern-state fundamentalist christian ie on gay issues/genetics/stem cell research etc,
-often speaks out in the media about how compared to all the other religions in the UK, christians are ignored, unrepresented and marginalised,
-has been in the papers about when the ASA banned an advert about churches healing illnesses (citing his own miraculous cure in church as evidence that the ASA should have let the church in question make whatever claims they liked in the adverts)
-and gets his interns supplied by a Christian Charity that offers a prayer-based cure for homosexuality (with an evidence base that says that no one has actually been ‘cured’, and indeed a number of ‘patients’ were instead traumatised and attempted suicide within a year.)

But apart from that he is a great guy!

ohh ffs you know you’re all wrong. again. all wrong. surely I’m right. I’ve just got to go figure out what “I’m Right” is, then it’s all cool! and you’re wrong…

eddie izzard was campaigning with ken at the last mayoral elections

I saw them do a Q and A session at UCL,
he was very impressive, hes naturally quick and was up to speed with relevant info, stats etc
just a shame he was tied to such a lame duck as ken

considering borris only scraped it by a few % against an obviously past it red ken and with all the london papers (and most of the nationals) behind him i doubt borris would stand a chance againt izzard

but borris will be looking for camerons job by then

Joining the Hutterites could be an option.

considering borris only scraped it by a few % against an obviously past it red ken and with all the london papers (and most of the nationals) behind him i doubt borris would stand a chance againt izzard

Maybe. Although I think there’s the possibility that the electorate is becoming so polarised that this kind of split will become more and more common, ala America – though thankfully with both sides being moderates, unlike in the US!

Sorry Julian rugby was more interesting! But good effort to keep the bickering count high. Please help me descend to the lower ground and outline clearly the sneaky amendments. All I have been able to see from a quick search is the proposal to force CCG to consider private providers alongside NHS providers. Please tell me that there is more to it that than, before I join in the faux outrage and “privatisation by the backdoor” camp. There really must be proper story here?

I don’t see myself as that educated on politics, I just want people to be nice, so stop smoking yo bastards and open a window

THM, all you need in this linky here.

If you can be bothered to read it all, the QC tasked with translating it into plain English confirms that sec25 would have in effect forced CCG’s/LCG’s to tender out services they were quite happy with not tendering. The moral outrage of which you speak stems from repeated promises before the bill was passed that this was not going to be the case. Democracy, eh? 😉 There is also some other stuff in it about the possibility of private enterprise forcing a fragmenting of services tendered out so they could ‘cherry-pick’ the lowest-risk (clinical and financial) parts and leave the difficult or not-so-profitable ones aside for acute hospitals trusts to pick up. Which is also not what the Commons voted for, and not what Lansley and others repeatedly promised during the last 18 months.

As such, yes to me it’s totally unsuprising that Cameron was happy to leave funding alone recently as there would be more to offer private enterprise had all this sneaked through. As I said, they only climbed down from this one on monday or tuesday this week though.

Julian, that is an interesting link thank you. I can see clearly now why Burnham has been accused of crying wolf. It seems an apt description. It is also interesting to see where the EU stands on this. So great link and excellent and impartial use of the word, “possibility.”

Of course if any minister was guilty of what you may be insinuating then the result would be clear and welcome. A stretch at HM pleasure for corruption.

It’s why he should be very careful about his rhetoric on Mid.Staffs and ‘coasting’ hospitals.

Whilst the Mid Staffs report has being doing the rounds Andy “save the NHS” Burnham has been conspicuous by his absence……. nothing to do with all those reports/ representations on what was happening at the time that were sent to him going into file 13

the “infection” is now spreading to Bolton hospital and I imagine other will be outted soon

The NHS should be about outcomes for patients and everything should be driving to improve them, and it should be free at point of use for those eligible for the care, not health tourists http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2012/aug/23/health-tourist-nigeria-manchester

Of course if any minister was guilty of what you may be insinuating then the result would be clear and welcome. A stretch at HM pleasure for corruption.

THM, the evidence in hansard and the recent wording of section 75 speaks for itself doesn’t it? That’s not my opinion, it is clear in black and white that section 75 contradicts senior ministers in various places. The climb-down this week would also not have been necessary if there was no case to answer, surely?

Whether it is tantamount to corruption punishable by law? Hmmmm…I expect this sort of thing happens inadvertently or otherwise with less ‘heavy’ issues quite often, but that no-one normally expects such scrutiny. There is btw a mechanism for scrutinising legislation after it is passed: I expect it would not exist if there was never/had never been a need to use it.

Again, ‘possibility’ of forced fragmentation of services/tenders/contracts is still more/different than what Howe and Lansley are on record as promising last year. Hey, perhaps it’s just the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing?

THM please don’t muddy waters by making this a left vs right thing please, I have no sympathy for Burnham (who is right of centre anyway IMO) either: the Act as it stands now is not what clinicians and patients want, but then neither were Johnson/Burnham’s changes (much of what we see in the NHS was happening regardless of the outcome of the last election).

Julian, sorry I don’t get the right v left thing. You asked me to comment on section 75. I didnt know the details but a search immediately brings up Burnham again and again. He is the one who is making the most about it, so it seems perfectly sensible to comment on that. In the same way that you have bought individual Tories into the debate. Or is this just a one party issue? But your own comments hardly suggest major levels of outrage, so perhaps we are on the same boat here?

There do appear to be discrepancies in the communication of aspects of this policy here, at least if the QC you quote is to be believed. And I have no reason to doubt it. And this is in some ways part of the tragedy of the NHS, that sensible questions have to be disguised because no party can be seen to be questioning this national treasure – with the exception that dear old Vince in his dotty old man role can actually be useful and ask the emperors new clothies question here! So there is a point to him after all.

The S75 debate is interesting. I imagine turning the key aspects on their head ie reversing them and then trying to argue why the opposite would be good idea. Not an easy exercise!

The fragmentation issues is a real one, however, and one that should deserve better thought.

Who else but the shadow health secretary would you expect to make a big deal about section 75? Particularly given the fairly incontravertible and major discrepancies betweem what the House of Commons was led to believe they were voting for and what was, (until Tuesday this week) being made law.

I tried to give you an alternative explanation for your pointing out the recent and unexpectedly opposite stances of VC and DC on health ringfencing. Such an interesting observation that you mentioned it in 2 different posts. I brought individual tories ‘into the debate’ beacuse they are key players in the discrepancies between what was recorded as promises to parliament, and what appears in section 75. And yet since then, all you seem to have done is “whatabouting” with regards to Cable and then Burnham.

I don’t see it as a left vs right thing either but you seem to be sending it that way by avoiding commenting on the notion that Cameron may have been playing his cards close to his chest (with regards to the ringfencing of health funding) in anticipation of section 75 going through un-molested, and instead giving some amusingly insincere compliments on my post/link and gunning for the shadow health secretary.

And you wonder why people think you are a Conservative apologist! 😀

Julian, I actually don’t give it anywhere near the level of attention that you think. It’s a minor issue IMO and apart from responding the title of this thread, can’t quite see what you are trying to do/point you are trying to make. If you think the only motive for DC ring fencing NHS is in anticipation of S75 then so be it. There is a certain logic to the point. But I think that there are wider and more obvious reasons. Since this is largely a red herring in the grander scheme of things I will leave it at that.

The link was very helpful – just not in the way you intended. For that my thanks were genuine.

Julian, I actually don’t give it anywhere near the level of attention that you think. It’s a minor issue IMO

And the latest contraditiction is the Tories defending (ring fencing) spending on the NHS while the lIb Dems (Uncle Vince) argue that all departments including health should face th same impact of cuts. Its a funny old world.

But when no one rose to it the first time you made it again two posts later. 😕

edit: on the NHS, note the irony I pointed out above, that it is VC not DC/GO calling for the end of ring fencing of the NHS etc. A Lib Dem telling the Tories to cut spending on our national treasure in the same way as everything else, even tanks and bombs. Amazing!

Is this “no honestly I’m not really that interested in the point I so clumsily laboured earlier on in the thread” some sort of “surrey defence”? 😉

And yes I am posting within the spirit of the thread title. Great fun. And in the sprit of the thread title, please don’t think anyone doesn’t realise which peerless paragon of politically neutral reporting and comment[/url] you borrowed your “Boy who cried wolf” analogy from. 😀

Wow, Julian, you obviously put a lot of effort into this! Another interesting link (no I don’t read The Spectator, but nice try) but not as good as your previous one. Really there is no need to bother with the smileys, the intention is clear, but it washes right past!

Wow – thats brilliant Julian

you’ve just critisised someone for using a biased source with your comment “peerless paragon of politically neutral reporting”

Yet you yourself have relied for much of your attack on a report by another “politically neutral” source in the form of 38 degrees

Even better than that – the 38 Degrees report on the health service reform relies on an “independent” legal opinion by a QC

And just who is David Lock QC I hear you ask?

Funnily enough, he’s the former Labour MP for Wyre Forest

Outstanding!

And, even better, what did he say in his maiden speech at the house of commons?

The market beloved of Adam Smith and the Conservative party is an amoral device, and many issues in health care require moral decisions.

Impeccable!

You couldn’t have relied on a better impartial source of opinion to base your attack on, could you Julian?

*adds Yunki to list of naughty boys that Santa won’t come to visit for starting this! we could all be discussing tyres and gear dangler set ups*

it’s a dirty job, but someone’s gotta do it.. 😀

At least I wear my bleeding lefty heart on my sleeve!

THM spends half his considerable amount of posting/typing time on laying claim to some kind of sagely ‘meta’ position inaccessible to us mere plebs, and the other half denying his obvious right-wing bias. All with frequent doses of somewhat nauseating insults poorly-dressed up as compliments. (See his last post. Oh, and the one before, and the one before that too.) He uses smilies sometimes too, but I don’t think he needed them here.

Nevertheless on a ‘fun’ thread like this it is just too much to leave alone. THM’s speed in replying to my posts would suggest he thinks so too, I expect he thinks/knows he is making a fool out of me and enjoying himself as well. FWIW I just read with interest his posts on ecomomics these days: there is as much point me challenging him on that as there is in him challenging me on health.

rattrap, I left out links to the Grauniad, unison and TUC websites in favour of the 38 degrees one! Unsuprisingly I didn’t find much to support the issue in the middle/right leaning press, mostly just reports about people’s responses/reactions to it rather than the issue itself.

38 degrees rattled the Labour government’s cage in their early days, and there is no reason from what they have campaigned on more recently (and indeed the last Labour election manifesto) to think that they wouldn’t still be upsetting a labour-led government if we still had one. They are biased because they challenge the government: will they have a right wing bias if Labour win next time? I wouldn’t call them ‘neutral’ by any stretch but they do seem to be populated by green/liberal types. Many conservatives backed their challenge of the Forestry sell-off btw. What is interesting is that the demographic of their members (professional, literate etc) do spend a remarkable amount of energy campaigning for things that actually people who don’t vote or use the internet much.

And just who is David Locke QC I hear you ask?

Funnily enough, he’s the former Labour MP for Wyre Forest

Touché!

Do you think they would have got a Conservative-voting QC to agree to help them in this case? FWIW they say they paid his firm £10k for the work(I hope they got a few more bits of paper than the 11 on the pdf for that though!), and as a QC he has a lot to lose professionally by hamming it up too much for the lefties.

Crikey Julian relax! You are wasting time and effort personalising things. Its not healthy, even when discussing the NHS. Plebs, bias, nauseating – your blood pressure must really be rising? Let it go, its not worth it.

But feel free to go back and look where the jibes started, and I have no issue with any “challenge” on economics (this is a forum after all) but please don’t make accusations about others when as rattrap pointed out you are merely describing your own behaviour. Much nicer to keep it real and polite.

Healthy, NHS, blood pressure… thy hospital-themed pun-chalice overfloweth. (genuine 😆 )

But really what did you expect on a thread that started with that picture?

Nevertheless, I’m glad to see you have put your days of personalising things behind you, and are willing share your insight in this through pointing out the errors of other people’s my ways. There was an interesting ‘confessional’ thread about this by your own fair hand last year wasn’t there? Perhaps I should look it up sometime.

Andy “save the NHS” Burnham has been conspicuous by his absence

Burnham is keeping his trap shut because he knows full well that Mid.Staffs happened on NuLav’s watch (e.g. see Private Eye‘s ‘Return to the killing fields’) – and indeed, it was a partial consequence of their policies. Meanwhile, the tabloids are baying for Sir David Nicholson’s blood – but (with grimly amusing irony) this Gov probably needs him for the implementation of the ConDem reforms (so big you’ll be able to see ’em from space, as he put it).

As for the privatisation of the NHS, it’s blatantly obvious that this was always the Tory intent: it’s why Lansley spent the opposition years preparing a Blitzkrieg plan, it’s why DOH uses such disingenuous language about the reforms, it’s why Section 75 was being sneaked thru and it’s why the likes of Monitor are stuffed to the gills with ex-Mckinsey types – all waiting for their big moment. Personally, I don’t think any of ’em really grasp what a mess this is turning into (although they may have very clear ideas about how the private healthcare lobby will be gaining from it). Personally, I’m sick to the back teeth with the political wailing and nashing of teeth – whether it be NuLav trying to distance themselves from past mistakes, or Tories badmouthing the NHS, whilst failing to explain how the nascent reforms will be improving matters in acute care (or indeed, their own links to the private healthcare lobby – de Bois is a good example). Platitudes about “choice and competition” are going to sound very fugging hollow as working relationships across the service are weakened – while the likes of Virgin, Serco, Circle etc profit off the back of NHS infrastructure, acute capacity and workforce training. It’s an utter top-down cluster-fug, & I’m willing to bet that it won’t do anything for the kind of patients who were failed by Mid-Staffs.

Oh, and Hunt makes my skin crawl. 👿

Sorry THM, but I’m with julianwilson. It’s not just that I disagree with you on stuff, I just find your posts on politics often come across as somewhat superior and a bit disingenuous. You always claim political neutrality (as well as the moral high ground) but generally espouse a broadly right-wing viewpoint. Why not have the courage of your convictions?

Whenever anyone tries to engage you on a tricky point you have a tendency to shift the goalposts, ignore it and focus on something else, or obfuscate the issue with some largely irrelevant technical economics jargon. Gets pretty wearing after a while.

Erm, with grum and julianwilson here.

Add in a large dash of patronisationshire sauce to taste.