[Closed] the tories

yes.. there is this idea going around that they will streamline the public sector and save us £x from our tax bill and we will all suddenly prosper.

Biggest economic lie going, but the easiest to sell to the public.

Let's be truthful they govern for the minority of the country.

The choice of parties that they've aligned themselves in Europe doesn't seem to bode well either.

what are the (credible) alternatives ?

I think they're in other countries 🙂

They will get in and will make as crap a job of it as New Labour has done. Some people will get rich and another generation will be squandered.

I'm more afraid of new labour than tories. Both bad, but Brown is the worst leader I can remember including Thatcher. He really is that bad IMHO. Sad really.

Captain Flashheart to the forum please, Captain Flashheart!

[/page]

I'm more afraid of new labour than tories. Both bad,

My fear is that voters are paralysed by fear and keep voting for either.

"worried " about a slightly right of centre goverment rather than a slightly left of centre one !! Come on for the vast majority of people there wont be any difference. A couple of people will do better a couple worse, just how it always is.

anyone read their policy on education? any teacher who's pupils are failing gets sacked, replaced with younger, newly qualified students.....

Sacking a teacher because she has been given a lowest-set idiot class that doesn't want to work... replaced with a student. Brilliant david. really brilliant.

>anyone read their policy on education?

No, got a link ?

Populations get the politicians they deserve, and this population, unfortunately, seems to deserve the Tories. In ten years time, the people who voted Tory will be the people moaning about how bad things are.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

[img] [/img]

'We care so much about the poor, yah?'

Same shit, different bucket.
Vince Cable for President!! 😉

I'm concerned, yeah. There's a severe talent vacuum in Westminster and with the Tory party in particular. Not encouraging for the tough few years that lie ahead. A point I've seen made a few places concerns the parallels between Cameron and Blair - how they're both good communicators, media-friendly empty suits. The difference being that electing such a cypher in 1997 was not a problem given the thriving economic climate of the country - Blair was the perfect man for 97 in hindsight. Now though? No way - we need a leader of weight and substance, an anti-Cameron. Unfortunately there is no one around the UK political landscape who fits the bill.

Cameron bears the classic politicians curse, like McBroon, of being the least offensive option to all wings of the party.

Fortunately the people pulling his strings are somewhat more embedded in the principles of Libertarian Conservatism than he appears to be.

For all who worry about what damage the tories could do if they get in, I need only offer three horrifying words - Prime Minister Mandelson

[i]For all who worry about what damage the tories could do if they get in, I need only offer three horrifying words - Prime Minister Mandelson[/i]

Surely, no one would be daft enough to ever let that happen............................................would they?? 😯

I personally can't wait to see the back of Labour. They are notoriously bad with money, always have been and always will be. I feel much more confident in the ability of the Tories to steer us out of this recession. I would also like to have the chance to vote on future European legislation, something we can't do under Brown and Labour.

Anyone see[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/andrew_marr_show/default.stm ] David Cameron interview by Andrew Marr[/url] this morning? The guy never answered a single question. Not for want of trying by Marr, and there were a few golden but brief flashes of panic on DC's face.

I realise your thinking 'Politician avoids question shocker' but any other would have picked out at least a few for sensible debate or policy clarification.

The impression that comes across is a totally vacuous philosophy of get in to power, to feed the smug monster.

It would be funny to see Mandelson run in an election, if only to see the Tories struggling with their inner scumbag qualities. Puts me in mind of Norman Tebbit endorsing Iain Duncan Smith against Michael Portillo - 'He's a normal, everday, family man' 🙂

anyone read their policy on education? any teacher who's pupils are failing gets sacked, replaced with younger, newly qualified students.....

Sacking a teacher because she has been given a lowest-set idiot class that doesn't want to work... replaced with a student. Brilliant david. really brilliant.

Saw this on the news last night. Great, another reactionary tory govt looms, creating sh1t lives for everyone in order to corner the knee jerk votes market.

Will the last person out please turn off the lights etc etc

fastindian Don't worry it'll not touch you unless your on of those thats got rich of nu labour, but then you'll be clever enough to get rich out of the tories. Course you could have a vested interest in not having the tories because the labour goverment is paying your wages. Supose if thats the case then you should not be aloud to vote. I reckon all state employees should not be able to vote in any election.

When Marr asked him how much he was worth after a report in a paper estmated 30million his wriggle was classic. He scares the shit out of me. I also fail to see how labour have done that badly though, I mean most of the same major things would of been done by the Tories. His comment about cutting spending and closing quangoes (???spelling??) wouldnt cause job losses was great.

I need only offer three horrifying words - Prime Minister Mandelson

A nice bit of melodramatic bollox there ratty ..... the geezer isn't even standing for member of parliament in the general election. So there is no possibility at all of him becoming leader of the Labour Party and even less, of the Queen asking him to be PM.

However, what ratty says here is quite true :

Cameron bears the classic politicians curse, like McBroon, of being the least offensive option to all wings of the party.

Fortunately the people pulling his strings are somewhat more embedded in the principles of Libertarian Conservatism than he appears to be.

What ratty means is, that despite Cameron appearing to be quite a fair and reasonable sort of guy (a bit like Blair) he will once prime minister, become a prisoner to the extreme right-wing freaks which hold so much sway within the Tory Party.

People like Zulu-Eleven's favourite guru Dan Hannan. This is the guy who says that the NHS should be scrapped because according to him it makes people "iller", yes you heard right - "iller" ! And it has been a failure for the last 60 years. He would like it replaced by the American model ...ie no health service. It's called "Libertarian Conservatism"

This new darling of the Tory Party and favourite right-wing pin-up boy Dan Hannan also said in Oct 2004, quote :

[i]"In the ten years that I have been travelling to Iceland, I have watched an economic miracle unfold there.”
“Today, Icelanders are absolutely rolling in it. A people two generations away from subsistence farming have become international tycoons.”[/i]

Three years later Iceland was bankrupt. Broke. Penniless. And the collapsed Icelandic banks were left owing Billions of pounds to local authorities throughout Britain.

So much for the "business acumen" of this Tory right-wing hero then.

Now some might dismiss Dan Hannan as a maverick with no influence .... not true. He has a lot of influence within the Tory party and is one of their most important speech writers. He also has a close relationship with Cameron, which explains why he was never disciplined when he rubbished the British NHS on US television.

[i]Course you could have a vested interest in not having the tories because the labour goverment is paying your wages[/i]

Nail on the head, Turkeys don't vote for Christmas! And wheres the main increase in government employees? yep, white collar bureaucrat civil servants, spot on the demographic for the vital influential swing voter...

Pisses me off the whole 'Tories would cut investment prolonging the recession' lie - Keynsian investment out of recession was about putting money into something that gave tangible results afterwards, about creating infrastructure, using money and creating jobs building houses, hospitals and factories, not about paying for pen pushers to process government paperwork from one department to another in an endless circle!

At the moment we're overspending our national income by Billions of pounds every week, Theres two choices to reduce this deficit - raise more tax, or spend less, I don't think that Labour are capable of either

but Brown is the worst leader I can remember including Thatcher.

And yet, many governments including the Conservative government in the US under G W Bush, took Gordon Brown's policies as an example of what action should be taken in face of the global recession.

There is no doubt that Gordon Brown could have been a much much better chancellor, if he had ditched the failed Thatcherite experiment of deregulation and "the market always knows best" which caused this crises in the first place.

But a Tory chancellor would have been much much worst........... George Osborne ??? ....ffs

I think mt's English teacher should be sacked.

Ernie - the thing you choose to ignore regards Iceland, is that the free market was NOT allowed to rein, the UK government interfered, assets were frozen using anti terrorist legislation.

The whole point of a free market is that there must be freedom to fail, without that people invest in high risk investments because they feel immune to the threat of losing everything, the free market relies on personal responsibility, that its YOUR responsibility to choose where you put your money, and that if you choose greedily, then you risk losing the lot and being left with nothing - the people who invested in notoriously (small c) conservative Barclays did so on a lesser interest rate than those who chose offshore high interest investments - theres a reason why they paid higher returns, by interfering and thinking that there can be no losers, Gordon perpetuated the very boom and bust he claimed to have abolished

I worry for our future, not because of Dave though. I actually suspect he's really an alright chap. I'm sure any of us could sit and have a beer with him in the same way that we could, say, have a beer with Flash or Stoner. Dave has had an easy ride in life, up until his combination of genes with the missus didn't quite work out for his son, who died tragically young. But that wasn't his or her fault, how were they to know? I'm sure if I sat down for a brandy with him, he'd be more than able to hide the massive difference in the metallic nature of the spoons that were in our mouths when we exited our respective mothers' wombs. I think he believes in the NHS, in good state provided education and in fairness and justice for all.

My worry, is as ernie says, that I strongly suspect he's had to "sell his soul" (not literally of course, I don't believe he really has one) to the far right slashers and burners part of his party. Worryingly, he completely avoided making his position on Europe clear today. Even more worryingly (this concerned me big time a few months back), he never gave Hannan the disciplining he deserved after his debacle on American TV. Worryingly again, he's allowed the Euro-tories to align themselves with some truly nutcase parties in Brussels. And finally, worryingly (I'm really really worried now), he seems to be happy for the BBC to be taken apart bit by bit to be ravaged by Murdoch and Associates (Inc).

And here's the rub for me...I don't think Dave really wants all this bad stuff to happen, because, despite his background, I think he might just give a shit about the rest of us busily walking the breadline, having to use the NHS and send our kids to state schools...I always thought Major was a decent bloke surrounded by horrible individuals - the only difference being that (most of) Major's crowd had been exposed for the useless bunch of incompetents they were. However, there is a rising element of pretty horrible (and young) individuals in the party who have some kind of sway over him - and when Dave gets in, I think there's going to be a line of these guys at his door waiting for their pounds of flesh..and we have no idea how painful it's going to be when we're giving it, and how long it'll take for the wounds to heal.

tinribz - Member
Anyone see Gordon Brown interview by Andrew Marr last week? The guy never answered a single question. Not for want of trying by Marr, and there were a few golden but brief flashes of panic on GB's face.

See what I did there?

To be honest, this thread will simply descend as usual. Lots of people will blame Facha for everkink, innit (regardless of the fact that someone else has had the reins for quite some little while). Other folks will take the opposite point of view.

Me? Well, I have some doubts over Osbourne, mainly because of his connections with Mandelson and chums, but I would far rather see my country represented by Cameron and Hague than by anyone from the Labour party. As to "Saint" Vince? Give it a rest. The man's happily feathering his nest with sucking up to the media and saying what they want hear. Economic genius he is not.

I would far rather see my country represented by Cameron and Hague

Wouldn't you rather we knew who was pulling their strings though Flash? Surely you would wouldn't you?

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Ernie - the thing you choose to ignore regards Iceland, is that the free market was NOT allowed to rein..........The whole point of a free market is that there must be freedom to fail.....

Ratty ..... I am honestly gobsmacked !

Now, I can understand that you might want to put a 'spin' on things, But this is frankly ridiculous !

Let me remind you again what the guy whom you consider to be your guru, Dan Hannan said. [i]Remember[/i], this is the guy who you reckon has all the answers, the guy who [i]really[/i] understands economics.

Dan Hannan Oct 2004, quote :

[i][b]"“Icelanders are rolling in it. Why? Because they understand that small is beautiful and have stayed out of the EU”

“In the ten years that I have been travelling to Iceland, I have watched an economic miracle unfold there.”

“Today, Icelanders are absolutely rolling in it. A people two generations away from subsistence farming have become international tycoons.”

“This sparse, chilly speck of tundra has just overtaken Norway to become the wealthiest place in Europe."[/i][/b]

[u]HE WAS WRONG[/u] !

And he wasn't wrong about any old thing. He was wrong in his whole economic analyses. He wrong about the things which he most fundamentally believes in.

Do you understand what I am saying ?

Bring back maggie!

Here's the article which he wrote Ratty, in case you want to argue that he didn't say those things.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/spectator/spec402.html

BTW, Boris Johnson was editor of the Spectator when that complete load of nonsense was published.

Daniel Hannan is an extremist imbecile ernie. Not sure how relevant it is bringing him up in a conversation about the Tory party. It would be like dismissing today's labour party because Arthur Scargill is putting the odd candidate up for the Socialist Labour Party.

I am by nature and nurture a Tory supporter - my one blip was voting out the corrupted and lost shower in 1997 believing that any change had to be better. Still, older and wiser...

But Dave and chums worry me - I'm now in the public sector and I am horrified at the waste and cost incurred by ill thought out legislation knee jerked into creation and rushed through a useless rubber stamping Parliament by the current lot, largely, I believe, because the vast majority of Labour MPs are too young, too sheep like and lacking in any "real world" experience that could generate an iota of common sense between them

And then I look at the Tory alternative. Plus ca change!

The Lib Dems were looking an interesting alternative, but have noticeably NOT been talking about Europe in recent months.

I'm not Euro sceptic enough to vote UKIP, not racist enough to vote BNP, not naive enough to vote Green. Unless I stand as an independent, I'll have no one to vote for!

Ernie, I did not say for one second that he didn't say it, I think you've missed my point completely - you cannot deny the fact that in this case free market economics were not allowed to reign, therefore you cannot draw a conclusion as to what would have happened if they had been, we simply don't know!

[i]you cannot deny the fact that in this case free market economics were not allowed to reign, therefore you cannot draw a conclusion as to what would have happened if they had been, we simply don't know![/i]

Blimey! I've heard more cogent arguments from people trying to convince me that Jesus is my saviour.

Just to worry you all further, there were rumours of a Bill being drafted that would have (very quietly) enabled Lord Mandelson to return to the elected chamber and beome Prime Minister, which he can't do while a Lord.

FWIW, I think the Tories screwed up ditching Hague as leader - I know he was an idiot at times, but he had something about him. Maybe a backbone? Hague for PM, Vince Cable as Chancellor - I'd vote for that!

you cannot deny the fact that in this case free market economics were not allowed to reign, therefore you cannot draw a conclusion as to what would have happened if they had been, we simply don't know!

Can you tell me the reason why every government on the planet is currently intervening rather than letting the market work?
Why does no one trust the market but you?
If you want equilibrium the market is great however if you want all your citizens to eat food and have jobs it may not be the best method- this is perhaps best demonstarted by every government on the planet being both interventionist and protectionist.

Almost all observers beleive that the main cause of the current banking crisis was a result of unrelgulated banking sector - which is the free market at work is it not?
I am glad we have you as the sole voice of reason in this current crisis#

Edit :No law is required for Mandy to renounce his peerage and become PM it has been done before with Alec Douglas-Home (Conservative)1963/4
Tony Benn also used this to renounce his hereditary peerage.

How do you think they could do this quietly Parliament is an open public debating forum with reporters etc?

Free market economics were allowed to reign labrat. The result was something called a recession, you may of heard of it.

While I can agree that if you are going to practise the dogma of free market economics then those who live by the sword, should have actually died by it, but it's never going to happen, so ditch it.

Hannan's description of Iceland before the bust doesn't seem very different to anything else I read at the time, apart forhis claim that being outside the EU had something to do with it (which is of course simply an article of faith for Hannan).

It was greedy money for nothing types in Britain who happily invested tax payer's money in Icelandic banks without thinking it through, and Gordon Brown's FSA that thought it was all fine.

I think the Tories screwed up ditching Hague as leader

It shows the really poor quality of Politicians we have from all parties if you think Hague would have made a good PM.

and Gordon Brown's FSA that thought it was all fine.

And there was me thinking it was independent. In fact that was the problem.

Daniel Hannan is an extremist imbecile ernie. Not sure how relevant it is bringing him up in a conversation about the Tory party.

He is extremely relevant. As Zulu-Eleven quite rightly said (and it was in response to his post btw, so if you have any issues it's with him) :

Zulu-Eleven

Cameron bears the classic politicians curse, like McBroon, of being the least offensive option to all wings of the party.

Fortunately the people pulling his strings are somewhat more embedded in the principles of Libertarian Conservatism than he appears to be.

Dan Hannan is very influential within the Tory Party. Only today I saw that BBC News 24 gave him a very long interview at the Conservative Party Conference. And as I have said, he has written speeches for Tory Party leaders and is a friend of Cameron.

Obviously he isn't the face of Tory Party which those planning the Conservative Party election campaign want the public to see.

EDIT : "Libertarian Conservative" is how Dan Hannan would describe himself.

Rubbish El-Bent - we've never had anything approaching a true free market economy, we've had a controlled, regulated and insured market economy - who sets the interest rates?

Ernie - have you read the plan yet? would be more than happy to Email you a copy if you didn't want to line his evil capitalist pockets!

ernie, does that mean that everyone who has written a speech or two, as well as doing an interview or two is "very influental in the Labour party"? If so, Eddie Izzard and Fiona Phillips are evidently the beacons of Labour policy! 😉

Hannan is A face of the Conservatives, much as the oh so right on [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5309794/MPs-expenses-Left-wing-MPs-118000-claims-for-second-home.html ]Bob Marshall-Andrews[/url] is A face of the Labour party. That is not to say that either is the very heart of the party.

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Ernie, I did not say for one second that he didn't say it, I think you've missed my point completely - you cannot deny the fact that in this case free market economics were not allowed to reign,

Not allowed to reign ? Not allowed to reign ???

So why the **** did your messiah say that it was the best example in the world ??!!

He said that he knew everything that anyone needed to know about Iceland. He said that he had been travelling to Iceland for ten years and knew a multitude of Icelandic politicians, indeed I believe that he was best man at the wedding of an Icelandic minister.

Have you actually read the article ?

Dan Hannan was wrong......wrong wrong wrong. Not because he didn't understand what was happening in Iceland, but because the economics he supports, are shit. You use a technical term.

Zulu 11 can you answer my post rather than go on about Iceland not being a true free market economy (which is true).
No one uses free market economics for a very good reason it does not work unless all you seek is equilibrium. Unfortunately we[ humans] value other things above finding the perfect supply and demand for goods/services etc . Apparently we want poor people to eat and most of us to work , taxation to be fair, to have our own industries rather than just China, to have Green policies , educate our children and (I know but get this one) redistribute wealth - some crazy people think this is fair way to do things. Imagine that. Have they not heard of the trickle down effect the idiots.
Given this how could we ever have a freemarket anywhere is everyone wrong but you?

What kind of nirvana do you think it would have provided if Iceland had just gone for it?

CaptainFlashheart - Member

ernie, does that mean that blah blah blah

If you think Dan Hannan is irrelevant Cap'ain, you best write to the BBC and tell them not to waste your money giving long interviews to irrelevant nobodies.

Personally I trust the BBC's judgement on the subject more than yours.

And how important Dan Hannan is, is the one thing me and Zulu-Eleven actually agree on 😯

A nasty bunch the tories - you can see them rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of cutting the welfare state.

Lets get a couple of things clear. UK is not highly taxed in comparison to other EC states and our services are badly funded as a result. Our poor services are due in the main to underfunding.

GBs handling of the economic crisis is well thought of worldwide and most other countries followed his lead in managing it. Osbornes answer of " do nothing" would have made it a lot worse.

If the tories get in with a decent majority as looks likely you can say goodbye to the NHS as a universal and free service. You can see the final end of social services and this increases in nastyness such as the baby P case. Increased unemployment and poverty with the rise in crime that brings is a given.

You will see a massive rise in crime - compared to the massive reduction is crime over the last ten years. Crime is at a 30 yr low in scotland.

You can kiss goodbye to the affluence we have.

What a wasted opportunity the last ten years. Some good stuff at the beginning of the labour government - devolution, family tax credits, expansion of secondary education and an easing of the underfunding of the NHS. How did all that goodwill and the massive majority end in so little concrete improvement? Why did they lose their way so quickly.

For sure they don't deserve our support anymore more but teh prospect of a Tory government is so depressing. Kiss goodbye to the NHS

Ernie, I would be happy to see the BBC not give long coverage to a great many people.

Personally I trust the BBC's judgement on the subject more than yours.

Good for you, my dear old thing, good for you. I, however, would suspect that given their rather Guardianista/Left leaning bias (Who is Marr married to again, oh yes...) they had chosen to interview Hannan as it is exactly the message they wish to make. Now, that is not to say the the BBC is [i]always[/i] biased, but many of their senior political reporters are very well connected within the Labour party.

Hannan is, as I said before, one part of a party. There are people in the Labour party who dwell on the outer edges as well, viz Dennis Skinner, but that does not make them the voice of their party. Both are trivial, entertaining to the other side's conspiracy loons but little more than that.

If you are so convinced that Hannan is writing Conservative policy, please do provide the proof of that.

TJ, do shut up. What a pile of sensationalist tosh. Do you write for the Guardian? Oh, no wait a minute, you can spell so clearly not.

Ernie - perhaps he just wasn't aware of the behind the scenes government guarantees and “artificially low interest rates” caused by the Housing Financing Fund (HFF)? After all, he did say it was a miracle...

Junkyard - The driver of the free market is greed, the brake of that greed is fear of loss, Free market economics accepts that for there to be winners, there have to be losers, the reason that governments intervene is that nobody wants to be the loser, and governments continue promise the impossible to their people in an effort to get elected - as long as we all stay greedy, in our consumerist western lifestyle, then we acknowledge that someone somewhere is poor to balance our wealth, quite clearly, thats unsustainable, and sooner or later there will be a crash.

If you are so convinced that Hannan is writing Conservative policy, please do provide the proof of that.

Dan Hannan is a leader writer for the Daily Telegraph. He has written speeches for Tory leaders. He is close to Cameron. He doesn't sound like a nobody in the Tory Party to me.

You want proof ? Look it up yourself - it's all out there on the internet.

TandemJeremy - Member
A nasty bunch the tories - you can see them rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of cutting the welfare state.

Prove it. How about cutting the waste on a client/voter state?

TandemJeremy - Member Our poor services are due in the main to underfunding.

Despite Labour pouring funds at public spending? No, the problem is poor spending, poor management. Not funds.

TandemJeremy - Member
GBs handling of the economic crisis is well thought of worldwide and most other countries followed his lead in managing it. Osbornes answer of " do nothing" would have made it a lot worse.

Well done, parrot the "Do nothing Tories" line.

TandemJeremy - Member
If the tories get in with a decent majority as looks likely you can say goodbye to the NHS as a universal and free service.

Policy evidence, if you please. Or is this more sensationalist tosh designed to scare the masses?

TandemJeremy - Member
You can see the final end of social services and this increases in nastyness such as the baby P case. Increased unemployment and poverty with the rise in crime that brings is a given.

Stop it now, please, it's too funny!

TandemJeremy - Member
You will see a massive rise in crime - compared to the massive reduction is crime over the last ten years. Crime is at a 30 yr low in scotland.

According to whatever set of figures you choose to use.

TandemJeremy - Member
You can kiss goodbye to the affluence we have.

The whole F**ING country is bankrupt. Public borrowing is spiralling out of control. Is that really "affluence"?

TandemJeremy - Member
What a wasted opportunity the last ten years. Some good stuff at the beginning of the labour government - devolution, family tax credits, expansion of secondary education and an easing of the underfunding of the NHS. How did all that goodwill and the massive majority end in so little concrete improvement? Why did they lose their way so quickly.

Why did people vote for them again and again? You are the people to blame.

TandemJeremy - Member
For sure they don't deserve our support anymore more but teh prospect of a Tory government is so depressing. Kiss goodbye to the NHS

Again, please provide your proof that the Conservative government will do away with the NHS.

Bored now. Going to watch Kevin Mcloud on the Grand Tour instead. Far more intellectually stimulating than your dull, parroted dross.

 

Ernie - perhaps he just wasn't aware of the behind the scenes government guarantees and “artificially low interest rates”

Well we best ignore everything he says then. Because this was a subject which he said he knew extremely well.

And you best throw away your copy of "The Plan" ..........clearly the bloke doesn't know what he's talking about.

Probably best not to vote Tory too, since according to you, he will be "pulling the strings" in any Tory government.

[s]Ernie[/s] edit - TJ - you've missed the fact that even if "right wing loonies" like Hannan are writing Tory policy, the policy doesn't threaten the universal health care obligation:

[i]
?is is not a shift to a non-universal scheme. we are committed to a system that covers all citizens, whatever their circumstances. most people might be able to look after their healthcare, free from government targets and bureaucracies. But some will never manage to earn enough to pay enough into their own savings or catastrophic insurance accounts. Here the state must continue funding healthcare through the welfare system, and there will need to be state oversight ensuring that expenditure is required and cost effective. ?e poorest will receive a better quality of care than now, partly due to market efficiencies which will make the entire health sector more competitive, but also because instead of attempting to look after all citizens the government is focusing on the most vulnerable.[/i]

Ernie - have you actually read the plan yet? I mean, if you're going to tell us all about what an austere hellish nightmare we would all be living under if Hannan was pulling the strings, it might be worth having actually read what he's proposing... or is it just the classic 'beware the bogeyman' scare tactic?

Junkyard, if you were right regards iceland, then why haven't the other tax islands failed, Switzerland, the Channel Islands, Lichtenstein, Monaco?

CFH - underfunding in the NHS is the main issue it faces - simple. We spend around 9% of GDP on healthcare, most of the rest of the EU around 12%, the USA 20%. It was 7% of gdp when labour came in. Underfunding over decades ins the main issue. We still spend less than all our rivals on healthcare. We need to spend more to have a decent healthcare system.

This is undeniable truth as is the reduction in crime - all figures from reported crime to the british crime survey show massive reductions in crime over ten years. Fact and unarguable by anyone with a grain of intelligence

The do nothing Tories line? Only repeating what Osbourne has said. That was clearly their preferred policy for dealing with the recession - cut spending not increase spending as the rest of the world has done.

Proof that the conservatives will destry the NHS - again speeches made by senior tories and ideas from their think tanks and previous experience of tory governments and the NHS

Zulu - that quote from you clearly means the end of universal provision and the creation of a two tier system.

CFH - not up to your usual standard old chap yours is the dull parrotted dross that is actually wrong in fact - in ewassily provasble facts.

[img] [/img]

Ernie - have you actually read the plan yet? ......or is it just the classic 'beware the bogeyman' scare tactic?

WTF would I do that ? 😯

I know the geezer talks complete shite, I've seen him tell an American audience that the British NHS makes people "iller" as he puts it. And that it is a 60 year old failed experiment.

Would you like me to post the link to the video ? I can if you want........that would be a very good 'beware the bogeyman' scare tactic, eh ?

I've also seen plenty of other complete bollox he spouts (apart Iceland) so why would want to sit down and read a book by him ffs ?

Ah, so, you don't know what the tories actually intend to do (since clearly Hannan is writing their policies), but you inherently [b]know[/b] that it will be bad and cut everything and end the NHS because, they're, well, tories - nicely constructed argument there Ernie

[b]Creation[/b] of a two tier system? Erm, have you ever heard of BUPA...

Mmmm, have you tried to find an Intensive Care bed in a BUPA hospital?

I'm quite looking forward to it really. What do you think they'll get - 1, mibbe 2 MPs in Scotland. With Labour finished for a generation, Cameron might just be the last PM of the UK.

Have you tried to find one in an NHS hospital recently crikey? I mean, since we're spending how much more on the NHS than we were a decade ago?

I know how many beds there are, and can tell you which ones are empty closest to you....

How about chemotherapy? how much of that do BUPA do?

What about an Accident and Emergency unit?

Hmmm? BUPA do those do they?

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Ah, so, you don't know what the tories actually intend to do......

Well I do know that you talk as much shite as your messiah Dan Hannan does.

Does that count ?

And your point being?

Sorry, we don't have a two tier system at the moment?

Funny you should mention Chaemo really isn't it, given the availability of certain cancer therapies on the NHS that you can buy privately...

Ernie - Well I do know that you talk as much shite as your messiah Dan Hannan does.

Ah, you see, you fall back into the old trap of trying to play the man not the ball, you couldn't debate the issues without trying to get personally abusive could you, Just like Fred you lose it and start getting shouty and abusive when you cannot make a coherent argument... such a shame

Zulu - don't talk carp - I know you find it hard not to

When labour came to power we spent about 7.8% of GDP on healthcare. We now spend 9% EU average is 12% and the USA spends 20%.

So we still spend far less than comparable countries. Our NHS is still underfunded. This is the main reason for its sometimes poor performance

The only silver lining is a druidh says - should mean independence for Scotland because i really don't think the Scots will take another tory cutting government that they have not voted for.

So, we spend more Tandem, thats the test is it?

great, we spend more money on managers and external consultants

🙄

[i]Sorry, we don't have a two tier system at the moment?[/i]

No, we have a system where you can pay to see the same doctors that you see in the NHS, that allows you to be treated earlier or more convieniently.

A system that mainly treats those without serious or terminal conditions, that provides no emergency care, no critical care, not much in the way of longer term care.

We actually have one system, the NHS, and a small private sector.

Zulu - Ernies position is far more coherent that yours which is full of lies, half truths and misrepresentations and ill considered tory dogma

No private healthcare system anywhere in the world does as much for as little money as the NHS it is the single most efficient provider of healthcare in the world - except perhaps cuba

Zulu - yes. More money is needed. Better management as a part of this. NHS managerial costs are the lowest in the EU.

Not just better management but better research, better funding for meds, better pay for the staff and more staff. its not rocket science

No, we have a system where you can pay to see the same doctors that you see in the NHS, that allows you to be treated earlier or more convieniently.

And thats not two tier? thats the great dream is it?

Lies and half truths TJ? party political dogma? Like:

If the tories get in with a decent majority as looks likely you can say goodbye to the NHS as a universal and free service. You can see the final end of social services and this increases in nastyness such as the baby P case.

Better management TJ? Try telling that to the patients of Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS trust

Great dream?

Go on then, give me a clue what that means.

without trying to get personally abusive

LOL ! Have we got to the bit in the argument where you say "you're being horrid to me " ? 😀

Well actually, we've got to the bit in the argument where I think to myself "why am I arguing with this dipstick".
So yeah, I'll leave it to you and TJ......... I might take a peak every now again to see how you're getting on 8)

Don't do that Earnie - don't leave me trapped with the loonies!

Zulu - the NHS needs more and better management. Probably its worst aspect is poor management at middle and senior grades along with political moving of the goal posts too frequently.

Are you saying the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS trust would be better with less money and less management?

Yeah, TJ, more managers, thats what was needed, not someone with the simple ****ing common sense to say "hang on theres a problem here, everything's covered in shite!"

C'mon Ernie, argue the points and play nicely, thats always been the way here, I don't feel the need to start calling you names because you don't agree with me - its like having a petulant Fred back in the building.

TJ spouting his usual bollocks, again.

TBH TJ, you should be first in the cull of NHS workers. Your job is obviously not that important or needed as you seem to be on here most of the time. Or is it allowed in the public sector that workers/comrades spend half their working day on the internet, posting, bollocks?

You were going to explain what the great dream is?

While you're thinking about it, here's something to read.

[u]Robert Baker: Don't use private medicine unless you're feeling fine[/u]

[i]I am going to let you in on a trade secret. One that every junior doctor in Britain knows; and then promptly forgets when they get to be a consultant. It is a secret that could just save your life - or, at very least, your savings. That secret is this: If you have anything wrong with you, don't go private. Stick to the bread and butter NHS.

Please note that conditional clause. If you have anything wrong with you. I will explain later why, if you're well, you might also want to steer clear of MammonCare plc.

Let us suppose you require major surgery. You discover that your local hospital has a long waiting list, so you use your savings to bring your date forward. You are admitted to a prestigious private hospital. The operation goes well but afterwards you suffer complications. You need a tube in your throat to help you to breathe. During the night your tube falls out or becomes blocked. The (only available) duty doctor is called. He does not know how to replace the tube or unblock it and nor do the nurses. There is no other doctor available. You die.

This is an extreme - but true - example of one of the problems with private hospitals. What would have happened in the NHS? Even your local bog-standard rackety old district general would have multiple doctors from various specialties on hand for just such emergencies.

About 500 seriously ill patients are transferred to NHS intensive-care beds from private hospitals every year - ICU is not covered by most insurance policies. There are virtually no private intensive care units. Out of hours, private hospitals usually boast a single duty doctor - the RMO, or resident medical officer. They are usually in training, working for an exam and desperate for a quiet life. They may have no experience whatever of your particular condition.

Of course I exempt (from this particular criticism) those few private units that are situated within large NHS hospitals. Nor would I be so bold as to present our final experiment with socialism as perfect. But there are clear, even statutory differences between the two that reflect their relative safety. Some are exempt from regulations by registering as nursing homes or, in one case, by Royal Charter.

The Government's new plan for improving the quality in the NHS in the wake of Bristol, Ledward and the rest is called Clinical Governance. The scheme can best be understood under seven headings, bombastically called the Seven Pillars. Taking each in turn:

Research and Development. The non-pharmaceutical private sector contributes, effectively, no research or development. No marks. Quality Indicators - designed to compare units and hospitals - private sector not included, no marks. Risk Management - designed to reduce accident and error. No statutory obligation to carry this out in private hospitals. No marks. Clinical Efficacy - assessing the best and most effective treatments - exclusively carried out by the state and academic sectors. No marks. Continuing Medical Education - ensuring that consultants are kept up to speed. No obligation for private consultants to comply. No marks. Audit - examining past performance against an agreed standard. No involvement by private sector. No marks Patient Empowerment - self explanatory. I suppose if you want the choice of a leather sofa in the waiting room, and a doctor who uses a Montblanc pen, then that's a sort of power. One mark. Total for private hospitals: one mark out of seven.

Harley Street is, of course, utterly unregulated. Any quack can set up shop on the Street of Shamen (sic) and any quack does. Like Elsie in Cabaret, rental may be arranged by the hour. One lucrative pastime comprises employment health screening. If you work in the City you may have had to undergo this yourself - a round of blood tests and a trot on the treadmill to check out your ticker. Such patients - and the worried well - are known as the "dairy herd", to be regularly milked.

There is a simple mathematical theory to explain why screening the healthy is so bent. Bayes' theorem of conditional probability refers to the interpretation of any given test with reference to the prior conditions of the studied population. Consider two weather forecasters, one living in Addis Ababa and one in Fort William. Both use the same tests, including monitoring changes in atmospheric pressure on a barometer. Suppose the barometer needle says "rain likely". Which meteorologist is going to be correct in his prediction?

Similarly, if you apply medical tests to the wrong population, then your results will not be reliable, and the consequences unpredictable. No test is perfect and there will inevitably be both false positives and false negatives, with potentially serious results. For these reasons there is almost no point - with certain exceptions, like HIV tests - in screening healthy people.

What can be done about it? The Commission for Health Improvement has announced that it is going to be "breathing down the neck" of private hospitals. Quite right too. The chief difference between accepting money for iffy medical practice and pick-pocketing is that the Artful Dodger never expected his victims to hold their wallets deferentially open and say, "Do you take Visa?"

The writer is a registrar at a London teaching hospital [/i]

never post from work. I only work part time.

I speak from 30 yrs of experience of the NHS and private healthcare working from healthcare assistant to senior management- firstly under labour, then tory, then labour, then SNP.

My experience leads me to believe that:
On the whole the Tories put less money into the NHS. The historical record and the rehtoric from them now show this
Political involvement in the NHS is rarely useful from any side.
Better quality management is crucial to the success of the NHS
Clinical skills are not as good as people would like you to think
Wastage is much less than people would like you to think
Underfunding is obvious to anyone who has significant experience in the NHS although the increase in funding over the last 12 years is obvious.

Zulu - lanesra - what is your experience of the NHS You appear not to have a clue what you are talking about.

Yeah Crikey, and in the meantime we pay for people like John Pilley to get two sex changes on the NHS:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article787563.ece

Let alone pissing money up the wall working round the two week rule and paying Lloyd Grossman £100k to taste a menu...

Do you really think that people should get non essential treatment on the NHS?

if you want something more than that, should everyone else pay for it? of course not - I really suggest that you go away and read what has actually been proposed by the conservative thinktanks regards medical insurance rather than harp on about some threat of a "two tier" NHS that we already have!