Jump to content


Have the Conservatives fixed our country?

Recommended Posts

Please explain what the conservatives have done that would stop another Harold Shipman?

 

 

 

And the Keogh report, have you read it?

 

 

Oh dear, ending student nurse bursaries isn't going to help achieve that is it... Nor discouraging people from becoming doctors and causing many existing ones to go abroad.

 

Shipman happened early on Labour's watch and they eventually put in some measures to stop it happening again. I have read both the Keogh Report and the Francis Report. They simply report an uncontrolled, uncaring NHS with managers paying themselves huge salaries and pensions. Under Labour doctors were given huge pay rises in return for less work and less scrutiny.

 

In 2005 I sat on a NICE committee looking into preventing deaths caused by blood clots. At that time 30,000 people a year were dying as a result of blood clots, and the vast majority of those were as a consequence of NHS intervention.

 

I simply make the point that pouring money into the NHS does not make it better or safer. What the NHS really needs is better management, and it won't get it under a Labour government. It is more likely under a Tory government.

 

But the fact remains that on Labour's watch billions were poured in and tens of thousands of lives were thrown away through neglect by an uncaring, unreformed, unaccountable medical profession. Remember that propaganda slogan: The NHS is Safe in Our Hands. What it actually meant was: The NHS Staff are Safe in Our Hands, but NHS Patients are Not.

 

I say again that the idea that Labour has a monopoly on compassion is utterly laughable, and has no basis in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel the same way about the Guardian.

Fortunately in this case, they are of the same view:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/26/80-percent-junior-doctors-took-part-in-all-out-strike

If you don't believe the Guardian either, tell me what you do think of as a reliable source and I bet you a penny to a gooseberry that it'll say the same thing.

They say entirely different things. :huh:

 

---------- Post added 09-08-2016 at 21:17 ----------

 

Shipman happened early on Labour's watch and they eventually put in some measures to stop it happening again. I have read both the Keogh Report and the Francis Report. They simply report an uncontrolled, uncaring NHS with managers paying themselves huge salaries and pensions. Under Labour doctors were given huge pay rises in return for less work and less scrutiny.

 

In 2005 I sat on a NICE committee looking into preventing deaths caused by blood clots. At that time 30,000 people a year were dying as a result of blood clots, and the vast majority of those were as a consequence of NHS intervention.

 

I simply make the point that pouring money into the NHS does not make it better or safer. What the NHS really needs is better management, and it won't get it under a Labour government. It is more likely under a Tory government.

 

But the fact remains that on Labour's watch billions were poured in and tens of thousands of lives were thrown away through neglect by an uncaring, unreformed, unaccountable medical profession. Remember that propaganda slogan: The NHS is Safe in Our Hands. What it actually meant was: The NHS Staff are Safe in Our Hands, but NHS Patients are Not.

 

I say again that the idea that Labour has a monopoly on compassion is utterly laughable, and has no basis in reality.

 

You can say it as many times as you like, it's a strawman, I never said that Labour was a solution. I said that the conservatives were destroying the NHS, that's an entirely different statement to the one you are apparently arguing against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They say entirely different things. :huh:

 

---------- Post added 09-08-2016 at 21:17 ----------

 

 

You can say it as many times as you like, it's a strawman, I never said that Labour was a solution. I said that the conservatives were destroying the NHS, that's an entirely different statement to the one you are apparently arguing against.

 

Don't start with that calling everything a strawman again.

 

The Guardian article makes it quite clear that the dispute is over pay and conditions. As do dozens of other articles by various sections of the press over many weeks.

Who told you otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They say entirely different things. :huh:

 

---------- Post added 09-08-2016 at 21:17 ----------

 

 

You can say it as many times as you like, it's a strawman, I never said that Labour was a solution. I said that the conservatives were destroying the NHS, that's an entirely different statement to the one you are apparently arguing against.

 

Who says the Conservatives are destroying the NHS? You? The medical profession? From your comments below you seem to be basing your opinion solely on the amount of money spent, not on the experience of patients. The only ones destroying the NHS are so-called medical professionals, and their corrupt managers.

 

The bill for medical negligence claims against the NHS is now more than £19,000,000,000. What could the NHS do with that money? Instead of being spent on care it is paid to lawyers and compensation to injured or killed patients. And how much do you think corrupt managers have spent on lawyers and compensation to whistle-blowers that they have tried and failed to suppress?

 

The NHS is awash with cash, but not enough of it gets spent on patient care. Too much of it is poured down the throats of lawyers, administrators, PR, useless management and incompetent medical staff. This government has pledged to make the NHS more efficient, and top of that list of efficiencies is to cut down on negligence by doctors. Of course, the BMA will fight them tooth and claw for the right to kill patients and not have to take responsibility. That's always been the way for doctors.

 

You can huff and puff all you like but the reality is that the NHS was out of control under Labour. This government is trying to get it back under control and is being fought every step of the way by a bolshy medical profession demanding the right to get paid more, to do less, and to remain unaccountable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can huff and puff all you like but the reality is that the NHS was out of control under Labour. This government is trying to get it back under control and is being fought every step of the way by a bolshy medical profession demanding the right to get paid more, to do less, and to remain unaccountable.

 

Sounds like you think the Tories are failing to 'get it under control'; still blaming Labour after six years in power, :loopy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who says the Conservatives are destroying the NHS? You? The medical profession? From your comments below you seem to be basing your opinion solely on the amount of money spent, not on the experience of patients. The only ones destroying the NHS are so-called medical professionals, and their corrupt managers.

Not in the slightest, the amount of money spent was merely one issue that unbeliever wanted to challenge. Point proven though.

The other factors beyond underfunding were the incredibly badly handled junior doctors contract, the removal of student nurse bursaries and the general breakdown in the relationship between the government and the medical professionals.

 

The bill for medical negligence claims against the NHS is now more than £19,000,000,000. What could the NHS do with that money? Instead of being spent on care it is paid to lawyers and compensation to injured or killed patients. And how much do you think corrupt managers have spent on lawyers and compensation to whistle-blowers that they have tried and failed to suppress?

Excessive management would be another common complaint, and with that excess you're going to increase opportunity for poor decision making and outright corruption.

What's the source for the 19 billion btw?

 

The NHS is awash with cash, but not enough of it gets spent on patient care. Too much of it is poured down the throats of lawyers, administrators, PR, useless management and incompetent medical staff.

This last seems highly unlikely to me, they are very heavily regulated and monitored.

This government has pledged to make the NHS more efficient, and top of that list of efficiencies is to cut down on negligence by doctors. Of course, the BMA will fight them tooth and claw for the right to kill patients and not have to take responsibility. That's always been the way for doctors.

You sound like you have an axe to grind.

 

You can huff and puff all you like but the reality is that the NHS was out of control under Labour. This government is trying to get it back under control and is being fought every step of the way by a bolshy medical profession demanding the right to get paid more, to do less, and to remain unaccountable.

 

You can huff and puff all you like but the reality is that the NHS is being severely damaged by this government, probably with a view to privatising it and making themselves and their mates rich.

 

---------- Post added 10-08-2016 at 08:35 ----------

 

Don't start with that calling everything a strawman again.

Everytime someone says "well Labour aren't the answer". I will call it a strawman, because I have never said that they are.

The Guardian article makes it quite clear that the dispute is over pay and conditions. As do dozens of other articles by various sections of the press over many weeks.

Who told you otherwise?

Can you quote the bit that makes that clear, because I didn't see that section when I read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not in the slightest, the amount of money spent was merely one issue that unbeliever wanted to challenge. Point proven though.

The other factors beyond underfunding were the incredibly badly handled junior doctors contract, the removal of student nurse bursaries and the general breakdown in the relationship between the government and the medical professionals.

Excessive management would be another common complaint, and with that excess you're going to increase opportunity for poor decision making and outright corruption.

What's the source for the 19 billion btw?

This last seems highly unlikely to me, they are very heavily regulated and monitored.

You sound like you have an axe to grind.

 

You can huff and puff all you like but the reality is that the NHS is being severely damaged by this government, probably with a view to privatising it and making themselves and their mates rich.

 

---------- Post added 10-08-2016 at 08:35 ----------

 

Everytime someone says "well Labour aren't the answer". I will call it a strawman, because I have never said that they are.

 

Can you quote the bit that makes that clear, because I didn't see that section when I read it.

 

 

You offer no answers. There's nothing wrong with somebody pointing out that the obvious alternative to government policy that you criticise is worse as demonstrated by the official opposition. It's not a strawman.

You complain often about people making strawman arguments and putting words in your mouth. Then speak. Tell us what you would do, or who in politics you align yourself with so that we can discuss it. A criticism only approach to debate is of minimal utility.

 

Junior doctors march across Westminster Bridge during their strike calling for more pay and better working conditions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/10093091/NHS-negligence-claims-rise-by-20-per-cent-in-just-one-year.html

 

Medical staff may be heavily regulated, but they are rarely held to account by those regulators. Not one doctor was even disciplined after 1400 deaths at Mid Staffs. A licence to practice is a licence to kill.

Edited by Jim Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A licence to practice is a licence to kill.

 

What an appalling sentiment. You definitely have an axe to grind.

 

Your book (at 157 pages, more a pamphlet, and a vanity published pamphlet at that) on Amazon has the following blurb:

 

"What is it like to be on the receiving end of an uncaring, incompetent Welfare State? Why are hospital patients drinking water from flower vases? Why are social services failing to protect children? It is because the caring professions don't care, and nobody is going to make them?"

 

To your final question the answer, largely, is no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know quite a few doctors (junior mostly) and they all care deeply about their patients and the service they provide to them.

 

---------- Post added 10-08-2016 at 14:12 ----------

 

You offer no answers. There's nothing wrong with somebody pointing out that the obvious alternative to government policy that you criticise is worse as demonstrated by the official opposition. It's not a strawman.

You complain often about people making strawman arguments and putting words in your mouth. Then speak. Tell us what you would do, or who in politics you align yourself with so that we can discuss it. A criticism only approach to debate is of minimal utility.

 

I didn't suggest that Labour had the answers.

 

So to keep popping up and going "well Labour would be worse" is not a valid response to my opinion that the conservatives are harming the NHS (and the country). It's a response to a view I haven't expressed that labour would be better. It is the very definition of a strawman. Arguing against a point that HASN'T been made.

 

1 line of the article, that's it?

 

I didn't take a criticism approach to debate. The topic of the thread is there at the top, it's asking for opinions on whether the conservatives have "fixed" the country. I've said no, and given multiple reasons why. What it doesn't say is "who would do a better job?" and I haven't tried to answer that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What an appalling sentiment. You definitely have an axe to grind.

 

Your book (at 157 pages, more a pamphlet, and a vanity published pamphlet at that) on Amazon has the following blurb:

 

"What is it like to be on the receiving end of an uncaring, incompetent Welfare State? Why are hospital patients drinking water from flower vases? Why are social services failing to protect children? It is because the caring professions don't care, and nobody is going to make them?"

 

To your final question the answer, largely, is no.

 

I'll be very happy to read your well crafted arguments if you have any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll be very happy to read your well crafted arguments if you have any.

 

'A licence to practice is a licence to kill' is a baseless and risible abstraction. It is the seething rhetoric of someone who has an axe to grind.

 

It is clear from the blurb of your book that you have had a bad experience. This is not indicative of the lack of care across the board of those that work within the NHS and Social Services.

 

The Telegraph article you posted speaks of an increased will of patients to complain, of a billion pounds being spent on compensation and of ambulance chasing lawyers. If I wanted to make the argument you are making I would not have chosen that article because it doesn't back up the inflammatory comment you sign off your post with. Not one jot.

Edited by Santo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.