Is Our NHS in Safe Hands?

[Guest makapaka]

6 hours ago, Halibut said:

I think you're exceedingly naive. The reality is, if you let business in, patient care will suffer - as business is about making profit.  Everything else is of lesser importance.

There are plenty of businesses run on a not for profit basis. 
 

a similar approach by the NHS wouldn’t be the end of the world providing the savings made were ploughed back into the service.

 

[the_bloke 17]

9 hours ago, Halibut said:

I think you're exceedingly naive. The reality is, if you let business in, patient care will suffer - as business is about making profit.  Everything else is of lesser importance.

Considering most GP surgeries aren't owned by the NHS, can you identify those that are privately run compared to those run by the NHS by the level of care they provide to their patients?

[Robin-H 11]

10 hours ago, Halibut said:

I think you're exceedingly naive. The reality is, if you let business in, patient care will suffer - as business is about making profit.  Everything else is of lesser importance.

I have been treated in the NHS and at the BMI Thornbury, which is a private hospital, (although through the NHS, so I didn't pay for either).

 

Whilst the treatment at both was excellent, the facilities, level of attention, food, hospitality, etc etc was of a much higher standard at the Thornbury Hospital. I saw no evidence at all that letting business in has caused the level of patient care to suffer, indeed it was quite the opposite. 

[Longcol 602]

27 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

I have been treated in the NHS and at the BMI Thornbury, which is a private hospital, (although through the NHS, so I didn't pay for either).

 

Whilst the treatment at both was excellent, the facilities, level of attention, food, hospitality, etc etc was of a much higher standard at the Thornbury Hospital. I saw no evidence at all that letting business in has caused the level of patient care to suffer, indeed it was quite the opposite. 

Although to provide that standard throughout the NHS would mean big increases in taxation or significantly fewer patients treated.

[Robin-H 11]

7 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Although to provide that standard throughout the NHS would mean big increases in taxation or significantly fewer patients treated.

Yes, I appreciate it would not be easy to provide that level of service through the NHS. 

 

However, I was responding to a comment that was implying that business involvement lowers patient care. I don't believe that to be true. 

[Longcol 602]

9 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

Yes, I appreciate it would not be easy to provide that level of service through the NHS. 

 

However, I was responding to a comment that was implying that business involvement lowers patient care. I don't believe that to be true. 

If wholesale privatisation took place  that would depend obviously on how much current NHS funding went to the private sector and what percentage of that went on services and what was retained as profit.

 

I agree you can provide better quality services with increased investment , whether provided by the state or "privately"  - that is the model here in France where individuals contribute to Health Services by  top up insurance - usually via mutuals - although state funding is also higher per capita.

[Westie1889 0]

12 hours ago, Halibut said:

I think you're exceedingly naive. The reality is, if you let business in, patient care will suffer - as business is about making profit.  Everything else is of lesser importance.

Exceedingly naive😂 really?

The thing that is really naive is to assume all business is bad and all state enterprises good.

There is a mix needed as with all the pressures on the NHS and the demographic time bomb there will never be sufficient funding so it has to use what is gets efficiently. And unfortunately efficient use of resources it not something that is common within state enterprises, especially in the UK.

As I said in my post we have several friends within local hospitals and they say the waste is huge and avoidable, but sadly that culture is embedded deeply.

Ultimately it’s business that pays for the NHS through direct taxation and job creation so it can’t be all bad can it?

[Longcol 602]

On 26/12/2019 at 08:29, Westie1889 said:

I don’t disagree with staff moral being an issue and both sides of the political debate are partly responsible for this as both main parties use the NHS as a political football.
Saying that I would hope if I were in that position knowing my actions could and would endanger someone’s life (as in our experience) that I would try my best and that plainly didn’t happen with us.

i think there is a dilemma in the business v care mindset as I mentioned in my post, my main thought on the business side of things is that with a limited budget it’s the only way I feel they can try to make the money go further.

I work in procurement and know of organisations selling to the NHS who got 6 times the price for their product than they would off a commercial customer, as things were not run as professionally as they would be in a business.

we also have friends at various levels in local hospitals and they all say the waste is horrendous  due to there not being the correct mindset and they find trying to change that culture an uphill battle.

Thats what I mean by saying it needs a mix of both cultures within the organisation, generate more money through savings and professional management to allow the front line more resources to do get on and do their job.
 

 

So who's telling the right story, the NHS Supply Chain;

 

https://www.supplychain.nhs.uk/savings/

 

or you?

 

 I think many people are rightly concerned about the potential increase in prices of drugs if we sign a trade deal with the USA.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/27/us-trade-deal-nhs-investigation-brexit-drugs

 

 

[Halibut 12]

2 hours ago, Westie1889 said:

Exceedingly naive😂 really?

The thing that is really naive is to assume all business is bad and all state enterprises good.

There is a mix needed as with all the pressures on the NHS and the demographic time bomb there will never be sufficient funding so it has to use what is gets efficiently. And unfortunately efficient use of resources it not something that is common within state enterprises, especially in the UK.

As I said in my post we have several friends within local hospitals and they say the waste is huge and avoidable, but sadly that culture is embedded deeply.

Ultimately it’s business that pays for the NHS through direct taxation and job creation so it can’t be all bad can it?

Of course there will - whenever the ultra rich and multinational corporations are made to pay a fair share share.

[Guest makapaka]

1 hour ago, Halibut said:

Of course there will - whenever the ultra rich and multinational corporations are made to pay a fair share share.

Why do you you always quote a single line from a post.

 

of course there are simpler routes but  might not be Immediately achievable - like getting corporate giants to completely change an approach that is so ingrained as to be the norm.

 

but there are things that can be addressed much sooner - with the approach suggested - which would improve people’s lives much sooner.

Edited December 27, 2019 by makapaka

[the_bloke 17]

12 hours ago, makapaka said:

Why do you you always quote a single line from a post.

 

of course there are simpler routes but  might not be Immediately achievable - like getting corporate giants to completely change an approach that is so ingrained as to be the norm.

 

but there are things that can be addressed much sooner - with the approach suggested - which would improve people’s lives much sooner.

It's known as selective abstraction. The refusal to acknowledge that you are replying to a post which actually contains a valid point of view in case you have to refute it or give an opinion. Common technique for Internet debate when all you want to do is wind people up rather than actually debate anything yet still want to appear like you've 'won'.

 

If people are so sure that private healthcare is so terrible compared to 'pure NHS' - whatever that is - then let's have some stats and examples.

[the_bloke 17]

16 hours ago, Longcol said:

So who's telling the right story, the NHS Supply Chain;

 

https://www.supplychain.nhs.uk/savings/

 

or you?

 

 I think many people are rightly concerned about the potential increase in prices of drugs if we sign a trade deal with the USA.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/27/us-trade-deal-nhs-investigation-brexit-drugs

 

 

https://wwwmedia.supplychain.nhs.uk/media/Toilet-Paper-FAQs-FINAL.pdf is from the supply chain link above. If you read it, you'll see it took the NHS 2 YEARS to create a Paper Hygiene Products Framework to determine the specification for toilet paper. Going back to my earlier post, this is not efficient or value for money. Ultimately, after the meetings and collective tea drinking, it turns out they can save 13% on loo roll by buying as a collective.

 

Does this mean that before 2016 no one did this? Obviously not, if this is to go by:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-flushes-25m-down-toilet-4029928

 

'One trust spent £32 on a 100-pack of toilet rolls while another paid more than double – £66 – for the same item.'

 

Seriously? Who signed off on that decision?

 

I'm amazed it takes a committee 2 years to come up with a scheme for toilet paper.