Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Lib Dems To Demand Emergency £2Bn Bailout For The Nhs - Reports

Recommended Posts

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/23/emergency-2bn-bailout-nhs-is-bonkers-doctor

An emergency bailout of £2bn is needed to plug a black hole in NHS funding, Liberal Democrat sources claim, as a leading doctor called the Government's plans for extended seven-day care as "just bonkers".

Senior Lib Dem figures are planning to approach party leader Nick Clegg to demand the extra funding for the health service ahead of the Government's autumn statement, the Times reported.

There are widespread fears among senior doctors that the NHS will struggle to cope with rising demand without more money after four years of efficiency savings in which it has been trying to shave £20bn from its costs.

But Dr Mark Porter, chairman of council at doctors union the British Medical Association (BMA), said it was "economic illiteracy" to try to improve the health service without more resources.

Doctors will reportedly call for automatic increases in the NHS budget to cope with demand, rising by about 4% a year, at the BMA's annual representative meeting which gets under way in Harrogate on Monday.

Hmmm increasing spending by 4% YoY in an economy growing by at best 2%!!! I see our doctors understand basic maths and they are prescribing drugs!

The PFI timebomb kicking in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/23/emergency-2bn-bailout-nhs-is-bonkers-doctor

Hmmm increasing spending by 4% YoY in an economy growing by at best 2%!!! I see our doctors understand basic maths and they are prescribing drugs!

The PFI timebomb kicking in?

Getting rid of the PFI deals, which generally represent appalling value for money, would allow the NHS to increase front line spending whilst decreasing overall spending.

But it would upset quite a lot of Tory and Labour doners. And a lot of people in the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One way of wasting extra money is to allow hospitals to compete.

If you live in Cambridgeshire then the local radio often plays adverts from Hinchingbrooke hospital in Huntingdon (the one run by Circle but that is still an NHS hospital). Every single penny spent advertising that hospital is taken directly from patient care. They are trying to take patients away from other local hospitals which is essentially a pointless exercise that adds no value to anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS needs a kick up the ****.

Whoeever decided to piss cash up on walk in centres needs a slap.

http://www.nhs.uk/Services/clinics/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=96551

Originally open 24/7, then closed at 11 and then at 8. Which means it's only open for an hour longer than my GPs.
They don't do xray if you've injured yourself within 6 weeks.
Or see if you if you're likely to need referring.
They are basically a triage for A&E. So why didn't they just spend some money at the local A&E and actually make it useful.

Opening times Monday Unknown Tuesday Unknown Wednesday Unknown Thursday Unknown Friday Unknown Saturday Unknown Sunday

Unknown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS needs a kick up the ****.

Whoeever decided to piss cash up on walk in centres needs a slap.

http://www.nhs.uk/Services/clinics/Overview/DefaultView.aspx?id=96551

Originally open 24/7, then closed at 11 and then at 8. Which means it's only open for an hour longer than my GPs.

They don't do xray if you've injured yourself within 6 weeks.

Or see if you if you're likely to need referring.

They are basically a triage for A&E. So why didn't they just spend some money at the local A&E and actually make it useful.

Opening times Monday Unknown Tuesday Unknown Wednesday Unknown Thursday Unknown Friday Unknown Saturday Unknown Sunday

Unknown

Gotta love that old 'argument by random anecdote'..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love that old 'argument by random anecdote'..

the NHS has been plagued by appalling decisions to waste tons of money opening new buildings. If you don't think that's relevant then that's fine.

The elephant in the room is probably actually sat on your lap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the NHS has been plagued by appalling decisions to waste tons of money opening new buildings. If you don't think that's relevant then that's fine.

The elephant in the room is probably actually sat on your lap.

It's very relevant if it's true.

Indeed, many of these PFI deals have been about new buildings - usually new buildings that were very much required, but acquired in the most expensive possible way due to a political decision to try and shift spending off the balance sheet. Not sure how that sort of thing means that it's the fault of the NHS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very relevant if it's true.

Indeed, many of these PFI deals have been about new buildings - usually new buildings that were very much required, but acquired in the most expensive possible way due to a political decision to try and shift spending off the balance sheet. Not sure how that sort of thing means that it's the fault of the NHS.

The NHS should have said "Actually you could forgo the building costs and just give us the same amount of extra staff to work here."

Somewhere there is a layer (or 4) of management in the NHS that needs removing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting rid of the PFI deals, which generally represent appalling value for money, would allow the NHS to increase front line spending whilst decreasing overall spending.

But it would upset quite a lot of Tory and Labour doners. And a lot of people in the city.

I don't think it really matters how efficiently we spend the cash we are going to go from crisis to crisis with multi billion shortfalls and raids from other allocations such as libraries, social housing, leisure ....anything that isn't deemed essential for the elderly.

We are a fat ageing population with self inflicted conditions such as type two diabetes and thrombosis and other conditions that just occur with age like dementia. The NHS will increasingly get swamped, and how we keep this expensive Ponzi on track (which the current main elderly users never paid for and is going onto the two trillion national debt) God only knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHS should have said "Actually you could forgo the building costs and just give us the same amount of extra staff to work here."

Somewhere there is a layer (or 4) of management in the NHS that needs removing.

The NHS probably has far too few managers:

The picture is complicated further by the number of qualified doctors and nurses in management positions or who have some management responsibility. However, the Kings Fund applied the ONS definitions of management to the NHS workforce and came to a figure of 4.8 percent. This is slightly higher than the official NHS number (just over 3 percent) but much lower than the ONS estimate of managers in the UK workforce – 15.4 percent.

In other words, the NHS has a managerial workforce a mere one-third the size of that across the economy as a whole (ONS 2010). If anything, that points to the conclusion that the NHS, particularly given the complexity of health care, is under- rather than over-managed.

The NHS in England is a £100 billion-a-year-plus business. It sees 1 million patients every 36 hours, spending nearly £2 billion a week. Aside from the banks, the only companies with a larger turnover in the FTSE 100 are the two global oil giants Shell and BP. If it were a country it would be around the thirtieth largest in the world. It might just as sensibly be asked, how can it be run effectively with only 45,000 managers.

'>Link

Peter.

Who changed the expletive delted editor?

Edited by Blue Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ghouls are in charge.

A year ago, a relative was diagnosed with cancer. She was otherwise in good health, so it was rapidly decided she should have an operation.

So far, so good from the NHS.

What happened next was .... nothing. Or rather, worse than nothing. Month after month, that operation just didn't happen. The prospect of it remained a constant week or two away.

Well, if the NHS is just about to operate, you don't go private, or go abroad for treatment. So treatment gets delayed - between four and five months until we finally gave up waiting and went elsewhere. By then it was too late, the cancer had spread to the brain and was inoperable.

Another couple of months and her life was over. But ironically, at that point our fabled "health" and "social care" systems swung into action with a vengeance. No expense spared over the final three months, as she grew too weak to go out even in a wheelchair, or be left alone for five minutes in the house.

A woman in urgent need of treatment gets strung along and fobbed off. A sad wraith whose continued existence mocked her memory gets the full treatment to deny her a natural death. This is not a health service, it's a drain-the-living, feed-the-ghouls service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a relative who is very young & has been fighting a brain tumour for 4 years now. The NHS has been excellent over all with regards his treatment so far. There has been the odd hiccup, however this has been down to the stupidity/laziness/unprofessionalism of the individual involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! That is a shocking story porca misèria. Almost better not to have known. Might have lasted longer? I bet it's not uncommon.

I used to always hear this phrase in the past "don't worry, it's somebody else's money."

As a nation we seem to be very good at creating the parasite/host relationship to the benefit of the parasite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very relevant if it's true.

Indeed, many of these PFI deals have been about new buildings - usually new buildings that were very much required, but acquired in the most expensive possible way due to a political decision to try and shift spending off the balance sheet. Not sure how that sort of thing means that it's the fault of the NHS.

Quite

Who should lose the £2 billion to pay for this bailout then, in practical terms, ie a source the govt can actually get its hands on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very relevant if it's true.

Indeed, many of these PFI deals have been about new buildings - usually new buildings that were very much required, but acquired in the most expensive possible way due to a political decision to try and shift spending off the balance sheet. Not sure how that sort of thing means that it's the fault of the NHS.

I remember a few months ago having to pick my jaw off the floor when some admin type came on the TV and said "it doesnt matter how much it cost, its worth every penny" with regard to this little scheme.

Soaring Private Finance initiative (PFI) repayments could see taxpayers footing a bill of almost £2 billion for Peterborough City Hospital - despite it costing just £289 million to build.

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/health/health-news/final-cost-of-peterborough-city-hospital-could-be-close-to-2bn-1-3097802

Its not their money, so what do they care. They get to extract their £100k a year over it after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An emergency bailout of £2bn is needed to plug a black hole in NHS funding, Liberal Democrat sources claim,..

Yet another bald political claim absent of detailed justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a few months ago having to pick my jaw off the floor when some admin type came on the TV and said "it doesnt matter how much it cost, its worth every penny" with regard to this little scheme.

Soaring Private Finance initiative (PFI) repayments could see taxpayers footing a bill of almost £2 billion for Peterborough City Hospital - despite it costing just £289 million to build.

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/health/health-news/final-cost-of-peterborough-city-hospital-could-be-close-to-2bn-1-3097802

Its not their money, so what do they care. They get to extract their £100k a year over it after all.

I wonder if she has a similar view of house prices?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soaring Private Finance initiative (PFI) repayments could see taxpayers footing a bill of almost £2 billion for Peterborough City Hospital - despite it costing just £289 million to build.

How is this level of economic stupidity even possible?

Rip up all of these contracts - and make them an offer they can't refuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a few months ago having to pick my jaw off the floor when some admin type came on the TV and said "it doesnt matter how much it cost, its worth every penny" with regard to this little scheme.

Soaring Private Finance initiative (PFI) repayments could see taxpayers footing a bill of almost £2 billion for Peterborough City Hospital - despite it costing just £289 million to build.

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/health/health-news/final-cost-of-peterborough-city-hospital-could-be-close-to-2bn-1-3097802

Its not their money, so what do they care. They get to extract their £100k a year over it after all.

Does that include maintenance and running costs over the term ? Sounds a lot anyway I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/23/emergency-2bn-bailout-nhs-is-bonkers-doctor

Hmmm increasing spending by 4% YoY in an economy growing by at best 2%!!! I see our doctors understand basic maths and they are prescribing drugs!

The PFI timebomb kicking in?

And the pensioner time bomb blowing up too. All of those care costs are heavily skewed towards end of life and we have a tidal wave of olds hitting the NHS.

Probably why these lib dense are bricking it, they haven't got a student vote any more, they need the grey vote more than ever.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.