|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 27, 2023 10:46:12 GMT
Johnson's hospital building project is better, costwise.
He promised 40 new hospitals in the 2019 manifesto, and ministers have repeatedly claimed that the hospitals will be delivered by 2030. Now, an investigation by the Observer has revealed that only 10 of the 40 projects have the full planning permissions they need to go ahead.
40 new hospitals by 2030
The biggest hospital building programme in a generation According to the latest filings, 12 of the projects have no planning permission. Another 18 have only secured some kind of preliminary agreement, or have no confirmed permission. Several of the NHS trusts involved said they were awaiting a funding settlement from the government to progress the planning and design stages of their proposed projects.
What the hell has that word salad got to do with the overspend by PFI schemes? You once had some credibility but this latest - 'oh dont look at what Labour do, look at what the Tories do' is pretty pathetic even by the standards of the usual Labour shills on here. You brought up the cost and funding of a hospital:
Mar 26, 2023 18:20:30 GMT 1 Pacifico said:
The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds?
In a similar vein, I was pointing out that funding Boris's hospital building plans required less money than actually building them...
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 27, 2023 11:19:56 GMT
Thank you  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 27, 2023 11:20:26 GMT
What the hell has that word salad got to do with the overspend by PFI schemes? You once had some credibility but this latest - 'oh dont look at what Labour do, look at what the Tories do' is pretty pathetic even by the standards of the usual Labour shills on here. You brought up the cost and funding of a hospital:
Mar 26, 2023 18:20:30 GMT 1 Pacifico said:
The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds?
In a similar vein, I was pointing out that funding Boris's hospital building plans required less money than actually building them...
So nothing to do with the subject under discussion - just 'don't look at PFi - look over there .' |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 27, 2023 11:28:48 GMT
You brought up the cost and funding of a hospital:
Mar 26, 2023 18:20:30 GMT 1 Pacifico said:
The Tory Governments did not sign the PFI contracts - Labour did. Was the deal that was agreed by Labour where a £2 billion hospital ended up costing £10 billion a wise use of public funds?
In a similar vein, I was pointing out that funding Boris's hospital building plans required less money than actually building them...
So nothing to do with the subject under discussion - just 'don't look at PFi - look over there .' If PFI has nothing to do with funds and financing, does the F really mean F-all ? |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 27, 2023 11:33:10 GMT
No body, not even your magnificent 'have an answer for everything' self LOL, forecast the international financial meltdown, maybe that's why you are so reluctant to acknowledge the damage it did, or the reduction in NHS funding under the Tories. Instead of being a sarcastic 'know all' Why not take a look at the full picture? The Scottish PFI debt of £2b now costing £10b is for 45 hospitals and other health facilities, plus IIRC maintenance for what is it 25 or 30 years? The NHS then becomes the owner of property. In the same way as anyone who takes out a mortgage on a house. LOL - you keep waffling on about the 'international financial meltdown' as though it mean't anything. As I asked previously (but which you were unable to answer) what happened during the 'international financial meltdown' that changed the terms of the PFI contracts to make them more expensive. If you are correct and Labour agreed a contract for running a hospital where the cost of the contract would rise if a bank went bust, then they are a bigger bunch of imbeciles than even I took them to be. And I pointed out just what a stupid question that is. I have already shown the answer to your question, it is the reason the Tory government reduced the average annual funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. They didn't need to change the PFI contracts to make them more difficult to be met, they just reduce the NHS funding making it much more difficult for the NHS to comply with their PFI commitments. It wasn't a bank that went bust, it was the whole economy. You now rate a great big zero in terms of credibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 27, 2023 14:39:43 GMT
Thank you I was repeating Vinny, spoofed again.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 27, 2023 17:13:54 GMT
So nothing to do with the subject under discussion - just 'don't look at PFi - look over there .' If PFI has nothing to do with funds and financing, does the F really mean F-all ? It's got bugger all to do with the financing of the hospitals proposed by Johnson. If you dont want to discuss the disaster that was PFI then fine - but some of us are more interested in Governments wasting tax payers hard earned cash. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 27, 2023 17:16:35 GMT
LOL - you keep waffling on about the 'international financial meltdown' as though it mean't anything. As I asked previously (but which you were unable to answer) what happened during the 'international financial meltdown' that changed the terms of the PFI contracts to make them more expensive. If you are correct and Labour agreed a contract for running a hospital where the cost of the contract would rise if a bank went bust, then they are a bigger bunch of imbeciles than even I took them to be. And I pointed out just what a stupid question that is. I have already shown the answer to your question, it is the reason the Tory government reduced the average annual funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. They didn't need to change the PFI contracts to make them more difficult to be met, they just reduce the NHS funding making it much more difficult for the NHS to comply with their PFI commitments. It wasn't a bank that went bust, it was the whole economy. You now rate a great big zero in terms of credibility. How does the NHS budget change the terms of a PFI contract - You do realise we have contract Law in the UK?. The idea that PFI contracts are dependent on the vagaries of NHS budgets from year to year is quite frankly hilarious. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Mar 27, 2023 17:30:49 GMT
If PFI has nothing to do with funds and financing, does the F really mean F-all ? It's got bugger all to do with the financing of the hospitals proposed by Johnson. If you dont want to discuss the disaster that was PFI then fine - but some of us are more interested in Governments wasting tax payers hard earned cash. They can't help it the left turn every thread into the NHS and brexit, as though somehow the votes will flood in |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 28, 2023 8:02:17 GMT
Thank you I was repeating Vinny, spoofed again. I know, who's spoofed now?  |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 28, 2023 8:28:25 GMT
And I pointed out just what a stupid question that is. I have already shown the answer to your question, it is the reason the Tory government reduced the average annual funding of the NHS from 3.7% to around 1.5%. They didn't need to change the PFI contracts to make them more difficult to be met, they just reduce the NHS funding making it much more difficult for the NHS to comply with their PFI commitments. It wasn't a bank that went bust, it was the whole economy. You now rate a great big zero in terms of credibility. How does the NHS budget change the terms of a PFI contract - You do realise we have contract Law in the UK?. The idea that PFI contracts are dependent on the vagaries of NHS budgets from year to year is quite frankly hilarious. I have never claimed or even suggested that the terms of PFI contracts were changed, that insinuation is just your silly little hiding place. You prattled on about the costs of PFI, even getting that completely wrong in the first place. I pointed out that in 2010 the government, because of the unforeseeable international financial meltdown (the worst in 60 years) found it had a huge deficit to eliminate. Part of eliminating that deficit was the reducing of the average of NHS funding from 3.7% per annum to around 1.5% per annum. That reduction in income threw the NHS into financial difficulties including having to pay for PFIs. Obviously, without that cut in income PFI repayments would have been more easily met. That reality really isn't difficult to understand. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 28, 2023 8:34:31 GMT
How does the NHS budget change the terms of a PFI contract - You do realise we have contract Law in the UK?. The idea that PFI contracts are dependent on the vagaries of NHS budgets from year to year is quite frankly hilarious. I have never claimed or even suggested that the terms of PFI contracts were changed, that insinuation is just your silly little hiding place. You prattled on about the costs of PFI, even getting that completely wrong in the first place. I pointed out that in 2010 the government, because of the unforeseeable international financial meltdown (the worst in 60 years) found it had a huge deficit to eliminate. Part of eliminating that deficit was the reducing of the average of NHS funding from 3.7% per annum to around 1.5% per annum. That reduction in income threw the NHS into financial difficulties including having to pay for PFIs. Obviously, without that cut in income PFI repayments would have been more easily met. That reality really isn't difficult to understand.
That is no excuse for Blair signing a contract where a £2 Billion Hospital ends up costing the taxpayer £10 Billion - I dont want to 'easily meet' those costs, I want prudent financial planning which we failed to get from Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 29, 2023 12:46:53 GMT
I have never claimed or even suggested that the terms of PFI contracts were changed, that insinuation is just your silly little hiding place. You prattled on about the costs of PFI, even getting that completely wrong in the first place. I pointed out that in 2010 the government, because of the unforeseeable international financial meltdown (the worst in 60 years) found it had a huge deficit to eliminate. Part of eliminating that deficit was the reducing of the average of NHS funding from 3.7% per annum to around 1.5% per annum. That reduction in income threw the NHS into financial difficulties including having to pay for PFIs. Obviously, without that cut in income PFI repayments would have been more easily met. That reality really isn't difficult to understand.
That is no excuse for Blair signing a contract where a £2 Billion Hospital ends up costing the taxpayer £10 Billion - I dont want to 'easily meet' those costs, I want prudent financial planning which we failed to get from Labour. There was no £2b hospital costing ten billion. That £2b you quote was for Scotland's 45 hospitals plus other NHS buildings plus 25 years of building maintenance. £10b was the over all cost for everything over 25 years, at which time the hospitals etc. became owned by the NHS, given that all the payments were made on time. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Mar 29, 2023 16:49:50 GMT
That is no excuse for Blair signing a contract where a £2 Billion Hospital ends up costing the taxpayer £10 Billion - I dont want to 'easily meet' those costs, I want prudent financial planning which we failed to get from Labour. There was no £2b hospital costing ten billion. That £2b you quote was for Scotland's 45 hospitals plus other NHS buildings plus 25 years of building maintenance. £10b was the over all cost for everything over 25 years, at which time the hospitals etc. became owned by the NHS, given that all the payments were made on time. LOL - even the leadership of the Labour Party have given up trying to defend PFI schemes that lumbered the taxpayer with massive bills but you keep on trying.. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Mar 30, 2023 14:48:41 GMT
There was no £2b hospital costing ten billion. That £2b you quote was for Scotland's 45 hospitals plus other NHS buildings plus 25 years of building maintenance. £10b was the over all cost for everything over 25 years, at which time the hospitals etc. became owned by the NHS, given that all the payments were made on time. LOL - even the leadership of the Labour Party have given up trying to defend PFI schemes that lumbered the taxpayer with massive bills but you keep on trying.. Its take some patience keeping up with the twists you keep throwing in, but, well here we go again. I am not defending PFIs, but I take an entirely different path than you over PFIs. While you exaggerate, distort and deviate I repeatedly attempt to bring you back to the truth. |
|
