|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 17, 2024 18:54:15 GMT
Well yes the HoL, but one hurdle at a time I suppose. I think one of the amendments is that a future [Labour] government cant unilaterally scrap the bill. No Parliament can bind a future Parliament, as you well know. That's not true, Tony Blair with his GP contracts has tied the hands of every future government, including Labour, it's set in stone because it was a UNION /Blair pact.
If you don't believe it google it, the GP contracts are foolproof and Blair was the biggest fool of all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 17, 2024 18:56:36 GMT
Rwanda would be a brilliant plan if it were not for three things: The European Court of Human Rights The European Convention on Human Rights Left wing human rights lawyers. All of which are real danger to this country. The amendments MP's will shortly be voting on address these problems. Well there is also the small matter of, Rwanda doesn't have room for hundreds of thousands maybe just a thousand at the outside. Says who? |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jan 17, 2024 19:18:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 17, 2024 19:19:33 GMT
Labours immigration minister Stephen Kinnock has just said at the despatch box, that international agreements the ECHR and the ECtHR 'enhance' our sovereignty! Naturally he neglected to go into any detail.
And to think, this left wing wanker will probably be the immigration minister in a few months, answering only to Starmer, a left wing socialist human rights lawyer. God help us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 17, 2024 19:20:52 GMT
The Standard and LBC? Behave yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jan 17, 2024 19:22:49 GMT
The Standard and LBC? Behave yourself. Show me the accommodation in Rwanda for more than a thousand? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 17, 2024 19:30:27 GMT
The Standard and LBC? Behave yourself. Show me the accommodation in Rwanda for more than a thousand? Quick to self build and bamboo is plentiful. Sorted...  |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Jan 17, 2024 19:31:57 GMT
Show me the accommodation in Rwanda for more than a thousand? Quick to self build and bamboo is plentiful. Sorted... LOL that was fecking brilliant red, by the way it is the biggest con by the cons going. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 17, 2024 19:36:25 GMT
Rwanda is a brilliant plan, we so far after two years or so of political wrangling have sent none, meanwhile under the agreement we have received a few. Rwanda would be a brilliant plan if it were not for three things: The European Court of Human Rights The European Convention on Human Rights Left wing human rights lawyers. All of which are real danger to this country. The amendments MP's will shortly be voting on address these problems. You forgot British High |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 17, 2024 19:37:32 GMT
Quick to self build and bamboo is plentiful. Sorted... LOL that was fecking brilliant red, by the way it is the biggest con by the cons going. ... meanwhile back in the UK our homegrown UK homeless make do with cardboard boxes, so those self-build bamboo huts would be like luxury to them, but of course not up to the standard our foreign illegal migrants 'DEMAND'. |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 17, 2024 19:37:50 GMT
No Parliament can bind a future Parliament, as you well know. That's not true, Tony Blair with his GP contracts has tied the hands of every future government, including Labour, it's set in stone because it was a UNION /Blair pact.
If you don't believe it google it, the GP contracts are foolproof and Blair was the biggest fool of all.
What contracts are they? |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 17, 2024 19:42:37 GMT
That's not true, Tony Blair with his GP contracts has tied the hands of every future government, including Labour, it's set in stone because it was a UNION /Blair pact.
If you don't believe it google it, the GP contracts are foolproof and Blair was the biggest fool of all.
What contracts are they? Changes to GP contracts in 2004 enabled them to opt out of evening and weekend work while new rules on bonus pay pushed the average GP salary to over £100,000. To delighted Tory laughter and cheering, Mr Wright demanded at question time: "Can it be true that we had to pay GPs a lot more money to do a lot less work and now we have to pay them a lot more money to take on the work that we paid them to stop doing?" |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Jan 17, 2024 19:59:20 GMT
Rwanda would be a brilliant plan if it were not for three things: The European Court of Human Rights The European Convention on Human Rights Left wing human rights lawyers. All of which are real danger to this country. The amendments MP's will shortly be voting on address these problems. Well there is also the small matter of, Rwanda doesn't have room for hundreds of thousands maybe just a thousand at the outside. And we do I suppose...... |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 17, 2024 20:14:39 GMT
• GPs 'delighted' with lucrative pay dealChanges to GP contracts in 2004 enabled them to opt out of evening and weekend work while new rules on bonus pay pushed the average GP salary to over £100,000. To delighted Tory laughter and cheering, Mr Wright demanded at question time: "Can it be true that we had to pay GPs a lot more money to do a lot less work and now we have to pay them a lot more money to take on the work that we paid them to stop doing?" Would that be the 2004 contact achieved what it wanted to do. April 2004, the new contract is intended to attract more doctors into general practice through better pay and improved conditions. The NHS is expected to benefit by linking GPs’ pay to their clinical performance and by improved accessibility to services through more flexible working.1 The NHS has realised some but not of all the benefits from the new contract. Over the first three years, the contract cost £1.8 billion more than originally expected because the Department underestimated the cost of delivering services such as out-of-hours care. The level of GP performance, as measured by the Quality and Outcomes Framework, also exceeded estimates and led to additional expenditure. The Department believes the cost of the contract is now under closer control and that by the end of 2008 it will have recovered any overspend. The Department has succeeded in increasing the number of GPs working in the NHS above the target it set itself: more than 4,000 additional GPs from March 2003, an increase of 15%. It has also been successful in introducing a pay for performance system which has increased the consistency of care for long term conditions. The new contract has helped increase the breadth of services provided in primary care, but has had less success in improving access to primary care, particularly in more deprived areas. Can't see anywhere it can't be changed. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 17, 2024 20:22:45 GMT
• GPs 'delighted' with lucrative pay dealChanges to GP contracts in 2004 enabled them to opt out of evening and weekend work while new rules on bonus pay pushed the average GP salary to over £100,000. To delighted Tory laughter and cheering, Mr Wright demanded at question time: "Can it be true that we had to pay GPs a lot more money to do a lot less work and now we have to pay them a lot more money to take on the work that we paid them to stop doing?" Would that be the 2004 contact achieved what it wanted to do. April 2004, the new contract is intended to attract more doctors into general practice through better pay and improved conditions. The NHS is expected to benefit by linking GPs’ pay to their clinical performance and by improved accessibility to services through more flexible working.1 The NHS has realised some but not of all the benefits from the new contract. Over the first three years, the contract cost £1.8 billion more than originally expected because the Department underestimated the cost of delivering services such as out-of-hours care. The level of GP performance, as measured by the Quality and Outcomes Framework, also exceeded estimates and led to additional expenditure. The Department believes the cost of the contract is now under closer control and that by the end of 2008 it will have recovered any overspend. The Department has succeeded in increasing the number of GPs working in the NHS above the target it set itself: more than 4,000 additional GPs from March 2003, an increase of 15%. It has also been successful in introducing a pay for performance system which has increased the consistency of care for long term conditions. The new contract has helped increase the breadth of services provided in primary care, but has had less success in improving access to primary care, particularly in more deprived areas. Can't see anywhere it can't be changed. GP partners have benefited most from the new contract, with an average pay increase of 58% and decreased working hours. Other staff, such as practice nurses and salaried GPs, have had only small pay rises despite taking on a larger proportion of the workload in general practice. GP productivity has actually decreased, on average, by 2.5% per year in the first two years of the contract. Primary Care Trusts have lacked the capacity and capability to commission local services effectively and have not used the contract in a way that fully realises its benefits. They have spent more than they were allocated, but failed to use the contract to provide more convenient opening hours and more general practice services in deprived areas. The Department has now issued central directions to Primary Care Trusts to tackle these issues. publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmpubacc/463/463.pdf3 Getting more out of the new contract 21. The new contract has not yet delivered all the benefits that the Department expected it to achieve.42 In particular, the contract has been less successful in redirecting funds to areas with the greatest need and has had mixed success in incentivising improved access to general practice services. Whilst recruitment of GPs in deprived areas has improved, it is still worse when compared to more affluent areas.43 The average expenditure on general practice care in relation to need is lower in some of the most deprived areas of the country (Figure 6). For many patients, the contract actually led to a decrease in GP provision through the removal of the GP’s responsibility for out-of-hours care, loss of Saturday surgeries and reducing the times that a patient can make an appointment.44 22. The new contract successfully increased the types of services that are available in general practice, but has not yet led to the development of as many new services as the Department had expected. Many of the new services reflect national directions, rather than services responding to specific local needs. In 2006–07, 71% of Primary Care Trusts did not spend their allocation for locally enhanced services. These allocations were expected to be the minimum level that a Trust would spend on enhanced services.45 23. One of the key objectives of the new contract was to increase access to GP services but efforts to improve access have been mixed. The contract allows Primary Care Trusts to increase provision of GP care by negotiating locally with GPs to extend hours using local enhanced services payments, or to commission new general practice services through competitive tendering. These options have not been used effectively by Primary Care Trusts in commissioning services to address local need.46 24. As part of the new contract, the Department negotiated a national enhanced service to incentivise GPs to offer appointments to patients within 48 hours. Currently, 90% of patients are seen within this target. However, this has also had a perverse effect for patients, as GPs reduced the amount of appointments that were available to be booked in advance. The Department has now allocated some of the points available under the Quality and Outcome Framework to measure patient satisfaction against this access target. In addition, the inconvenience of not being able to see a doctor in the evening or at weekends has been highlighted as an issue in patient surveys.47 The Department has responded to patients’ concerns about being unable to see a doctor in the evening and at weekends by issuing a national directive to extend opening hours using directed enhanced services.48 |
|
