|
|
Post by witchfinder on Sept 3, 2024 7:45:25 GMT
The improvements to the NHS under the Blair / Brown administration were colossal, begining straight away in 1997 the reforms and investment plus massive recritment took time, described by Tony Blair as the equivelant of "slowing down an oil tanker, stopping it, and then going into reverse".
Waiting lists fell dramatically, waiting times fell, thousands of extra nurses and doctors were recruited, and the NHS underwent its biggest building and refurbishment programme since the NHS was created, unlike Boris Johnsons "40 new hospitals" which never existed.
Prior to 1997 the NHS was deteriorating ( as it always does under the Tories ), staff morale was very low, there was an annual winter bed crisis, junior doctors were working ridiculous and dangerous hours, and investment in hospital estate was at an all time low.
In 2010 the satisfaction rate in the NHS was at a record high - now look at it today
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 3, 2024 10:52:30 GMT
The improvements to the NHS under the Blair / Brown administration were colossal, begining straight away in 1997 the reforms and investment plus massive recritment took time, described by Tony Blair as the equivelant of "slowing down an oil tanker, stopping it, and then going into reverse". Waiting lists fell dramatically, waiting times fell, thousands of extra nurses and doctors were recruited, and the NHS underwent its biggest building and refurbishment programme since the NHS was created, unlike Boris Johnsons "40 new hospitals" which never existed. Prior to 1997 the NHS was deteriorating ( as it always does under the Tories ), staff morale was very low, there was an annual winter bed crisis, junior doctors were working ridiculous and dangerous hours, and investment in hospital estate was at an all time low. In 2010 the satisfaction rate in the NHS was at a record high - now look at it today Once again one can be a political winner if one passes most of the cost of all the improvements you make on to a following government. We are paying for those improvements in a sort of double way. We pay the PFI contractual costs and we borrow money to make those payments. In some circumstances in the old days changing a lightbulb was given to the in-house maintenance crew who obliged; now it is a process of paperwork and requests and can cost 100s of pounds. |
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Sept 4, 2024 10:01:24 GMT
P.F.I Contracts
These contracts do not apply to the NHS or the Department of Health, instead they apply to individual hospitals or hospital trusts, and most hospitals are free from PFI contracts. For example the James Cook University Hospital in Middlesbrough is paying a PFI contract from its budget, but over the river in Stockton the North Tees Hospital is not.
The idea that it is PFI contracts which are causing many of the issues within our NHS does not stand up.
Financial problems within the NHS applies to both hospitals and trusts free from PFI contracts, and to those with PFI contracts.
Money was not borrowed to fund thousands of extra staff, doctors and nurses in the late 1990s / early years of the 21st century, or to refurbish hundreds of hospitals and A&E departments, this money was provided by the treasury and the department of health.
What has suprised me is the fact that the electorate have not turned on the Tories before 2024, I am suprised that the British public have tolerated such things as ridiculous ambulance response times and soaring waithing lists / times, but maybe Brexit got in the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 4, 2024 11:12:11 GMT
P.F.I Contracts These contracts do not apply to the NHS or the Department of Health, instead they apply to individual hospitals or hospital trusts, and most hospitals are free from PFI contracts. For example the James Cook University Hospital in Middlesbrough is paying a PFI contract from its budget, but over the river in Stockton the North Tees Hospital is not. The idea that it is PFI contracts which are causing many of the issues within our NHS does not stand up. Financial problems within the NHS applies to both hospitals and trusts free from PFI contracts, and to those with PFI contracts. Money was not borrowed to fund thousands of extra staff, doctors and nurses in the late 1990s / early years of the 21st century, or to refurbish hundreds of hospitals and A&E departments, this money was provided by the treasury and the department of health. What has suprised me is the fact that the electorate have not turned on the Tories before 2024, I am suprised that the British public have tolerated such things as ridiculous ambulance response times and soaring waithing lists / times, but maybe Brexit got in the way. The point I made was they are an ongoing cost now and one can claim to have invested heavily in the NHS if one transfers the debt and costs to future parties. I never said it was all but it is a cost for far too many. www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/healthcare/2022/05/pfi-repayments-are-costing-some-hospitals-twice-as-much-as-drugs#:~:text=English%20NHS%20trustsIn 97 the economy was booming and then Blair came in and the grpwth continued but we have to consider at what price. This from 2007. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6643601.stm#:~:text=If%20that's%20all "For under Messrs Blair and Brown together, Britain has allowed itself to become the most global of the world's large economies. We have allowed our companies to be bought up by foreigners, our manufacturing has been allowed to move off-shore, we have been a more vociferous champion of free trade than our large trading partners. And above all, perhaps the biggest single economic decision of the Blair government's period in office, we have allowed foreign labour to migrate here more freely than most of our counterparts. Mr Blair has promoted a global role for the British economy The effects may have been deliberate, they may have been accidental; you may view them as positive, you may view them as negative. But the net result is an economy that is rather different to the one Labour inherited. Business and financial services have become our dominant industries, and manufacturing has shrunk in relative terms far more than anyone could have predicted (from 21% of our economy in 1997, to less than 14% today). The population has grown by about 4% - you have to go back a generation to find population growth at that on that scale." It is often stated that Thatcher destroyed manufacturing yet here it is starkly illustrated that under Blair manufacturing as a percentage of GDP actually fell by over 30%. Under the whole term of Thatcher manufacturing rose by about 9%. What is clear is that, although the process was well underway Blair managed to destroy the UK society as any sort of cohesive unit and accelerated the process of community division. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 4, 2024 21:12:27 GMT
There were massive changes under New Labour, and the NHS despite the international meltdown, was in a better condition in 2010 than it was in 1997. Perhaps you needed to visit Specsavers. Or perhaps just stop reading biased right-wing newspapers like the Mail and others, that might help you. IIRC, Starmer has ideas about some use of the private sector in a way that is beneficial to the NHS. I know what you stated, it was nothing more than stunted thinking on your part, and therefore worthless opinion. I must have hit a nerve with facts , hence your usual kind of reply I have always considered you a worthless perjure individual and about as much use to Debate as a one legged man at an arse kicking party.  Read some of the improvements made by New Labour. www.ft.com/content/168e1278-2b24-11df-93d8-00144feabdc0 |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 5, 2024 6:30:55 GMT
I must have hit a nerve with facts , hence your usual kind of reply I have always considered you a worthless perjure individual and about as much use to Debate as a one legged man at an arse kicking party. Read some of the improvements made by New Labour. www.ft.com/content/168e1278-2b24-11df-93d8-00144feabdc0Making it run more on commercial lines seems to have worked. Is that the message we take from this? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 5, 2024 6:53:37 GMT
Making it run more on commercial lines seems to have worked. Is that the message we take from this? well Blair did privatise more of the NHS than any other government - perhaps a lesson to be learnt? |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Sept 5, 2024 7:06:48 GMT
Tory Blair?
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 5, 2024 7:40:54 GMT
Making it run more on commercial lines seems to have worked. Is that the message we take from this? You spotted the beauty of having a government that will do what is best for the country and 'for the majority not the few'. Not governed by political ideology. It is why New Labour was a breath of fresh air. They also made the system work while those committed to a 'commercial' approach only, failed. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 5, 2024 7:46:12 GMT
To suggest the twisting of the truth is so typical of closed minded political Rightists ^^^. Clearly open minded Blair as apposed to the closed minded approach by the Tories. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 5, 2024 8:11:05 GMT
Making it run more on commercial lines seems to have worked. Is that the message we take from this? You spotted the beauty of having a government that will do what is best for the country and 'for the majority not the few'. Not governed by political ideology. It is why New Labour was a breath of fresh air. They also made the system work while those committed to a 'commercial' approach only, failed. It was the commitment to the commercial approach that Blair adopted, against the wishes of the ideologues in his party. I agree making things work is the answer but making things work for 55 million people becomes more problematic when you increase that number rapidly to over 60 million people. The whole thing has to be joined up. It is the inability of governments to do that tells the tale. If you lay on extra buses to to deal with a backlog of people waiting at bus stops it is just plain idiotic to wilfully add to the queue of people through deliberate policy. It all makes little sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Sept 5, 2024 9:18:35 GMT
You spotted the beauty of having a government that will do what is best for the country and 'for the majority not the few'. Not governed by political ideology. It is why New Labour was a breath of fresh air. They also made the system work while those committed to a 'commercial' approach only, failed. It was the commitment to the commercial approach that Blair adopted, against the wishes of the ideologues in his party. I agree making things work is the answer but making things work for 55 million people becomes more problematic when you increase that number rapidly to over 60 million people. The whole thing has to be joined up. It is the inability of governments to do that tells the tale. If you lay on extra buses to to deal with a backlog of people waiting at bus stops it is just plain idiotic to wilfully add to the queue of people through deliberate policy. It all makes little sense. The latest figures on the UK Population is now 69,205,904 as of Friday, August 30, 2024, the NHS cannot cope with the demand in its present state even with roughly 1.5 million people working within the NHS. It has to be made more efficient and cost effective no Government past or present has done that, cherry picking what one lot of Politicians have done over another lot of Politicians when in office is Political point scoring for votes smoke and mirrors, IMO it is just ignoring the Elephant in the room, it will collapse that is the reality of the situation. Here in the Republic of Ireland Medical Treatment is not free you have to pay for treatment if you are in employment, the average waiting time for treatment is about two years, many like ourselves take out Medical Insurance no other choice. Only recently in the Irish Media it was claimed the population will be nearly 6 million by 2030,in its present state their Health System will be totally overwhelmed it cannot cope now. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 5, 2024 10:30:57 GMT
As Milton Friedman pointed out years ago - you can have mass immigration or you can have a welfare state - you cannot have both.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 6, 2024 6:21:38 GMT
It was the commitment to the commercial approach that Blair adopted, against the wishes of the ideologues in his party. I agree making things work is the answer but making things work for 55 million people becomes more problematic when you increase that number rapidly to over 60 million people. The whole thing has to be joined up. It is the inability of governments to do that tells the tale. If you lay on extra buses to to deal with a backlog of people waiting at bus stops it is just plain idiotic to wilfully add to the queue of people through deliberate policy. It all makes little sense. The latest figures on the UK Population is now 69,205,904 as of Friday, August 30, 2024, the NHS cannot cope with the demand in its present state even with roughly 1.5 million people working within the NHS. It has to be made more efficient and cost effective no Government past or present has done that, cherry picking what one lot of Politicians have done over another lot of Politicians when in office is Political point scoring for votes smoke and mirrors, IMO it is just ignoring the Elephant in the room, it will collapse that is the reality of the situation. Here in the Republic of Ireland Medical Treatment is not free you have to pay for treatment if you are in employment, the average waiting time for treatment is about two years, many like ourselves take out Medical Insurance no other choice. Only recently in the Irish Media it was claimed the population will be nearly 6 million by 2030,in its present state their Health System will be totally overwhelmed it cannot cope now. I don't call raising the investment in health systems to equal the average in Europe, cherry picking. Your determination to undermine the NHS is full of cherry picked comments. This government has already suggested changes to the NHS as in more use of the private sector where it is useful and beneficial to the NHS. All under the NHS banner, not privatisation. The NHS using the private sector. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 6, 2024 6:28:30 GMT
You spotted the beauty of having a government that will do what is best for the country and 'for the majority not the few'. Not governed by political ideology. It is why New Labour was a breath of fresh air. They also made the system work while those committed to a 'commercial' approach only, failed. It was the commitment to the commercial approach that Blair adopted, against the wishes of the ideologues in his party. I agree making things work is the answer but making things work for 55 million people becomes more problematic when you increase that number rapidly to over 60 million people. The whole thing has to be joined up. It is the inability of governments to do that tells the tale. If you lay on extra buses to to deal with a backlog of people waiting at bus stops it is just plain idiotic to wilfully add to the queue of people through deliberate policy. It all makes little sense. It was the inclusion of some of the commercial approach, not a wholesale commercial approach by New Labour, that made the difference. The Old Conservative ideological commercial approach failed time and time again. This government is open to changes in the way the NHS functions, IMO we need to to see what they do. |
|
