NHS

[albie]

Vote in HoC tonight on privatisation in the NHS.

Corbyn proposed it should be halted, but the proposal fell.
Swindleson and the LibDems did not support it;
https://evolvepolitics.com/jo-swinsons-lib-dems-refuse-to-support-motion-to-halt-nhs-privatisation/

Unreal, unless she is angling for a new coalition with Johnson after a GE.
After all, the last coalition worked so well!

[DonnyOsmond]

I didn't mind them under Cable but Swinson's turned them into Tories. The Tories themselves aren't getting the stick they deserve because Lib Dems have distracted people.

[bpoolrover]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

[SydneyRover]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.

[Sprotyrover]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.

See it off where?

[DonnyOsmond]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

And yet you keep defending the tories and brexit which should just about see it off.

See it off where?

To Trump.

[albie]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.

I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.

Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.

So what to do!

[drfchound]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.

I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.

Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.

So what to do!

What to do?

Isn’t that why we have politicians ?

[Ldr]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.

I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.

Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.

So what to do!

Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory

[albie]

Ldr,

That might be so, but do you want it to selective in terms of pricing and availability of treatment.

The US businesses looking at UK public assets are concerned with shareholder value...that means generating profit for investors. If that comes at the expense of universal standards of provision, would that be a good thing?

As Blackpool says, if you don't see privatisation as the solution, then you need to be careful not to enable it by mistake, by concentrating on another issue.

The Labour alternative for the NHS is set out here:
https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/10/inequality-is-britains-greatest-illness

[Ldr]

No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.

[SydneyRover]

No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.

LDR outsourcing is just another name for private health care is it not? so it all depends on the level of outsourcing in any period and whether it is increasing over time to determine whether or not there is a push towards privatisation. Everyone fully understands that johnson is a snake that cannot be trusted on any matter a prime eg removing worker rights from the WA. Unless there is some legal limitation to prevent privatisation I wouldn't bet my house on it not happening under the tories.

[albie]

Outsourcing is a reasonable way to describe contracts let to private service providers for short term periods.

It is not the only method of transferring NHS resources to private interests. 
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) under both Labour and Tories, looked to secure infrastructure on the never never.

These contracts are very expensive compared to other means of financing, and often result in payments which are back end loaded, so an increasing burden is placed upon budgets going forward.

At the end of the day neither is public sector provision and control as set out in the original NHS plan, which Labour now intends to reboot for the future.

[Ldr]

No of course not, I also bristle at use of the word privatisation, which is not happening, outsourcing yes, privatisation no. 2 different things, the p word is used in an emotional context by some and is completely inaccurate.

LDR outsourcing is just another name for private health care is it not? so it all depends on the level of outsourcing in any period and whether it is increasing over time to determine whether or not there is a push towards privatisation. Everyone fully understands that johnson is a snake that cannot be trusted on any matter a prime eg removing worker rights from the WA. Unless there is some legal limitation to prevent privatisation I wouldn't bet my house on it not happening under the tories.

No, healthcare remains public  I.e. free to the patient at point of delivery which is the ethos of the NHS.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.

I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.

Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.

So what to do!

Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory

It's not remotely like a conventional insurance scheme.

In an insurance scheme, you pay according to the cover you want and the risk you represent.

In the NHS, you pay according to your ability to pay, without reference to risk.

[SydneyRover]

I'd prefer 99%-100% of it to be done in NHS facilities by NHS staff but understand this cannot always be done, as more outsourcing increases whether it is free to the client or not the easier it is for any future government to press and pull privatisation levers.

If the UK is going to brexit and do trade deals under WTO then there should be legal definable safeguards not to bargain away the NHS, it appears (and thanks to Albie's post) that only the labour party is prepared to put this in writing at present.

It shouldn't be a problem for johnson and his government to put into legislation anything he promises on this matter now if he and his government are going to keep their word in the future should it?

[Ldr]

The problem is most people know that the nhs needs sorting out, I’m not saying privatise it but something needs to change, you could throw 10 billion a year extra at it and it still would not be right

Trouble is that if you are a leaver, when you back Johnson because of that, you also buy in to the sale and break up of the NHS.

I would guess that most leavers also want to keep and support the NHS, without moving to a US insurance based system.

Same point about other policy choices, which is why a GE focussed on brexit comes with a package many will find unacceptable.

So what to do!

Let's not kid ourselves, we have an insurance based system, its just compulsory and non discriminatory

It's not remotely like a conventional insurance scheme.

In an insurance scheme, you pay according to the cover you want and the risk you represent.

In the NHS, you pay according to your ability to pay, without reference to risk.

So what I said then 😁

[SydneyRover]

''Outsourcing''/privatisation

parliament today:

Corbyn:

''He told PMs: "I hate it to break it to the prime minister, but under his government and that of his predecessor privatisation has more than doubled to £10bn in our NHS.''

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-cant-explain-workers-20705784

[Ldr]

Hate to  break it to you but without outsourcing the system doesnt cope. 1 year waits become multi year waits

[Ldr]

Sydney do you understand how the NHS works? Not a dig btw, genuine question

[SydneyRover]

Sydney do you understand how the NHS works? Not a dig btw, genuine question

In short no, but I have a fair idea how politics work and if johnson is allowed to get brexit over the line without safeguards to workers rights, the NHS, conservation, greenbelt land etc etc etc we'll all know the answer to your question and I'm not being smart either.

[Ldr]

Curious as to what you think I was going to say?

[SydneyRover]

Curious as to what you think I was going to say?

Not sure what you mean there ldr but the main thrust of my argument for outsourcing is that the more of it that is done the less the NHS is doing and the easier to privatise. Privatisation and the tories go together hand in glove, it's in their political dna.

It is a fundamental for the tories to privatise as much of whatever it can get it's hands on, this helps with its campaign to reduce the size of government, de-unionising of the workforce, helps its mates get their hands on business opportunities, defunds and weakens its political opponents mainly labour.

[wilts rover]

Hate to  break it to you but without outsourcing the system doesnt cope. 1 year waits become multi year waits

Private companies are not outsourcing NHS contracts to provide a better service. They are doing it to make money - at taxpayers expense.

http://www.patients4nhs.org.uk/private-companies-involvement-in-the-nhs/

One of the rationales for privatisation has been that the private sector is more efficient in running services. This has turned out to be something of a myth: a number of corporations have withdrawn from large contracts or had their contracts terminated due to serious problems. For example,

    In 2015, a £800 million contract for older peoples’ services was eventually awarded to UnitingCare by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough CCG after a tendering process costing over £1 million. Eight months into the contract, UnitingCare withdrew stating that the contract was not financially viable.
    The private company running Hinchingbrook Hospital (Circle) cited financial reasons for pulling out of a 10 year contract in January 2015. This was just two years into the contract and just before a highly damning report from the Care Quality Commission on the hospital’s management and culture and the quality of care it provided.
    In 2016, the outsourcing giant Capita was awarded a £330 million, seven-year contract to run primary care support services. Its bid included cutting support staff from 1,314 to 314, reducing the cost of the service by 69% (a saving of £60 million). This and other high risk strategies led to widespread failures, such as serious problems with patient record transfers, shortages of medical and other supplies, and delayed payments, loss of earnings and chaos for many GPs, dentists, opticians and pharmacists.
    A report on the Capita contract by the National Audit Office in 2018 identified failings on the part of NHSE (e.g. it had not understood primary care support services well enough to set contract targets; and basic principles were still not agreed more than two years into the contract), while Capita’s failings potentially put patients at risk (e.g. 87 women were incorrectly notified that they were no longer part of the cervical screening programme). The British Medical Association (BMA) has called for NHSE to bring primary care support services back in-house.

There are also concerns about whether or not private companies are avoiding paying tax on their profits. For example, Virgin Care pays no tax in the UK: it’s parent company is registered in the British Virgin Islands. In October 2016, BBC Midlands reported that 12 NHS GP practices and urgent care centres across the West Midlands were ultimately owned by Malling Health, a company based in a tax haven in the Bahamas. Malling Health exchanged bank loans with an interest rate of 4% for a loan at 20% interest with the owner of Bahamas-based Butterfly Ventures. The company says this arrangement is more flexible, but experts claim it’s a way of diverting money into a low tax area.

http://www.patients4nhs.org.uk/private-companies-involvement-in-the-nhs/

[SydneyRover]

Thanks Wilts for all the data, a typical scenario runs along the lines of starve a government entity of funds and run it down then you can claim it's not efficient not working property and blame the unions, give tax cuts to the already wealthy and business and then claim the country can't afford to run the NHS and do everything for everybody let the private sector do it, bingo full house privatisation jackpot.

[Sprotyrover]

So no one on this forum has any evidence of a plan by the Tories to sell of the NHS! Or introduce a compulsory 80 hour working week , or bring back the workhouse!🤔

[SydneyRover]

Sproty, did I ever tell you the story about the scorpian and the frog? 

[albie]

Trump has been very direct about everything being up for grabs if the UK wants a US trade deal;
https://www.politico.eu/article/us-takes-aim-at-the-uks-national-health-service/

Why would the Tories and the LibDems not agree to the Corbyn amendment if they had no plans to go down this road?

Lots of background on this site, for those interested;
https://weownit.org.uk/nhs-trade-deal-action

I hope I'm wrong about this, but I fear the worst on the other side of an election.
Clearly Johnson will not big it up until the votes are in the bag.

[i_ateallthepies]

Privatisation has worked well for the prison service and railways too.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Sproty, did I ever tell you the story about the scorpian and the frog? 

Hang on you posted you didnt like things that weren't facts being posted as so, so equally should have some disdain for the nonsense being quoted about Tory policies.

FWIW, outsourcing has huge benefits..I formerly worked within it mostly on public sector contracts and it did yield benefits.  All of the clients in my areas were labour councils largely.....

The nhs will never end up like the American system, never. The country wont allow it, would be political suicide.