Labour top brass getting down to business

[Filo]

Do most people support the rail strikes?

I certainly do, and others that are striking to ensure their wages at minimum match inflation and their T&C’s are not eroded, our fore fathers fought for what we have today!

[tyke1962]

 What's concerning myself with regards to Keith and the Labour Party is it's pretty obvious that if elected to government then Austerity will be prevalent .

How Labour Austerity will differ to the Tory version is maybe debatable however I'm far from convinced .

Austerity is the policy of the rich man that preserves their wealth and it's everyone else's wages and social structures that are hit with catastrophic consequences .

Austerity is rolled out and accepted by politicians as the only show in town when harsh times arrive and influenced by those with vested interests so as to not offer the alternative to neoliberalism .

That couldn't be further from why the Labour Party was formed in the first place and whilst I understand that in order to get elected Labour have to unite the working and middle class vote .

Where this goes spectacular wrong for me personally with the Labour Party is that both the working and middle classes are getting it in the backside big time , the middle classes possibly more than the working class at this moment in time .

We are at a moment in history when going down the same rabbit holes just in order to be elected in my opinion isn't good enough .

So yes I'll tick the Labour box at the next GE just to get rid of these current lunatics but in my opinion not a right lot will change in the UK under a Labour government and real CHANGE is desperately needed .

[wilts rover]

Do most people support the rail strikes?

If only the post above yours had a link to where you could check what % of people support particular strikes...

[Bentley Bullet]

Dunno, do they?

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/support-december-rail-strikes-lower-october-action-public-opinion-remains-divided

[drfchound]

Well you would say that wouldn't you? I'll take that as an admission I was correct then pud.

I don't even know what you're trying to claim to be fair. Perhaps if you actually tried to offer some substance rather than pick petty points on individual posters we'd have more interesting debate.

Agreed

Also agreed.

[SydneyRover]

It's quite straight forward wilts, pud made a pompous statement that 'sensible' people don't want a pay rise ............

''Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce''

Did he? Well if you say so but I don't read that as pompous. Even if you do then there are ways of replying without being personally offensive. I don't always agree with him but I know from previous posts pud is a decent poster.

What I would have done would be to go out and get a recent graph that shows most people do support the strikes and public sector workers getting a decent pay rise. What that says about people who don't support them not being sensible, well that's for them to say:

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/12/20/nurses-and-ambulance-workers-have-most-public-supp

Pompous is not offensive if the person making the statement does not appear to understand or refuses to understand the circumstance of the people in question wilts aye? I did ask for proof.

[SydneyRover]

I guess the support draining away from the government shows where sentiment lies, my only concern is that the government sees a culture war as it's only way out and this will only happen if the public loses their nerve and hence support for those engaged in industrial action. The rags are trying their best to turn the argument and keep their readership atm.

[SydneyRover]

I have read a bit of Starmers speech. It's very centrist imo. That appeals to someone like me, it's realistic and what the majority probably want to see.

Most sensible people don't want to see mass public sector pay rises and subsequent tax rises they want to see something proportionate.  Labour are rightly not committing to things they realistically can't produce.

Citation please pud

It's an opinion (these matter too).  Let's see if a party proposing tax increases and mass pay rises (inflation....) could win an election, I doubt it.

An opinion from a person that is in an earnings bracket way above the what the majority earns says that he doesn't want tax rises. I guess it's how you frame the question pud.

Would you like to see those all those who earn far more than what you are earning or will ever earn pay a bit more so you can have a fully functioning NHS, Police service, Schools, child care, councils etc and enjoy a more equal cohesive community?

To be fair, you've no idea what I earn or how, it's not relevant either.

I think it's important to assess the merits of each and every element.  Is losing half your earnings enough of a contribution from those at the top or should it be more?

Where would you set the tax brackets and what percentages would you apply? It's a tricky topic.

Or to puit it another way. Should we pay for public services, health, education, transport, roads, leisure, for everyone through tax - or should only rich people have access to these things - like Victorian Britain?

Tricky one.

One could of course use this as an example ..................

''Revealed: NHS trusts tell patients they can go private and jump hospital queues .......... ''NHS trusts with record waiting lists are promoting “quick and easy” private healthcare services at their own hospitals, offering patients the chance to jump year-long queues, the Observer can reveal.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/07/revealed-nhs-trusts-tell-patients-they-can-go-private-and-jump-hospital-queues

[drfchound]

Nothing new there Syd.
I had a bad knee injury 42 years ago.
I was taken to Hospital with my knee locked in a weird position and was told I could have surgery to put it right but it would mean waiting 3 to 4 months.
However if I paid I could get it done two days later.
The football club paid the bill, I got the knee repaired after jumping the queue.

[SydneyRover]

yes there is hound, there is a code of conduct under the trust system, I guess you didn't read it.

The premium treatments are being offered through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts and typically located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would eventually treat patients if they stayed on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of conduct, private services cannot impact on NHS patient care, and profits go back into the health service.

[ncRover]

yes there is hound, there is a code of conduct under the trust system, I guess you didn't read it.

The premium treatments are being offered through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts and typically located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would eventually treat patients if they stayed on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of conduct, private services cannot impact on NHS patient care, and profits go back into the health service.

What % of NHS staff also work privately?

Won’t private services “impact” the NHS by taking some pressure off it?

[drfchound]

yes there is hound, there is a code of conduct under the trust system, I guess you didn't read it.

The premium treatments are being offered through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts and typically located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would eventually treat patients if they stayed on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of conduct, private services cannot impact on NHS patient care, and profits go back into the health service.

You have no idea  whether the staff and surgeons who repaired my knee were the same people who would have done so had I waited three months.

[wilts rover]

yes there is hound, there is a code of conduct under the trust system, I guess you didn't read it.

The premium treatments are being offered through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts and typically located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would eventually treat patients if they stayed on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of conduct, private services cannot impact on NHS patient care, and profits go back into the health service.

What % of NHS staff also work privately?

Won’t private services “impact” the NHS by taking some pressure off it?

Not really. NHS work is done for cost. Private work is done for cost + profit. Therefore if the NHS pays for patients to have treatment in private hospitals - they will be able to treat less patients. Or something else will have to be cut-back.

Anyway we don't need private hospitals. These 40 new hospitals with 50 000 new nurses that Johnson promised will be coming on-line soon. Wont they...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Thing is though Wilts, as Streeting said very clearly this morning, there are phases of action needed in addressing the crisis in the NHS that the Tories have allowed to develop.

You can't develop new NHS capacity overnight. So if you want to quickly get waiting lists down, you likely have to buy in private capacity. That's from necessity, not choice.

The key then is to invest in the long term capacity of the NHS, so that the buying on of private help us only a short term expedient.

That is an approach that shows hard headed pragmatism for both the short and long terms.

[wilts rover]

Yes that's a short term fix to address immediate issues. The thread I am reply to appears to imply using private services (to replace NHS) permanently. Which is the current Tory 'policy' (or appears to be by running it down so much).

Streeting was clear it would only be short-term until he built up NHS capacity.

[ncRover]

yes there is hound, there is a code of conduct under the trust system, I guess you didn't read it.

The premium treatments are being offered through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts and typically located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would eventually treat patients if they stayed on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of conduct, private services cannot impact on NHS patient care, and profits go back into the health service.

What % of NHS staff also work privately?

Won’t private services “impact” the NHS by taking some pressure off it?

Not really. NHS work is done for cost. Private work is done for cost + profit. Therefore if the NHS pays for patients to have treatment in private hospitals - they will be able to treat less patients. Or something else will have to be cut-back.

Anyway we don't need private hospitals. These 40 new hospitals with 50 000 new nurses that Johnson promised will be coming on-line soon. Wont they...

How much of those getting private care had had it funded by the NHS?

On that note Wilts, it would be interesting to see how many of the last 3 prime ministers pledges have come true amidst this circus merry-go-round.

[ncRover]

Yes that's a short term fix to address immediate issues. The thread I am reply to appears to imply using private services (to replace NHS) permanently. Which is the current Tory 'policy' (or appears to be by running it down so much).

Streeting was clear it would only be short-term until he built up NHS capacity.

I wasn’t implying that by the way, just recognising that private can have it’s uses.

[drfchound]

It would also be interesting to know how many of our government bashing posters have had private healthcare at some time through their lives.
From what I have read on here over the years quite a few have now, or have had, good jobs and good jobs often include private healthcare cover for senior staff.
I don’t expect anyone to step forward though and admit to it.

[Ldr]

[/quote]

Not really. NHS work is done for cost. Private work is done for cost + profit. Therefore if the NHS pays for patients to have treatment in private hospitals - they will be able to treat less patients. Or something else will have to be cut-back.


[/quote]

Love to read the source for this given how wrong it is

[ncRover]

It would also be interesting to know how many of our government bashing posters have had private healthcare at some time through their lives.
From what I have read on here over the years quite a few have now, or have had, good jobs and good jobs often include private healthcare cover for senior staff.
I don’t expect anyone to step forward though and admit to it.

I think the general sentiment is that anything private can’t possibly serve the community.

I work in a small business private healthcare dealing with MSK cases. We are well respected in the community, improve the health of those in it and take the pressure of such cases off the local GPs.

If we were to assimilate within the NHS tomorrow. Our waiting list would rapidly lengthen and standards would go down. If people have the money to afford those standards, I don’t see the problem.

That doesn’t mean I want the NHS to get run down or to not get any help either. But private healthcare can help holistically to take pressure off the NHS. It does desperately need it. I just don’t like the implication from those on the left that any private healthcare is is profit and greed-driven.

Also, if Rishi Sunak was to use the NHS when he can afford to otherwise, is he not taking up the space of someone else who genuinely needs it? I don’t understand the issue with that part of his interview.

[SydneyRover]

nc What you appear not to accept is that private facilities take resources from the NHS. In the article I posted it stated that private work should not be done to the detriment of NHS patients which is in effect what is happening, although profits from private work in trusts is paid back to the trust/NHS the private work takes the resources from it and the NHS patients get bumped down the list. If this continues and the private sector grows then we will end up with a us style copycat system.

[albie]

The Labour plan to use private sector to address NHS capacity issues is that the Tories have been doing this since 2010.
£100 billion of NHS cash has been handed to private health since 2010.

In some cases NHS bed capacity was reduced annually and sold off to private health providers.

The Tories spent £13 billion on private sector bed capacity in 3 years.
During that time NHS waiting lists doubled.

Private health charge 11% more than the NHS. They refuse to treat patients with complex issues.
They are interested in the low risk proceedures, and leave the NHS to deal with more challenging cases.

Streeting is in the pay of a private health interest, who cover his office costs with donations.

Labour would have more credibility if they committed to the re-possession of those NHS assets transferred to private providers.

Return the capacity to NHS services by the most direct means, rather than restoring capacity by new provision which is ripe for re-sale at at change in government.

Running parallel systems is a waste of resources.
It writes profit taking into the DNA of the system.

[SydneyRover]

From the article

''Hospitals are offering hip replacements from £10,000, cataract surgery for £2,200 and hernia repairs for £2,500. MRI scans are offered for between £300 and £400''

How is someone that struggles or cannot pay for food or heating that cannot get a decent pay rise be expected to be able to afford this.

7 million + on the waiting list.

[wilts rover]

Not really. NHS work is done for cost. Private work is done for cost + profit. Therefore if the NHS pays for patients to have treatment in private hospitals - they will be able to treat less patients. Or something else will have to be cut-back.


[/quote]

Love to read the source for this given how wrong it is
[/quote]

Not really one source but a very brief summary of a number of things I have read over the years. here's some

https://www.bma.org.uk/media/5378/bma-nhs-outsourcing-report-march-2022.pdf

https://fullfact.org/health/how-much-nhs-market-system-costing/?utm_source=content_page&utm_medium=related_content

https://www.hsj.co.uk/finance-and-efficiency/nhs-spend-on-private-healthcare-rose-27-per-cent-in-a-year/7031836.article

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-hospital-stops-plan-charge-16548975

Happy to be corrected and have it explained how something which costs more will be cheaper?

[SydneyRover]

The Labour plan to use private sector to address NHS capacity issues is that the Tories have been doing this since 2010.
£100 billion of NHS cash has been handed to private health since 2010.

In some cases NHS bed capacity was reduced annually and sold off to private health providers.

The Tories spent £13 billion on private sector bed capacity in 3 years.
During that time NHS waiting lists doubled.

Private health charge 11% more than the NHS. They refuse to treat patients with complex issues.
They are interested in the low risk proceedures, and leave the NHS to deal with more challenging cases.

Streeting is in the pay of a private health interest, who cover his office costs with donations.

Labour would have more credibility if they committed to the re-possession of those NHS assets transferred to private providers.

Return the capacity to NHS services by the most direct means, rather than restoring capacity by new provision which is ripe for re-sale at at change in government.

Running parallel systems is a waste of resources.
It writes profit taking into the DNA of the system.

You expect labour to fix almost 13 years of total incompetence overnight? And again you are asking labour to scare the horses, they won't be able to do anything if they don't get into government. The chaos of 4 tory governments is not going to be solved by the first labour government, ask the TUC.

[wilts rover]

Percentage of total UK income owned by top 1% since end of WW1

https://twitter.com/PplPolPlace/status/1612073326549307397

[SydneyRover]

Yes wilts, what is the point of being the 6/7th wealthiest country if only a small % can get access to it. How many of those on the waiting list cannot work or cannot work to fully or need to be cared for by others, wouldn't fixing the NHS make good economic sense?

[albie]

Syd,

Your reply 84 completely misses the point of my post.

It is not incompetence by the Tories...it is ideology.
They believe private health, for profit, is a better model of health provision.

Of course Labour should argue for a different approach.
There is no electoral value in supporting the existing transfer of resource from the public sector, when public opinion is strongly in favour of the NHS.

The idea that there is no alternative to a two tier model of health care is nonsense.
Transfer health resources into the system which offers better value for money to the whole community, not to the advantage of private shareholders.

There is also no excuse for accepting sponsorship from the private health sector whose interests are in your portfolio.

[SydneyRover]

I don't think labour does support the transfer of public resources to the private sector Albie, it's a matter of timing. If the tories weren't so incompetent the economy starting from austerity would be in a lot better place, true the money may not have flowed to the NHS but the general population may have been able to afford to use the facilities.

[albie]

There is a general summary of the state of play here, with references for those who like more detail;
https://chpi.org.uk/uncategorized/is-a-two-tier-healthcare-system-inevitable-in-the-uk/

The question is how best to reverse trends already in evidence, and what are the core matters of principle to base the health system upon.