FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The NHS
The NHS
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?" So the Tory’s run the NHS ? Surely the NHS runs itself ? It’s a gravy train for so many people at the cost of the public. Needs clearing out from the top down and rebuilding from the bottom up  | |||
| |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it?" I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed" The problem with the NHS as I see it, is its size. The largest employer of people in Europe and 5th largest in the world, I believe. The sting in the tail is the high skill levels and complexity of the work it does. Nightmare to manage, and I would be really interested in the "how" it can be managed better, I think it needs something radical, not sure what but that's all I have.  | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed The problem with the NHS as I see it, is its size. The largest employer of people in Europe and 5th largest in the world, I believe. The sting in the tail is the high skill levels and complexity of the work it does. Nightmare to manage, and I would be really interested in the "how" it can be managed better, I think it needs something radical, not sure what but that's all I have. "While I don't disagree with what you say, I would say limiting the scope to that would be a mistake. It needs the lost funding restored and needs for the government to stop placing obstacles in its' way. In essence we need to look for and identify all the issues, inside and out of the NHS. focusing on one side only won't have the result most want, and that's a functioning world leading NHS | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed The problem with the NHS as I see it, is its size. The largest employer of people in Europe and 5th largest in the world, I believe. The sting in the tail is the high skill levels and complexity of the work it does. Nightmare to manage, and I would be really interested in the "how" it can be managed better, I think it needs something radical, not sure what but that's all I have.
While I don't disagree with what you say, I would say limiting the scope to that would be a mistake. It needs the lost funding restored and needs for the government to stop placing obstacles in its' way.
In essence we need to look for and identify all the issues, inside and out of the NHS. focusing on one side only won't have the result most want, and that's a functioning world leading NHS"I said above here, that I would advocate a start again, centre of excellence that removes all of the red tape, processes and issues facing the hospitals and trusts today. Build it learn from it and drive in the changes that worked to the rest of the estate. Outside of that approach, I can only see old wounds and cash as a temporary plaster. I think the NHS could do with a fresh start. | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed The problem with the NHS as I see it, is its size. The largest employer of people in Europe and 5th largest in the world, I believe. The sting in the tail is the high skill levels and complexity of the work it does. Nightmare to manage, and I would be really interested in the "how" it can be managed better, I think it needs something radical, not sure what but that's all I have.
While I don't disagree with what you say, I would say limiting the scope to that would be a mistake. It needs the lost funding restored and needs for the government to stop placing obstacles in its' way.
In essence we need to look for and identify all the issues, inside and out of the NHS. focusing on one side only won't have the result most want, and that's a functioning world leading NHS
I said above here, that I would advocate a start again, centre of excellence that removes all of the red tape, processes and issues facing the hospitals and trusts today. Build it learn from it and drive in the changes that worked to the rest of the estate. Outside of that approach, I can only see old wounds and cash as a temporary plaster.
I think the NHS could do with a fresh start. "Not sure how feasible that is, firstly because the people responsible for starting the new one would be the same people trying to kill the old one (the tories). Secondly in order to do it you would need to build such a large interconnected structure in order for it to be anywhere near capable of handling even 10% of the current NHS. It may take longer, but I think reform of the existing system is the only route which is both affordable and wont have people fall through the cracks and die. | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed The problem with the NHS as I see it, is its size. The largest employer of people in Europe and 5th largest in the world, I believe. The sting in the tail is the high skill levels and complexity of the work it does. Nightmare to manage, and I would be really interested in the "how" it can be managed better, I think it needs something radical, not sure what but that's all I have.
While I don't disagree with what you say, I would say limiting the scope to that would be a mistake. It needs the lost funding restored and needs for the government to stop placing obstacles in its' way.
In essence we need to look for and identify all the issues, inside and out of the NHS. focusing on one side only won't have the result most want, and that's a functioning world leading NHS
I said above here, that I would advocate a start again, centre of excellence that removes all of the red tape, processes and issues facing the hospitals and trusts today. Build it learn from it and drive in the changes that worked to the rest of the estate. Outside of that approach, I can only see old wounds and cash as a temporary plaster.
I think the NHS could do with a fresh start.
Not sure how feasible that is, firstly because the people responsible for starting the new one would be the same people trying to kill the old one (the tories).
Secondly in order to do it you would need to build such a large interconnected structure in order for it to be anywhere near capable of handling even 10% of the current NHS.
It may take longer, but I think reform of the existing system is the only route which is both affordable and wont have people fall through the cracks and die."I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. | |||
 | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3." I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover" Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 | |||
"Has it crossed your mind that perhaps it is the upper and middle management plus elements of the civil service that are actually at fault? Funny how things seem to get worse no matter which political party holds power isn't it? I find it more fascinating how people will ignore the Tories roll in defunding the NHS and making harder for the NHS to do its job. Yes the NHS runs itself, but it's budget is set by the Tories, the Tories control the laws around it, they control who gets what contract for it. Yes the NHS could do better within itself, but far more good would come from having a government that actually wants it to suceed" Indeed. It doesn't really run itself - not with the level of government involvement it has; which is fair enough, given how it's funded. I'm sure the Scottish and Welsh governments want it to succeed - maybe even Westminster does - but although the majority of the time, the NHS does work, for most people; the number of times it's failing to do so is on the increase, in all four nations of the UK. A lack of adequate funding is, no doubt, a factor. But a lot of the stress the NHS is under is due to the regretfully large percentage of UK citizens who are unhealthy enough to need it. Perhaps investing money in raising people out of poverty and in the prevention of illness might be an alternative to expensive cures? | |||
" Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 " emotive point for the celtic nations. equivalent funding as regards HS2 under the barnet formula was point blank refused by the current government, who deem a project building a rail line from london through the midlands and onto leeds as somehow directly benefiting wales scotland and northern ireland. the money owed would go a very very long way to properly funding devolved healthcare. levelling up is clearly a fiction | |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?" Charge people for not attending appointments - it's been floated for years. If the NICS is too much too soon, a £10 fee for non attendance, rising to £25 for continued missed appointments would motivate people to stop wasting providers time...? Obviously an hours overlap allowing for say traffic, disability, appointments brought forward etc | |||
| |||
"^ As I am now overthinking this... oversight would be needed as Trusts could easily overbook patients in attempts to raise cash, as patients might not be able to park/book in resulting in charges. " Also fixed penalties are only really a disincentive / punishment for the poor. Now if it were a variable fine based on earnings that would affect everyone more equally. | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 " Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! | |||
| |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.!" Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? " When finished HS2 will connect 25 Million people and expects over 100 million people a year to use it. It's a good job you wasn't around a couple of hundred years ago when steam trains first appeared. You would be complaining they are not needed.! | |||
| |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? When finished HS2 will connect 25 Million people and expects over 100 million people a year to use it. It's a good job you wasn't around a couple of hundred years ago when steam trains first appeared. You would be complaining they are not needed.!" Why have you got so much support for this money pit of a project? | |||
| |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? When finished HS2 will connect 25 Million people and expects over 100 million people a year to use it. It's a good job you wasn't around a couple of hundred years ago when steam trains first appeared. You would be complaining they are not needed.! Why have you got so much support for this money pit of a project? " Because its an important engineering project. It has created thousands of jobs, has given the opportunity for people to learn new trades. The NHS is a money pit constantly wanting more money. It needs restructuring and the money going towards the care of people not into overpaid executives/managers pockets. | |||
| |||
"As a user of freight trains the key benefit of the new lines is the freeing up of the existing lines for freight. The U.K. rail freight extra capacity is non existent and we cannot continue to just keep adding trucks . The congestion in this country is amongst the worst in Europe due to a lack of investment for decades . It’s impacting our ability to trade effectively. Sadly it’s not going to make a huge difference very quickly because even if we double the rail freight capacity across the country the effect on road traffic is limited. So we need a combination of both. The French had their high speed train running 40 years ago. We in the U.K. went for free market forces. How did that work out? " That is an interesting view, I'm still struggling to understand how the costs, that vary from £98 billion to £172 billion will provide a return on investment. | |||
"As a user of freight trains the key benefit of the new lines is the freeing up of the existing lines for freight. The U.K. rail freight extra capacity is non existent and we cannot continue to just keep adding trucks . The congestion in this country is amongst the worst in Europe due to a lack of investment for decades . It’s impacting our ability to trade effectively. Sadly it’s not going to make a huge difference very quickly because even if we double the rail freight capacity across the country the effect on road traffic is limited. So we need a combination of both. The French had their high speed train running 40 years ago. We in the U.K. went for free market forces. How did that work out? That is an interesting view, I'm still struggling to understand how the costs, that vary from £98 billion to £172 billion will provide a return on investment. " I’m not claiming any knowledge on that but an engineer I know says they are spending a fortune on environmental stuff. As with most government contracts such as the armoured vehicles for the army , over run mismanagement comes to mind. PPE!! I will defer to people who know more as not something I know either way. | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? When finished HS2 will connect 25 Million people and expects over 100 million people a year to use it. It's a good job you wasn't around a couple of hundred years ago when steam trains first appeared. You would be complaining they are not needed.! Why have you got so much support for this money pit of a project? Because its an important engineering project. It has created thousands of jobs, has given the opportunity for people to learn new trades. The NHS is a money pit constantly wanting more money. It needs restructuring and the money going towards the care of people not into overpaid executives/managers pockets. " I understand the jobs, I'm failing to see the justification for the cost of this enterprise. I think the money being ploughed into this could have been used to improve so much more of the country. Police, fire fighters, hospitals, even paying off the debt we are in. We have a little while to wait to see if HS2 was a worthwhile venture or not. I don't want it to fail if they wont stop the spending on it, that would be plain stupid, but right now I'm not convinced. | |||
"I was thinking the hospital and trust could be built in a deprived area, with failing infrastructures, health, unemployment etc. The whole thing starts a fresh outside of the traditional NHS. Staff, suppliers everything under a new NHS2 banner. Can it bring jobs, better services, improve the health of the people in the area. Take what works there and adopt it in to the NHS, each hospital that gets upgraded becomes part of NHS2, until they are all NHS2 and we start again on NHS3. I get the thought, but in essence you are going to need a period where both are running, there is problems with staffing as is, how would you staff and fund both even if it were only for a month? Then what would you do with all the old infrastructure? I feel with the sort of expense needed to do that you could get a lot more benefit with reform. The key I think would be to get people at the top with proven track records in socialised medicine (whether it be in systems here or abroad) to replace who is there, and give them backing to get the job done, I imagine it would be faster, cheaper and less chaotic. Their priority should be health care provision, as opposed to the current targets which are likely budgetary or patient turnover Funding would come from the vote winning.. Halt HS2 to Fund NHS2 Your answer is to stop Europe's largest mega-project and to make up 20,000 people unemployed. Clearly not a vote winner for those workers, their family and friends.! Maybe those workers could be working on building hospitals and infrastructures that are actually needed and benefits the majority of people? When finished HS2 will connect 25 Million people and expects over 100 million people a year to use it. It's a good job you wasn't around a couple of hundred years ago when steam trains first appeared. You would be complaining they are not needed.! Why have you got so much support for this money pit of a project? Because its an important engineering project. It has created thousands of jobs, has given the opportunity for people to learn new trades. The NHS is a money pit constantly wanting more money. It needs restructuring and the money going towards the care of people not into overpaid executives/managers pockets. I understand the jobs, I'm failing to see the justification for the cost of this enterprise. I think the money being ploughed into this could have been used to improve so much more of the country. Police, fire fighters, hospitals, even paying off the debt we are in. We have a little while to wait to see if HS2 was a worthwhile venture or not. I don't want it to fail if they wont stop the spending on it, that would be plain stupid, but right now I'm not convinced." By the same view many people objected to the M1. They want it wider now. I work in Manchester and London so the fact I get there 20 mins quicker is I can confirm pretty irrelevant to me.. it’s about capacity as i mentioned above and also competing with air. Our infrastructure of roads and rail is woefully inadequate. It’s never a good time to build for everyone or indeed our country’s finances, but in this country it’s always take action way to late. We need to invest and over build to allow for growth. Look at the ridiculous converting of hard shoulders which are lethal. Expansion on the cheap. I’ll give an example of how rail and road capacity affects costs. Thirty years ago trucks could do “almost” two trips a day from Immingham docks to Manchester a couple of days a week. ( 9 hours driving) Today they are lucky to do it once. So it’s doubled the cost of using those trucks in real terms. Regardless of fuel etc Delayed freight trains and delayed traffic costs millions every day in this country. You can’t see the bill but it’s massive and it financially affects every single one of us . | |||
| |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now? Charge people for not attending appointments - it's been floated for years. If the NICS is too much too soon, a £10 fee for non attendance, rising to £25 for continued missed appointments would motivate people to stop wasting providers time...? Obviously an hours overlap allowing for say traffic, disability, appointments brought forward etc " I would agree with that approach which as you say has been suggested for several years. However I would say it needs to work both ways. So if an appointment is cancelled/ postponed at the last minute then there should be repercussions for that too | |||
"Poverty results the biggest health inequalities. Improved living conditions, diets and life chances." This is true | |||
| |||
"Is the NHS failing or a victim of its own success? The population is getting older and living longer. Older ppl id guess use the NHS more. So NHS budgets need to increase with inflation, population growth and age growth. Have they ? Dunno. I have no experience of being in the NHS. But have seen the private sector decide to cut out the middle managers ... Only to find they were doing stuff. I'm sure there are slackers and many who have Peter principaled themselves. But to identify them needs good managers! " I think there is an element of truth to all the statements I have seen summarised as such (in order from what I think the biggest culprits are to the least) 1) The NHS has been failed by the government 2) The NHS has been failed by budgetary issues (both cuts and misspending) 3) The NHS has been failed by the Upper management 4) The NHS has been a victim of its own success 5) The NHS has failed itself This is why I think there isn't a single right answer to fixing it, it needs a multi-pronged approach, spearheaded by people that want to see it be all it can be, for the nation and not for some privatised medicine companies. | |||
| |||
"Is the NHS failing or a victim of its own success? The population is getting older and living longer. Older ppl id guess use the NHS more. So NHS budgets need to increase with inflation, population growth and age growth. Have they ? Dunno. I have no experience of being in the NHS. But have seen the private sector decide to cut out the middle managers ... Only to find they were doing stuff. I'm sure there are slackers and many who have Peter principaled themselves. But to identify them needs good managers! I think there is an element of truth to all the statements I have seen summarised as such (in order from what I think the biggest culprits are to the least) 1) The NHS has been failed by the government 2) The NHS has been failed by budgetary issues (both cuts and misspending) 3) The NHS has been failed by the Upper management 4) The NHS has been a victim of its own success 5) The NHS has failed itself This is why I think there isn't a single right answer to fixing it, it needs a multi-pronged approach, spearheaded by people that want to see it be all it can be, for the nation and not for some privatised medicine companies." Very well put Great post. If we value it than we should fix it. It can’t carry on with its present path. We will get to the point we’re it’s unaffordable then the nightmare of two tier health as in the US will become reality. I for one want it to be our NATIONAL Health Service. Paid for by tax payers and free at use for all. | |||
"^ As I am now overthinking this... oversight would be needed as Trusts could easily overbook patients in attempts to raise cash, as patients might not be able to park/book in resulting in charges. Also fixed penalties are only really a disincentive / punishment for the poor. Now if it were a variable fine based on earnings that would affect everyone more equally." Would you believe it, NICS + No sliding scale and details still on a postcard but £10 it is. lol https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62366197 | |||
| |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?" . Maybe we need to start by doing a detailed analysis of who uses the services and why they are using it. Operations are now routinely undertaken which may have been avoided previously. Many older people are requesting operations which potentially result in their quality of life being decreased if the operation is not a success. In other European countries you would not be able to use the NHS free of charge . Both Ireland and France charge. One issue we need to address urgently is the number of Doctors and nurses which we train . Average salaries for Doctors is a lot less in France . Having assessed who is using the NHS and why they are using it , we then need to address the issue as to whom should provide the service . Hoe many people actually need to see a Doctor and would the assessment be better undertaken by a nurse.. In some cases NHS staff have refused to assist in recovering money from Health Tourists. It seems that shortage of funds is not a problem for these staff | |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?. Maybe we need to start by doing a detailed analysis of who uses the services and why they are using it. Operations are now routinely undertaken which may have been avoided previously. Many older people are requesting operations which potentially result in their quality of life being decreased if the operation is not a success. In other European countries you would not be able to use the NHS free of charge . Both Ireland and France charge. One issue we need to address urgently is the number of Doctors and nurses which we train . Average salaries for Doctors is a lot less in France . Having assessed who is using the NHS and why they are using it , we then need to address the issue as to whom should provide the service . Hoe many people actually need to see a Doctor and would the assessment be better undertaken by a nurse.. In some cases NHS staff have refused to assist in recovering money from Health Tourists. It seems that shortage of funds is not a problem for these staff " Yes exactly, some of the people who use the NHS are even poor people. Maybe we should cut them off from using it?  | |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?. Maybe we need to start by doing a detailed analysis of who uses the services and why they are using it. Operations are now routinely undertaken which may have been avoided previously. Many older people are requesting operations which potentially result in their quality of life being decreased if the operation is not a success. In other European countries you would not be able to use the NHS free of charge . Both Ireland and France charge. One issue we need to address urgently is the number of Doctors and nurses which we train . Average salaries for Doctors is a lot less in France . Having assessed who is using the NHS and why they are using it , we then need to address the issue as to whom should provide the service . Hoe many people actually need to see a Doctor and would the assessment be better undertaken by a nurse.. In some cases NHS staff have refused to assist in recovering money from Health Tourists. It seems that shortage of funds is not a problem for these staff " it's safe to ignore this nonsense. what's important is holding 12 years worth of lazy and stupid health secretaries to account, having failed to take any action on their watch. | |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?. Maybe we need to start by doing a detailed analysis of who uses the services and why they are using it. Operations are now routinely undertaken which may have been avoided previously. Many older people are requesting operations which potentially result in their quality of life being decreased if the operation is not a success. In other European countries you would not be able to use the NHS free of charge . Both Ireland and France charge. One issue we need to address urgently is the number of Doctors and nurses which we train . Average salaries for Doctors is a lot less in France . Having assessed who is using the NHS and why they are using it , we then need to address the issue as to whom should provide the service . Hoe many people actually need to see a Doctor and would the assessment be better undertaken by a nurse.. In some cases NHS staff have refused to assist in recovering money from Health Tourists. It seems that shortage of funds is not a problem for these staff " Another option may be a detailed analysis of how long graduates stay in the UK after qualifying. It's widely known our education system is cheaper and more reputable than many other countries. Once graduated, flying back to the US, China, Ireland (where ever), is often more economical than studying at home. Any industry leaking professionals (teachers, dr's, dentists, engineers), could impose a mandatory 5 year stay in NHS, state ed, local authority instead of the more usual 1 year (I think), to gain necessary experience. It would also mean anyone receiving a bursary would understand they would be taking it on with the understanding of a 5 year work period. Moving to private practice would then be curtailed. | |||
"It's in deep shit, as we all know. It isn't being run properly by the Tories in England, the SNP in Scotland, Labour in Wales and the DUP don't want N. Ireland to have a government because they're infantile. So, WTF do we do now?. Maybe we need to start by doing a detailed analysis of who uses the services and why they are using it. Operations are now routinely undertaken which may have been avoided previously. Many older people are requesting operations which potentially result in their quality of life being decreased if the operation is not a success. In other European countries you would not be able to use the NHS free of charge . Both Ireland and France charge. One issue we need to address urgently is the number of Doctors and nurses which we train . Average salaries for Doctors is a lot less in France . Having assessed who is using the NHS and why they are using it , we then need to address the issue as to whom should provide the service . Hoe many people actually need to see a Doctor and would the assessment be better undertaken by a nurse.. In some cases NHS staff have refused to assist in recovering money from Health Tourists. It seems that shortage of funds is not a problem for these staff Another option may be a detailed analysis of how long graduates stay in the UK after qualifying. It's widely known our education system is cheaper and more reputable than many other countries. Once graduated, flying back to the US, China, Ireland (where ever), is often more economical than studying at home. Any industry leaking professionals (teachers, dr's, dentists, engineers), could impose a mandatory 5 year stay in NHS, state ed, local authority instead of the more usual 1 year (I think), to gain necessary experience. It would also mean anyone receiving a bursary would understand they would be taking it on with the understanding of a 5 year work period. Moving to private practice would then be curtailed. " . A very interesting point and one which we should address | |||
| |||
| |||
