Support for NHS the reforms proposed by the Tory and Lib Dem coalition is scant as the fantastic infographic below shows:
Showing posts with label NHS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NHS. Show all posts
Monday, March 05, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
NHS reform re-toxifies the Tory brand
I can't understand why the Tories are so hell-bent on reforming the NHS. This unpopular change is dragging their brand through the mud when the party has traditionally struggled to get people to believe they will not destroy the NHS. Why do it when you don't have to? Just leave it alone. At least wait for people to trust you first before meddling.
David Cameron and Andrew Lansley are hell-bent on NHS reform precisely because it is such a political body. The NHS symbolises the Labour Party and therefore the Tories have always been suspicious of it. I can understand but not excuse that. What many Tories are now refusing to forgive is Cameron's picking of an unnecessary and un-winnable fight when the economic climate makes governing hard enough.
Cameron is trying to plough the changes through whatever the opposition in the hope that people will have forgotten about it by 2015 at the next general election. I doubt voters will forget.
Cameron and Lansley contradict themselves when they claim the reason for the NSH changes, like GP fundholding in the early 1990s, is to take power away from bureaucrats and give it to highly trusted doctors. That might be fine. Except that falls down when the Tories ignore these trusted experts, doctors and nurses, to ignore their advice about the bill.
If we trust doctors, as Cameron says we do. Trust their judgement and drop the bill or watch the Tory brand disappear again.
David Cameron and Andrew Lansley are hell-bent on NHS reform precisely because it is such a political body. The NHS symbolises the Labour Party and therefore the Tories have always been suspicious of it. I can understand but not excuse that. What many Tories are now refusing to forgive is Cameron's picking of an unnecessary and un-winnable fight when the economic climate makes governing hard enough.
Cameron is trying to plough the changes through whatever the opposition in the hope that people will have forgotten about it by 2015 at the next general election. I doubt voters will forget.
Cameron and Lansley contradict themselves when they claim the reason for the NSH changes, like GP fundholding in the early 1990s, is to take power away from bureaucrats and give it to highly trusted doctors. That might be fine. Except that falls down when the Tories ignore these trusted experts, doctors and nurses, to ignore their advice about the bill.
If we trust doctors, as Cameron says we do. Trust their judgement and drop the bill or watch the Tory brand disappear again.
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
NHS reform will press ahead
After being criticised by GPs, doctors, nurses, trade unions, the lap-dog Lib-Dems and Labour, David Cameron today unveiled sweeping changes to NHS reforms. Is this a significant political moment as it shows that the coalition isn't quite steaming ahead with its agenda as it would have liked?
I'm not sure the changes are as big as Cameron makes out. The fundamental changes to the NHS will still happen, even if a bit later than planned. GPs will still take over the commissioning of services from primary care trusts. Greater competition will still take place with private sector providers. I accept that the plans have been watered down but the fundamentals remain.
The reform process is ill thought out and suggests a dogmatic wish to return to the John Major days of GP fund-holding. I don't really understand on what basis the Tories decided that GP commissioning would be the answer to the NHS ills. There is no reason at all for this form of service delivery to be more efficient. On the contrary, spending swathes of scarce cash on a major reorganisation at a time when funds are so scarce seems completely foolhardy. For a Tory party that is so bent on cutting public spending to do this now shows how committed they are to the changes and demonstrates an ideological commitment to them.
The delays and changes show how hard Cameron is finding it to run his party and get his legislation through. I expect him to overcome these obstacles and press ahead with an unnecessary and costly reorganisation of the NHS just when it needed it least.
I'm not sure the changes are as big as Cameron makes out. The fundamental changes to the NHS will still happen, even if a bit later than planned. GPs will still take over the commissioning of services from primary care trusts. Greater competition will still take place with private sector providers. I accept that the plans have been watered down but the fundamentals remain.
The reform process is ill thought out and suggests a dogmatic wish to return to the John Major days of GP fund-holding. I don't really understand on what basis the Tories decided that GP commissioning would be the answer to the NHS ills. There is no reason at all for this form of service delivery to be more efficient. On the contrary, spending swathes of scarce cash on a major reorganisation at a time when funds are so scarce seems completely foolhardy. For a Tory party that is so bent on cutting public spending to do this now shows how committed they are to the changes and demonstrates an ideological commitment to them.
The delays and changes show how hard Cameron is finding it to run his party and get his legislation through. I expect him to overcome these obstacles and press ahead with an unnecessary and costly reorganisation of the NHS just when it needed it least.
Monday, May 16, 2011
The NHS:The end of the public service ethos
The point of the NHS is that it is free at the point of use. Nobody is expected to pay directly for their healthcare, it is paid out of central taxation. Another central principle is that the NHS doesn't exist for profit. What we pay in taxes shouldn't be creamed off to pay dividends instead of patient care. This is the pubic service ethos. The Tories plans for the NHS eat away at this.
Today's reports that one of David Cameron's aides Mark Britnell would be a "big opportunity" for the private sector show that the government's (not publicly stated) aim is to chip away at the public service ethos in the NHS. It strikes me that the point in these reforms is to allow the private sector a greater role in NHS service provision. This makes it likely that the private sector will cream off the profitable parts and leave the state to pick up and pay for the rest. Chipping away at the public service ethos is also likely to chip away at the quality of care given to patients as the profit motive encourages the cutting of corners.
Politicallly Britnell's comments demonstrate an extreme naivety about how people feel about the NHS. It also suggests that Cameron's proclaimed "love" for the NHS isn't the same love shared by the rest of the country. Cameron's advisor's comments were not off guard, off the record or mis-quoted. They show what the Tories really want to do to the NHS. They want to part privatise it.
The "pause" in the NHS reforms were just that. Nothing will change, the same reforms will happen, just a little later. Politically the result will be the same. As the Mirror reports that 62% of people are against the reforms, added to all of the professional bodies, this is yet another unpopular and unnecessary Tory policy. How will the Lib Dems react? They won't be able to stop it no matter how vociferous their complaints. Cameron is ploughing on regardless.
At least today's comments showed the Tories' true intentions, nobody can say they didn't realise what they were planning to do when the NHS gets sold off.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Proud of the NHS?
Is the NHS safe in Tory hands? It certainly wasn't in the 1980s and 1990s when I grew up. On the evidence of today's comments by Tory MEP Daniel Hannan, attacking our proudest achievement, I am led to suspect the answer to be no.
I've not been surprised at the American reaction to Obama's plans to expand state health care provision. I have been a little surprised though that ordinary Americans might be against extending their rights to better health.
Hannan's view of the NHS is not one I share. Waiting lists are no longer an issue like he says. As a member of the Tory party perhaps he should remember the closed wards and patients left to die on trolleys every winter as was usual when his party was last in power?
Hannan's Tory party is one of a small state, cuts and always putting the individual first. This is what lurks behind Cameron's compassionate conservatism. I suspect this to be revealed after the next election.
I've not been surprised at the American reaction to Obama's plans to expand state health care provision. I have been a little surprised though that ordinary Americans might be against extending their rights to better health.
Hannan's view of the NHS is not one I share. Waiting lists are no longer an issue like he says. As a member of the Tory party perhaps he should remember the closed wards and patients left to die on trolleys every winter as was usual when his party was last in power?
Hannan's Tory party is one of a small state, cuts and always putting the individual first. This is what lurks behind Cameron's compassionate conservatism. I suspect this to be revealed after the next election.
Friday, March 13, 2009
National Health Service survey
Please complete this survey to show your support (or otherwise) for the NHS. This is for a friend who is looking to understand people's experience of healthcare in the UK. It only takes a minute and your support is greatly appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)