When will indyref2 happen?

[Baxter Parp]

2 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

FFS, do you want me to say It a 3rd time? I said a 'different' model from the Private Finance Initiative racket (and how contracts were set up).

How does private investment work perfectly well in other countries, and is there anything we can learn from them in exploring an alternative funding model perhaps, that will maintain quality, improve safety and meet increased demand.

Right, a model that doesn't exist and relies on private investment from companies/entities/individuals not interested in making a profit.

[RedRob72]

Perhaps these countries,leaders and people have a more civic all in it together sort of mentality, the business folk with serious cash and influence in this country prefer to influence voters to suit their agendas, they ain't helping the SNP any time soon.

The question wasn't aimed at the SNP (or a criticism of the Scottish Government), it was addressed to the NHS across the UK as a whole (and including consideration of devolved budgets).

[ayrmad]

1 minute ago, RedRob72 said:

The question wasn't aimed at the SNP (or a criticism of the Scottish Government), it was addressed to the NHS across the UK as a whole (and including consideration of devolved budgets).

In Scotland it's only about the SNP, they're the only show that matters for the next 4 or 5 years.

Down south the Tories will be Tories, their pals,family etc would all get the secret nod about where to invest their cash.

[RedRob72]

Right, a model that doesn't exist and relies on private investment from companies/entities/individuals not interested in making a profit.

If it's properly controlled, and regulated, it can and does work, look at the way the German system is managed for example.

[Baxter Parp]

Just now, RedRob72 said:

The question wasn't aimed at the SNP (or a criticism of the Scottish Government), it was addressed to the NHS across the UK as a whole (and including consideration of devolved budgets).

The NHS isn't across the UK as a whole.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Scotland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Wales

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_National_Health_Service_(England

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_in_Northern_Ireland

[RedRob72]

The NHS isn't across the UK as a whole.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Scotland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Wales
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_National_Health_Service_(England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_in_Northern_Ireland

And your point? Manchester Healthcare has its owned devolved budget, others will follow! The Question remains the same, are we using the best available funding model to meet increased demand on health and social care providers across the country.

[Baxter Parp]

27 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

If it's properly controlled, and regulated, it can and does work, look at the way the German system is managed for example.

So it's not just about funding then.

[RedRob72]

So it's not just about funding then.

Of course not, but the 'way' it is funded surely directs how the system is managed and regulated. I don't see anything wrong in tapping into the commercial business sector for that sort of expertise and resource either. It can only compliment the skills and knowledge already deployed in NHS.

[Baxter Parp]

6 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Of course not, but the 'way' it is funded surely directs how the system is managed and regulated. I don't see anything wrong in tapping into the commercial business sector for that sort of expertise and resource either. It can only compliment the skills and knowledge already deployed in NHS.

Except that has never proved to be true in any way shape or form.

[ayrmad]

4 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Of course not, but the 'way' it is funded surely directs how the system is managed and regulated. I don't see anything wrong in tapping into the commercial business sector for that sort of expertise and resource either. It can only compliment the skills and knowledge already deployed in NHS.

From what I've seen of private involvement in the NHS it's all about profiteering/empire building and very little about improving the service, we're missing targets on NHS and education while theirs appear to be a shambles.

[strichener]

2 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

From what I've seen of private involvement in the NHS it's all about profiteering/empire building and very little about improving the service, we're missing targets on NHS and education while theirs appear to be a shambles.

Yes but that includes the doctors, consultants, nurses and surgeons that take on private work. 

In terms of private money being invested in the NHS, it really is simplistic to say that it is detrimental to the health service for a profit making company to be involved.  That is making an assumption that the public NHS is the most economically efficient organisation.  The Department of Health has previously published evidence of substantial waste in the NHS,  profit can reside in the current NHS waste. 

 

[RedRob72]

Except that has never proved to be true in any way shape or form.

Perhaps it's a case of selecting the right people across the political scale and careful considered appointments from Commerce (certainly including the Insurance sector), again other countries seem to find this perfectly workable and efficient, I've already mentioned Germany as one example.

[Baxter Parp]

6 minutes ago, strichener said:

Yes but that includes the doctors, consultants, nurses and surgeons that take on private work. 

In terms of private money being invested in the NHS, it really is simplistic to say that it is detrimental to the health service for a profit making company to be involved.  That is making an assumption that the public NHS is the most economically efficient organisation.  The Department of Health has previously published evidence of substantial waste in the NHS,  profit can reside in the current NHS waste. 

 

The NHS is the most efficient health service.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

The United Kingdom ranks first overall, scoring highest on quality, access and efficiency,"

[Baxter Parp]

2 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Perhaps it's a case of selecting the right people across the political scale and careful considered appointments from Commerce (certainly including the Insurance sector), again other countries seem to find this perfectly workable and efficient, I've already mentioned Germany as one example.

The NHS also outperforms the other countries – which include France, Germany and Canada – in managing the care of people who are chronically ill, the report said.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

[RedRob72]

Yes but that includes the doctors, consultants, nurses and surgeons that take on private work. 

In terms of private money being invested in the NHS, it really is simplistic to say that it is detrimental to the health service for a profit making company to be involved.  That is making an assumption that the public NHS is the most economically efficient organisation.  The Department of Health has previously published evidence of substantial waste in the NHS,  profit can reside in the current NHS waste. 

A very interesting point indeed, when people talk about privatisation of the NHS do they include the thousands of consultancy days paid for by private healthcare providers, to doctors employed on NHS contracts.
Do they include this increasing lucrative work as back door privatisation or not. Yes it's allowed in their terms and conditions, but isn't it the same argument, re public/private spend.

[RedRob72]

The NHS also outperforms the other countries – which include France, Germany and Canada – in managing the care of people who are chronically ill, the report said.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

Yet just 2 and a half years late the Guardian & other major news outlets are telling us that the NHS is at breaking point, it's literally on its knees, junior doctors down south claiming that the service is falling apart,levels of patient safety are dangerously low!!
Which is to be?

[Wren Road]

Loyal to a Queen that hates you
Votes for a party that hates you
Goes to an occupied country to March for a Dutch Prince that hates you
Supports a team that you allowed to die

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

What a confused little lad.

[ayrmad]

19 minutes ago, strichener said:

In terms of private money being invested in the NHS, it really is simplistic to say that it is detrimental to the health service for a profit making company to be involved.

It's not simplistic to say that those at the top of the tree are shuffling them 'n' theirs into positions that enables them to elicit profit at very little risk.

That is making an assumption that the public NHS is the most economically efficient organisation.

I certainly don't believe any of our major organisations are nearly as economically efficient as they should be, I'm quite open to private investment in all major organisations if they're aimed at providing the best service for our buck, at the moment it wouldn't be based on anything other than seeing the best in others wishful thinking, we're in a union where greed is good is the only mantra and that ain't changing anytime soon.

 The Department of Health has previously published evidence of substantial waste in the NHS,  profit can reside in the current NHS waste. 

I'm not doubting that but we appear all too willing at the moment to allow charlatans to charge 20,30 or more times the going rate for drugs etc without as much as a raised eyebrow. 

 

 

[strichener]

9 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

The NHS is the most efficient health service.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/17/nhs-health

The United Kingdom ranks first overall, scoring highest on quality, access and efficiency,"

I think that you will find that the IEA has already raised concerns about the methodology used in this report that was based almost entirely on survey responses.  It also has a bias towards single-payer systems like the NHS.

Here is something a little less biased and using multiple sources.  http://www.sochealth.co.uk/2015/01/18/international-comparisons-say-nhs/

[Baxter Parp]

13 minutes ago, RedRob72 said:

Yet just 2 and a half years late the Guardian & other major news outlets are telling us that the NHS is at breaking point, it's literally on its knees, junior doctors down south claiming that the service is falling apart,levels of patient safety are dangerously low!!
Which is to be?

 

 

2 years of cuts can make a hell of a difference to any service.  The point is that the publicly funded NHS is the best healthcare system in the world when it's properly funded.