Campaigners fight privatisation of NHS drug and alcohol services

Campaigners fight privatisation of NHS drug and alcohol services

Campaigners fight privatisation of NHS drug and alcohol services

First published in News by , Health reporter

CAMPAIGNERS are calling for drug and alcohol services in Brighton and Hove to continue to be run by the NHS.

The city council has put substance misuse services out to tender after carrying out a review and redesign.

The city's range of support and treatment had previously been run by the NHS and several different agencies.

A decision on the new contract is expected to be announced shortly. Unison members from the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, who work in the city, are petitioning the council to keep the service they provide within the NHS.

They have joined forces with the Sussex Defend the NHS campaign group and will be lobbying members of the council’s health and wellbeing board at their next meeting.

Branch communications officer Nick McMaster said: “We oppose the tendering out of this service as this is a process that promotes the privatisation of the NHS.

“By keeping this successful, award winning drug and alcohol service within the NHS, the council will not only protect a valued institution for future generations, but help protect the pay and conditions of loyal NHS staff who are also Brighton and Hove taxpayers.

“We urge the public to write to their councillors to keep the pressure on our council to save the NHS for patients, for staff, for everyone.”

Brighton and Hove director of public health, Tom Scanlon, said: “The proposed new service is much more focused on recovery from addiction than the current service is and it has incorporated the ideas that came from the stakeholder engagement.

“Local clinicians from primary care including homeless services have been closely involved in assessing the bids.

“The current focus is to ensure maximum public health gain with a service that provides high quality at a competitive cost, with additional social value without any significant service disruption as a result of the retender.”

A petition will be presented to the meeting on September 9.

Comments (48)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:29am Sun 24 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

I can understand the unions (and their green party puppets) being against any form of privatisation, but for the patients is there ay real problem?

As long as we are properly cared for, and we get safe treatment in a reasonable time , does it really matter who provides the service?
I can understand the unions (and their green party puppets) being against any form of privatisation, but for the patients is there ay real problem? As long as we are properly cared for, and we get safe treatment in a reasonable time , does it really matter who provides the service? G Wiley
  • Score: -14

9:23am Sun 24 Aug 14

MICKY389 says...

Ask some of the unfortunates in Kent what they think of their marvellous privatised patient transport service, and see what they have to say.
Ask some of the unfortunates in Kent what they think of their marvellous privatised patient transport service, and see what they have to say. MICKY389
  • Score: 33

9:53am Sun 24 Aug 14

Nikski says...

The slow stealthy march to private health care continues......piece by piece the NHS is being sold off. Some services just should not be run by private companies whose main motivation is profit and not the interests of the service users. Fight this!
The slow stealthy march to private health care continues......piece by piece the NHS is being sold off. Some services just should not be run by private companies whose main motivation is profit and not the interests of the service users. Fight this! Nikski
  • Score: 33

10:15am Sun 24 Aug 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

A friend of mine has been involved in the tender process for the privatisation of another service currently being delivered by the NHS service and the tenders being preferred are those with unqualified staff delivering services as this is cheaper than having nurses and experts delivering them.
It will be interesting to hear the business model of the successful tender and the staffing level and qualifications. I bet charities will bid and be unable to deliver to a high enough standard or attract and pay qualified staff and end up referring patients to GPs and A&E.
A friend of mine has been involved in the tender process for the privatisation of another service currently being delivered by the NHS service and the tenders being preferred are those with unqualified staff delivering services as this is cheaper than having nurses and experts delivering them. It will be interesting to hear the business model of the successful tender and the staffing level and qualifications. I bet charities will bid and be unable to deliver to a high enough standard or attract and pay qualified staff and end up referring patients to GPs and A&E. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 31

10:15am Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

First privatise the services bit by bit so that a few lobbying large health corporations (mainly from USA) can make money, then gradually end care free at the point of delivery because "we can't afford it" (yet somehow we are supposed to afford even more expensive private care!). Just think of the mess made of dentistry to see the way we are going.
First privatise the services bit by bit so that a few lobbying large health corporations (mainly from USA) can make money, then gradually end care free at the point of delivery because "we can't afford it" (yet somehow we are supposed to afford even more expensive private care!). Just think of the mess made of dentistry to see the way we are going. HJarrs
  • Score: 8

10:40am Sun 24 Aug 14

SmileyD says...

Funny, but I don't remember this being in the Green Party's manifesto...
Funny, but I don't remember this being in the Green Party's manifesto... SmileyD
  • Score: 19

10:48am Sun 24 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

Naturally the Green policy can't be shared yet as it's still 'party confidential'.

Until it can be lets assume everyone else's plans are rubbish and won't work.
Naturally the Green policy can't be shared yet as it's still 'party confidential'. Until it can be lets assume everyone else's plans are rubbish and won't work. Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: 5

12:10pm Sun 24 Aug 14

whatone says...

For those of you blaming the greens, it doesn't matter what party is in charge locally - the government in their privatisation drive have forced it upon them.

http://www.bmj.com/c
ontent/346/bmj.f1322


In addition many services that supply medicines where the NHS also tender are biased towards the private sector - the NHS has to pay VAT whilst the private sector doesn't!

Example: http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/busine
ss/news/revealed-the
-vat-loophole-drivin
g-nhs-pharmacy-servi
ces-into-hands-of-pr
ivate-sector-9622064
.html

So not only do private companies profit from illness, tax revenues fall.

There is only one way this is heading. A private insurance based health service and a large proportion of the population not covered for care, and people discarded:
http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/health/health
news/9962195/NHS-ref
orms-From-today-the-
Coalition-has-put-th
e-NHS-up-for-grabs.h
tml

You only have to look at America to see where we will end up!
For those of you blaming the greens, it doesn't matter what party is in charge locally - the government in their privatisation drive have forced it upon them. http://www.bmj.com/c ontent/346/bmj.f1322 In addition many services that supply medicines where the NHS also tender are biased towards the private sector - the NHS has to pay VAT whilst the private sector doesn't! Example: http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/busine ss/news/revealed-the -vat-loophole-drivin g-nhs-pharmacy-servi ces-into-hands-of-pr ivate-sector-9622064 .html So not only do private companies profit from illness, tax revenues fall. There is only one way this is heading. A private insurance based health service and a large proportion of the population not covered for care, and people discarded: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/health/health news/9962195/NHS-ref orms-From-today-the- Coalition-has-put-th e-NHS-up-for-grabs.h tml You only have to look at America to see where we will end up! whatone
  • Score: 11

12:18pm Sun 24 Aug 14

notslimjim says...

G Wiley wrote:
I can understand the unions (and their green party puppets) being against any form of privatisation, but for the patients is there ay real problem?

As long as we are properly cared for, and we get safe treatment in a reasonable time , does it really matter who provides the service?
Correct.

We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for.

Things like this remind us that all those lovely people from abroad who come here to run the NHS are actually fairly cr*p at what they do.
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: I can understand the unions (and their green party puppets) being against any form of privatisation, but for the patients is there ay real problem? As long as we are properly cared for, and we get safe treatment in a reasonable time , does it really matter who provides the service?[/p][/quote]Correct. We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for. Things like this remind us that all those lovely people from abroad who come here to run the NHS are actually fairly cr*p at what they do. notslimjim
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Sun 24 Aug 14

whatone says...

to notslimjim

"We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for."

What happens when we don't get a service we've already paid for, and will have to pay more for in the future?
to notslimjim "We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for." What happens when we don't get a service we've already paid for, and will have to pay more for in the future? whatone
  • Score: 7

12:58pm Sun 24 Aug 14

notslimjim says...

whatone wrote:
to notslimjim

"We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for."

What happens when we don't get a service we've already paid for, and will have to pay more for in the future?
If the service is being provided under an agreement with the NHS, that charge won't arise.
[quote][p][bold]whatone[/bold] wrote: to notslimjim "We don't get charged second time for something we've already paid for." What happens when we don't get a service we've already paid for, and will have to pay more for in the future?[/p][/quote]If the service is being provided under an agreement with the NHS, that charge won't arise. notslimjim
  • Score: -9

1:04pm Sun 24 Aug 14

SmileyD says...

whatone wrote:
For those of you blaming the greens, it doesn't matter what party is in charge locally - the government in their privatisation drive have forced it upon them.

http://www.bmj.com/c

ontent/346/bmj.f1322



In addition many services that supply medicines where the NHS also tender are biased towards the private sector - the NHS has to pay VAT whilst the private sector doesn't!

Example: http://www.independe

nt.co.uk/news/busine

ss/news/revealed-the

-vat-loophole-drivin

g-nhs-pharmacy-servi

ces-into-hands-of-pr

ivate-sector-9622064

.html

So not only do private companies profit from illness, tax revenues fall.

There is only one way this is heading. A private insurance based health service and a large proportion of the population not covered for care, and people discarded:
http://www.telegraph

.co.uk/health/health

news/9962195/NHS-ref

orms-From-today-the-

Coalition-has-put-th

e-NHS-up-for-grabs.h

tml

You only have to look at America to see where we will end up!
Thanks for that, I take back what I said about the Green council. I'm aware that local government doesn't have a great deal of say, even in decisions taken at local level and, of course, it's not the Green councillors and their friends who will benefit financially from this bonanza but the Tory & Lib Dem MPs & peers with financial interests in private health companies who voted through this wholesale asset-stripping process. And not forgetting of course HM's Opposition too - after all it was 'New Labour' who started the whole privatisation ball rolling!
[quote][p][bold]whatone[/bold] wrote: For those of you blaming the greens, it doesn't matter what party is in charge locally - the government in their privatisation drive have forced it upon them. http://www.bmj.com/c ontent/346/bmj.f1322 In addition many services that supply medicines where the NHS also tender are biased towards the private sector - the NHS has to pay VAT whilst the private sector doesn't! Example: http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/busine ss/news/revealed-the -vat-loophole-drivin g-nhs-pharmacy-servi ces-into-hands-of-pr ivate-sector-9622064 .html So not only do private companies profit from illness, tax revenues fall. There is only one way this is heading. A private insurance based health service and a large proportion of the population not covered for care, and people discarded: http://www.telegraph .co.uk/health/health news/9962195/NHS-ref orms-From-today-the- Coalition-has-put-th e-NHS-up-for-grabs.h tml You only have to look at America to see where we will end up![/p][/quote]Thanks for that, I take back what I said about the Green council. I'm aware that local government doesn't have a great deal of say, even in decisions taken at local level and, of course, it's not the Green councillors and their friends who will benefit financially from this bonanza but the Tory & Lib Dem MPs & peers with financial interests in private health companies who voted through this wholesale asset-stripping process. And not forgetting of course HM's Opposition too - after all it was 'New Labour' who started the whole privatisation ball rolling! SmileyD
  • Score: 14

1:27pm Sun 24 Aug 14

NickBrt says...

I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh! NickBrt
  • Score: 3

1:35pm Sun 24 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies?

Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)?

Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better?

Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want?

The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients?

And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?
Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs? G Wiley
  • Score: -2

1:54pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital.

The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.
Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital. The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason. Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -10

2:01pm Sun 24 Aug 14

SmileyD says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital.

The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.
Wrong - on so many levels...
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital. The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.[/p][/quote]Wrong - on so many levels... SmileyD
  • Score: 2

2:48pm Sun 24 Aug 14

sussexram40 says...

Bit by bit - the NHS is being privatised by the Tories so their mates in business can make profits from illness.
Health services should be run as a public service and not for profits.
Private firms will not operate to the same high standards in terms of quality of staff, regulation and confidentiality.
If this goes much further the good people will take to the streets to exercise their democratic right to protest.
Bit by bit - the NHS is being privatised by the Tories so their mates in business can make profits from illness. Health services should be run as a public service and not for profits. Private firms will not operate to the same high standards in terms of quality of staff, regulation and confidentiality. If this goes much further the good people will take to the streets to exercise their democratic right to protest. sussexram40
  • Score: 13

6:28pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
[quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started? HJarrs
  • Score: 1

7:04pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

G Wiley wrote:
Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies?

Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)?

Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better?

Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want?

The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients?

And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?
Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer.

The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?[/p][/quote]Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better. HJarrs
  • Score: 1

7:15pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa
tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party. Thay Qon U
  • Score: 10

7:17pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa

tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking. HJarrs
  • Score: -4

7:22pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

You can have a pop at the council as much as you like, but the reality is that this government is privatising health and education before our very eyes, with barely a peep from a compliant media.

It is time some of you woke up to what is going on in this country.
You can have a pop at the council as much as you like, but the reality is that this government is privatising health and education before our very eyes, with barely a peep from a compliant media. It is time some of you woke up to what is going on in this country. HJarrs
  • Score: 1

7:22pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

You can have a pop at the council as much as you like, but the reality is that this government is privatising health and education before our very eyes, with barely a peep from a compliant media.

It is time some of you woke up to what is going on in this country.
You can have a pop at the council as much as you like, but the reality is that this government is privatising health and education before our very eyes, with barely a peep from a compliant media. It is time some of you woke up to what is going on in this country. HJarrs
  • Score: -2

8:03pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Here is an inconvenient article for the ideological nutters that would privatise the NHS, like my good friend Patchy.

"Cost, efficiency and access to healthcare in Britain put it to the top of the pile, as Switzerland comes second and Sweden third" independent, 17th July.
http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/uk/uks
-healthcare-ranked-t
he-best-out-of-11-we
stern-countries-with
-us-coming-last-9542
833.html

Not only does the NHS come out top in this international comparison, it is also one of the cheapest!

It is time we all fought for the NHS and against the stealth privatisation. We can do that in May 2015 for pro NHS parties (and that is not the Conservatives).
Here is an inconvenient article for the ideological nutters that would privatise the NHS, like my good friend Patchy. "Cost, efficiency and access to healthcare in Britain put it to the top of the pile, as Switzerland comes second and Sweden third" independent, 17th July. http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/uk/uks -healthcare-ranked-t he-best-out-of-11-we stern-countries-with -us-coming-last-9542 833.html Not only does the NHS come out top in this international comparison, it is also one of the cheapest! It is time we all fought for the NHS and against the stealth privatisation. We can do that in May 2015 for pro NHS parties (and that is not the Conservatives). HJarrs
  • Score: -1

8:13pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

The most respected EU survey ranks the English NHS 14th in Europe. All the countries above England have private healthcare systems - presumably all run by nutters?
http://www.healthpow
erhouse.com/files/eh
ci-2013/ehci-2013-su
mmary.pdf
The most respected EU survey ranks the English NHS 14th in Europe. All the countries above England have private healthcare systems - presumably all run by nutters? http://www.healthpow erhouse.com/files/eh ci-2013/ehci-2013-su mmary.pdf Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -9

8:16pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa


tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course? Thay Qon U
  • Score: 0

8:41pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa



tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below.

Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?).

Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?[/p][/quote]Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below. Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?). Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy. HJarrs
  • Score: 3

9:03pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa




tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below.

Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?).

Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.
I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?[/p][/quote]Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below. Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?). Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.[/p][/quote]I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC. Thay Qon U
  • Score: 1

9:08pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa





tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below.

Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?).

Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.
I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.
You mean the council are not dogmatic.

Next.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?[/p][/quote]Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below. Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?). Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.[/p][/quote]I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.[/p][/quote]You mean the council are not dogmatic. Next. HJarrs
  • Score: -1

9:19pm Sun 24 Aug 14

Thay Qon U says...

HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa






tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below.

Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?).

Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.
I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.
You mean the council are not dogmatic.

Next.
Sorry to be dogmatic, but it should be " the council IS not dogmatic".
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?[/p][/quote]Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below. Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?). Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.[/p][/quote]I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.[/p][/quote]You mean the council are not dogmatic. Next.[/p][/quote]Sorry to be dogmatic, but it should be " the council IS not dogmatic". Thay Qon U
  • Score: 0

9:37pm Sun 24 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Thay Qon U wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
NickBrt wrote:
I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh!
NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?
Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa







tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.
Forced is the word you are seeking.
Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds?

I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations.

There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services.

I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?
Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below.

Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?).

Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.
I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.
You mean the council are not dogmatic.

Next.
Sorry to be dogmatic, but it should be " the council IS not dogmatic".
Surely, that is pedantic, not dogmatic. Innit.
[quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Thay Qon U[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: I would like our brilliant pavilion mp to run drug services. That would be a laugh![/p][/quote]NickBrt what is the Labour position? Is it to continue the privatisation process that Labour started?[/p][/quote]Presumably, as it is BHCC that is looking at outsourcing these treatment services then this competitive tendering/'privatisa tion' process has been instigated and sanctioned by the 'ruling' Green Party.[/p][/quote]Forced is the word you are seeking.[/p][/quote]Is that the same 'forced' that you would use to describe the Green Party being 'forced' to accept the funding for the i360 from the PWLB Government funds? I am assuming that BHCC are required to subject these services to competitive tendering in accordance with the legal requirements of the EU Procurement Regulations. There is nothing to stop a bid being submitted by a public body for delivering these treatment services. I seem to recall that Cllr Bowden's PR company has experience in advising the health sector - perhaps he could advise UNISON on their potential 'in-house' bid for these treatment services - free of charge of course?[/p][/quote]Forced is forced. It is out of the council's hands and has been dealt with below. Let's not forget that the EU legislation you mention was cheerleadered by Labour and Conservative parties, who also support the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) that is being negotiated in secret and that is a serious threat to our sovereignty (why is UKIP so silent on this?). Only the Greens are fighting TTIP. If that agreement is signed, US health corporations would be able to sue the UK government for not tendering services! So much for democracy.[/p][/quote]I've heard that Penny Thompson has been singing the praises on her council blog recently about the cleanliness of the local public toilets which are outsourced to Wettons - seems like there are mixed messages and dysfunctionality around outsourcing at BHCC.[/p][/quote]You mean the council are not dogmatic. Next.[/p][/quote]Sorry to be dogmatic, but it should be " the council IS not dogmatic".[/p][/quote]Surely, that is pedantic, not dogmatic. Innit. HJarrs
  • Score: 0

2:03am Mon 25 Aug 14

Zeta Function says...

'Does it matter who provides the services?'

Yes it does. Heard of breast implants?

Women paid huge sums to private providers, who provided sub standard implants.

Some providers might persuade addicts to pay extra for quack therapies and other treatments.

Far better not to develop drink, drug, **** addictions than to be exploited by any health servicer!
'Does it matter who provides the services?' Yes it does. Heard of breast implants? Women paid huge sums to private providers, who provided sub standard implants. Some providers might persuade addicts to pay extra for quack therapies and other treatments. Far better not to develop drink, drug, **** addictions than to be exploited by any health servicer! Zeta Function
  • Score: 3

5:17am Mon 25 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital.

The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.
Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment?
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital. The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.[/p][/quote]Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment? Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: 6

8:27am Mon 25 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?
Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.
@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues!

So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses.

As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al!

It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does.

But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them.

And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?[/p][/quote]Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.[/p][/quote]@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues! So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses. As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al! It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does. But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them. And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects! G Wiley
  • Score: 3

8:56am Mon 25 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

G Wiley wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?
Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.
@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues!

So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses.

As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al!

It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does.

But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them.

And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects!
We have had 35 years of privatisation experience. You seem to wish upon us success like the energy industry that soaks the consumer, the railways that have burnt through billions more of subsidy than the nationalised predecessor, privatised school meals services were locked into long term contracts serving our kids rubbish.

In pretty much all privatisations, the terms and conditions of ordinary people were reduced, little innovation was forthcoming and a small number of senior managers and big shareholders made a killing.

Keep your rose tinted glasses help firmly on.
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?[/p][/quote]Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.[/p][/quote]@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues! So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses. As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al! It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does. But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them. And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects![/p][/quote]We have had 35 years of privatisation experience. You seem to wish upon us success like the energy industry that soaks the consumer, the railways that have burnt through billions more of subsidy than the nationalised predecessor, privatised school meals services were locked into long term contracts serving our kids rubbish. In pretty much all privatisations, the terms and conditions of ordinary people were reduced, little innovation was forthcoming and a small number of senior managers and big shareholders made a killing. Keep your rose tinted glasses help firmly on. HJarrs
  • Score: 2

8:58am Mon 25 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

G Wiley wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?
Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.
@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues!

So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses.

As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al!

It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does.

But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them.

And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects!
I feel your comments are a little unkind.

The Green party has only ever had the interests of its voters at heart in determining policy and pursuing the many improvements that we have delivered over our (may I suggest) very successful tenure.

Sour grapes and envy is the sense I have from those who wish their Party's had had the vision and commitment to achieve similar results.
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: Is this a just fight to maintain inefficient and restrictive working practices for the NHS employees rather than being concerned about the ever increasing cost of providing the services and the need to delivering cost efficiencies? Is the way to do this either by making major changes to the way they work (which the unions won't like) - or though getting private companies involved (which the unions are totally against due to their left-wing anti-capitalist ambitions)? Or do we keep pumping money into the NHS in a vain hope that doing so will make services better? Isn't it more important to determine what patients (i.e. the customers) actually want rather than what the employees want? The real question is whether the NHS is run for the benefit of the employees or for the patients? And it is interesting to hear all the scare stories about the dangers of privatisation of services – what about all the failings that occurs within the non-private institutions? What about mid-Staffs?[/p][/quote]Yes, in your world patients are reduced to customers. The real question is will the privatised service formerly known as the NHS be run for the benefit for wealthy shareholders and millionaire senior managers or for patients? We only have to look over to the USA to see the answer. The NHS is one of the greatest British inventions. It is not perfect (what is?), but it is up there with any health system you care to mention and costs a fraction of a privatised system. It is a shame that people like you cannot take pride in an institution that has improved the lives of millions and work to make it better.[/p][/quote]@HJarrs - what a lot of comments from you - glad to see the green party still firmly focused on environmental issues! So the progressive green party want to keep the NHS running the same way it when it started in 1948? The world had changed - even if the greens want to return to the socialist 1970s world with with the unions controlling the government and ruining British businesses. As long as the service carries on offering free treatment to patients at the point of delivery, how does it matter who actually provides what and how? IMHO - not at al! It only affects the management and staff who have to look at how they can provide cost competitive services to the private sector. If they can, then they run the service - if they can't, then the private sector does. But if, as you claim, the NHS actually provides the lowest cost services, then they keep providing them. And yes - patients should be treated as customers - how do you think patients should be treated? Perhaps the way the green party treats the residents of Brighton and Hove - arrogantly as subjects![/p][/quote]I feel your comments are a little unkind. The Green party has only ever had the interests of its voters at heart in determining policy and pursuing the many improvements that we have delivered over our (may I suggest) very successful tenure. Sour grapes and envy is the sense I have from those who wish their Party's had had the vision and commitment to achieve similar results. Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: -3

9:11am Mon 25 Aug 14

wippasnapper says...

What is it with B&HCC always destroying what has been successful up till now Why do they always have to disrupt services that run smoothly i.e. DOTE FIX WHAT DOTE NEED FIXING mind you in saying that the only thing needing fixing is the Gang-Green’s hear in B&H
What is it with B&HCC always destroying what has been successful up till now Why do they always have to disrupt services that run smoothly i.e. DOTE FIX WHAT DOTE NEED FIXING mind you in saying that the only thing needing fixing is the Gang-Green’s hear in B&H wippasnapper
  • Score: 1

9:49am Mon 25 Aug 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

Benny Duncan-Jarrs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital.

The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.
Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment?
So somethingsarejustwro
ng is back. I've seen you off once. I'll see you off again.
[quote][p][bold]Benny Duncan-Jarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital. The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.[/p][/quote]Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment?[/p][/quote]So somethingsarejustwro ng is back. I've seen you off once. I'll see you off again. Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -2

10:29am Mon 25 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Benny Duncan-Jarrs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital.

The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.
Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment?
So somethingsarejustwro

ng is back. I've seen you off once. I'll see you off again.
The ramblings of a mad man or a genius?

Either way my sense is that alcohol may be at the very heart of the issue and as in most cases the problems are much deeper rooted than the symptoms on display.

lets hope that both the weather in Brighton and the comments from Cyril become more cheerful as the day progresses
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Benny Duncan-Jarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: Usual hysteria from the left - especially the unions - the same people who brought you Stafford Hospital. The most successful treatment for alcohol abuse is Alcoholics Anonymous which is 100% independent and voluntary. Alcohol "professionals" in the NHS are often (but not always) against AA for precisely that reason.[/p][/quote]Cyril - You seem to know an awful lot about alcohol abuse! Care to explain in the hope that it might bring some credibility to an otherwise lacklustre and factually incorrect comment?[/p][/quote]So somethingsarejustwro ng is back. I've seen you off once. I'll see you off again.[/p][/quote]The ramblings of a mad man or a genius? Either way my sense is that alcohol may be at the very heart of the issue and as in most cases the problems are much deeper rooted than the symptoms on display. lets hope that both the weather in Brighton and the comments from Cyril become more cheerful as the day progresses Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: 3

10:31am Mon 25 Aug 14

redwing says...

wippasnapper wrote:
What is it with B&HCC always destroying what has been successful up till now Why do they always have to disrupt services that run smoothly i.e. DOTE FIX WHAT DOTE NEED FIXING mind you in saying that the only thing needing fixing is the Gang-Green’s hear in B&H
It's a good idea to read the previous comments before joining in.
[quote][p][bold]wippasnapper[/bold] wrote: What is it with B&HCC always destroying what has been successful up till now Why do they always have to disrupt services that run smoothly i.e. DOTE FIX WHAT DOTE NEED FIXING mind you in saying that the only thing needing fixing is the Gang-Green’s hear in B&H[/p][/quote]It's a good idea to read the previous comments before joining in. redwing
  • Score: 0

10:55am Mon 25 Aug 14

notslimjim says...

sussexram40 wrote:
Bit by bit - the NHS is being privatised by the Tories so their mates in business can make profits from illness.
Health services should be run as a public service and not for profits.
Private firms will not operate to the same high standards in terms of quality of staff, regulation and confidentiality.
If this goes much further the good people will take to the streets to exercise their democratic right to protest.
And there are no former Labour Health ministers on the books of any of these firms?
[quote][p][bold]sussexram40[/bold] wrote: Bit by bit - the NHS is being privatised by the Tories so their mates in business can make profits from illness. Health services should be run as a public service and not for profits. Private firms will not operate to the same high standards in terms of quality of staff, regulation and confidentiality. If this goes much further the good people will take to the streets to exercise their democratic right to protest.[/p][/quote]And there are no former Labour Health ministers on the books of any of these firms? notslimjim
  • Score: 3

11:43am Mon 25 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield
trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s... G Wiley
  • Score: -1

3:44pm Mon 25 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

G Wiley wrote:
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield

trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first.

British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...[/p][/quote]What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first. British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks. HJarrs
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote:
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield


trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first.

British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.
British Industry didn't lose it's way.

The electorate lost their way and the idea of an easy living crept in supported by the nonsensical and frankly unbelievable promises made by politicians with their own personal agendas.

The mugs and vulnerable voted Labour (benefits for doing nothing - great times) and once Blair and his cronies had their credit limit upped to increase the national debt to new records (without the ability for repayment) it was open season. That was when we stepped in and Brighton presented the ideal opportunity to create a model designed for the
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...[/p][/quote]What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first. British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.[/p][/quote]British Industry didn't lose it's way. The electorate lost their way and the idea of an easy living crept in supported by the nonsensical and frankly unbelievable promises made by politicians with their own personal agendas. The mugs and vulnerable voted Labour (benefits for doing nothing - great times) and once Blair and his cronies had their credit limit upped to increase the national debt to new records (without the ability for repayment) it was open season. That was when we stepped in and Brighton presented the ideal opportunity to create a model designed for the Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: 2

4:37pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Benny Duncan-Jarrs says...

Benny Duncan-Jarrs wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote:
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield



trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first.

British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.
British Industry didn't lose it's way.

The electorate lost their way and the idea of an easy living crept in supported by the nonsensical and frankly unbelievable promises made by politicians with their own personal agendas.

The mugs and vulnerable voted Labour (benefits for doing nothing - great times) and once Blair and his cronies had their credit limit upped to increase the national debt to new records (without the ability for repayment) it was open season. That was when we stepped in and Brighton presented the ideal opportunity to create a model designed for the
cont...

exploitation of the majority for the benefit of the < 5%.

We will continue to make hay whilst the sun shines
[quote][p][bold]Benny Duncan-Jarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...[/p][/quote]What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first. British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.[/p][/quote]British Industry didn't lose it's way. The electorate lost their way and the idea of an easy living crept in supported by the nonsensical and frankly unbelievable promises made by politicians with their own personal agendas. The mugs and vulnerable voted Labour (benefits for doing nothing - great times) and once Blair and his cronies had their credit limit upped to increase the national debt to new records (without the ability for repayment) it was open season. That was when we stepped in and Brighton presented the ideal opportunity to create a model designed for the[/p][/quote]cont... exploitation of the majority for the benefit of the < 5%. We will continue to make hay whilst the sun shines Benny Duncan-Jarrs
  • Score: 3

7:15pm Mon 25 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote:
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield


trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first.

British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.
@HJarrs - and more bovine excrement from you to justify the communistic ambitions of the watermelon party. Now altogether now...

The people's flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyr'd dead
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts' blood dyed its ev'ry fold.
Then raise the scarlet standard high,
Within its shade we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here

You obvious live in a sad little world of juvenile left-wingers who have failed miserably in life and then blame big business or governments for their situation and are sitting back and wanting the rest of the world to give them above inflation pay increases just because they are 'the workers'.

How about the businesses in communist Russia run to keep people employed - like the renowned one where one factory made bottles - shipped them to another factory where they broke them up and the sent them back to the first factory to be melted down to make new bottles? Is that the sort of work the the greens think we should have?

I humbly suggest that you and your band of lefty losers jump on a ship and sail to the 'state-run' People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam or any other communist state and demand a 'Living Wage' and see what you get compared to the relative luxury you get in a country run by capitalist model!

You might find it is similar to the green council that treats the residents with contempt as they similarly, arrogantly, 'know what is best', and just print money to solve economic problems.

For heavens sake - take responsibility for your life and grow up - you are almost as pathetic as your role model Ben Duncan!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...[/p][/quote]What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first. British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.[/p][/quote]@HJarrs - and more bovine excrement from you to justify the communistic ambitions of the watermelon party. Now altogether now... The people's flag is deepest red, It shrouded oft our martyr'd dead And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold, Their hearts' blood dyed its ev'ry fold. Then raise the scarlet standard high, Within its shade we'll live and die, Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer, We'll keep the red flag flying here You obvious live in a sad little world of juvenile left-wingers who have failed miserably in life and then blame big business or governments for their situation and are sitting back and wanting the rest of the world to give them above inflation pay increases just because they are 'the workers'. How about the businesses in communist Russia run to keep people employed - like the renowned one where one factory made bottles - shipped them to another factory where they broke them up and the sent them back to the first factory to be melted down to make new bottles? Is that the sort of work the the greens think we should have? I humbly suggest that you and your band of lefty losers jump on a ship and sail to the 'state-run' People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam or any other communist state and demand a 'Living Wage' and see what you get compared to the relative luxury you get in a country run by capitalist model! You might find it is similar to the green council that treats the residents with contempt as they similarly, arrogantly, 'know what is best', and just print money to solve economic problems. For heavens sake - take responsibility for your life and grow up - you are almost as pathetic as your role model Ben Duncan! G Wiley
  • Score: 2

7:54pm Mon 25 Aug 14

HJarrs says...

G Wiley wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
G Wiley wrote:
And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at:

nhstimeline.nuffield



trust.org.uk

As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members.

Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses.

Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born.

I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done.

Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power.

Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...
What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first.

British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.
@HJarrs - and more bovine excrement from you to justify the communistic ambitions of the watermelon party. Now altogether now...

The people's flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyr'd dead
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts' blood dyed its ev'ry fold.
Then raise the scarlet standard high,
Within its shade we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here

You obvious live in a sad little world of juvenile left-wingers who have failed miserably in life and then blame big business or governments for their situation and are sitting back and wanting the rest of the world to give them above inflation pay increases just because they are 'the workers'.

How about the businesses in communist Russia run to keep people employed - like the renowned one where one factory made bottles - shipped them to another factory where they broke them up and the sent them back to the first factory to be melted down to make new bottles? Is that the sort of work the the greens think we should have?

I humbly suggest that you and your band of lefty losers jump on a ship and sail to the 'state-run' People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam or any other communist state and demand a 'Living Wage' and see what you get compared to the relative luxury you get in a country run by capitalist model!

You might find it is similar to the green council that treats the residents with contempt as they similarly, arrogantly, 'know what is best', and just print money to solve economic problems.

For heavens sake - take responsibility for your life and grow up - you are almost as pathetic as your role model Ben Duncan!
I am obviously getting to you aren't I Patchy. But then you are an extremist.

It must be really frustrating knowing that the vast majority of people in the UK support the NHS and want it improved not broken up. We all know that the stealth privatisation of services is only the prelude to the charging for services. After all, this is a country happy to force people to queue at soup kitchens and food banks.

When it comes to health though, you unwittingly make a good point. Why is it that impoverished Cuba can manage or better the life expectancy of the USA? Private medicine anyone?
[quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]G Wiley[/bold] wrote: And just to point out that the NHS has been changing (and progressing) over the past 66 years since it's inception - have a look at: nhstimeline.nuffield trust.org.uk As you will see, there have been many changes to how the NHS works since Labour started the NHS in 1948 - with changes from all political parties affecting organisation, responsibilities and interfaces with patients in attempts to improve service and efficiency. The unions are always against change and especially anything that dilutes their power and income from members. Whilst HJarrs and the unions (that the greens are in bed with) see things through their watermelon (eco-green on the outside and communist-red on the inside) coloured glasses. Many people try to take a sensible, pragmatic, realistic view that the NHS needs to progress - to modernise and introduce new, standardised ways of working to reduce costs and improve efficiency - only the irresponsible, idealogical, immature greens think we can return to an idealistic period that most of them weren't even born. I do feel sorry for the NHS employees in that the changes risk their ways of working that they have become used to - but they need to grasp change, and take advantage of it, rather than fight it hoping they keep doing things the way they have always done. Look what happened to all the British industries that lost out to foreign competition to only, now, be being rebuilt by private enterprise and flexible working practices now that the anti-capitalist unions have been reduced in power. Finally - remember to vote in the elections next May - and vote for any party except the greens who continue to think and act like the labour party of the 1970s...[/p][/quote]What are you rambling on about Patchy? Of course there is always change in public services, there will always continue be so. However, locking in health services into long term contracts is hardly putting the patient first. British industry lost its way through a lack of investment, short termism and owners taking too much money out. Much of our infrastrucure is owned by foreign nationalised companies rather than by us and the uk has become an experiment in turbo capitalism that leaves over a million needing to seek help from food banks.[/p][/quote]@HJarrs - and more bovine excrement from you to justify the communistic ambitions of the watermelon party. Now altogether now... The people's flag is deepest red, It shrouded oft our martyr'd dead And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold, Their hearts' blood dyed its ev'ry fold. Then raise the scarlet standard high, Within its shade we'll live and die, Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer, We'll keep the red flag flying here You obvious live in a sad little world of juvenile left-wingers who have failed miserably in life and then blame big business or governments for their situation and are sitting back and wanting the rest of the world to give them above inflation pay increases just because they are 'the workers'. How about the businesses in communist Russia run to keep people employed - like the renowned one where one factory made bottles - shipped them to another factory where they broke them up and the sent them back to the first factory to be melted down to make new bottles? Is that the sort of work the the greens think we should have? I humbly suggest that you and your band of lefty losers jump on a ship and sail to the 'state-run' People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam or any other communist state and demand a 'Living Wage' and see what you get compared to the relative luxury you get in a country run by capitalist model! You might find it is similar to the green council that treats the residents with contempt as they similarly, arrogantly, 'know what is best', and just print money to solve economic problems. For heavens sake - take responsibility for your life and grow up - you are almost as pathetic as your role model Ben Duncan![/p][/quote]I am obviously getting to you aren't I Patchy. But then you are an extremist. It must be really frustrating knowing that the vast majority of people in the UK support the NHS and want it improved not broken up. We all know that the stealth privatisation of services is only the prelude to the charging for services. After all, this is a country happy to force people to queue at soup kitchens and food banks. When it comes to health though, you unwittingly make a good point. Why is it that impoverished Cuba can manage or better the life expectancy of the USA? Private medicine anyone? HJarrs
  • Score: -2

7:55am Tue 26 Aug 14

G Wiley says...

The trouble with HJarrs is that he confuses supporting the NHS (which I do) with the need to improve cost efficiency and to continually look at how to improve services and reduce costs (which I also do).

WTF has privatisation of services got to do with the actual delivery of services? If the end result is the same or better, it doesn't matter who delivers them.

WTF has soup kitchens got to do with the privatisation of NHS services? HJarrs obviously lives in another, deluded, world, and probably need to get professional help to deal with his paranoia and his delusions of adequacy.

The greens aren't worried about the patients - they are worried about supporting the unions that want to keep being funded by their members.

AFAIK, there is no mention of charging for services, so he is just stirring up trouble as usual and if he didn't realise, a number of services already have charges - dentists, opticians, pharmacists - and all based upon the premise the those that can afford to pay - do - and those that can't - do not.

I imagine the greens will want to nationalise the dentists, doctors and pharmacists like they want to with banks, railways, energy, and water.

Let's hope HJarrs keeps up the watermelon rubbish as it just goes to show that the greens have no real interest in the environment but are really just a re-branded communist party.

Remember when you see anything from HJarrs - it is probably the result of a sad little man who has never achieved anything in life and wants to blame everyone else for his personal failings - and not that of someone who really cares about the NHS - except as a vote winning gambit.

Roll on May 2015. Make sure you vote and make sure you vote for any party except the greens. Could anyone really imagine such a group of naive incompetents actually running the country?

At least, based upon their miserable growth figures in the recent elections, probably bolstered by their embarrassment of a council and the associated MP, that we can just tell them that 'we do not give a d*mn' to the rantings of a group of demented a*ses.
The trouble with HJarrs is that he confuses supporting the NHS (which I do) with the need to improve cost efficiency and to continually look at how to improve services and reduce costs (which I also do). WTF has privatisation of services got to do with the actual delivery of services? If the end result is the same or better, it doesn't matter who delivers them. WTF has soup kitchens got to do with the privatisation of NHS services? HJarrs obviously lives in another, deluded, world, and probably need to get professional help to deal with his paranoia and his delusions of adequacy. The greens aren't worried about the patients - they are worried about supporting the unions that want to keep being funded by their members. AFAIK, there is no mention of charging for services, so he is just stirring up trouble as usual and if he didn't realise, a number of services already have charges - dentists, opticians, pharmacists - and all based upon the premise the those that can afford to pay - do - and those that can't - do not. I imagine the greens will want to nationalise the dentists, doctors and pharmacists like they want to with banks, railways, energy, and water. Let's hope HJarrs keeps up the watermelon rubbish as it just goes to show that the greens have no real interest in the environment but are really just a re-branded communist party. Remember when you see anything from HJarrs - it is probably the result of a sad little man who has never achieved anything in life and wants to blame everyone else for his personal failings - and not that of someone who really cares about the NHS - except as a vote winning gambit. Roll on May 2015. Make sure you vote and make sure you vote for any party except the greens. Could anyone really imagine such a group of naive incompetents actually running the country? At least, based upon their miserable growth figures in the recent elections, probably bolstered by their embarrassment of a council and the associated MP, that we can just tell them that 'we do not give a d*mn' to the rantings of a group of demented a*ses. G Wiley
  • Score: 2
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree