The stats above do show why the NHS remains so stubbornly a Labour issue. It's obvious at every level from the intellectual to the gut feeling that many Tories feel that it's inefficient,outdated, bureaucratic and generally unappealing. But they don't quite dare to say so in the stark terms of Mike K, so even if there was a good case for change it's not made, and when change occurs, as is happening now, it's done with assurances that it's not really changing at all.
I fail to see how anyone could not see that, that is a spoof account. It's as blatant as they come.
Really?
Was this a spoof?
Fearmongering in the gloaming
Things must be grim at Project Fear HQ if things have gotten this desperate and amateurish 15 months out. The latest speculative FearBomb is that “mobile phone companies could introduce roaming charges when people cross over the border.”
(Coupled, rather excellently, with the assertion that “Scottish independence could also drive up the cost of posting letters”, apparently under the impression that we’ve all forgotten the price of a stamp in the UK rocketing by a eye-watering 39% last year.)
We all love our mobile phones, so that would be an excellent piece of scarework – if only it was more than a fortnight since the EU announced that roaming charges are to be abolished in Europe by July 2014, two months before the independence referendum and almost two years before Scotland would actually be independent.
Come on, guys, it’s like you’re not even trying any more.
Given that a handful of Labour MPs may vote in favour of such an order, there must be a fair chance of it's going ahead.
Wouldn't it be more sensible for the Lib Dem and Labour leaderships to block the legislation now?
The most politically appealing way of blocking it will be at report stage, by tabling a series of vexatious wrecking amendments, which will ensure that the Bill is talked out. Private members Bills are not subject to programming motions, and there are tight restrictions on the extent to which closure can be moved. There is also very limited time for consideration. That would enable Labour and the LibDems to defeat the Bill without having to vote against it. I would estimate that there is a 45% chance of the Bill dying on Report, and about a 5% chance of the Lords throwing it out. However, if the Bill is enacted, and its a big if, it will create some serious political difficulties for the next government, regardless of its composition.
Worse than that. It means that Ed Miliband cannot refer to any other cases when seeking to arraign Len McCluskey in the court of public opinion. If this is an "exceptional" case, it's going to be harder to come down heavily on him.
Good point. Perhaps it won't remain exceptional for long.
On the other hand, Buddha Ed admitting that he was so wrapped in his meditations that he failed to notice even more such shenanigans is not good either.
I don't understand why Tories so totally don't get it on the NHS but they don't - tis very weird.
The only things about the NHS that would be safe for them to attack are the target culture, the nomenklatura management, especially the family affair aspect of it, and the big scandals like Stafford that are the result of the first two.
One of the things they don't get is counter-intuitively they'd be better able to chop up the NHS and sell it off cheap to their mates if they improved the existing NHS first as then they'd be trusted more. They can't do that though because they hate the NHS too much to stay calm.
nb If UKIP was 2/3 Labour and 1/3 Tory rather than (the probably long-term voting optimum of) 2/3 Tory and 1/3 Labour then saying the EU wants the NHS privatized so EU countries can compete for pieces of it and that all of liblabcon are privately signed up to privatizing it for that reason would be a great BOO line.
I don't understand why Tories so totally don't get it on the NHS but they don't - tis very weird.
The only things about the NHS that would be safe for them to attack are the target culture, the nomenklatura management, especially the family affair aspect of it, and the big scandals like Stafford that are the result of the first two.
One of the things they don't get is counter-intuitively they'd be better able to chop up the NHS and sell it off cheap to their mates if they improved the existing NHS first as then they'd be trusted more. They can't do that though because they hate the NHS too much to stay calm.
nb If UKIP was 2/3 Labour and 1/3 Tory rather than (the probably long-term voting optimum of) 2/3 Tory and 1/3 Labour then saying the EU wants the NHS privatized so EU countries can compete for pieces of it and that all of liblabcon are privately signed up to privatizing it for that reason would be a great BOO line.
Can you truly understand the mind of a mad religiously fuelled jihadi flying into the twin towers.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
It's not just the unions. The doctors (who, let's face it, are often prima donnas) are just as bad.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
So one satirical tweet that merely mocked Lamont's self-evident impotence is hardly that blatant.
It's utterly blatant. Only a fool could believe that was a real account or that Alistair Darling would actually atack Johann Lamont like that.
Speaking of amateurish campaigns, how are the SNP's plans for the North Sea blockade coming along?
Calm down dear. It was one tweet not the account as you appear to have missed in your own foolishness.
Your own eccentric and deranged babbling about a North Sea Oil blockade merely underlines the easily spoofed nature of Better Together's Project Fear. So thanks for that.
I can see why you would be so touchy about Darling though. Big hero of yours is he?
Scots Tories give Alistair Darling standing ovation Scots Tories give Alistair Darling standing ovation
The interesting question is which side is Cerise on?
As Blairites and Brownites (for want of better labels) have been fighting over selection for ages you wonder why it should blow up now.
Either the Brownites messed up in Falkirk giving the Blairites the opportunity to stick the boot in and the abuse of process is too bad for Cerise to help his team - reluctance to sack Watson might fit that version - or Cerise has changed sides - the steam coming out of various ears might fit that version more.
Hard to see Cerise changing sides unless he had alternative source of funds in advance though. All very mysterious.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
It's not just the unions. The doctors (who, let's face it, are often prima donnas) are just as bad.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
Sounds like he's in the wrong anecdote, sorry, job.
Don't get sick abroad tim - they don't have the NHS anywhere else - you will probably die.
Does Sunny not know that the fight with Len is making Ed look strong and decisive?
Well done Labour leadership – you’ve fallen into the Tory trap of turning a local row into a headline scandal, and sent Westminster hacks scurrying to find any activist willing to complain about selection processes.
The longer this drags on the worse it gets. By next week or soon after, the Conservatives will move quickly on legislation to limit union funding of Labour. A financially crippled Labour party is their main hope for outright victory in 2015.
They’ll say this row illustrates the ‘malign and undemocratic’ influence unions have on the Labour party. The Lib Dems will support them. Labour will be completely blind-sided and paralysed. After starting a massive row with the unions they’ll find it difficult to argue that unions don’t try and interfere with politics.
Of course, Labour will argue the Falkirk row shows the party does not let unions dictate policy but the public won’t understand the nuances. The press will pile in. Labour’s message will be lost. And the government won’t find it difficult to pass such legislation.
I have no idea why the Labour leadership are escalating it, but the row with Unite is going to blow up in Ed Miliband’s face.
@tim - In due course I may be able to tell you about another rather more serious matter. However, it is currently subject to a formal legal procedure, so I can't say more at this stage.
So one satirical tweet that merely mocked Lamont's self-evident impotence is hardly that blatant.
It's utterly blatant. Only a fool could believe that was a real account or that Alistair Darling would actually atack Johann Lamont like that.
Speaking of amateurish campaigns, how are the SNP's plans for the North Sea blockade coming along?
Calm down dear. It was one tweet not the account as you appear to have missed in your own foolishness.
Your own eccentric and deranged babbling about a North Sea Oil blockade merely underlines the easily spoofed nature of Better Together's Project Fear. So thanks for that.
I can see why you wold be so touchy about Darling though. Big hero of yours is he?
Scots Tories give Alistair Darling standing ovation Scots Tories give Alistair Darling standing ovation
Erm, so far as I was aware the SNP's plan was just to block access to Scottish fishing grounds, don't think I mentioned oil anywhere. So you appear to be the only one babbling about an oil blockade.
Perhaps you deny that these very words were spoken by the First Minister's spokesman:
"Do Spanish and Portuguese fishermen, and others for that matter, want what would become Scottish waters to be blocked off to their fisherman?"
I don't understand why Tories so totally don't get it on the NHS but they don't - tis very weird.
The only things about the NHS that would be safe for them to attack are the target culture, the nomenklatura management, especially the family affair aspect of it, and the big scandals like Stafford that are the result of the first two.
One of the things they don't get is counter-intuitively they'd be better able to chop up the NHS and sell it off cheap to their mates if they improved the existing NHS first as then they'd be trusted more. They can't do that though because they hate the NHS too much to stay calm.
nb If UKIP was 2/3 Labour and 1/3 Tory rather than (the probably long-term voting optimum of) 2/3 Tory and 1/3 Labour then saying the EU wants the NHS privatized so EU countries can compete for pieces of it and that all of liblabcon are privately signed up to privatizing it for that reason would be a great BOO line.
Can you truly understand the mind of a mad religiously fuelled jihadi flying into the twin towers.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
The politics are Labour can privatize the NHS without people noticing because people would never imagine they'd do that but if the Tories want to privatize it they should improve it first. They have (or had) open goals to do that but they can't stay calm enough.
I don't understand why Tories so totally don't get it on the NHS but they don't - tis very weird.
The only things about the NHS that would be safe for them to attack are the target culture, the nomenklatura management, especially the family affair aspect of it, and the big scandals like Stafford that are the result of the first two.
One of the things they don't get is counter-intuitively they'd be better able to chop up the NHS and sell it off cheap to their mates if they improved the existing NHS first as then they'd be trusted more. They can't do that though because they hate the NHS too much to stay calm.
nb If UKIP was 2/3 Labour and 1/3 Tory rather than (the probably long-term voting optimum of) 2/3 Tory and 1/3 Labour then saying the EU wants the NHS privatized so EU countries can compete for pieces of it and that all of liblabcon are privately signed up to privatizing it for that reason would be a great BOO line.
Can you truly understand the mind of a mad religiously fuelled jihadi flying into the twin towers.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
It's not just the unions. The doctors (who, let's face it, are often prima donnas) are just as bad.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
Sounds like he's in the wrong anecdote, sorry, job.
Don't get sick abroad tim - they don't have the NHS anywhere else - you will probably die.
Don't be daft. But their systems are likely to be a lot more expensive.
The USA spends more simply on administering its health system than it does on it's military.
The whining about the BBC/NHS/Multiracial opening ceremony was Tory/UKIP territory if I remeber the protagonists correctly.
Replace them with immigrants.
There were lots of Labour posters whining about the Olympics too, tim.
Not the nurses - do not insult the workers of the NHS - they are the most important part of the NHS - the workers and their pay packets - you will be issued with a fatwa for having the temerity to comment !!
Nasreen Akhtar, polling station clerk at the Madeley Centre Polling Station, has today pleaded guilty to misconduct in public office for helping her nieces to cast fraudulent votes in the 2012 local government election in Derby.
Her nieces, Tameena and Samra Ali, have also pleaded guilty to personation by voting as people other than themselves.
Noshiela Maqsood has pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice by trying to cover up the offending by claiming to police that she had voted in the Derby local government election when, in fact, she had not.
Abid Sabir, brother of Nasreen Akhtar, has also pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice.
Mohammed Akbar, father in law of Noshiela Maqsood, was charged with perverting the course of justice, although the CPS has decided to offer no evidence in relation to this after he received a police caution for wasting police time.
Plato
Does the article say whether the above voted for a single party, and, if so, which one?
Dunno but Socrates would've had their religion pinned down by now though.
You mean the old socrates. The new one probably wants to keep his head down on that subject for a while yet. ;^ )
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
It's not just the unions. The doctors (who, let's face it, are often prima donnas) are just as bad.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
I think it's the human condition for quite a lot of people: they will NOT accept that someone else tells them how to do something better, however sensible. I met it in private industry too.
Actually I'm a bit like that myself, aren't you sometimes? My wife tells me that the dishes will rinse better if I soak them more first and I go "Stop criticising how I wash the dishes!"
Works in reverse too, though - someone gives you half-baked advice on something they don't understand and then gets miffed if you don't take it. People with faddish dietary ideas are especially prone to it.
CCHQ spinning around in a frenetic way. When will the Times join the witch-hunt?
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden 2m Unite docs show involvement in 41 seats, 8 have selected Unite members. Ed Miliband insists that #Falkirk is unique for Labour. Credible?
NHS nurses..my daughter who is a staunch labourite is taking legal action against the nurses at her local hospital for the dangerous and callous treatment she received last week after surgery..on the advice of the surgeon who did the op.. Merciful angels they were most definitely not..in her words.."Lazy and callous"
In the surgeons words "Incompetent and dangerous idiots"
The Tories have a massive open goal in front of them to do with all the big scandals inside the NHS related to the soviet-style target culture and the nomenklatura management that would help them and hurt Labour but they won't take the shot because they don't want to improve the NHS because they think it will make it harder to privatize.
I think it's the human condition for quite a lot of people: they will NOT accept that someone else tells them how to do something better, however sensible. I met it in private industry too.
Actually I'm a bit like that myself, aren't you sometimes? My wife tells me that the dishes will rinse better if I soak them more first and I go "Stop criticising how I wash the dishes!"
Me? Certainly not - how could you think such a thing???
Actually, there is a serious point here, which is that the NHS has never really resolved the question of whether it is managed by doctors or administrators, and that's different from private industry (and I would guess different from private hospitals as well, although I know less about that side). It's obviously a difficult question in some cases where decisions impact on clinical care, but I'm astonished at the degree to which doctors get involved in things like setting rotas and dealing with personnel questions. They seem very reluctant to let go control of these areas, which you'd have thought they'd be delighted to have someone else do. The net result is that very highly trained and expensive doctors are doing things which others could do (and probably do better at that).
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm pretty sure we haven't got this right.
Completely off topic, but any insights would be gratefully received ...
I have to drive from upstate Michigan to Boston this summer. By far the quickest way to do it is to take the road through Canada along the top of Lake Erie and back ino the US at Buffalo. However, I am not sure how easy it is for non-US passport holders to get back into the US by land crossing once they have left. Does anyone have any recent experience of this? Also, are car hires usually good for the US and Canada, or do you need to arrange a separate deal if you are going to drive in both countries?
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
It's not just the unions. The doctors (who, let's face it, are often prima donnas) are just as bad.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
I think it's the human condition for quite a lot of people: they will NOT accept that someone else tells them how to do something better, however sensible. I met it in private industry too.
Actually I'm a bit like that myself, aren't you sometimes? My wife tells me that the dishes will rinse better if I soak them more first and I go "Stop criticising how I wash the dishes!"
Works in reverse too, though - someone gives you half-baked advice on something they don't understand and then gets miffed if you don't take it. People with faddish dietary ideas are especially prone to it.
Nick
The worst though are those who have been trained in inter-personal and motivational skills by an overpromoted intern from HR.
They are the ones who sidle up behind your shoulder, watch you doing the dishes and then say: "You are doing a great job there. Can you think of any way in which you can improve what you are doing?".
To which the correct answer is of course: "No I f**king can't. Now b*gger off and pester someone else".
NHS nurses..my daughter who is a staunch labourite is taking legal action against the nurses at her local hospital for the dangerous and callous treatment she received last week after surgery..on the advice of the surgeon who did the op.. Merciful angels they were most definitely not..in her words.."Lazy and callous"
In the surgeons words "Incompetent and dangerous idiots"
Sorry to hear about that, and I wish her luck. It sounds as though the surgeon's on her side though, in spirit at least.
As we saw during the 5 day whine on here that marked the start of the Olympics the PB Salafist Tories
The whining at the start of the Olympics was truly hilarious. But it was in no way limited to Tories.
The whining about the BBC/NHS/Multiracial opening ceremony was Tory/UKIP territory if I remeber the protagonists correctly.
Replace them with immigrants.
Not just faux naif tim, faux moronique to pretend not to understand the Boyle point. The NHS is great, it's free and does a relatively good job most of the time, but it is not a religion. All other first world countries, bar the USA which is nuts, have similarish and not noticeably poorer systems. The Boyle deception is to pretend that a. the NHS is like a celestial version of apple pie, and b. that tories for that very reason hate it and want it to fail and all its patients to die. It just ain't so.
Here's a PB tory anecdote for you: I had a colonic resection for stage 3 bowel cancer in March, on the NHS. I could easily have afforded to go private but chose not to, largely on the advice of a girlfriend who spookily enough, is a colorectal nurse in the private sector. I do not hate the NHS, I think in my case it has been fantastic.
But enough of the lefty jingoism, unless you can back it up with a lot of articles from the foreign, first-world press lamenting that their local system is not more closely modelled on the NHS. Good luck with finding them.
Quick question, given there are stories about MPs getting a pay rise coming up - if, as is sometimes claimed, the bad old system of expenses was a result of MPs being underpaid and so using expenses to get around that*, why then were there so many nonsense claims for things MPs did not need to buy, and therefore claim for? If expenses were to cover things they needed but their wages would not permit them to buy, far fewer people would have been mad in the first places. But a trouser press was never a legitimate business expense in the first place, so someone does not need a salary increase to buy one if they cannot afford it - as I enjoy saying, you need a suit to enter the Commons or they tell you to leave, but you don't need fantastic creases to do the job.
*Ian Kennedy: Moreover, we know what happens when the element of pay is pushed aside as being simply too hard - the nods and winks school of public financing emerges, and ultimately we end up with circumstances like 2009"
Completely off topic, but any insights would be gratefully received ...
I have to drive from upstate Michigan to Boston this summer. By far the quickest way to do it is to take the road through Canada along the top of Lake Erie and back ino the US at Buffalo. However, I am not sure how easy it is for non-US passport holders to get back into the US by land crossing once they have left. Does anyone have any recent experience of this? Also, are car hires usually good for the US and Canada, or do you need to arrange a separate deal if you are going to drive in both countries?
I have done this regularly in the past. Once got made to wait 3 hours by an unpleasant immigration official,they will punish you with a long wait for the slightest reason.
On another occasion crossed on foot from Canad ,over the Rainbow bridge at Niagra,the immigration officials were shocked that anyone would try and enter on foot,and took ages to let me in.
However on most occasions it is straightforward.
Do not get me started on transiting through Miami.
The hospitals got taken over by the Jews and the BBC years ago. You think those incinerators burning all the evidence need to be near hospitals, really?
The Tories have an open goal seeking out scandals inside the NHS related to the target culture and the way the nomenklatura select candidates for public sector jobs.
Luckily for Labour they won't take the shot because they don't want to improve the NHS.
Completely off topic, but any insights would be gratefully received ...
I have to drive from upstate Michigan to Boston this summer. By far the quickest way to do it is to take the road through Canada along the top of Lake Erie and back ino the US at Buffalo. However, I am not sure how easy it is for non-US passport holders to get back into the US by land crossing once they have left. Does anyone have any recent experience of this? Also, are car hires usually good for the US and Canada, or do you need to arrange a separate deal if you are going to drive in both countries?
I have done this regularly in the past. Once got made to wait 3 hours by an unpleasant immigration official,they will punish you with a long wait for the slightest reason.
On another occasion crossed on foot from Canad ,over the Rainbow bridge at Niagra,the immigration officials were shocked that anyone would try and enter on foot,and took ages to let me in.
However on most occasions it is straightforward.
Do not get me started on transiting through Miami.
A long time ago - a good friend of mine who was one one of the most diffident people you can imagine somehow irritated an immigration bod at Miami, ended up being held and deported! He had no idea what he'd done.
Having experienced US immigration on several occasions, I tend to just look at my shoes or out of the windows in case they take offence at me smiling in the wrong way.
I don't see why it can't remain free at the point of delivery but with incentives to take out insurance for those who can afford it
It could do a lot of things if the people suggesting the changes were *trusted*. People ignore the critical point and then get all surprised at the polling numbers.
Mr Jones - As Sir Humphrey said it all depends on how you phrase the question, ' do you think those who can afford it should be given incentives to take out insurance to remove them from the NHS waiting list and cut down the time it takes to get treatment on the NHS' sounds rather better than 'do you think rich people should get a tax break for private medical insurance breaking up the principle of the NHS?' No surprises for guessing which gets more public approval!
Mr Jones - As Sir Humphrey said it all depends on how you phrase the question, ' do you think those who can afford it should be given incentives to take out insurance to remove them from the NHS waiting list and cut down the time it takes to get treatment on the NHS' sounds rather better than 'do you think rich people should get a tax break for private medical insurance breaking up the principle of the NHS?' No surprises for guessing which gets more public approval!
It really doesn't - not on this. If you're not trusted on the NHS then most people will switch off as soon as you open your mouth so you might as well be reading out the phonebook.
It might change with a general weakening of support for welfare but i doubt it.
It may be counter-intuitive for some but if the Tories want to privatize the NHS then they should try and improve it first to build up trust.
I visited my local NHS A and E this week first time for 20 years or more.It was a reasonably pleasant and efficient experience,I was Triaged,assessed,Xrayed,and diagnosed,and out within 2 Hrs. It all seemed calm and organised,gave them 9/10 in the follow up phone survey. The bad part was the expensive car park,and had to park a long way from reception,this was a real pain,literally,as I had a broken foot. I suspect it would have been much worse at night when the local fighting drunks roll in. Anyway I am now grounded for 6 weeks,so will have to fill my time posting on PB.
I visited my local NHS A and E this week first time for 20 years or more.It was a reasonably pleasant and efficient experience,I was Triaged,assessed,Xrayed,and diagnosed,and out within 2 Hrs. It all seemed calm and organised,gave them 9/10 in the follow up phone survey. The bad part was the expensive car park,and had to park a long way from reception,this was a real pain,literally,as I had a broken foot. I suspect it would have been much worse at night when the local fighting drunks roll in. Anyway I am now grounded for 6 weeks,so will have to fill my time posting on PB.
How do we know Survation isn't the new gold standard?
Until its accuracy is proven in several elections as the best, it cannot achieve the title of gold standard - it might well be the most accurate indicator right now, but without more elections to test it, there's no way to prove it, so it's not how do we know it isn't, but how do we know it is until that point which seems the most reasonable position.
Has Ed M actually being waiting for a moment like this? Lefties despite the LDs now, so Labour are in no real danger of losing the votes of dedicated leftists to anyone, and they won't risk staying at home and let a Tory government in through the back door (people in the centre staying away might achieve that). Ed M is looking very serious and not pettily political in all this (ironically, given it is a party poitical issue)
Mr Jones - No, offering more choice has nothing to do with 'privatising the NHS' and as long as free healthcare is available to those who need it, there is no reason we cannot follow the insurance model of much of continental Europe
Mr Jones - No, offering more choice has nothing to do with 'privatising the NHS' and as long as free healthcare is available to those who need it, there is no reason we cannot follow the insurance model of much of continental Europe
Just saw one of the many clips of McCluskey, and I loved the bit about Ed M being the leader of 'our' party and how that doesn't mean they agree on everything, and that in a democratic party you can (and are allowed presumably), to disagree.
I'm sure many Tory backbenchers will be pleased to hear that, given that their disagreements with their party leader is a sign of a party in chaos, apparently (yes, they are MPs so it's not quite the same, but some Labour bod was going on about Labour being a broad coalition the other day, and it's curious that one person's broad coalition is another person's hopelessly divided party)
Was, about 5 years ago on an American cruise ship entering Aussie waters. Immigration officials came on board and went through the process before we docked. Mostly Americans on board, so Brits were a novelty, and we were allowed to take our spouses passports. The Americans were bemused that my (Yorkie) friend and myself were not only allowed to do that, but spent the "interview" time joking with the immigration staff about cricket, at I should emphasise, the immigration officers instigation.
Just saw one of the many clips of McCluskey, and I lived the bit about Ed M being the leader of 'our' party and how that doesn't mean they agree on everything, and that in a democratic party you can (and are allowed) presumably, to disagree.
I'm sure many Tory backbenchers will be pleased to hear that, given that their disagreements with their party leader is a sign of a party in chaos, apparently (yes, they are MPs so it's not quite the same, but some Labour bod was going on about Labour being a broad coalition the other day, and it's curious that one person's broad coalition is another person's hopelessly divided party)
Lynton Crosby will be loving that statement from LenM. Labour, the party of the unions.
tim .. why do you post on a political forum.. you obviously have no effin idea ..altho you do post as an expert on virtually every subject that crops up.from MMR, Farming, Homeopathy, NHS, Education, Defence, Housing and housing prices, where the airport should be built. What Cameron thinks, What Osborne thinks, etc, and now you are posting as an expert on WW1 shell shock victims,your talents are endless.
I have no idea how you get that info ..but you post on it.. this is a free forum.. if you dont like what I post then eff off.
.Do I annoy you because I refer to you as the Cheshire Farmer you claimed to be, and not the offie worker you really are.
Sorry if the dots bother you.Tough.
If OGH has a problem with me then he can and no doubt will tell me..in the meantime you are just another poster
Mr Jones - Again, comes back to how the argument is presented, but I can see this conversation is going round in circles so we will have to agree to differ. Anyway, off now to the gym and then watch the end of Murray's match
tim , is that the drug you take, give it up, it aint working. Try one that deals with delusions of grandeur, being a medical expert you will know which one to go for
"... I’m having a laugh at Labour (who isn’t?) while pointing out the impossibility of being the perfect candidate, to make a point: the selection procedure needs to be reformed.
For while Labour’s problems are of its own making, none of us can claim to be perfect. The Tory process works as follows: interested applicants are assessed by the Parliamentary Assessment Board (PAB), and gain entry to the “list”. Being on this list permits application to seats; but control over the final selection is in the hands of the local, voluntary association. There’s an uneasy dance, often, between Tory central office (CCHQ) and the association officers, but it’s the associations that have the power. It’s their shortlist and their membership will vote for their choice.
Neither aspect of the process works perfectly. The PAB itself is a fair process, I’d say, reminiscent of any other competency-based job interview. I went through it in 2010 because David Cameron opened up the list and I wanted to apply to stand in Brighton Pavilion. To my surprise, I passed.
Brighton Association, it turned out, was able to resist my many charms and the seat was fought by the wonderful Charlotte Vere. After the election, I was told by CCHQ that henceforth I could apply only for “The City Seats Initiative” – inner city seats, where the candidate’s task is to rebuild the association. I politely declined, and came off the list: I’d come to realise that I didn’t have the urge to fight any seat that might have me. I wanted to beat Caroline Lucas, and represent Brighton.
CCHQ meddles like this, because it’s trying to craft a population of candidates to do the party proud. But the meddling never works – whether with the City Seats thing, or the unlamented “A list” (“You look nice! Do you want to be an MP?”) – because no central office can know who will work best in any particular town. But neither would it do to allow associations total control. By definition, those of us who belong to a party are unrepresentative, because we’ve self-selected ourselves to be activists. It’s quite arrogant to say that no matter how poorly an association might function (some are great, some aren’t) they have the best knowledge of how to determine who should fight an election for the Conservatives.
There’s an answer to this. CCHQ is entitled to run its PAB process. But final selection should be by primary – whether open, postal or electronic, I don’t really care. Anyone on the PAB list, and anyone who is a member of a local association, should be entitled to put their name forward, and all the voters in the seat be given a chance to have a say in the final selection. Boris Johnson’s mayoral candidacy was selected in this way. Commentators often mention how Boris is “Tory mayor of a Labour city”; no one ever makes the link with the method by which he was chosen for that fight..."
Murray's incensed, his gander was up, but in all fairness, apparently the Janowicz has been complaining about the light for ages, and they won't complete the fourth set before it gets too dark and they have to close the roof, so fairer for both they do it at the start of the set.
Murray incensed at the roof being closed at this juncture...
Cameron blames Len McCluskey
Miliband calls for an inquiry
Hah!
Clegg begs to just be left out of it.
Farage blames EU rules on light regulation.
Natalie Bennett just wants people to know she exists and also has a view on this.
Galloway makes it all about him.
Salmond bemoans a lack of independence for the roof operators to make their own decision for the benefit of Murray/Scotland, the decision made by some London based bureacrat/referee.
We need to know how seriously to take Survation but unfortunately we'll probably have to wait until the European elections next year to find out, assuming the firm does polling for that election.
Blimey, one guy is shouting that the pole has broken, another is reinventing the English language and someones "gander is up"
Is that not the expression? *shrugs* I must have been using it wrong for years, or else Murray's pet goose is really pleased at his rallying. And "someone's" gander, please.
Blimey, one guy is shouting that the pole has broken, another is reinventing the English language and someones "gander is up"
Is that not the expression? *shrugs* I must have been using it wrong for years, or else Murray's pet goose is really pleased at his rallying. And "someone's" gander, please.
Oh, the guy that stormed out to get an In/Out referendum vote, then ran away when one was offered. That guy?
I had literally forgotten about him.
Absence from the spotlight may not make the British public fonder of Nick Clegg, unfortunately for him and the LDs, but it gives him a break at least - I think that's all he wants at this point, a peaceful time before his scheduled Julius Ceasaring. Now that's reinventing the English language.
Comments
https://twitter.com/PopulusPolls/status/353162949294186496/photo/1
The stats above do show why the NHS remains so stubbornly a Labour issue. It's obvious at every level from the intellectual to the gut feeling that many Tories feel that it's inefficient,outdated, bureaucratic and generally unappealing. But they don't quite dare to say so in the stark terms of Mike K, so even if there was a good case for change it's not made, and when change occurs, as is happening now, it's done with assurances that it's not really changing at all.
Ian Davidson
Roger Godsiff
Kate Hoey
Kelvin Hopkins
Dennis Skinner
Graham Stringer
Gisela Stuart
Was this a spoof? Nope.
So one satirical tweet that merely mocked Lamont's self-evident impotence is hardly that blatant.
On the other hand, Buddha Ed admitting that he was so wrapped in his meditations that he failed to notice even more such shenanigans is not good either.
I don't understand why Tories so totally don't get it on the NHS but they don't - tis very weird.
The only things about the NHS that would be safe for them to attack are the target culture, the nomenklatura management, especially the family affair aspect of it, and the big scandals like Stafford that are the result of the first two.
One of the things they don't get is counter-intuitively they'd be better able to chop up the NHS and sell it off cheap to their mates if they improved the existing NHS first as then they'd be trusted more. They can't do that though because they hate the NHS too much to stay calm.
nb If UKIP was 2/3 Labour and 1/3 Tory rather than (the probably long-term voting optimum of) 2/3 Tory and 1/3 Labour then saying the EU wants the NHS privatized so EU countries can compete for pieces of it and that all of liblabcon are privately signed up to privatizing it for that reason would be a great BOO line.
It's utterly blatant. Only a fool could believe that was a real account or that Alistair Darling would actually atack Johann Lamont like that.
Speaking of amateurish campaigns, how are the SNP's plans for the North Sea blockade coming along?
A similar level of rage erupts from the unions when you try and standardise on pen colour to save money.
A while back I was talking to someone who worked as an administrator in a large hospital (just about the world's most thankless job, I imagine). He had discovered that the hospital was buying vast numbers of sterile dressings from a single supplier, but because they ordered them in various different pack sizes they weren't getting the best price. When he tried to standardise on buying in packs of 12 or whatever it was, which would have saved thousands a year, he got a vitriolic reaction from one of the consultants, accusing him of interfering with clinical decisions blah blah. He had to back down and watch the money being wasted.
http://news.sky.com/story/1111979/falkirk-row-union-boss-hits-back-at-labour
Who'd've thunk it?
Remember, the unity of the UK depends on these folk.
It was one tweet not the account as you appear to have missed in your own foolishness.
Your own eccentric and deranged babbling about a North Sea Oil blockade merely underlines the easily spoofed nature of Better Together's Project Fear. So thanks for that.
I can see why you would be so touchy about Darling though. Big hero of yours is he? Darling of the tory party. That's bound to help what with the legendary scottish tory surge poised to hit any decade soon.
LOL
The interesting question is which side is Cerise on?
As Blairites and Brownites (for want of better labels) have been fighting over selection for ages you wonder why it should blow up now.
Either the Brownites messed up in Falkirk giving the Blairites the opportunity to stick the boot in and the abuse of process is too bad for Cerise to help his team - reluctance to sack Watson might fit that version - or Cerise has changed sides - the steam coming out of various ears might fit that version more.
Hard to see Cerise changing sides unless he had alternative source of funds in advance though. All very mysterious.
Erm, so far as I was aware the SNP's plan was just to block access to Scottish fishing grounds, don't think I mentioned oil anywhere. So you appear to be the only one babbling about an oil blockade.
Perhaps you deny that these very words were spoken by the First Minister's spokesman:
"Do Spanish and Portuguese fishermen, and others for that matter, want what would become Scottish waters to be blocked off to their fisherman?"
They start to gerrymander candidate selections.
A bold claim.
It was the kind of self-exhibitionism which makes the likes of Roger weep with joy.
Actually I'm a bit like that myself, aren't you sometimes? My wife tells me that the dishes will rinse better if I soak them more first and I go "Stop criticising how I wash the dishes!"
Works in reverse too, though - someone gives you half-baked advice on something they don't understand and then gets miffed if you don't take it. People with faddish dietary ideas are especially prone to it.
CCHQ Press Office @RicHolden 2m
Unite docs show involvement in 41 seats, 8 have selected Unite members. Ed Miliband insists that #Falkirk is unique for Labour. Credible?
In the surgeons words "Incompetent and dangerous idiots"
Strange how the swivel-eyed loons who were wetting themselves over two yougov polls are ignoring that. Must be a squirrel poll. ;^ )
It's nuts.
Actually, there is a serious point here, which is that the NHS has never really resolved the question of whether it is managed by doctors or administrators, and that's different from private industry (and I would guess different from private hospitals as well, although I know less about that side). It's obviously a difficult question in some cases where decisions impact on clinical care, but I'm astonished at the degree to which doctors get involved in things like setting rotas and dealing with personnel questions. They seem very reluctant to let go control of these areas, which you'd have thought they'd be delighted to have someone else do. The net result is that very highly trained and expensive doctors are doing things which others could do (and probably do better at that).
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm pretty sure we haven't got this right.
I have to drive from upstate Michigan to Boston this summer. By far the quickest way to do it is to take the road through Canada along the top of Lake Erie and back ino the US at Buffalo. However, I am not sure how easy it is for non-US passport holders to get back into the US by land crossing once they have left. Does anyone have any recent experience of this? Also, are car hires usually good for the US and Canada, or do you need to arrange a separate deal if you are going to drive in both countries?
The worst though are those who have been trained in inter-personal and motivational skills by an overpromoted intern from HR.
They are the ones who sidle up behind your shoulder, watch you doing the dishes and then say: "You are doing a great job there. Can you think of any way in which you can improve what you are doing?".
To which the correct answer is of course: "No I f**king can't. Now b*gger off and pester someone else".
Here's a PB tory anecdote for you: I had a colonic resection for stage 3 bowel cancer in March, on the NHS. I could easily have afforded to go private but chose not to, largely on the advice of a girlfriend who spookily enough, is a colorectal nurse in the private sector. I do not hate the NHS, I think in my case it has been fantastic.
But enough of the lefty jingoism, unless you can back it up with a lot of articles from the foreign, first-world press lamenting that their local system is not more closely modelled on the NHS. Good luck with finding them.
*Ian Kennedy: Moreover, we know what happens when the element of pay is pushed aside as being simply too hard - the nods and winks school of public financing emerges, and ultimately we end up with circumstances like 2009"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23202974
On another occasion crossed on foot from Canad ,over the Rainbow bridge at Niagra,the immigration officials were shocked that anyone would try and enter on foot,and took ages to let me in.
However on most occasions it is straightforward.
Do not get me started on transiting through Miami.
Luckily for Labour they won't take the shot because they don't want to improve the NHS.
Having experienced US immigration on several occasions, I tend to just look at my shoes or out of the windows in case they take offence at me smiling in the wrong way.
Who'd have thought it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
It might change with a general weakening of support for welfare but i doubt it.
It may be counter-intuitive for some but if the Tories want to privatize the NHS then they should try and improve it first to build up trust.
The bad part was the expensive car park,and had to park a long way from reception,this was a real pain,literally,as I had a broken foot.
I suspect it would have been much worse at night when the local fighting drunks roll in.
Anyway I am now grounded for 6 weeks,so will have to fill my time posting on PB.
I'm sure many Tory backbenchers will be pleased to hear that, given that their disagreements with their party leader is a sign of a party in chaos, apparently (yes, they are MPs so it's not quite the same, but some Labour bod was going on about Labour being a broad coalition the other day, and it's curious that one person's broad coalition is another person's hopelessly divided party)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dC1CWnAyZmJRYTdyMzl5S2RsanJ0TVE#gid=0
Many of the the Septics had a tough time!
I have no idea how you get that info ..but you post on it.. this is a free forum.. if you dont like what I post then eff off.
.Do I annoy you because I refer to you as the Cheshire Farmer you claimed to be, and not the offie worker you really are.
Sorry if the dots bother you.Tough.
If OGH has a problem with me then he can and no doubt will tell me..in the meantime you are just another poster
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sxPknjQnCg&feature=youtu.be&a
Unite's Liverpudlian leader , Len McCluskey ,accuses Labour and Ed M of being amateur.
Amateur , weak , and crap. That's EdM.
Try one that deals with delusions of grandeur, being a medical expert you will know which one to go for
"... I’m having a laugh at Labour (who isn’t?) while pointing out the impossibility of being the perfect candidate, to make a point: the selection procedure needs to be reformed.
For while Labour’s problems are of its own making, none of us can claim to be perfect. The Tory process works as follows: interested applicants are assessed by the Parliamentary Assessment Board (PAB), and gain entry to the “list”. Being on this list permits application to seats; but control over the final selection is in the hands of the local, voluntary association. There’s an uneasy dance, often, between Tory central office (CCHQ) and the association officers, but it’s the associations that have the power. It’s their shortlist and their membership will vote for their choice.
Neither aspect of the process works perfectly. The PAB itself is a fair process, I’d say, reminiscent of any other competency-based job interview. I went through it in 2010 because David Cameron opened up the list and I wanted to apply to stand in Brighton Pavilion. To my surprise, I passed.
Brighton Association, it turned out, was able to resist my many charms and the seat was fought by the wonderful Charlotte Vere. After the election, I was told by CCHQ that henceforth I could apply only for “The City Seats Initiative” – inner city seats, where the candidate’s task is to rebuild the association. I politely declined, and came off the list: I’d come to realise that I didn’t have the urge to fight any seat that might have me. I wanted to beat Caroline Lucas, and represent Brighton.
CCHQ meddles like this, because it’s trying to craft a population of candidates to do the party proud. But the meddling never works – whether with the City Seats thing, or the unlamented “A list” (“You look nice! Do you want to be an MP?”) – because no central office can know who will work best in any particular town. But neither would it do to allow associations total control. By definition, those of us who belong to a party are unrepresentative, because we’ve self-selected ourselves to be activists. It’s quite arrogant to say that no matter how poorly an association might function (some are great, some aren’t) they have the best knowledge of how to determine who should fight an election for the Conservatives.
There’s an answer to this. CCHQ is entitled to run its PAB process. But final selection should be by primary – whether open, postal or electronic, I don’t really care. Anyone on the PAB list, and anyone who is a member of a local association, should be entitled to put their name forward, and all the voters in the seat be given a chance to have a say in the final selection. Boris Johnson’s mayoral candidacy was selected in this way. Commentators often mention how Boris is “Tory mayor of a Labour city”; no one ever makes the link with the method by which he was chosen for that fight..."
EDIT! OK, Murray's broken back for 4-3!
I've looked everywhere. Under the bed, down the back of the sofa, in the larder, at the solicitors. Can't find it at all.
Has it been destroyed?
Miliband calls for an inquiry
Clegg begs to just be left out of it.
Farage blames EU rules on light regulation.
Natalie Bennett just wants people to know she exists and also has a view on this.
Galloway makes it all about him.
Salmond bemoans a lack of independence for the roof operators to make their own decision for the benefit of Murray/Scotland, the decision made by some London based bureacrat/referee.
Oh, the guy that stormed out to get an In/Out referendum vote, then ran away when one was offered. That guy?
I had literally forgotten about him.
Breaking: James Wharton announces he is withdrawing referendum bill and introducing Tennis (Overhead coverings) Bill forthwith.