I don't think May is nasty at all. I think she is what it says on the tin, a parochial daughter of a clergyman who possesses conservative instincts. I think Cameron and Osborne were not particularly nice, both arrogant public school bores.
I think May shares a number of traits with Gordon Brown though, both children of clergy....over thinking, indecision, control freakery and not being comfortable in their own skin. I think both are fundamentally good people though, people I would trust and personally warm to if I knew them.
I think SO & Fox project their own sense of powerlessness on May & conclude the only reason she's in charge is because she's 'nasty'. The Police Federation certainly thought so.....
On 'not being comfortable in her own skin' - I knew her at University and while it may appear to be the case in public its simply not true - agree on your assessment of Cameron - though I suspect Osborne may not be quite as bad. If I was told I'd be sitting next to one of them at a dinner party I know I'd enjoy sitting next to May, with Cameron I've no doubt I'd enjoy watching him holding forth to all & sundry, tho I suspect Osborne would be interesting....
Actually, I specifically said she is not nasty. I said she is totally out of her depth. That is very different.
I know...I can see why Fox though would pathologise May's character....if you work at the coal face and see the brutality of the Tory policies, it is impossible to view any good in the political leaders responsible for it, especially one's who profess to be christians.
Stoke is a great betting heat, and one way that this is proved is that supporters of all parties are trying to make a case for one of the others, and saying it will be a disaster for them if they dont win!!!
Sky seem to be getting considerable support for Theresa May's stance re GP surgeries
Obviously, it would. So there will be less coverage during days ? Or, are we asking GPs to work 7-days a week ?
Every other business manages to provide 7 day cover, you can get your TV or washing machine done no bother. It should not be beyond the wit of teh NHS to merge centres and provide a shift cover. The GP's get paid plenty, you never se a poor one. My surgery is open 9-5 Mon - Fri and closes for 1.5 hours for lunch, that is a pathetic service.
The problem is the NHS has for too long been run in the interests of the staff - especially GPs who happen to be among the highest paid. unfortunately to say so is akin to worship of the devil for far too many people.
Obviously, saying this makes you feel better; but it is, of course, nonsense. Do you know what pay nurses get, for example, and the hours they work?
In England it is £15K to £100K, Wales similar, Scotland £16K to £103K RN’s that work 8 or 10 hour days typically work about 40 hours or so per week, however nurses that work 12 hour days may end up working around 36 hours per week.
In either case both the 36 hour and 40 hour work weeks are generally considered full-time work for registered nurses.
As I suspected not badly paid at all.
Indeed and the low end will be student nurses , qualified RN starts low twenties without any speciality bonuses.
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories as here. There are two important issues:
1. The NHS is very good overall but it is not the envy of the rest of the world and many countries do healthcare much better.
2. The NHS is highly politicized and has an interest in generating repeated crisis stories as a means of securing more funding and little real reform.
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive, that doctors are lazy or that it needs to have user fees. It needs either more money, lower expectations or people accepting a post code lottery that it will be much better in some areas/for some people than for others.
Health workers are not saints but they are right to expect to be paid a decent wage. When we have a situation that we pay our doctors less than they could earn in US, Canada, Australia... Something is up... (and IMO mother Theresa isn't the morally pure figure people make he out to be either).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
I don't think May is nasty at all. I think she is what it says on the tin, a parochial daughter of a clergyman who possesses conservative instincts. I think Cameron and Osborne were not particularly nice, both arrogant public school bores.
I think May shares a number of traits with Gordon Brown though, both children of clergy....over thinking, indecision, control freakery and not being comfortable in their own skin. I think both are fundamentally good people though, people I would trust and personally warm to if I knew them.
I think SO & Fox project their own sense of powerlessness on May & conclude the only reason she's in charge is because she's 'nasty'. The Police Federation certainly thought so.....
On 'not being comfortable in her own skin' - I knew her at University and while it may appear to be the case in public its simply not true - agree on your assessment of Cameron - though I suspect Osborne may not be quite as bad. If I was told I'd be sitting next to one of them at a dinner party I know I'd enjoy sitting next to May, with Cameron I've no doubt I'd enjoy watching him holding forth to all & sundry, tho I suspect Osborne would be interesting....
Actually, I specifically said she is not nasty. I said she is totally out of her depth. That is very different.
I don't think she is out of her depth at all, she is probably more hard working than Cameron is and unlike him will do the preparation work before the negotiations rather than waltz in with sky high expectations and a back of an envelope plan and come back with virtually nothing. She does not look as much like a PM as Blair or Cameron but that is a different matter and she certainly looks more of a PM than Corbyn, Farron and Nuttall who are all she has to concern herself with at the moment
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories as here. There are two important issues:
1. The NHS is very good overall but it is not the envy of the rest of the world and many countries do healthcare much better.
2. The NHS is highly politicized and has an interest in generating repeated crisis stories as a means of securing more funding and little real reform.
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive, that doctors are lazy or that it needs to have user fees. It needs either more money, lower expectations or people accepting a post code lottery that it will be much better in some areas/for some people than for others.
Health workers are not saints but they are right to expect to be paid a decent wage. When we have a situation that we pay our doctors less than they could earn in US, Canada, Australia... Something is up... (and IMO mother Theresa isn't the morally pure figure people make he out to be either).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
However end of life care as part of the system is an aspiration but at £40,000 + per annum per person cannot just be paid for by taxes. It is hugely complex and needs the parties to get together and come to a consensus
It needs people that are able to, to make contributions to a fund to support their end of life care through their life, topped up by the government if the can't afford it. It needs everyone to pay something, so that people value it, or people making no contribution will feel no disincentive to take the piss.
The tricky bit in our system is stopping the government of the day raiding that fund at the first scent of fiscal gunpowder to bail out the problem du jour.
By 2020 it is a manifesto commitment of the government that the maximum any individual will have to pay is £75 000 for their care before the local authority take over
The £75,000 is based on medical care not 'hotel' care expenses. It is going to be difficult to separate them sometimes.
Only able to get 20-1 on Copeland Lib Dems this morning at William Hill. See the BBC are still plugging UKIP, they seem to be in denial about how badly they are currently polling. Looks like the Lib Dems will do well in both seats but I suspect Labour will put off the elections till May 4, thereby preventing hoardes of activists going because they will have their own local elections to deal with.
Just catching up on posts - sex, traitors and Enoch... what a colourful start to my day.
Sex, Traitors and Enoch is a normal start for any red blooded PBer.
Hope all enjoyed the sex part.
I've found that I am incapable of doing anything about the excessive length of my posts. How SeanF in particular squeezes so much into so few words - despite being a lawyer! - I can just stand back and admire. As I seem unable to emulate that style, I have been working on my prose to try to reduce the insipidity if not the wordcount, so at least some folk might battle through it...
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories as here. There are two important issues:
1. The NHS is very good overall but it is not the envy of the rest of the world and many countries do healthcare much better.
2. The NHS is highly politicized and has an interest in generating repeated crisis stories as a means of securing more funding and little real reform.
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
Switzerland is richer per capita than all of them and not in the EU or fully in the EEA
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive, that doctors are lazy or that it needs to have user fees. It needs either more money, lower expectations or people accepting a post code lottery that it will be much better in some areas/for some people than for others.
Health workers are not saints but they are right to expect to be paid a decent wage. When we have a situation that we pay our doctors less than they could earn in US, Canada, Australia... Something is up... (and IMO mother Theresa isn't the morally pure figure people make he out to be either).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
Ireland's GDP numbers should be taken with a pinch of salt. Ireland is rich, but not as rich as officially stated.
However end of life care as part of the system is an aspiration but at £40,000 + per annum per person cannot just be paid for by taxes. It is hugely complex and needs the parties to get together and come to a consensus
It needs people that are able to, to make contributions to a fund to support their end of life care through their life, topped up by the government if the can't afford it. It needs everyone to pay something, so that people value it, or people making no contribution will feel no disincentive to take the piss.
The tricky bit in our system is stopping the government of the day raiding that fund at the first scent of fiscal gunpowder to bail out the problem du jour.
By 2020 it is a manifesto commitment of the government that the maximum any individual will have to pay is £75 000 for their care before the local authority take over
The £75,000 is based on medical care not 'hotel' care expenses. It is going to be difficult to separate them sometimes.
You will have to pay for things like food and clothing and heating etc from your pension whether you enter care or not, so they can be separated on that basis
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive, that doctors are lazy or that it needs to have user fees. It needs either more money, lower expectations or people accepting a post code lottery that it will be much better in some areas/for some people than for others.
Health workers are not saints but they are right to expect to be paid a decent wage. When we have a situation that we pay our doctors less than they could earn in US, Canada, Australia... Something is up... (and IMO mother Theresa isn't the morally pure figure people make he out to be either).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories as here. There are two important issues:
1. The NHS is very good overall but it is not the envy of the rest of the world and many countries do healthcare much better.
2. The NHS is highly politicized and has an interest in generating repeated crisis stories as a means of securing more funding and little real reform.
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
Switzerland is richer per capita than all of them and not in the EU or fully in the EEA
Switzerland's position in Europe is rather unique and always has been.
The basic NHS problem is that we have more old people than ever before. Social care, including care homes, has to be an integrated part of the solution. We also need politicians grown-up enough to put down tribal differences and to work on a long-term strategy for the NHS that might involve some unpalatable truths for all - higher taxes, some point of use charges, for example. It will, of course, never happen.
Why point of use charges? The evidence is pretty clear that they are a dreadful idea...
We don't spend much on health compared to other wealthy countries and so actually get a great deal from the NHS. If we want a world class health service we should be prepared to pay for it.
And yet many countries in Europe already have point of use services [with some degree of later claimback and you simply don't see these recurring crisis stories as here. There are two important issues:
1. The NHS is very good overall but it is not the envy of the rest of the world and many countries do healthcare much better.
2. The NHS is highly politicized and has an interest in generating repeated crisis stories as a means of securing more funding and little real reform.
Overall it is very sad as there seems little real interest in being grown up about it's problems and a quite ridiculous tendency to sanctify health workers to a level way beyond Mother Theresa !
The NHS is not the best healthcare in the world.... But its failings are not that it is too expensive).
I can think of no valid reason why we should pay NHS staff more than the US which is much richer or Australia where the system is partly private and the cost of living quite a bit higher. Canada I know little about.
Australians are also a third richer than Brits by GDP per capita so should be better paid. All English speaking non EU nations are to my knowledge.
Not New Zealand.
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
Switzerland is richer per capita than all of them and not in the EU or fully in the EEA
Switzerland's position in Europe is rather unique and always has been.
Nonetheless it conducts trade with the EU on the basis of sector by sector agreements which is probably not a million miles from what May will ultimately get
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
Ireland's GDP numbers should be taken with a pinch of salt. Ireland is rich, but not as rich as officially stated.
Ireland being a less than quarter the population of Australia which in turn is only a third that of the UK. Not sure what parallels can be drawn here...
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
But if you factor in the price of a pint of Guinness...
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
Sky seem to be getting considerable support for Theresa May's stance re GP surgeries
Obviously, it would. So there will be less coverage during days ? Or, are we asking GPs to work 7-days a week ?
Every other business manages to provide 7 day cover, you can get your TV or washing machine done no bother. It should not be beyond the wit of teh NHS to merge centres and provide a shift cover. The GP's get paid plenty, you never se a poor one. My surgery is open 9-5 Mon - Fri and closes for 1.5 hours for lunch, that is a pathetic service.
Quite so, Mr. G and in some places such arrangements are in place, not 7 days a week but 6. My own local GP Practice has formed an alliance with two others in neighbouring villages. If someone needs to see a quack on the rush then they will be offered an appointment at one of the three surgeries within 24 hours and, if necessary, the same day. On the downside getting an appointment with one's own GP usually involves a two week wait.
It seems to me to be a very sensible system. If I am really not very well then I get to see a quack (who has access to my medical history) quickly, and in such circumstances I am probably not fussed who I see. On the other hand, I have a couple of long term chronic conditions that need to be monitored regularly and for those I prefer to see the same chap who has been looking after me for ten years or so. However, I can plan such visits so the 14 day wait in not a problem.
I doubt the system cost a lot to set up, some IT and networking plus a bit of commonsense management issues to sort out. So there would appear to be plenty of scope for increasing timely access to GPs without increasing costs to any significant degree.
Long term though the NHS model of everything is free at the time of use is going to have to change. On many measures (e.g. cancer survival rates) we have worse outcomes than some (most?) of our continental neighbours, yet they seem to manage those better outcomes even though they work with some sort of co-payment/private insurance system.
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
She won Witney and Sleaford and Copeland is coming up
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
It's also worth adding that although Ireland has recovered and recovered well from the crash, roughly 10% of mortgagors remain in negative equity with the banks extending and pretending.
She is more pleasant than Brown but had Brown taken over in 2003 after Blair had been toppled over Iraq (as Cameron went an equivalent 6 years into the Tory term after losing the EU referendum) he would likely have been PM for 7 years until 2010 so May could even outlast Cameron on that basis
When I think of May I think of an (English) opening batsman. If she gets in, she could stick around for some time, but it's equally possible that she could be bowled out quite quickly.
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke.
Most small service businesses now have online booking, delivery companies can tell me to within a few minutes when a package will arrive, and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup...but loads of GP surgeries haven't got online booking and those that do, according to the CAB most apparently do bugger all to make service users aware / restrict heavily the slots that can be booked online.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about also scheduling.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
It's also worth adding that although Ireland has recovered and recovered well from the crash, roughly 10% of mortgagors remain in negative equity with the banks extending and pretending.
What does extend and pretend have to do with negative equity? Positive equity doesn't turn a bad loan into a good loan.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK, and noticeably higher in Switzerland.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
It's also worth adding that although Ireland has recovered and recovered well from the crash, roughly 10% of mortgagors remain in negative equity with the banks extending and pretending.
I'm shocked it's that low given Irish house prices fell about 50% peak-to-trough.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
Make people pay a booking fee then. I'd pay it.
Free. At. Point. Of. Use.
Politically your suggestion will fail.
Charge for A&E if the person is over the drink drive limit or on illegal drugs
Ireland has a very high GDP. That is, if you look at the value of all production in Ireland, it is very high. However, the level of remittances from Ireland to other countries (i.e. corporates repatriating profits) means GNP is much lower.
Because of Ireland's super low corporate tax rates, there are lots of activities (like pharmaceutical manufatcuring) which take place there that employ few people and all the profits are then sent to companies in the UK, the US and Japan.
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK, and noticeably higher in Switzerland.
Are you sure about the cost of living in Eire being lower than in the UK ?
The unemployment rate in Ireland is 7.9%, in the UK it is 4.8%
So the average Brit is noticeably if not hugely richer than the average Irish person, and that's ignoring the vastly greater latent wealth of the UK, national assets, housing stock, corporate and cultural wealth, and so on.
Meanwhile the average median salary in Switzerland is.... €69,000. Yes, €69,000
The idea that the Irish are richer than the SWISS is enjoyably preposterous.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK, and noticeably higher in Switzerland.
Are you sure about the cost of living in Eire being lower than in the UK ?
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Yes I know, its just that things businesses do all the time and make perfect sense have a habit of becoming massively controversial and eventually politically impossible where public services are involved.
I am familiar with how this dance goes, I spent several fruitless years a couple of decades ago working on IT solutions to reduce benefit fraud, and got basically nowhere for the same reasons.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
Make people pay a booking fee then. I'd pay it.
So would I, but again, political dynamite, left leaning politicians would be jumping up and down in seconds about how the rich are getting preferential access to the health system.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK
I would say the cost of living is higher in Ireland than in Britain. Consumer prices are generally higher, sometimes much higher. Ordinary cheddar cheese in the supermarkets can be €25 per kilogram. Half the population have private health insurance. I can't think of much that's cheaper other than petrol (slightly) and rents in rural areas.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK
I would say the cost of living is higher in Ireland than in Britain. Consumer prices are generally higher, sometimes much higher. Ordinary cheddar cheese in the supermarkets can be €25 per kilogram. Half the population have private health insurance too. I can't think of much that's cheaper other than petrol (very slightly) and rents in rural area.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
Make people pay a booking fee then. I'd pay it.
Free. At. Point. Of. Use.
Politically your suggestion will fail.
Refundable deposit. You could even make it refundable only to UK citizens if you like to pander to the mean spirited.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
b) Charge
You want to let the homeless die on the streets?
I would assume not letting the homeless die in the streets is part of "only doing the essentials" ?
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK
I would say the cost of living is higher in Ireland than in Britain. Consumer prices are generally higher, sometimes much higher. Ordinary cheddar cheese in the supermarkets can be €25 per kilogram. Half the population have private health insurance too. I can't think of much that's cheaper other than petrol (very slightly) and rents in rural area.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
b) Charge
You want to let the homeless die on the streets?
Drama Queen!
"It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily"
What part of that didn't you get?
A&E's aren't under pressure at weekends in the evening because homeless people are out on the lash I'll give you a clue
Fascinating to see David, a Conservative activist, opining at length about the LDs and others asserting how (apparently) we are going to win both Stoke and Copeland.
Curious because little or nothing has been said about the Party who on paper ought to be the big challengers in both seats - the Conservatives. We are told ad nauseam how popular May's Government is, how Labour are unelectable, how UKIP are a busted flush and how the LDs are irrelevant.
Surely, on that basis, the Conservatives should be favourites to win BOTH seats and yet we hear next to nothing from the various Conservative activists on here about how their party is going to win yet they talk up the prospects of other parties.
So why can't the Conservatives win BOTH Copeland and Stoke with their double figure opinion poll leads ?They start a close second in one and a good third in the other and seem on paper a much more likely prospect than a party which lost its deposit in both contests last time.
The failure of the Conservatives to win either seat would be far more significant than the failure of the LDs to win either seat though no one seems willing to say that (except me).
But no national poll has given the Tories a lead in excess of 18%. Even that would imply a Labour hold in Stoke! Current polls place the Tory lead closer to 12% - which would imply a comfortable Labour win there.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK
I would say the cost of living is higher in Ireland than in Britain. Consumer prices are generally higher, sometimes much higher. Ordinary cheddar cheese in the supermarkets can be €25 per kilogram. Half the population have private health insurance too. I can't think of much that's cheaper other than petrol (very slightly) and rents in rural area.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
b) Charge
You want to let the homeless die on the streets?
Drama Queen!
"It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily"
What part of that didn't you get?
A&E's aren't under pressure at weekends in the evening because homeless people are out on the lash I'll give you a clue
A 'free service to stop poor people dying ...' sums up Medicare, part two of the two-tier US system. Only the destitute need apply. The US govt spends as much money on healthcare in the form of Medicare and Medicaid as the UK govt. spends.
In your aim to abolish the NHS and save money, you'll spend £ billions on extra red tape, like staff time finding out if the 'destitute' person has assets secretly stashed away.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
Make people pay a booking fee then. I'd pay it.
How do they pay, when a significant amount of the demographic don't have credit cards? Are we allowing the "rich" to make bookings that the plebs can't??
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
... and then after all that paperwork some silly sod gives away all the information anyway by leaving a CD filled with it in a rubbish bin.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
It still is something that should be in every GP surgeries by now. I don't disagree there are additional considerations, but loads of businesses have similar data security issues these days, in fact most really do.
It was promised in 2010 that within a few years it would be everywhere. Also, as I say it isn't even just not having the online system, CAB found that surgeries are doing a great job of not telling people when they have it and also making sure there are of only limited use by heavily restricting the slots available.
I can, and do, book appontments with my GP on-line. And, incidentally request repeat prescriptions, which are then transmitted electronically to the local pharmacy. I can’t book more than one appointment any time, though, although I could, I suspect book one manually with the receptionist, and, as far as preceriptions are concerned, if I want anythjing much before it’s due, it’s refused and I have to visit the surgery and explain to the staff why I need it early...... usually because I’m off on holiday.
Re cost of living: please also remember that the taxation system is important. A country with high levels of VAT and low income tax will seem expensive, while one with high income tax and low vat will feel cheap.
I can, and do, book appontments with my GP on-line. And, incidentally request repeat prescriptions, which are then transmitted electronically to the local pharmacy. I can’t book more than one appointment any time, though, although I could, I suspect book one manually with the receptionist, and, as far as preceriptions are concerned, if I want anythjing much before it’s due, it’s refused and I have to visit the surgery and explain to the staff why I need it early...... usually because I’m off on holiday.
This is basically what a CAB report found. Can you imagine if Amazon ran their business like this...you can only buy one product at a time, you can't buy things well in advance, etc etc etc.
I have few problems with making people pay for missed appointments if they don't have a good excuse; perhaps make it happen if appointments are missed *multiple* times.
However I cam against making people pay per appointment. Many of the people who need to access their doctors are poor, and it's important for the poor to have as much access as the well-off. This is especially the case with immunisations, sexual health and other similar cases.
I have few problems with making people pay for missed appointments if they don't have a good excuse; perhaps make it happen if appointments are missed *multiple* times.
However I cam against making people pay per appointment. Many of the people who need to access their doctors are poor, and it's important for the poor to have as much access as the well-off. This is especially the case with immunisations, sexual health and other similar cases.
You could have a 3 strikes types rule. The stuff about not being fair for the poor, most other walks of life if you keep booking stuff and then don't turn up, they charge you, so it isn't exactly out of the norm...especially if it is easy to cancel via an app or phone number. Very very few people these days don't have access to a mobile, i mean even "child" migrants in Calais Jungle have Whatsapp.
On the NHS debate. I remember when younger (late '80s) that A&E at the weekend tended to be full of accidents and emergencies - the amateur sportsmen, DIYers and traffic accident victims getting put back together again. I also remember that a sick child or elderly would be able to get the doctor out, to take a look, reassure the carer and write a prescription if necessary.
As someone who's not lived in the UK for a decade, this OOH system of care appears to have broken down completely, now everyone goes to A&E and is expected to be seen in a four hour window even when that's not appropriate.
If I'm sick and want to see a doctor, there needs to be an easy way to do so, and an appointment made. Personally I've not seen a doctor in two decades, so if I'm sick I don't care which doctor i see, but I can understand why those with complicated medical histories might want to see a specific GP who understands their history.
There needs to be a serious conversation involving all medical and political parties about the future of the NHS, probably a Royal Commission. It's abundantly clear that serious reform is needed which is currently politically impossible.
I can, and do, book appontments with my GP on-line. And, incidentally request repeat prescriptions, which are then transmitted electronically to the local pharmacy. I can’t book more than one appointment any time, though, although I could, I suspect book one manually with the receptionist, and, as far as preceriptions are concerned, if I want anythjing much before it’s due, it’s refused and I have to visit the surgery and explain to the staff why I need it early...... usually because I’m off on holiday.
This is basically what a CAB report found. Can you imagine if Amazon ran their business like this...you can only buy one product at a time, you can't buy things well in advance, etc etc etc.
The booking system, including the bar, seems fair enough to me. Not comparable with Amazon at all. Why would anyone want to request multiple appointments?
As far as requesting prescriptions too frequently is concerned, in my last couple of jobs I spent a lot of time trying to control over-requesting and over-prescribing, so while I get irritated now and then I can see the sense of it. My only serious grumble is that the local CCG considers that people on regular medication should not take more than two weeks holiday at a time! When one goes off for a month every so often that can cause ‘discussion’!
@Moniker: I suspect the cost of living in Northern Ireland is a lot lower than in England, hence that article.
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
Ireland never *feels* rich to me, not in the way that Central London does, or most of Switzerland, or the Californian Coast, or parts of Tuscany, Provence, Bavaria or Singapore...
But going by the stats it should feel richer than Hong Kong!
At best (the affluent bits of Dublin, or the southern coast), it feels about as rich as Edinburgh, or the Devon riviera.
That's using my S K Tremayne "feels rich" Rich-o-Meter (patent pending), and it's served me well in the past. I remember visiting Ireland BEFORE the crash and thinking, hold on, this is meant to be one of the richest countries in the EU, with property prices like Monaco, something is very wrong. And it was.
Ireland shouldn't feel any richer than the average for the UK, because it isn't any richer than the average for the UK. And the average for the UK includes Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and lots of places where a one bedroom flat costs less than half a million pounds.
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
I think you need to PPP it, as the cost of living is noticeably lower in Ireland than in the UK
I would say the cost of living is higher in Ireland than in Britain. Consumer prices are generally higher, sometimes much higher. Ordinary cheddar cheese in the supermarkets can be €25 per kilogram. Half the population have private health insurance. I can't think of much that's cheaper other than petrol (slightly) and rents in rural areas.
The World Bank's methodology is pretty thorough. They look at the proportion of income that goes on income tax, rent, utilities, housing taxes, etc., and then the cost of a normalised basket of goods.
If you look solely at "in store" prices, you are missing a massive number of things that come out of your pay packet first.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
It still is something that should be in every GP surgeries by now. I don't disagree there are additional considerations, but loads of businesses have similar data security issues these days, in fact most really do.
It was promised in 2010 that within a few years it would be everywhere. Also, as I say it isn't even just not having the online system, CAB found that surgeries are doing a great job of not telling people when they have it and also making sure there are of only limited use by heavily restricting the slots available.
The reality is that your local small business like the gym doesn't give a shit about data security to any reasonable government standard. To do it properly costs serious time and money.
What would make sense is for a group of GP surgeries in an area to club together and buy a booking system between them, with options for visits to a specific doctor, a specific surgery or just any doctor in the town.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
It still is something that should be in every GP surgeries by now. I don't disagree there are additional considerations, but loads of businesses have similar data security issues these days, in fact most really do.
It was promised in 2010 that within a few years it would be everywhere. Also, as I say it isn't even just not having the online system, CAB found that surgeries are doing a great job of not telling people when they have it and also making sure there are of only limited use by heavily restricting the slots available.
The reality is that your local small business like the gym doesn't give a shit about data security to any reasonable government standard. To do it properly costs serious time and money.
What would make sense is for a group of GP surgeries in an area to club together and buy a booking system between them, with options for visits to a specific doctor, a specific surgery or just any doctor in the town.
I’m pretty sure, Sandpit that that’s what’s happened locally.
Re GP hours...as I have said a number of times, the fact that all GP surgeries don't have online booking in this day and age is a total joke. Even really small service businesses now have online booking and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about scheduling.
Online booking without payment or proper authentication is fraught with problems, its too easy for some asshat to just book all the slots for the doctor each day.
I have no problem charging people for missed appointments. My gym fines me a £5 for any class I book and don't attend. And repeat offenders lose the ability to use the online booking for a period of time (one can still attend classes, but you can't book as long in advance and you can't use the online system while "suspended").
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
It's not quite that simple unfortunately. I could set up the system for the gym in a day, but for a GP surgery there will be a lot of paperwork about confidentiality and security that combine to add a zero or more to the price of the system.
... and then after all that paperwork some silly sod gives away all the information anyway by leaving a CD filled with it in a rubbish bin.
The NHS was not set up to deal with the things it has to deal with now. It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily. It was not a drop in centre for the same drunks and illegal drug users to be patched up time and again.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
b) Charge
Just out of interest... who are the deserving and the underserving?
@Moniker: I suspect the cost of living in Northern Ireland is a lot lower than in England, hence that article.
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
Ireland never *feels* rich to me, not in the way that Central London does, or most of Switzerland, or the Californian Coast, or parts of Tuscany, Provence, Bavaria or Singapore...
But going by the stats it should feel richer than Hong Kong!
At best (the affluent bits of Dublin, or the southern coast), it feels about as rich as Edinburgh, or the Devon riviera.
That's using my S K Tremayne "feels rich" Rich-o-Meter (patent pending), and it's served me well in the past. I remember visiting Ireland BEFORE the crash and thinking, hold on, this is meant to be one of the richest countries in the EU, with property prices like Monaco, something is very wrong. And it was.
Ireland shouldn't feel any richer than the average for the UK, because it isn't any richer than the average for the UK. And the average for the UK includes Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and lots of places where a one bedroom flat costs less than half a million pounds.
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
Absolutely, and hats off to them. I'm just reiterating the point that the stats which put Ireland in the top ten richest countries on earth, above the Nordics, Switzerland, America, are insane.
Talking of places *feeling* rich, here's a fascinating table of OECD regions (not countries)
I am surprised that someone with no apparent qualifications in art history or museums or design or curatorship can end up with one of the best jobs in the Museum world.
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
Stoke is a great betting heat, and one way that this is proved is that supporters of all parties are trying to make a case for one of the others, and saying it will be a disaster for them if they dont win!!!
Indeed, it is all pretty silly. For a start Stoke-on-Trent Central is demographically perhaps the worst Stoke seat for UKIP with significantly fewer older residents; much of it is student housing alongside Muslim enclaves. But apparently it's a must-win for UKIP...
I am surprised that someone with no apparent qualifications in art history or museums or design or curatorship can end up with one of the best jobs in the Museum world.
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
The old adage (but true) comes up; it's not what you know but whom you know.
@Moniker: I suspect the cost of living in Northern Ireland is a lot lower than in England, hence that article.
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
Ireland never *feels* rich to me, not in the way that Central London does, or most of Switzerland, or the Californian Coast, or parts of Tuscany, Provence, Bavaria or Singapore...
But going by the stats it should feel richer than Hong Kong!
At best (the affluent bits of Dublin, or the southern coast), it feels about as rich as Edinburgh, or the Devon riviera.
That's using my S K Tremayne "feels rich" Rich-o-Meter (patent pending), and it's served me well in the past. I remember visiting Ireland BEFORE the crash and thinking, hold on, this is meant to be one of the richest countries in the EU, with property prices like Monaco, something is very wrong. And it was.
Ireland shouldn't feel any richer than the average for the UK, because it isn't any richer than the average for the UK. And the average for the UK includes Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and lots of places where a one bedroom flat costs less than half a million pounds.
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
Absolutely, and hats off to them. I'm just reiterating the point that the stats which put Ireland in the top ten richest countries on earth, above the Nordics, Switzerland, America, are insane.
Talking of places *feeling* rich, here's a fascinating table of OECD regions (not countries)
@Moniker: I suspect the cost of living in Northern Ireland is a lot lower than in England, hence that article.
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
Ireland never *feels* rich to me, not in the way that Central London does, or most of Switzerland, or the Californian Coast, or parts of Tuscany, Provence, Bavaria or Singapore...
But going by the stats it should feel richer than Hong Kong!
At best (the affluent bits of Dublin, or the southern coast), it feels about as rich as Edinburgh, or the Devon riviera.
That's using my S K Tremayne "feels rich" Rich-o-Meter (patent pending), and it's served me well in the past. I remember visiting Ireland BEFORE the crash and thinking, hold on, this is meant to be one of the richest countries in the EU, with property prices like Monaco, something is very wrong. And it was.
Ireland shouldn't feel any richer than the average for the UK, because it isn't any richer than the average for the UK. And the average for the UK includes Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and lots of places where a one bedroom flat costs less than half a million pounds.
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
Absolutely, and hats off to them. I'm just reiterating the point that the stats which put Ireland in the top ten richest countries on earth, above the Nordics, Switzerland, America, are insane.
Talking of places *feeling* rich, here's a fascinating table of OECD regions (not countries)
I am surprised that someone with no apparent qualifications in art history or museums or design or curatorship can end up with one of the best jobs in the Museum world.
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
What struck me was no experience in management of large organizations or any kind of large budget?
I reckon either he will need a #2 who knows what they are doing... Or we will soon see one of the big 4 arriving and explaining what he should already know.
@Moniker: I suspect the cost of living in Northern Ireland is a lot lower than in England, hence that article.
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
Ireland never *feels* rich to me, not in the way that Central London does, or most of Switzerland, or the Californian Coast, or parts of Tuscany, Provence, Bavaria or Singapore...
But going by the stats it should feel richer than Hong Kong!
At best (the affluent bits of Dublin, or the southern coast), it feels about as rich as Edinburgh, or the Devon riviera.
That's using my S K Tremayne "feels rich" Rich-o-Meter (patent pending), and it's served me well in the past. I remember visiting Ireland BEFORE the crash and thinking, hold on, this is meant to be one of the richest countries in the EU, with property prices like Monaco, something is very wrong. And it was.
Ireland shouldn't feel any richer than the average for the UK, because it isn't any richer than the average for the UK. And the average for the UK includes Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and lots of places where a one bedroom flat costs less than half a million pounds.
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
Absolutely, and hats off to them. I'm just reiterating the point that the stats which put Ireland in the top ten richest countries on earth, above the Nordics, Switzerland, America, are insane.
Talking of places *feeling* rich, here's a fascinating table of OECD regions (not countries)
I am surprised that someone with no apparent qualifications in art history or museums or design or curatorship can end up with one of the best jobs in the Museum world.
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
What struck me was no experience in management of large organizations or any kind of large budget?
I reckon either he will need a #2 who knows what they are doing... Or we will soon see one of the big 4 arriving and explaining what he should already know.
His background is in academia and writing rather than management but there will be a separate chairman and board of trustees to assist him https://www.vam.ac.uk/info/trustees
I am surprised that someone with no apparent qualifications in art history or museums or design or curatorship can end up with one of the best jobs in the Museum world.
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
What struck me was no experience in management of large organizations or any kind of large budget?
I reckon either he will need a #2 who knows what they are doing... Or we will soon see one of the big 4 arriving and explaining what he should already know.
Presumably that is the full time job of the #2, whilst the #1 gets on with the important job of glad handing donors and people wanting to lend collections, and chatting up politicians and select committees about budgets. Rather like the difference between a minister and a permanent secretary
Comments
Ireland is richer per capita PPP than Australia and not far behind the USA. Perhaps we should join the Eurozone?
The £75,000 is based on medical care not 'hotel' care expenses. It is going to be difficult to separate them sometimes.
See the BBC are still plugging UKIP, they seem to be in denial about how badly they are currently polling. Looks like the Lib Dems will do well in both seats but I suspect Labour will put off the elections till May 4, thereby preventing hoardes of activists going because they will have their own local elections to deal with.
https://twitter.com/andyburnhammp/status/820243550478680065
Oh please Tristram !!
It seems to me to be a very sensible system. If I am really not very well then I get to see a quack (who has access to my medical history) quickly, and in such circumstances I am probably not fussed who I see. On the other hand, I have a couple of long term chronic conditions that need to be monitored regularly and for those I prefer to see the same chap who has been looking after me for ten years or so. However, I can plan such visits so the 14 day wait in not a problem.
I doubt the system cost a lot to set up, some IT and networking plus a bit of commonsense management issues to sort out. So there would appear to be plenty of scope for increasing timely access to GPs without increasing costs to any significant degree.
Long term though the NHS model of everything is free at the time of use is going to have to change. On many measures (e.g. cancer survival rates) we have worse outcomes than some (most?) of our continental neighbours, yet they seem to manage those better outcomes even though they work with some sort of co-payment/private insurance system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
Labour want Parliament to have a vote on choosing between whatever the government comes up with an a deal free exit to WTO... it's a view I suppose.
Most small service businesses now have online booking, delivery companies can tell me to within a few minutes when a package will arrive, and there is publicly available software that costs peanuts and is easy to setup...but loads of GP surgeries haven't got online booking and those that do, according to the CAB most apparently do bugger all to make service users aware / restrict heavily the slots that can be booked online.
It isn't (just) about the number of hours open, it is about also scheduling.
Funnily enough it seems to work. And this stuff is all built into the software. Basically businesses seem to manage to deal with this, even really small ones.
Re "proper authentication ", my GP has online booking and to get the log-in you have to be authauthenticated, so you can't just book out all the appointments. BUT, they restrict the online booking slot to only a few a day, which defeats the object of the exercise.
Free. At. Point. Of. Use.
Politically your suggestion will fail.
Will prob come to about £350m pw!
Well the time for her to get bowled out quickly is running out fast
She has been stuck on 0 for some time, needs to score a run soon.
'Go on Tessy, take a smash at it..'
Best mind the windows...
Ireland has a very high GDP. That is, if you look at the value of all production in Ireland, it is very high. However, the level of remittances from Ireland to other countries (i.e. corporates repatriating profits) means GNP is much lower.
Because of Ireland's super low corporate tax rates, there are lots of activities (like pharmaceutical manufatcuring) which take place there that employ few people and all the profits are then sent to companies in the UK, the US and Japan.
To see the average wealth of an Irisih family, you'd be better off looking at GNP per capita, PPP adjusted. Which is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(PPP)_per_capita
Ireland comes out a long way behind Switzerland and almost identical to the UK.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/news/border-towns-boom-time-as-southern-shoppers-flock-to-northern-ireland-35192961.html
The World Bank link I posted shows the PPP adjustments by country, and their methodology is - I believe - pretty sound.
I am familiar with how this dance goes, I spent several fruitless years a couple of decades ago working on IT solutions to reduce benefit fraud, and got basically nowhere for the same reasons. So would I, but again, political dynamite, left leaning politicians would be jumping up and down in seconds about how the rich are getting preferential access to the health system.
Now that it has to dal with thing s such as that, as well as our imported, massive population, it can no longer be done for free, so the answer is simple
a) Strip it back so it only does essentials (and is able to distinguish between deserving and undeserving)
b) Charge
http://tinyurl.com/ht865bb 23 acres €400 k.
"It was a free service to stop poor people dying unnecessarily"
What part of that didn't you get?
A&E's aren't under pressure at weekends in the evening because homeless people are out on the lash I'll give you a clue
A 'free service to stop poor people dying ...' sums up Medicare, part two of the two-tier US system. Only the destitute need apply. The US govt spends as much money on healthcare in the form of Medicare and Medicaid as the UK govt. spends.
In your aim to abolish the NHS and save money, you'll spend £ billions on extra red tape, like staff time finding out if the 'destitute' person has assets secretly stashed away.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/20/kent_nhs_data_loss/
It was promised in 2010 that within a few years it would be everywhere. Also, as I say it isn't even just not having the online system, CAB found that surgeries are doing a great job of not telling people when they have it and also making sure there are of only limited use by heavily restricting the slots available.
I can’t book more than one appointment any time, though, although I could, I suspect book one manually with the receptionist, and, as far as preceriptions are concerned, if I want anythjing much before it’s due, it’s refused and I have to visit the surgery and explain to the staff why I need it early...... usually because I’m off on holiday.
However I cam against making people pay per appointment. Many of the people who need to access their doctors are poor, and it's important for the poor to have as much access as the well-off. This is especially the case with immunisations, sexual health and other similar cases.
As someone who's not lived in the UK for a decade, this OOH system of care appears to have broken down completely, now everyone goes to A&E and is expected to be seen in a four hour window even when that's not appropriate.
If I'm sick and want to see a doctor, there needs to be an easy way to do so, and an appointment made. Personally I've not seen a doctor in two decades, so if I'm sick I don't care which doctor i see, but I can understand why those with complicated medical histories might want to see a specific GP who understands their history.
There needs to be a serious conversation involving all medical and political parties about the future of the NHS, probably a Royal Commission. It's abundantly clear that serious reform is needed which is currently politically impossible.
As far as requesting prescriptions too frequently is concerned, in my last couple of jobs I spent a lot of time trying to control over-requesting and over-prescribing, so while I get irritated now and then I can see the sense of it.
My only serious grumble is that the local CCG considers that people on regular medication should not take more than two weeks holiday at a time! When one goes off for a month every so often that can cause ‘discussion’!
Nevertheless, it has gone from being a lot poorer than the UK in the mid 1980s, to being about the same as us today. During a time when our exports have increased 6-fold, theirs have increased 30-fold. Productivity per hour worked has gone from 40% less than us, to 10% more than us. It has been an enormous success story, largely based around deregulation and low taxes.
If you look solely at "in store" prices, you are missing a massive number of things that come out of your pay packet first.
What would make sense is for a group of GP surgeries in an area to club together and buy a booking system between them, with options for visits to a specific doctor, a specific surgery or just any doctor in the town.
Fair enough as long as the patient gets paid by the NHS if they have to wait longer than 10 minutes beyond their allotted appointment time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending
I guess all those young graduates wanting jobs in museums and galleries will find it reassuring that you can get your foot through the door without prior experience.
I reckon either he will need a #2 who knows what they are doing... Or we will soon see one of the big 4 arriving and explaining what he should already know.
http://metro.co.uk/2015/11/18/how-does-your-salary-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-country-5511194/
(Maybe due to profits on their bad bank.)
https://www.vam.ac.uk/info/trustees