A political thread 😱 🙈 🙉 | Page 20 | Vital Football

A political thread 😱 🙈 🙉

The NHS is publicly funded, so we have the absolute right to question what happens to our £250m a day. I would like to know why it employs 1 million people, and yet only 300,000 are in positions where they have contact with patients.

Of course you have to have support and logistics and estates an all those other things, but the question would be, 'Is the NHS top heavy with jobs that don't actually do anything for patient care.' You know how it works. You give health and safety to Brian to manage and in the wink of an eye, its a department of 50 and Brian is on £80k a year, trying desperately to find risks that need managing, so they can stay on the gravy train. Ditto, Diversity,

I want the NHS to tell us how much money they need to meet their obligations fully, rather than us finding an extra £100m or £500m to shove into the bottom bucket.
 
The NHS is publicly funded, so we have the absolute right to question what happens to our £250m a day. I would like to know why it employs 1 million people, and yet only 300,000 are in positions where they have contact with patients.

Of course you have to have support and logistics and estates an all those other things, but the question would be, 'Is the NHS top heavy with jobs that don't actually do anything for patient care.' You know how it works. You give health and safety to Brian to manage and in the wink of an eye, its a department of 50 and Brian is on £80k a year, trying desperately to find risks that need managing, so they can stay on the gravy train. Ditto, Diversity,

I want the NHS to tell us how much money they need to meet their obligations fully, rather than us finding an extra £100m or £500m to shove into the bottom bucket.
Too true FKB.
Problem is that, whoever analyses the set up to make it patient focused and effective, will have, or be judged as having, 'an agenda' so will be rubbished by the ones who sufffer from the analysis.

Any logical 'efficency' saving is seen as a form of privatisation as savings in supply chains and job cuts produce the knee jerk squeal of 'privatisation' by Labour- even though private companies are more often more efficient than state run organisations. What Liebour means by 'privatisation' is 'paid for by the consumer ' and, to me, at some point, some form of payment has to be brought in to carry on providing the ever increasing range and length of services available.

You need someone who the public trusts and respects - a David Attenborough type figure( Chris Whitty??) - to produce and implement the report and that will take years so, maybe, a change of government would scupper that method.

That's the other problem though, it's too big for polarised politics.

The NHS should be funded bythe taxpayer but taken out of the political sphere but that's easier to say than it is to do.
 
Too true FKB.
Problem is that, whoever analyses the set up to make it patient focused and effective, will have, or be judged as having, 'an agenda' so will be rubbished by the ones who sufffer from the analysis.

Any logical 'efficency' saving is seen as a form of privatisation as savings in supply chains and job cuts produce the knee jerk squeal of 'privatisation' by Labour- even though private companies are more often more efficient than state run organisations. What Liebour means by 'privatisation' is 'paid for by the consumer ' and, to me, at some point, some form of payment has to be brought in to carry on providing the ever increasing range and length of services available.

You need someone who the public trusts and respects - a David Attenborough type figure( Chris Whitty??) - to produce and implement the report and that will take years so, maybe, a change of government would scupper that method.

That's the other problem though, it's too big for polarised politics.

The NHS should be funded bythe taxpayer but taken out of the political sphere but that's easier to say than it is to do.
I agree tha the NHS is too improtant and should be under separate control.
And this means the Labour party only has rail nationalisation in it's quiver of
policies Just like 1948 but at least rationing is over in our modern world.
 
I agree tha the NHS is too improtant and should be under separate control.
And this means the Labour party only has rail nationalisation in it's quiver of
policies Just like 1948 but at least rationing is over in our modern world.
Don’t forget Royal Mail they want to privatise that again which I’m all for but not enough to vote for the loonies the trade off is too great atm
 
Don’t forget Royal Mail they want to privatise that again which I’m all for but not enough to vote for the loonies the trade off is too great atm
When I worked in a bank and was a Labour supporter I remember the call for nationalised banking. But they realised they would have trouble making it work.
 
When I worked in a bank and was a Labour supporter I remember the call for nationalised banking. But they realised they would have trouble making it work.
Privatisation works in many sectors eg gas, electric, telecoms as they have to provide a service not just a product and choice breeds competition which has to have a value for money element.

When you have a monopoly there is no competition, no need to provide, or even look at providing, better service. When the government of the day is happy to keep supporting that monopoly particularly to enforce it's ideology , at the taxpayers cost of course, then you end up with mediocrity, end user dissatisfaction but no choice to change to a different supplier.

Imagine if we all had to have Briish Telecom( or whatever the old name was- GPO??) 'phones. They'd still be the size of house bricks and there'd be no such things as social media, internet banking, online shopping etc etc because no one would have needed to develop them.

That's what monopoly brings-no invention, ne new thinking, just the base of a utilitarin service that, if it broke down, might get sorted within 3 months.

That's why the NHS needs to look at privatisation for service provision, procurement efficiencies and best practise from competitive operations and companies that will help control costs whilst ensuring money is not wasted.

In many cases it does outsource and I, for one, am glad of that. Both my cataract ops were done in private clinics with spare capacity and within weeks of diagnosis- not years.That's an example of public/private cooperation delivering a cost effective, timely service with excellent care standards.

Without that partnership I could well have waited months or years,not weeks, with deteriorating sight.
Still, the ideologists would have been happy albeit (as I might have been without the partnership) as short sighted and blinkered as their outdated, knee jerk thinking.
 
Well I can honestly say privatisation has had a detrimental effect on the service we provide yes we’re a leaner machine and it needed to be but the service should come first not the pound profit
It does depend on the product Bully. Gas is gas is gas so no difference who you get it from

From the days of being an essential service- when there was little choice -you are now one of so many other options- email, text etc so not only do you have a declining market but you can't match the speed and convenience of the newer methods.
To be viable the cost per delivery, per item, from private household to private recipient, would have to be astronomical hence the proliferation of direct mail distribution which seems to me to be the service the RM has become.Even that is becoming an outdated way of communicating when you only have to look at one online ad for eg windows and you're bombarded with links on all devices you own.

Ultimately I reckon the nationwide service will become obsolete and private delivery will be added to the range of products available from Amazon/Ebay etc.
 
It does depend on the product Bully. Gas is gas is gas so no difference who you get it from

From the days of being an essential service- when there was little choice -you are now one of so many other options- email, text etc so not only do you have a declining market but you can't match the speed and convenience of the newer methods.
To be viable the cost per delivery, per item, from private household to private recipient, would have to be astronomical hence the proliferation of direct mail distribution which seems to me to be the service the RM has become.Even that is becoming an outdated way of communicating when you only have to look at one online ad for eg windows and you're bombarded with links on all devices you own.

Ultimately I reckon the nationwide service will become obsolete and private delivery will be added to the range of products available from Amazon/Ebay etc.
The thing is all our competitors don’t have the infrastructure they are closing slowly but they will never equal it as it’s not financially viable we are bound by the uso which means we have to deliver where ever in the uk 6 days a week next day or as soon as possible
 
The thing is all our competitors don’t have the infrastructure they are closing slowly but they will never equal it as it’s not financially viable we are bound by the uso which means we have to deliver where ever in the uk 6 days a week next day or as soon as possible
That's where the gov't has to make a decision Bully.

Is the USO needed or more pertinently, worth the cost? Does it need to be 6 days? If abolished would the outcry have such a great political cost is probably the real question.

Take out Christmas and birthdays and the average individual won't use the service more than 5 times a year I guess but the outcry, the sentiment and nostalgia surrounding such events, would be deafening.

Tell the public Charles 2nd was a slave trader and it could be gone by next week!!!
 
That's where the gov't has to make a decision Bully.

Is the USO needed or more pertinently, worth the cost? Does it need to be 6 days? If abolished would the outcry have such a great political cost is probably the real question.

Take out Christmas and birthdays and the average individual won't use the service more than 5 times a year I guess but the outcry, the sentiment and nostalgia surrounding such events, would be deafening.

Tell the public Charles 2nd was a slave trader and it could be gone by next week!!!
Not the way it’s going some parts of the business that deal with the public are already working sundays the union is resisting to an extent but when Amazon and other competitors deliver on sundays what option do they have 🤷‍♂️
 
Not the way it’s going some parts of the business that deal with the public are already working sundays the union is resisting to an extent but when Amazon and other competitors deliver on sundays what option do they have 🤷‍♂️
That's the dilemna I suppose. Adapt & match, or better, the competition service or become extinct.
 
That's the dilemna I suppose. Adapt & match, or better, the competition service or become extinct.
TT, my old company was the first to intrduce next day delivery and when we first
decided to go that route we had a meeting to discuss the ins and outs. One bloke was insistant than if he wanted a delivery tomorrow then I would have ordered it yesterday. Daft as it sounds no one disagreed as delivery was free but the charge
for next day was to be £2.00. Next day was never more then 8% of deliveries.
These days I use Amazon and will not pay a delivery charge even if I have to wait.
 
TT, my old company was the first to intrduce next day delivery and when we first
decided to go that route we had a meeting to discuss the ins and outs. One bloke was insistant than if he wanted a delivery tomorrow then I would have ordered it yesterday. Daft as it sounds no one disagreed as delivery was free but the charge
for next day was to be £2.00. Next day was never more then 8% of deliveries.
These days I use Amazon and will not pay a delivery charge even if I have to wait.
I suppose that's how things have moved on Chips. Next day seems almost instant to our generation but those who have grown up with it see it as an imposition.

Today's consumer wants orders fulfilled virtually as they are placed. Just look at meal deliveries to your door within an hour of ordering and now groceries within 20 minutes.
 
I suppose that's how things have moved on Chips. Next day seems almost instant to our generation but those who have grown up with it see it as an imposition.

Today's consumer wants orders fulfilled virtually as they are placed. Just look at meal deliveries to your door within an hour of ordering and now groceries within 20 minutes.

The same people who hate capitalism...:rolleyes::rolleyes: