TTIP

[peteblue]

Basically, there are secret negotiations going on which may well allow American companies to have more political power in our own land than we do. It is massively undemocratic, not in the common man's interests and all rather sinister.

There. You're up to speed, now.

And it's being negotiated by the EU on your behalf, so no matter what you want you're going to get it anyway.......

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Those in favour of TTIP always said that it would not mean the NHS would be up for grabs by US health companies. They constantly said 'trust us' while they negotiated behind closed doors. Every time there was some sort of exposure about how TTIP would see the NHS fully privatised with a health insurance policy they said

What on earth? You say about scare mongering but it's hard to say anything else when such statements are made. A treaty saying "if you put something out to tender, there should be no barrier over who can submit a tender (but there is no obligation on you to choose anyone)" has absolutely nothing to do with full privatisation.

I mean do you even know what you're saying? Are you suggesting that if an American company (or frankly any company) has developed a way to improve health that is better than what we currently have/do, that they should be ignored on account of being both a company and American? It's absurd.

The level of debate around this has reached rock bottom. Did you know, for instance, that the Netherlands also have health insurance? Why does no one ever complain about having a Dutch style system forced upon us? I mean goodness, one of those horrible Dutch companies is working already in the Scottish NHS and is starting a trial at a trust in London (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-33259198).

Where was the cry about Dutch style privatisation of the beloved NHS? It's utter bloody nonsense, and scaremongering sums it up quite nicely.

 

[orchard]

Those in favour of TTIP always said that it would not mean the NHS would be up for grabs by US health companies. They constantly said 'trust us' while they negotiated behind closed doors. Every time there was some sort of exposure about how TTIP would see the NHS fully privatised with a health insurance policy they said, 'the NHS will not be up for grabs. A US style health service will not happen. It's scaremongering. The NHS will always be free at the point of delivery' etc.etc. etc..

It has took the political civil war in the Tory party to fully expose what TTIP would mean for the NHS. Those wanting to leave the EU broke rank and used the NHS to try and gain ground on those that want to remain. They blew the cover of what TTIP would really mean for the NHS. Some even did a 180% U-turn and declared that TTIP would be the 'worse thing to happen to the UK since the second world war. A national health crisis would emerge on an unprecedented scale'. Even though, they were in favour of TTIP last year, they are now solidly 'fundamentally' against.

This has forced the government to declare that there would be an 'amendment' to the Queens speech and add a Bill that would 'protect the NHS'.

"Lilley said: “I support free trade. But TTIP introduces special courts, which are not necessary for free trade, will give American multinationals the right to sue our government (but not vice versa) and could put our NHS at risk. I cannot understand why the government has not tried to exclude the NHS.”

It is a wonder that Lilley is not accused of being a 'scare monger,' an accusation slung at those who have been against TTIP for ages.

TTIP is far from being dead in the water. As a result the 'protection' of the NHS from being fully privatised by a Bill is ludicrous. The aim of Cameron/Osborne on one side and Johnson/Gove/Duncan Smith on the other, has always been a fully privatised health service - a shift of taxpayers money away from the state and into private hands. The French got their film industry protected by insisting that exclusions be inserted in any document. The exclusion of the NHS is not included in any document, and unlikely at this late stage to be.

To save his political bacon Cameron is attempting to hoodwink people. On the NHS and TTIP the horse has already bolted and the US health companies will not allow the NHS billions not to be up for grabs.

If the UK leaves the EU and tries to negotiate a separate trade deal with the US, the NHS billions will be included.

This

 

[hullefc]

What on earth? You say about scare mongering but it's hard to say anything else when such statements are made. A treaty saying "if you put something out to tender, there should be no barrier over who can submit a tender (but there is no obligation on you to choose anyone)" has absolutely nothing to do with full privatisation.

I mean do you even know what you're saying? Are you suggesting that if an American company (or frankly any company) has developed a way to improve health that is better than what we currently have/do, that they should be ignored on account of being both a company and American? It's absurd.

The level of debate around this has reached rock bottom. Did you know, for instance, that the Netherlands also have health insurance? Why does no one ever complain about having a Dutch style system forced upon us? I mean goodness, one of those horrible Dutch companies is working already in the Scottish NHS and is starting a trial at a trust in London (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-33259198).

Where was the cry about Dutch style privatisation of the beloved NHS? It's utter bloody nonsense, and scaremongering sums it up quite nicely.

Unfortunately, you should change the record. It is not about 'improving health' it is about getting their hands on the billions in the UK health care budget. Improving 'health' of Americans isn't the priority of US health companies as it would not be in the UK.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Unfortunately, you should change the record. It is not about 'improving health' it is about getting their hands on the billions in the UK health care budget. Improving 'health' of Americans isn't the priority of US health companies as it would not be in the UK.

What an absurd comment to make. There is an incredible amount of innovation taking place in healthcare right now, and the notion that the NHS should ignore any of it that's either not done by NHS researchers or even by British companies is utterly absurd, not to mention incredibly dangerous for patients.

 

[Clint Planet]

Bruce, you're pretty much on your own on this one. Even certain Tory MPs see TTIP as a threat to the NHS and, given American trade agreements in the past and how they've opened up markets for the big boys to move in, under-cut the local option and drive them out of business, I think your "fingers crossed they'll be nice" stance seems a tad naive.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Bruce, you're pretty much on your own on this one. Even certain Tory MPs see TTIP as a threat to the NHS and, given American trade agreements in the past and how they've opened up markets for the big boys to move in, under-cut the local option and drive them out of business, I think your "fingers crossed they'll be nice" stance seems a tad naive.

Not really bothered to be honest as I'm fairly confident in my knowledge of both how healthcare is changing more widely, and what the NHS is trying to do to cope with that. I would wager that my opinions are based upon a lot more facts than those of the Tory MPs, much less those on here.

What's more, I've also spoken at length recently with the EC commissioners for this kind of thing, and they aren't the incompetent bogeymen you're suggesting.

So yes, I'll stick to thinking there's a whole load of twaddle being said and written about this that marely reflects the underlying agenda of those doing the talking. I mean if you're happy to overlook that the Tory MPs bashing TTIP are Eurosceptic and therefore using the 'national religion' as a convenient weapon to push their leave agenda, just because they share your opinion on TTIP is pretty naive itself.

 

[Clint Planet]

Ha ha ha! You angry, boy!

Have you watched Life and Debt, yet, by the way? It really is an eye opener with regard to American trade agreement practice.

 

[neil999]

Not really bothered to be honest as I'm fairly confident in my knowledge of both how healthcare is changing more widely, and what the NHS is trying to do to cope with that. I would wager that my opinions are based upon a lot more facts than those of the Tory MPs, much less those on here.

What's more, I've also spoken at length recently with the EC commissioners for this kind of thing, and they aren't the incompetent bogeymen you're suggesting.

So yes, I'll stick to thinking there's a whole load of twaddle being said and written about this that marely reflects the underlying agenda of those doing the talking. I mean if you're happy to overlook that the Tory MPs bashing TTIP are Eurosceptic and therefore using the 'national religion' as a convenient weapon to push their leave agenda, just because they share your opinion on TTIP is pretty naive itself.

Alright clever cloggs, you cant be using facts in your argument!

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Ha ha ha! You angry, boy!

Have you watched Life and Debt, yet, by the way? It really is an eye opener with regard to American trade agreement practice.

Yeah it bugs me because I know how important healthcare is and it's ballsed up by it being so politicised.

 

[Clint Planet]

Yeah it bugs me because I know how important healthcare is and it's ballsed up by it being so politicised.

Same with education.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Same with education.

Anything that they touch really.

 

[hullefc]

What an absurd comment to make. There is an incredible amount of innovation taking place in healthcare right now, and the notion that the NHS should ignore any of it that's either not done by NHS researchers or even by British companies is utterly absurd, not to mention incredibly dangerous for patients.

Unfortunately, you have completely missed the point yet again about US health care companies. They are in the game for one reason only to make money. They see the billions slushing around the UK in health care and want a piece of the action. The other area US corporation want a slice of the action is in agriculture, particularly GM foods.

It doesn't matter how much 'innovation in health care' there is in the US, if you can't afford it then 'tough luck'. That is the starting point not to 'improve health' of US citizens per se but for those that can afford it. Which will be the same in the UK if TTIP comes into force and the NHS will become fully privatised. And no amount of twaddle will alter that. And no amount of twaddle will alter the push towards a fully privatised NHS if the likes of Johnson/Gove/Duncan Smith get to negotiate a US/UK trade agreement.

Expediency has become the order of the day for US health companies who are getting agitated at the stalled negotiations. Time is money.

You need to separate the issues a bit more and not be so blinkered with your wishful think, that all will be alright on the night if only we put faith in health care companies whether that be US or UK or European. Health has always been politicised and will continue to be so.

 

[tsubaki]

It doesn't matter how much 'innovation in health care' there is in the US, if you can't afford it then 'tough luck'. That is the starting point not to 'improve health' of US citizens per se but for those that can afford it. Which will be the same in the UK if TTIP comes into force and the NHS will become fully privatised. And no amount of twaddle will alter that. And no amount of twaddle will alter the push towards a fully privatised NHS if the likes of Johnson/Gove/Duncan Smith get to negotiate a US/UK trade agreement.

It is a bit of a myth that the US system is "fully privatized"; the US government actually pays out (just in terms of Medicare / Medicaid) nearly a third as much more per person as our government does for the entire NHS, and when you take into account the total of what is spent on healthcare over there (insurance costs, out-of-pocket expenses etc) it ends up being more than four times as much.

Bruce is right that it is being politicized - but that is largely because of the efforts by the healthcare industry, lobbyists and their pet politicians to make it so. If they hadn't, the US would have a better, more comprehensive and far cheaper healthcare system and the NHS would have been spared the disasters of PFI, the IT contract of the early 2000s, the almost as bad ISTC contract, the ongoing bullying of whistle-blowers and now the lunatic fight with the junior doctors.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Well again, I'm afraid you're wrong. For instance, the Mayo Clinic are a non-profit organisation, yet one of the most respected in the world. Likewise, many of the teaching hospitals in America, such as the Massachusetts General Hospital are also non-profit, with much of their work funded by the endowments of the universities attached to them. MGH, for instance, are the largest research hospital in the world. I'm sure they've got nothing they can offer the NHS though.

It's wholly possible, and eminantly sensible, to maintain the ethos of the NHS in being a service that is available to all and free at the point of care, whilst ensuring that delivery is done by whomever is best placed to do so. At the moment, there is so much happening in healthcare that the NHS is having the devils own job in keeping up, and it's struggling largely because of the sheer size of it. It's resulting in a huge fragmentation of service as some trusts do ok whilst others lag behind (and vice versa in other areas). The 'dissemination of excellence' is a massive issue for the service, and this is only likely to get worse.

The challenge is how to better integrate the abilities of the world not to put up the barriers.