Current Affairs 2017 General Election

[hullefc]

View attachment 36439

'Prime Minister, 'what is a mugwump'? 'We need strong and stable government'. 'Yes Prime Minister, but what is a mugwump? 'We need strong and stable government'. 'I understand that Prime Minister, but what is a wugwump? 'As I've said, we need strong and stable government'.

The more and more Theresa - she's not for answering a direct question - May is brought into the political arena, the more and more she sounds like an imbecile.

 

[JonS]

'Prime Minister, 'what is a mugwump'? 'We need strong and stable government'. 'Yes Prime Minister, but what is a mugwump? 'We need strong and stable government'. 'I understand that Prime Minister, but what is a wugwump? 'As I've said, we need strong and stable government'.

The more and more Theresa - she's not for answering a direct question - May is brought into the political arena, the more and more she sounds like an imbecile.

http://belltoons.co.uk/bellworks/index.php/if/2017/7678-260417_61_STRONGER

 

[gonetomorrow]

I am coming round to the conclusion that Mrs May is a WITCH!!!

BURN HER!!!

 

[Tubey]

If I were Corbyn - given May has basically advocated there the policy that poorer people should have fewer human rights - I'd go massive on that, because it's a disgusting response from the PM.

He won't though.

 

[peteblue]

Come on mate. You seem as knowledgeable as anyone on politics but your stance on the NHS is simply wrong. You mention your local NHS is fine and all things are merry, do you think this represents the whole country? Of course not. Do some research, read some articles/stories from people who experience it daily, watch the ITV insight programme on the problems..

Whatever your opinion is on Corbyn you've got to realise something has to be done about the NHS. Even if the funding improved only a few places that need it most, it's still better than nothing.

Here is a start for you (plus it has the famous "strong and stable leadership" in there somewhere) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39711133

That's why I was asking Clint to tell me where the picture was taken. There is always the call for 'more investment' but into what ? New hospitals, better equipment, more staff, better practices, pre hospital care, post hospital care, better medicines, etc etc. But has anyone actually articulated what the real problems are as opposed to saying the answer is to give more money to NHS workers and recruit more staff. Why does anyone believe that a pay packet will improve the service. Why does anyone believe that recruiting even more staff, which staff by the way and at which point in the NHS chain, will help to speed up the process. It's a joke, a complete farce. Corbyn like most politicians just wants to be seen throwing money at a problem, specifically to the voting elements of the NHS, more pay, more people, without once trying to understand where the actual problems are today or will be tomorrow. When someone finally says we are going to review the complete system, redesign the NHS with no sacred cows then we may have a serious debate and finally put the issue right. The hysteria needs to be taken away from this issue. Large Industrial companies know how to address process issues but there would be political uproar and marching nurses if anyone ever had the guts to look to put it right.....

 

[peteblue]

Earlier this year the House of Lords published a cross-party exploration of how the NHS can adapt to the changing times, and it was admitted that if they were to design a health system from fresh that's fit for modern times, the NHS would not be what they design. I'm not sure that politicizing it as heavily as it is helps matters one bit.

Only just seen this, spot on.......

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Only just seen this, spot on.......

It's a significant problem, as whilst we might want something more fit for today, we have to be realistic and deal with what we have. I know you've been in senior positions so can appreciate the slack/resource required to simultaneously change whilst maintaining business as usual. The NHS has no slack really, and the need to change is getting ever bigger.

I was speaking to a few people from the industry last night about this, and the only way I can really see it working is if the huge amount of preventative stuff that's being developed goes direct to the patient, and the NHS manage to figure out a way to integrate the data from it all so that GPs et al are both aware of what we're doing to stay well/manage chronic conditions, and can step in if required, but that inevitably creates a two tiered system with those that have the means and the motivation to invest in these things on one level, and those without on another.

What I think everyone really accepts is that this isn't something that a bit of money will fix. It goes deeper than that.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

View attachment 36439

I'm reminded of Ben Elton's routine about a Tory Minister trying to order a drink in a pub

"Of course I want a Gin and Tonic, I've always wanted a Gin and Tonic and I've never deviated from my policy of wanting a Gin and Tonic. No, no, no, no, you have asked the question and you will do me the courtesy of listening to fullness of my answer, quite frankly I expect the Labour party will soon be wanting a Gin and Tonic, haw haw haw!

Of course I want Ice and Lemon, I've always wanted Ice and Lemon, I'm sure the Labour Party will soon be demanding Ice and Lemon, haw haw haw...."

 

[tsubaki]

That's why I was asking Clint to tell me where the picture was taken. There is always the call for 'more investment' but into what ? New hospitals, better equipment, more staff, better practices, pre hospital care, post hospital care, better medicines, etc etc. But has anyone actually articulated what the real problems are as opposed to saying the answer is to give more money to NHS workers and recruit more staff. Why does anyone believe that a pay packet will improve the service. Why does anyone believe that recruiting even more staff, which staff by the way and at which point in the NHS chain, will help to speed up the process. It's a joke, a complete farce. Corbyn like most politicians just wants to be seen throwing money at a problem, specifically to the voting elements of the NHS, more pay, more people, without once trying to understand where the actual problems are today or will be tomorrow. When someone finally says we are going to review the complete system, redesign the NHS with no sacred cows then we may have a serious debate and finally put the issue right. The hysteria needs to be taken away from this issue. Large Industrial companies know how to address process issues but there would be political uproar and marching nurses if anyone ever had the guts to look to put it right.....

I don't think that there would be - if there really was an honest and open debate, without sacred cows being present, about the future of the NHS and what sort of healthcare system we are going to need to have for the next fifty to a hundred years.

Of course we will never have that debate, but not because of marching nurses and doctors - we will never have it because of the severe financial impact it would have on all manner of individuals and firms who are making a fortune out of the system as it exists now. In many ways its like the situation in the US, where all parties claim to want to reform the healthcare system to reduce costs (to the state as well as the individual) - but nothing is ever achieved because of the amount of money everyone involved would lose in the event of real reform to medicare / medicaid, or having an honest health insurance system (that didn't charge fathers for holding their baby, for instance).

Also just as an aside, there is every chance that recruiting more staff - and retaining those already in the NHS - could actually reduce costs, at least up to a certain level - the NHS paid out north of £3 billion in 2016 on agency cover.

 

[peteblue]

I don't think that there would be - if there really was an honest and open debate, without sacred cows being present, about the future of the NHS and what sort of healthcare system we are going to need to have for the next fifty to a hundred years.

Of course we will never have that debate, but not because of marching nurses and doctors - we will never have it because of the severe financial impact it would have on all manner of individuals and firms who are making a fortune out of the system as it exists now. In many ways its like the situation in the US, where all parties claim to want to reform the healthcare system to reduce costs (to the state as well as the individual) - but nothing is ever achieved because of the amount of money everyone involved would lose in the event of real reform to medicare / medicaid, or having an honest health insurance system (that didn't charge fathers for holding their baby, for instance).

Also just as an aside, there is every chance that recruiting more staff - and retaining those already in the NHS - could actually reduce costs, at least up to a certain level - the NHS paid out north of £3 billion in 2016 on agency cover.

Perhaps, but regarding the photo that Clint put up, would an apparent lack of room for beds be answered by paying staff more money, or would having more staff mean that the beds were not in a corridor, or would having additional wards solve the problem....

We still need to work out a plan for the future, what 'good' looks like, then plan to transfer/adjust/amend what we have today into what we really want. Even starting today it will take several years to determine what 'good' would look like and another two or three decades to move towards it. One thing is certain though, just carrying on what happens today with ever more money and playing politics will not solve the problems.......

 

[dandydan]

Anti democracy, working class hating, rabble rouser is a rape enabler. What a surprise!

 

[tsubaki]

Perhaps, but regarding the photo that Clint put up, would an apparent lack of room for beds be answered by paying staff more money, or would having more staff mean that the beds were not in a corridor, or would having additional wards solve the problem....

We still need to work out a plan for the future, what 'good' looks like, then plan to transfer/adjust/amend what we have today into what we really want. Even starting today it will take several years to determine what 'good' would look like and another two or three decades to move towards it. One thing is certain though, just carrying on what happens today with ever more money and playing politics will not solve the problems.......

I agree, and your earlier idea about an up-front tax to pay for it would be a decent one provided the state has an appropriate level of control over spending the money raised. We do desperately need an honest look at what it is we want the health service to do.

 

[DanEFC92]

 

[Clint Planet]

God, that is pathetic.

 

[Clint Planet]