The NHS should really have it's own thread with what's being done to it by these Tory extremists, but as they claimed it was safe under their watch let's have a couple of other opinions, don't just take it from one who doesn't get NHS support for (not rich) elderly parents, or incidentally 2 months and counting a foot injury for me...

 

"Graham YES Linehan

‏

Verified account

 

@Glinner

12h12 hours ago

More

So when I was a bit woozy and grateful after my op today I told a nurse how much I loved the NHS and she smiled sadly and said “They’re killing it through the back door, though.” She sort of shrugged while she said it, like it was a done deal.

51 replies 130 retweets 437 likes

Reply 51 Retweet 130 Like 437 Direct message

 

Graham YES Linehan

‏

Verified account

 

@Glinner

12h12 hours ago

More

How could anyone support the Tories, knowing they’re working to destroy one of the UK’s treasures? And how could anyone think a Corbyn Brexit won’t also spell doom for it? #nhs #brexit"

 

or how about an ex-Tory PM?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/j...omment-75674379

 

Just to be clear, May's racist "targets" have meant much-needed doctors (around 1500) have not been allowed into the country meaning ever-more vacancies. Major says leaving Johnson & Gove in charge of the NHS is like leaving a python in charge of a hamster.

 

Well, he knows them better than I do, I bow to his judgement....

Want to know who's to blame for the money wasted in the NHS?

 

Thatcher. Yes still she still casts a very long shadow. One of my friends recently told me he worked on IT systems for the NHS back in the day, and all hospitals were united under one relatively cheap (if basic in those days) system. The finance system for all hospitals in one Region cost around 100k a year. Thatcher sold the IT units, and the Regions scrapped. The IT section my friend worked for was bought by AT&T who started selling packages to Trusts. One Oracle system was sold to one trust for 5 million. That's the staff running it for 100k for a whole region vs billions lost on IT since. Say thank you Margaret RIP. The Tories like to blame the staff forced to run Trusts they invented and pay for IT systems they sold off to rich foreign companies, and blame everyone and everything except their own uselessness.

 

Just saying.

Want to know who's to blame for the money wasted in the NHS?

 

Thatcher. Yes still she still casts a very long shadow. One of my friends recently told me he worked on IT systems for the NHS back in the day, and all hospitals were united under one relatively cheap (if basic in those days) system. The finance system for all hospitals in one Region cost around 100k a year. Thatcher sold the IT units, and the Regions scrapped. The IT section my friend worked for was bought by AT&T who started selling packages to Trusts. One Oracle system was sold to one trust for 5 million. That's the staff running it for 100k for a whole region vs billions lost on IT since. Say thank you Margaret RIP. The Tories like to blame the staff forced to run Trusts they invented and pay for IT systems they sold off to rich foreign companies, and blame everyone and everything except their own uselessness.

 

Just saying.

And, of course, the same is happening with so many NHS supplies. NHS trusts can't get the same sort of deal that the NHS could get working as a national organisation. Who'd have thought?

 

I suppose the same could apply to countries. Perhaps a group of countries, working together, could get a better trade deal than individual countries. If only there was some sort of club we could join to exploit this.

This has always baffled me about the English system. It’s so decentralised that it just seems like a giant waste of money. Like why are there more than 15 providers of healthcare in Greater Manchester alone. That’s lunacy. Each of these trusts needs their own IT, Finance, Procurement, HR, Middle management etc. we need much larger regional trusts that control all healthcare in the region from high level trauma centres down to your local community hospital.

 

Further to that, procurement should be done by NHS England. The power of buying for every hospital in England would save the NHS a fortune in purchasing power. They should mandate GP practice procurement through NHS England too allowing them to access better rates and standardising basics across the country. (Easier for staff training enhancing ability for staff to move through the system)

 

As I understand it, NHS Scotland handles procurement for the country and the trusts here are significantly larger. I think only NHS Highlands and NHS Fife have trusts that line up with LA boundaries.

And, of course, the same is happening with so many NHS supplies. NHS trusts can't get the same sort of deal that the NHS could get working as a national organisation. Who'd have thought?

 

I suppose the same could apply to countries. Perhaps a group of countries, working together, could get a better trade deal than individual countries. If only there was some sort of club we could join to exploit this.

 

Oh, very droll - but what if the membership fee is too high?

What if the membership fee was about 1% of all government spending but added significantly more value to our economy in terms of trade, prosperity, welfare and direct investment?

 

I'd say that membership fee was worth the cost.

 

 

Unless of course you're referring to the post-2004 expansion influx of migration? Although you couldn't be because you said you're not a racist and that's very much the racist answer. :thinking:

 

This video has the Scottish Tories having strokes and aneurysms up and down Scotland over it's alleged nationalistic content and how it's a Independence propaganda video and the Scottish Government shouldn't be funding this.

 

I can't even. Ross Thompson, aside being kinda f***able in a i'll-consensually-gag-you-and-hate-f***-you way, really takes the biscuit here.

 

 

http://www.thenational.scot/news/16276457...._ever_/?ref=nuo

 

(Excuse the National Link, unsurprisingly the Conservative Broadcasting Corporation haven't reported on this)

 

Link to the actual campaign site: https://onescotland.org/campaigns/we-are-scotland/

What if the membership fee was about 1% of all government spending but added significantly more value to our economy in terms of trade, prosperity, welfare and direct investment?

 

I'd say that membership fee was worth the cost.

Unless of course you're referring to the post-2004 expansion influx of migration? Although you couldn't be because you said you're not a racist and that's very much the racist answer. :thinking:

 

Quite correct - as I've said all along, political independence means more to me than economics.

Quite correct - as I've said all along, political independence means more to me than economics.

 

Good . Stop justifying it on economic grounds because there arent any. We were lied to. Illegally. Look forward to the cambridge Anal Lickita grilling and Aaron Banks.

Good . Stop justifying it on economic grounds because there arent any. We were lied to. Illegally.

 

Unfortunately, lying during an election campaign *isn't* illegal. :(

 

Even if it were, there's no way any prosecution could happen before the election took place, and it would obviously be too late then. Also, there's the impossibility of quantifying what effect falsehoods had on the result.

Edited June 11, 20187 yr by vidcapper

Unfortunately, lying during an election campaign *isn't* illegal. :(

 

Even if it were, there's no way any prosecution could happen before the election took place, and it would obviously be too late then. Also, there's the impossibility of quantifying what effect falsehoods had on the result.

 

As I keep saying, the Leave campaign is being investigated because it WAS illegal use of money and data. That is a crime. Therefore the only fair option, since nobody can say how much it influenced the campaign, is to allow the public (or at least Parliament who we elected) a final say on what happens. If the Tories fail to provide us with the promised fabulous deal it's the only logical response. Had it been 20 points clear then there would be no argument. As it was close, then as Farage claimed, it's not the end of the matter. Committing economic suicide on lies and corruption is not democracy. Voting on a final agreement written in black and white with no bullshit from either side would be true actual democracy in action.

As I keep saying, the Leave campaign is being investigated because it WAS illegal use of money and data. That is a crime. Therefore the only fair option, since nobody can say how much it influenced the campaign, is to allow the public (or at least Parliament who we elected) a final say on what happens.

 

While I have some sympathy for this pov, if the original result was suspect, then it is *that* that should be re-asked, rather than a different question.

 

While I have some sympathy for this pov, if the original result was suspect, then it is *that* that should be re-asked, rather than a different question.

 

At this stage that would be pointless. Better to vote on an actual deal (a repeat vote would be irrelevant because we will be getting the best deal we can regardless of what fantasy promises are made in another campaign and we can't exactly withdraw Article 50, then vote and potentially issue it again. The EU will quite rightly say "on yer bike you vote on the deal we have agreed or you bugger off into an economic self-made pit").

 

As I say, no Project Fear, no fantasy lies, no corruption, no Fake News and Farage can lie all he wants all the live-long day till he explodes in frustration. It's very simple. We will be offered the best deal we can get by the EU, agreed by the senior Brexiter people who told us we would get the best deal we can and it will be marvellous and easy and everyone will be rushing to buy our products and sell us stuff. People can judge whether they provided what they claimed and wish to accept it, or whether they feel short-changed and would prefer things to stay the same. By definition a Hard Brexit No-deal is worse than whatever they agree and that was never promised by anyone, they only used it as a threat against the EU.

 

Democracy in action and whatever is decided is the End Of The Matter, because there can be no improved deal and no more lies about Brexit on either side.

As I say, no Project Fear, no fantasy lies, no corruption, no Fake News and Farage can lie all he wants all the live-long day till he explodes in frustration. It's very simple. We will be offered the best deal we can get by the EU, agreed by the senior Brexiter people who told us we would get the best deal we can and it will be marvellous and easy and everyone will be rushing to buy our products and sell us stuff. People can judge whether they provided what they claimed and wish to accept it, or whether they feel short-changed and would prefer things to stay the same. By definition a Hard Brexit No-deal is worse than whatever they agree and that was never promised by anyone, they only used it as a threat against the EU.

 

But you're assuming that Leavers will be compelled to accept that 'any deal is better than no deal' - that doesn't seem like a safe assumption to me.

But you're assuming that Leavers will be compelled to accept that 'any deal is better than no deal' - that doesn't seem like a safe assumption to me.

 

That seems like insane logic to me.

 

You are presented with the best deal Brexiteers can come up with after 3 years of negotiations and the choice is the best deal they can come up with or the worst deal imaginable? EVEN BREXITERS can see that these obsessed individuals will come to the conclusion that if the best deal available is to leave with no deal then that is the one they will present to Parliament because otherwise they risk a fake rubbish deal getting through and they just wasted 3 years of their lives pretending to negotiate.

 

I mean, really? They promised us the best deal they can deliver - that's US the British People, not US the Hard Brexiters who want a Hard Brexit, who are not in the majority. If they think they are in the majority then we can test the theory in a final public vote on the deal agreed, then the Brexiters have a choice of going with the deal the people who promised a good deal have agreed or alternatively rejecting the deal they agreed with the EU and going with the Hard Brexit option if they have no faith in their own deal. They are in charge and it's their choice. Then the public gets a final say on the deal they choose to go with or we stay as we are.

 

Not difficult.

That seems like insane logic to me.

 

Well, not everyone is as rational as we are. :teresa:

 

You did notice I was speaking in the third person, there?

 

Well, not everyone is as rational as we are. :teresa:

 

You did notice I was speaking in the third person, there?

 

Rationality has nothing to do with Brexit. Emotion rules. So yes SOME people will no doubt feel betrayed, but in the scenario we live with it is totally impossible to not make some people who voted for Leave to feel betrayed because everyone had different ideas about what was being promised. So you ignore the irrational people, do the best deal available to reduce the damage long-term, and give the rational people an opportunity to express their views on it as well as those who are ruled by their emotions. The bullies crying that everyone knew what they were voting is a lie, and they just are using Brexit for their own purposes. Witness anyone making valid points getting branded hugely emotional terms like "Traitor" "Enemies Of The People" and other offensive bullshit.

 

Lest everyone has forgotten, and as you enjoy quoting recent statistics, around 49% of people who bothered to vote would also fall into the same categories. They are calling us all Enemies of the United Kingdom by implication because we have deep concerns that they are a bunch of clueless dishonest villains who will warp the British Constitution to get their own way at any cost.

Rationality has nothing to do with Brexit. Emotion rules. So yes SOME people will no doubt feel betrayed, but in the scenario we live with it is totally impossible to not make some people who voted for Leave to feel betrayed because everyone had different ideas about what was being promised. So you ignore the irrational people, do the best deal available to reduce the damage long-term, and give the rational people an opportunity to express their views on it as well as those who are ruled by their emotions. The bullies crying that everyone knew what they were voting is a lie, and they just are using Brexit for their own purposes. Witness anyone making valid points getting branded hugely emotional terms like "Traitor" "Enemies Of The People" and other offensive bullshit.

 

Or from the other side 'little Englander', 'Xenophobe' etc.

 

Lest everyone has forgotten, and as you enjoy quoting recent statistics, around 49% of people who bothered to vote would also fall into the same categories. They are calling us all Enemies of the United Kingdom by implication because we have deep concerns that they are a bunch of clueless dishonest villains who will warp the British Constitution to get their own way at any cost.

 

Are you talking of specific powerful individuals, or Leavers in general?

Or from the other side 'little Englander', 'Xenophobe' etc.

Are you talking of specific powerful individuals, or Leavers in general?

 

I'm talking about the hugely powerful propaganda press and anyone posting offensive bullying propaganda online or on local newspapers comment columns, of which there are endless ongoing examples on a daily basis.

 

I'm not aware of any newspapers, and not much in the way of online comments slagging off people who voted Leave in comparison to the rabid Brexiters, fired up deliberately during the referendum by the rich and powerful, much more rational, but feel free to post some links.

 

PS "Little Englander" is quite a minor insult compared to "traitor", especially when one comment is largely correct and one comment is largely a complete lie, when one examines the dictionary meanings......

 

"Xenophobe" is certainly ticked in the boxes of the immigrant-hating, Aid-hating, EU-hating headlines in some sections of the press. It also certainly applies to some people, not least those beating up immigrants, parading nazi paraphernalia in front of Parliament this weekend (hilariously caught up in the middle of Naked Bike riders, they had no idea where to look there were so many dicks on display. And also the bike riders), or the odd extremist murdering the odd rational MP or non-white shopkeeper...

 

Now show me Leavers going out attacking people, murdering Brexiters, campaigning to destroy democracy etc etc.

 

My previous comments about knee-jerk reactions sort of trying to justify the unjustifiable by trying to make the other side of an argument look as bad still apply. There is no comparison. One side largely believes in democracy and fairness, one side at least in substantial part has problems with that concept and lies about and bullies those who do.

I don't understand the Brexiter sound and fury when called Little Englander,yet they have papers blaring out headlines of traitor, remoaner, etc, as if we aren't 50% of the electorate! Tactics Geobbels would be proud of.

 

Little Englander is a reply to remoaner.

 

It is nowhere near the same level as being called a traitor, as the extremist right keeps calling us for having a different opinion.