O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[OP67]

Are you saying that we have enough doctors and nurses and there is no, actual reason that waiting lists are so long or why ambulances have to stack up for hours at a time outside A+E? Are you saying it's simply, badly run and that we don't need more hospitals for the massively increased, population, schools and prisons also?

The infrastructure is in place for a population of 50-60 million, we have nearer 70 million, the maths don't add up

I'm not saying we don't but the amount of wasted money in the NHS is ridiculous and could be better spent on more doctors and nurses. More money just leads to more wasted money at the moment. The NHS needs massive reform not billions and billions thrown away at it each year!

[Elite_Pie]

Remember it was the older generation that voted brexit and it's them that are being hardest hit at present.

Remember that a fair few of them won't be here to vote at the next election, they'll be replaced by today's 14-18 year olds.

[jackal2]

I'm not saying we don't but the amount of wasted money in the NHS is ridiculous and could be better spent on more doctors and nurses. More money just leads to more wasted money at the moment. The NHS needs massive reform not billions and billions thrown away at it each year!

True. And if you can get to a situation where the existing money is spent more efficiently and produces the right outcomes for patients, then you'll have a more accurate picture of which areas are genuinely under-resourced and which areas are/were just badly run, which in turn means you can allocate 'new' money to the right places.

I don't often find myself saying positive things about Labour politicians, but a lot of what I've heard from Wes Streeting regarding NHS reform makes sense. The question is whether he means it sincerely, and whether he's prepared for the inevitable battle if he's genuine about trying to make it happen.

Whether it's health, or social care, any criticism or attempt at reform is usually met by the "How could you nasty people possibly queston this service? We're caring people doing good things!" narrative. Of course some parts of these services really are populated by caring people doing wonderful things, but the "protect our public services" line is also used as a shield to hide a lot of poor and self-indulgent practice, and to manipulate the more gullible elements of public opinion into not asking more questions.

The big problem with public sector services is that people have to pay for them whether they're getting a good service or not, so there's always the temptation for some working in those services to conclude that outcomes for customers don't really matter that much because they will get paid anyway. What's needed is the ability to identify and get rid of the bad eggs far more quickly, which sends a sharp message, and then the truly public service-oriented people - those attracted to the sector for all the right reasons - will thrive.

I've got no doubts that if we ever get to a situation where (e.g.) the NHS is operating at its most efficient and the gravy train element have been swept away, its potential is phenomenal.

[BigFatPie]

Happy Christmas Kelsdyke!!

https://x.com/bbcbreaking/status/187...615048060?s=46

[BigFatPie]

True. And if you can get to a situation where the existing money is spent more efficiently and produces the right outcomes for patients, then you'll have a more accurate picture of which areas are genuinely under-resourced and which areas are/were just badly run, which in turn means you can allocate 'new' money to the right places.

I don't often find myself saying positive things about Labour politicians, but a lot of what I've heard from Wes Streeting regarding NHS reform makes sense. The question is whether he means it sincerely, and whether he's prepared for the inevitable battle if he's genuine about trying to make it happen.

Whether it's health, or social care, any criticism or attempt at reform is usually met by the "How could you nasty people possibly queston this service? We're caring people doing good things!" narrative. Of course some parts of these services really are populated by caring people doing wonderful things, but the "protect our public services" line is also used as a shield to hide a lot of poor and self-indulgent practice, and to manipulate the more gullible elements of public opinion into not asking more questions.

The big problem with public sector services is that people have to pay for them whether they're getting a good service or not, so there's always the temptation for some working in those services to conclude that outcomes for customers don't really matter that much because they will get paid anyway. What's needed is the ability to identify and get rid of the bad eggs far more quickly, which sends a sharp message, and then the truly public service-oriented people - those attracted to the sector for all the right reasons - will thrive.

I've got no doubts that if we ever get to a situation where (e.g.) the NHS is operating at its most efficient and the gravy train element have been swept away, its potential is phenomenal.

What experience/knowledge are you basing all that on?

[Bohinen]

I don't often find myself saying positive things about Labour politicians, but a lot of what I've heard from Wes Streeting regarding NHS reform makes sense. The question is whether he means it sincerely, and whether he's prepared for the inevitable battle if he's genuine about trying to make it happen.

I wish I had your faith in him. It's pretty clear that Streeting just comes out with platitudes designed, frankly, to placate people like you. Reform is actually the last thing the NHS needs, it is still suffering from the last set of reforms designed by Lansley.

You know, the ridiculous internal market where tenders are issued by a group of GPs, and people in health care have to respond with their offering, and, you've guessed it, the cheapest one wins. Then, when the 'winners' find they can't actually provide the services for the money they quoted, those services are cut and patients suffer.

I used to respond to tenders in this way in the IT sector, but if we messed up, the worst case scenario, a bank or retailer would have a sub-par computer system, whereas in health, people die, or at the least are left in pain. This is no way to run a health service.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...us-nhs-reforms

[jackal2]

What experience/knowledge are you basing all that on?

A lot more than you probably think, and possibly more than you have yourself, but that's our own business isn't it.

As far as this message board's concerned, we're just two people with opinions like everyone else, and posters are free to agree or disagree regardless of how much experience they've got or from where. Besides, in some cases, people observing from a distance can see the big picture better than those stood close to it or even in it, so experience and knowledge aren't a guarantee of accurate perception.

[Med Pie]

True. And if you can get to a situation where the existing money is spent more efficiently and produces the right outcomes for patients, then you'll have a more accurate picture of which areas are genuinely under-resourced and which areas are/were just badly run, which in turn means you can allocate 'new' money to the right places.

You blame all the mess on inefficiency but what we need is to build hospitals and provide the beds, doctors and nurses, that we need. Patients are waiting years for treatment, not because of inefficiency, neither is that the reason for packed A+E departments. The entire system is in need of massive, expansion to accommodate the huge increase in population.

[jackal2]

I wish I had your faith in him. It's pretty clear that Streeting just comes out with platitudes designed, frankly, to placate people like you. Reform is actually the last thing the NHS needs, it is still suffering from the last set of reforms designed by Lansley.

I wouldn't go so far as to say I have "faith" in Wes Streeting. What I said above is that I've heard more sense from him than most Labour politicians on the subject, but I did caveat that by saying "if" he's genuine. You could well be right that he's just trying to placate a certain audience, in which case he'll come unstuck over time.

I would agree that no Government of any political persuasion has so far come close to successfully reforming the NHS, not least because it's such an unwieldy and impractical beast, but they need to keep trying. I don't agree that "reform is the last thing the NHS needs", because frankly without some kind of change of direction it will simply collapse and die under its own weight, and possibly not that far into the future.

The issue often gets bogged down in public versus private ownership debates. As I've intimated above, I don't actually have a problem with the NHS being publicly run, but too often in public sector organisations it's difficult or impossible to get rid of bad or self-indulgent practitioners or administrators who should not be there. The key to making things work a lot better is to be able to identify and get rid of those bad eggs far more quickly (and make sure they don't return in another guise). Aside from patients and service users, some of the people who get most frustrated with the public sector's inability to do this are those public sector employees desperately trying to make their organisation the best it can be.

[jackal2]

You blame all the mess on inefficiency but what we need is to build hospitals and provide the beds, doctors and nurses, that we need. Patients are waiting years for treatment, not because of inefficiency, neither is that the reason for packed A+E departments. The entire system is in need of massive, expansion to accommodate the huge increase in population.

Those two things aren't an either/or. You're probably right about the need for infrastructure expansion, but surely if you're going to embark on that project then it makes sense for the internal operating system to be in an optimum state so you get the best out of those new resources in which you're investing a considerable amount of public money.

I don't blame "all the mess on inefficiency", but I do recognise that far too much of it exists - you would have to be blind or deluded not to - and so the aim must be for reform and expansion to go hand in hand. (Plus, in some cases, if you get the existing systems working to the max, you might realise there isn't as much need for resource or physical capacity expansion as you first thought, but that has to be judged on an individual service basis.)