Andrew Lansley

[Saintandy666]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13063285

 

Surely can't stay for much longer now?

 

Hopefully he'll take his dangerous reforms with him.

 

Also, if anyone has not seen the Andrew Lansley Rap yet...

 

[bridge too far]

There'll be yet another U turn by this flippy floppy coalition and he'll be the fall-guy.

 

Clever Cameron - collective government means he doesn't directly take the flak for mistakes. He turns it onto the appropriate Secretary of State / local council. He doesn't actually lead, does he.

[Thedelldays]

There'll be yet another U turn by this flippy floppy coalition and he'll be the fall-guy.

 

Clever Cameron - collective government means he doesn't directly take the flak for mistakes. He turns it onto the appropriate Secretary of State / local council. He doesn't actually lead, does he.

 

just like all governments then...why are you shocked that this lot may do it..? dont recall you being so flippant about labour..?

[bridge too far]

just like all governments then...why are you shocked that this lot may do it..? dont recall you being so flippant about labour..?

 

Because I don't recall so many U turns by the last government in such a short timeframe. The leadership was strong - it may have been wrong (and sometimes was) but at least it was strong.

 

Where have I been 'flippant' exactly?

[LGTL]

I can't believe Cameron put him and Gove into what is possibly the two most important areas; Health and Education. The pair of them couldn't be more incompetent if they tried.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Being strong is not one of the words I would use to describe the last Labour Govt. Tony Blair's reforms were oppossed at every turn by Brown, so much so that he later said he regretted not being bold enough. The excallant Frank Field was thrown to the Wolves over "thinking the unthinkable" regrading welfare reform.All because Blair was weak and the whole Govt was paralysed by the TB/GB leadership farce.

[OldNick]

any person taking on the NHS is in trouble. Like all big organisations there is a lot of waste. Too many people are worried about their jobs at the top to make brave decisions. Personally i want a good health service that is free to those entitled to it. At the same time i dont wish to have the mickey taken by the staff

[Saintandy666]

I don't think Cameron has been keeping a close enough eye on Lansley and his health reforms due to their close personal relationship over the years. A number of times Cameron has been caught out as to the content of this bill, one example being when he clearly didn't know the bill would leave the NHS open to EU competition laws.

 

The whole bill is a total disaster for the NHS leaving it open part privatisation due to the 'any willing provider' part and the raising of the private healthcare cap. Not only this, but GPs do not want to become the accountants of the NHS, they do not have the time and they will become protest points for patients. The PCT's are unpopular for a reason, they administer the budgets, but at least they can do that free from moral interference.

 

The NHS could become unstable only being able to take the non-profitable operations and procedures while the private companies cherrypick at the profitable procedures. Then you have the NHS being liable to be sued and the whole thing stinks. The NHS isn't a business. I could go on and on but I won't.

[View From The Top]

I can't believe Cameron put him and Gove into what is possibly the two most important areas; Health and Education. The pair of them couldn't be more incompetent if they tried.

 

I've met Gove and he's an idiot who is so out of his depth it's scary. I'm sure he just makes things up as he goes along.

[Saintandy666]

I've met Gove and he's an idiot who is so out of his depth it's scary. I'm sure he just makes things up as he goes along.

 

Gove is so patronising its unreal.

 

Lansley is being a bit patronising at the moment with his rhetoric. He seems to think that all the objections come from the fact that his bill has not been explained properly as opposed to any actual substantive reservations. I think this is an insult to the intelligence of some of the people who criticise these reforms, many of whom are experts within the health field.

[CB Saint]

Could anyone make any reform to the NHS without attracting this kind of flack? It is not called one of the "third rails" of politics for nothing.

[um pahars]

Gove and Lansley seem to be from the same stock in that whilst Gove seems intent on taking the curriculum back to the Victorian era, Lansley is keen to take us back to the Doctor knows best era.

 

I'm certainly not against making efficiencies in the NHS, cutting out waste and putting patients first, but from what I can make out (and Lansley is right he hasn't sold this very well) this seems half baked and very risky. I'm not sure putting the GP's in charge is what they want, nor what patients want.

 

A bit of a ccok up really and although I don't particuarly like seeing U-Turns, I think this bill needs to be consigned to the dustbin.

[Deppo]

I never really liked her in 'Murder, She Wrote', but she was quite good in 'Bedknobs and Broomsticks'.

[SuperMikey]

It says something when your proposals to 'improve' the NHS are rejected by almost every single Medical counsel and group in the UK.

[saintfully]

I've met Gove and he's an idiot who is so out of his depth it's scary. I'm sure he just makes things up as he goes along.

 

Agreed.

 

Heard him getting absolutely pasted on Radio5 by a member of the public. Gove came across as someone promoted way beyond their skills just because of background, not achievement.

 

In short, he sounded like a right ti.t.

[revolution saint]

any person taking on the NHS is in trouble. Like all big organisations there is a lot of waste. Too many people are worried about their jobs at the top to make brave decisions. Personally i want a good health service that is free to those entitled to it. At the same time i dont wish to have the mickey taken by the staff

 

Care to give any examples of staff taking the mickey? If you're talking about waste then blame the the imposition of a fake "internal" (and a postcode lottery) market and blame PFI.

[pedg]

Having had Lansley as my local MP for 19 odd years I would like to personally thank the boundary commission for moving me out of his constituency!

 

But to be fair at least he is not Gove!

[angelman]

I hear a lot of people complaining about an awful lot, actually that should be most of the cuts, but that is all they do. Complain, whinge, *****. Why not try and be more constructive and offer some remedy to the problems that we have. The Health Service costs £100 billion a year, is good in some places and really bad in others. Bad in too many areas. Things need to change.

[Verbal]

I hear a lot of people complaining about an awful lot, actually that should be most of the cuts, but that is all they do. Complain, whinge, *****. Why not try and be more constructive and offer some remedy to the problems that we have. The Health Service costs £100 billion a year, is good in some places and really bad in others. Bad in too many areas. Things need to change.

 

I think when the nurses' union gives an unprecedented vote of no confidence in Lansley, at a crushing 98%, something is deeply wrong.

 

In any case, your premise is mistaken. This government came in pledging NOT to cut the NHS. That's not what these 'reforms' are supposed to be about - though heaven only knows what they ARE about. Even Cameron seems baffled. And are rightly seen as both bizarre (because GPs on many of their own admission know remarkably little about the way the HNS works, and yet they somehow will be given blanket powers to determine NHS spending), counterproductive (driving down patient care), and ideologically driven (trying to create a 'market' in health).

 

This thread should be merged with the Cameron=bellend thread - it's just the latest episode from these hopeless, immature, moronic, bellended toffs.

[Thedelldays]

Thing is verbal. The country can't afford to sustain the level of spending..

[Verbal]

Thing is verbal. The country can't afford to sustain the level of spending..

 

But Lansley is not proposing cuts to the NHS. He's proposing an INCREASE - and an overnight revolution based on some ideas he came up with in his sleep. And they're bonkers. It's like making army generals submarine commanders.

 

The strong likelihood is that - like higher education - these 'reforms' will cost billions more.

Edited 14 April, 2011 by Verbal

[Doctoroncall]

I would back Gerry Robinson to fix the NHS anyday.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

I hear a lot of people complaining about an awful lot, actually that should be most of the cuts, but that is all they do. Complain, whinge, *****. Why not try and be more constructive and offer some remedy to the problems that we have. The Health Service costs £100 billion a year, is good in some places and really bad in others. Bad in too many areas. Things need to change.

 

Sorry but this just sounds like rhetoric pulled straight from something you've heard/read in the media. Which areas are performing really badly? Why do you think they are performing badly?

[LGTL]

I hear a lot of people complaining about an awful lot, actually that should be most of the cuts, but that is all they do. Complain, whinge, *****. Why not try and be more constructive and offer some remedy to the problems that we have. The Health Service costs £100 billion a year, is good in some places and really bad in others. Bad in too many areas. Things need to change.

 

And it's worth every penny. You'd soon moan when the receptionist asks for your credit card and charges you £80 before you can see a doc to get some antibiotics...

[Saintandy666]

Thing is verbal. The country can't afford to sustain the level of spending..

 

These reforms do not save money, it's a separate entity from cuts. Infact, it'll cost billions to restructure the NHS in the way the bill wants to. Verbal is right.

[holepuncture]

It says something when your proposals to 'improve' the NHS are rejected by almost every single Medical counsel and group in the UK.

 

The Tory elite know better of course!

 

I think when the nurses' union gives an unprecedented vote of no confidence in Lansley, at a crushing 98%, something is deeply wrong.

 

Viva la revolution

 

Thing is verbal. The country can't afford to sustain the level of spending..

 

Must be all those torpedoes we keep blasting at Libya that’s pushing us overdrawn! Health should be of absolute importance, we should be able to afford the NHS.

 

And it's worth every penny. You'd soon moan when the receptionist asks for your credit card and charges you £80 before you can see a doc to get some antibiotics...

 

It will be a sad day, when society turns against itself and its every man for himself. Some of my very wealthy (well, rich parents, they haven’t earned any of it!) buddies seem to think this is the right way forward... but that’s ok, because they have enough money to pay for procedures. They honestly could not give a flying **** about the rest of the masses, all they want is to pay minimum tax. I remind them, that if they crash their sports cars, a private health system will not be able to save them, only the NHS is capable of that. I’d love to see Lansley be presented with a £0.5m bill after his daughter (just an example) broke her wrist riding a bike and had to be airlifted to hospital!... I’m sure he will feel just as 'liberated' as he is liberating the NHS!

 

Andrew Lansley...Tosser!

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/mar/25/andrew-lansley-rap-mc-nxtgen

[Wade Garrett]

Even Norman Tebbit, every right-wingers wet dream, is firmly against the Government plans for the NHS.

[Verbal]

Even Norman Tebbit, every right-wingers wet dream, is firmly against the Government plans for the NHS.

 

His views about the NHS generally have been shaped over the years by his wife's experiences in the NHS.

 

In any case, the wings of the Tory Party now seem to be not 'left or 'right', but 'occasionally reasonable' (Ken Clarke) to 'egotistical, dimwitted maniac' (Lansley), with 'rabbit caught in the headlights (Clegg, Honorary Tory for Sheffield South) somewhere in between. Lansley couldn't help himself with the language he used for the 'apology' he issued to health professionals for his (now on-hold) 'reforms': 'I'm sorry you don't get it.'

 

It's common to discover that politicians are idiots. But to put such an utter fool in charge of a £100 billion organisation is what makes Cameron so historically useless. Maybe he thought that Lansley's brainlessness wouldn't stand out among the other cretins like Gove (education u-turn), Spelman (Forests sell-off u-turn), Willetts (higher education cOck-up)...etc, etc. He was wrong.

[Special K]

There are some good things coming out of this coalition, but having Andrew Lansley as Health Secretary is not one of them. He's a liability and needs to stand at the back of the class and have a quiet word with himself.

[TopGun]

Every govt has one or two zealots in the early days. I think Lansley at Health and Gove at Education fulfil those categories. Portillo at Defence was another rampant right-winger when he was first allowed to have a chance at a Cabinet job. But he wised up quite quickly.

Edited 15 April, 2011 by TopGun

[Saintandy666]

[so22saint]

Sorry but this just sounds like rhetoric pulled straight from something you've heard/read in the media. Which areas are performing really badly? Why do you think they are performing badly?

 

Current experience with my terminally ill mum is that cancer care is terrible. Direct experience through my company is that procurement is a joke and wastes billions a year (and we're trying to help identify where to fix the hole). My wife is an intensive care nurse and in her experience ITU, HDU and A&E are what the NHS do best.

 

All organisations have good and bad bits, a realistic outlook would help (and this includes the proposed reforms as well as the existing edifice).

[1976_Child]

**** the NHS. Buy insurance instead. If you're too poor to pay the premiums then tough. Weed the proles out of the gene pool. That's what I say. Rich people get rich by working hard. Poor people are lazy scum, that's why they're poor. Why should rich people pay for the health care costs of benefit scum? Maybe if they stopped chain smoking and eating crap food they might live longer? A decent middle class family can afford health insurance at Bupa because they work hard. The same reason their daughters get to take riding lessons. God I hate proles. Even Romanians are betting at cleaning than benefit scum. If the under class non-human scum didn't exist we wouldn't have a problem in the NHS.

[suewhistle]

Either 1976_child is being a complete parody of a right wing **** or.. well, anyway

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/14/david-cameron-adviser-health-reform

[ecuk268]

**** the NHS. Buy insurance instead. If you're too poor to pay the premiums then tough. Weed the proles out of the gene pool. That's what I say. Rich people get rich by working hard. Poor people are lazy scum, that's why they're poor. Why should rich people pay for the health care costs of benefit scum? Maybe if they stopped chain smoking and eating crap food they might live longer? A decent middle class family can afford health insurance at Bupa because they work hard. The same reason their daughters get to take riding lessons. God I hate proles. Even Romanians are betting at cleaning than benefit scum. If the under class non-human scum didn't exist we wouldn't have a problem in the NHS.

 

Stop sitting on the fence. Tell us what you really think.

[angelman]

To a certain extent he has a point (although not about weeding out the gene pool). You have to make choices in life and if you have some disposable income you have to ask yourself whether you are happy with the NHS and whether private medical insurance is necessary. What would you rather have, Sky TV and a session or two down the boozer or private medical insurance. It also helps "subsidise" the NHS, although I stand to be corrected.

 

Some posts ago, someone asked me what sort of changes should be brought in in response to me saying that the NHS doesn't work well in a lot of areas. Here's a couple of interesting article: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=509445&in_page_id=2

http://www.derbygripe.co.uk/nhs.htm

 

And didn't some government, can't remember who says what, say that they were going to reintroduce the ward sister? Is this ever going to happen. And are 650 NHS managers worthy of receiving higher pay than the PM?

[1976_Child]

**** the NHS. Buy insurance instead. If you're too poor to pay the premiums then tough. Weed the proles out of the gene pool. That's what I say. Rich people get rich by working hard. Poor people are lazy scum, that's why they're poor. Why should rich people pay for the health care costs of benefit scum? Maybe if they stopped chain smoking and eating crap food they might live longer? A decent middle class family can afford health insurance at Bupa because they work hard. The same reason their daughters get to take riding lessons. God I hate proles. Even Romanians are betting at cleaning than benefit scum. If the under class non-human scum didn't exist we wouldn't have a problem in the NHS.

 

Either 1976_child is being a complete parody of a right wing **** or.. well, anyway

 

For the record, yes I am parodying. Thought the reference to rich kids' riding lessons might just have blown my cover.

[SuperMikey]

[video=youtube;5nh-yBnnx54]

 

38degrees members hand Nick Clegg a petition to oppose the NHS reforms - interesting bit with one of the members at the end where he talks about the government paving way for the juiciest bits of the health service to be taken over by big companies.

[bridge too far]

 

And didn't some government, can't remember who says what, say that they were going to reintroduce the ward sister? Is this ever going to happen. And are 650 NHS managers worthy of receiving higher pay than the PM?

 

There have always been ward sisters / charge nurses (male equivalent). The last government said it was going to re-introduce matrons and, by and large, this has happened.

 

With regard to 650 managers earning more than the PM. Two points - 1) those who believe in a market economy should understand that you pay what you need to to get the best available (at least, that's the argument the bankers put forward) and 2) the more pertinent question should be 'shouldn't the PM be paid more?'

[um pahars]

Is this ever going to happen. And are 650 NHS managers worthy of receiving higher pay than the PM?

 

Have to say that I'm never impressed with this line of argument.

 

Where is 650 in the context of number of people earning these type of salaries across the UK?????

 

Well when the 50% tax rate came in for people earning around the Prime minister's salary, it was said to affect 300,000 people.

 

In that context the 650 doesn't seem too perverse, particularly given the sums of money involved in the NHS, the number of employees, its role and importance in society etc etc etc.

 

(Put it this way, I've worked for medium sized companies before where 20+ people were on these wages - and they weren't a 30th the size of the NHS!!!!!!! Additionally, how many employees at Saints earn more than the Prime Minister???????).

[LGTL]

I can't believe Cameron trusts Osborne, Lansley and Gove in possibly the three most important offices in the country. All three of them are letting him down big time.

[angelman]

the more pertinent question should be 'shouldn't the PM be paid more?'

 

should MPs be paid at all?

[angelman]

I can't believe Cameron trusts Osborne, Lansley and Gove in possibly the three most important offices in the country. All three of them are letting him down big time.

 

I reckon wee George has some dirt on Cameron

[so22saint]

through my NHS work mentioned above I did find out that 16% of NHS spending is for the North Eastern trusts - can't help wondering what the per head spend is given most of us are down here and why there is so much spending?

[bridge too far]

through my NHS work mentioned above I did find out that 16% of NHS spending is for the North Eastern trusts - can't help wondering what the per head spend is given most of us are down here and why there is so much spending?

 

It's due to something called 'weighted capitation targets'. In other words, funding to each region takes into account the demographics of that region. For example, if a region has a disproportionate number of elderly people or very poor people, it will require more funding to cope with the problems and challenges that demographic can bring.

 

I found out today that the annual average spend per head of population is about £1,700 (as at 2009 - the most recent published figures).

[OldNick]

The NHS is a monster that needs the costs looking at . i doubt many would disagree.

The empty property scandal that the NHS is paying for is madness. These are the wasteful things that do your brain in.

The managers who signed the leases off will now be retired on final salary index linked pensions, while the nation toils to pay for it.

That is what the man in the street gets annoyed about IMO

[Colinjb]

The NHS is a monster that needs the costs looking at . i doubt many would disagree.

The empty property scandal that the NHS is paying for is madness. These are the wasteful things that do your brain in.

The managers who signed the leases off will now be retired on final salary index linked pensions, while the nation toils to pay for it.

That is what the man in the street gets annoyed about IMO

 

Absolutely. It's all too easy to take criticism of the NHS as a needless dig at the Nurses, Doctors and specialists who provide invaluable help to the nation. The entity that is the NHS is a behemoth of red tap, administrative complexity and apparent self interest.... something has to be done.

 

I could have saved the NHS money as part of my job a year ago, but because the savings would be 'cross department' (The work to illicit the saving would need to have been undertaken by someone other then the department it effected) then it was rejected as it would have been seen as a needless cost. Madness.

[bridge too far]

The NHS is a monster that needs the costs looking at . i doubt many would disagree.

The empty property scandal that the NHS is paying for is madness. These are the wasteful things that do your brain in.

The managers who signed the leases off will now be retired on final salary index linked pensions, while the nation toils to pay for it.

That is what the man in the street gets annoyed about IMO

 

What empty property are you talking about Nick?

 

Two things you need to know.

 

Firstly, some redundant NHS buildings are on sites that have covenants on them. If you were to drive along the Woodstock Road in Oxford, you'd see a huge swathe of land in the city centre, apparently unused. It's the site of the former Radcliffe Infirmary that has now relocated to fit-for-purpose buildings at the John Radcliffe Hospital. The site HAS been sold but it can only be developed by a health / education body. So - to those who know nothing about what's going on - it looks like an unused space.

 

Secondly, some old hospitals were paid for by local charities and fund-raising groups. The NHS doesn't necessarily OWN the land on which the buildings sit, rather it leases the land. So even if the buildings are empty, it's not the NHS that can dispose of the land.

 

Oh, and even if the NHS DOES own some redundant land / buildings that it CAN sell, the price it could realise isn't particularly good at the moment.

 

So - which buildings are you talking about as a for instance?

[OldNick]

What empty property are you talking about Nick?

 

Two things you need to know.

 

Firstly, some redundant NHS buildings are on sites that have covenants on them. If you were to drive along the Woodstock Road in Oxford, you'd see a huge swathe of land in the city centre, apparently unused. It's the site of the former Radcliffe Infirmary that has now relocated to fit-for-purpose buildings at the John Radcliffe Hospital. The site HAS been sold but it can only be developed by a health / education body. So - to those who know nothing about what's going on - it looks like an unused space.

 

Secondly, some old hospitals were paid for by local charities and fund-raising groups. The NHS doesn't necessarily OWN the land on which the buildings sit, rather it leases the land. So even if the buildings are empty, it's not the NHS that can dispose of the land.

 

Oh, and even if the NHS DOES own some redundant land / buildings that it CAN sell, the price it could realise isn't particularly good at the moment.

 

So - which buildings are you talking about as a for instance?

that's the trouble BTF. you defend the indefensible.

There was national coverage regarding the block of offices in Christchurch that are empty and still have a lease for (it was stated)another 50 years. There has been no attempt to try and sub-let. Then there is also offices in Southampton that are empty that rent is being paid on. I assume the NHS pay rates as well, no doubt they are on full repairing leases.

The item also stated that the NHS also own property worth over 2bn that is empty.

The defence was that if all the property was sold it would mean the prices would be poor (that never stopped dear Old Gordon selling the gold). The NHS is not a property company and

so some could be sold to help the squeeze, but it is easier to send out soundbites about the loss of nurses doctors etc rather than the managers have the hardship of sifting through old leases and checking exactly what property the trusts are paying out for and how to best dispose of any redundant assets.

i would not expect all property to be sold but do not tell me all is needed. as for the managers who signed off these long leases without get out clauses, i suspect are sunning themselves on the beaches of Spain etc and moaning that their pensions are not getting them as far as they had hoped.

[bridge too far]

But Nick, you'd be the first to moan if the NHS BOUGHT office blocks.

 

NHS Estates managers DO have an asset register that includes owned and rented property. They DO try to dispose of redundant assets where possible. The problem is that constant reorganisation (by governments of all hues) means that properties are leased to satisfy current needs and then no longer required. They can't just walk away from leases and, if you look around any town centre, you'll see that there are a lot of empty commercial properties - there is an office in my town that we were interested in and it's still empty after 3 years. So sub-letting isn't as easy as it seems.

 

I worked for two NHS Trusts' Estate departments over 10 years and I can assure you it's not as cut and dried as you're trying to make out. I don't know of any Estates managers sunning themselves in Spain (and I know a fair few). An Estates manager responsible for an estate of 3 hospitals and various leased offices would be lucky to earn £40-50K a year so his / her pension (probably £10K pa on average) wouldn't go far.