RIP Tony Benn.

[pap]

they are probably held somewhere in Diego Garcia and this is all part of the evil tory party plan???

 

Nah, just a shame is all.

 

These two boys were the instant reply to anyone who thought that Euro-scepticism was the sole preserve of the right wing.

[eurosaint]

As most have already said, he was a man of passion and conviction but realistically he never actually achieved anything because few people ever took him seriously !

Obviously the Tories mocked his views, but his own party often had issues with him as well !

Basically he was a loon who could be quite amusing but although I didn't agree with his politics I did respect him much more than the 'mealy mouthed hypocites' that Dubai_Phil referred to !

RIP TB

[scotty]

Instead of floundering outside the Eurozone do you mean?

 

 

How many citizens of the countries inside the eurozone do you reckon are glad they're in it, then? Even Alex Salmond changed his tune pretty sharpish, and is begging to stay in sterling even before the scottish referendum takes place. Benn was right on that one, though I disagreed with him on just about everything else except the Iraq invasion.

[Wes Tender]

A conviction politician. A rarity in these days of bland, middle of the road, soundbite, Oxbridge educated non-entities.

 

Anthony Wedgewood Benn was educated at Westminster and New College, Oxford, so naturally with his egalitarian leftie principles, he didn't like it to be known that he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a member of the aristocracy, educated amongst the sons of other toffs.

 

I remember him well as Postmaster General in Harold Wilson's government and I'm not going to lose any more sleep over his passing than I will when Roy Hattersley and Dennis Healey pop their clogs. They're next and no doubt similar platitudes will be trotted out about what splendid fellows they were too.

[bridge too far]

Anthony Wedgewood Benn was educated at Westminster and New College, Oxford, so naturally with his egalitarian leftie principles, he didn't like it to be known that he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a member of the aristocracy, educated amongst the sons of other toffs.

I remember him well as Postmaster General in Harold Wilson's government and I'm not going to lose any more sleep over his passing than I will when Roy Hattersley and Dennis Healey pop their clogs. They're next and no doubt similar platitudes will be trotted out about what splendid fellows they were too.

 

I think that's a little unfair. No-one can help their backgrounds or education as a child. He was the one who changed the law so that hereditary peers could denounce their peerage and I know for a fact that his children went to the local comprehensive (because I was working there at the time).

[Batman]

I think that's a little unfair. No-one can help their backgrounds or education as a child. He was the one who changed the law so that hereditary peers could denounce their peerage and I know for a fact that his children went to the local comprehensive (because I was working there at the time).

 

remember that when you talk about the tory lot, then

[solentstars]

Anthony Wedgewood Benn was educated at Westminster and New College, Oxford, so naturally with his egalitarian leftie principles, he didn't like it to be known that he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a member of the aristocracy, educated amongst the sons of other toffs.

 

I remember him well as Postmaster General in Harold Wilson's government and I'm not going to lose any more sleep over his passing than I will when Roy Hattersley and Dennis Healey pop their clogs. They're next and no doubt similar platitudes will be trotted out about what splendid fellows they were too.

he may have been a toff but not many gave up there titles plus the best government of this country 1945 attlees government was full of toffs who gave us the nhs and welfare state so the returning soldiers had a land fit for heros.i thought alot of benns policy's were extreme and saw him has the lefts version of thatcher.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

The old 'rose tinted spectacles' are in high demand on here today it seems.

 

I'm old enough to remember the dark days of the 1970's when men like Tony Benn and his ilk were at the zenith of their power and influence. Reading some of the more gushing contributions to this thread however forces me to conclude that some of our younger members would benefit from taking a step back, divesting themselves of the rose tints, and conducting a honest assessment of what kind of a unholy mess Benn and his fellow travellers would surely have made of this country had they gotten their way - and they so nearly did.

 

Remember this was a man afterall that while the Cold War was still very much a 'going concern' wanted this nation to withdraw from NATO and abandon its provisions for democracy's mutual defence - with consequences that could have been disastrous for not only this country but the wider world too. The European Union (although we knew it as the 'Common Market' back in the day) may still be a controversial issue with many, but remember Tony Benn represented a old school branch of socialist thinking that was quite as anti EU as any Daily Mail reading UKIP supporter is today.

 

Gods knows today's dominant 'Free Market' model is not yet a perfected vision of how Human society should be economically organised. Nevertheless surely one thing we have learnt is that the Bennite 'Command Economy' alternative has proved to be a utter disaster everywhere it has been tried. I say anyone who really believes that going back to the days when Government controlled, organised and effectively owned much of our industry can only be a misguided romantic (like Benn probably was) or someone too young to remember the appalling state this nation sank into when we last attempted to do something like that.

 

On a personal level I dare say meeting Tony Benn would have proved to be a infinetly more pleasant experience than spending any time at all with Margaret Thatcher would have been. I strongly suspect he was a more humane, better educated, intellectually more able and all round superior example of Humanity than she ever was. But the great paradox for us all is that history has shown that she was right far more often than he ever was.

 

Indeed from my point of view it seems to be a exercise in intellectual dishonesty to argue otherwise.

[Jonnyboy]

The crusty old c**t never fitted or properly aligned with any political affiliation, in my opinion; he followed the causes that fitted with his personal beliefs.

 

For that, he has a lot more respect from me than that pr*ck Crowe.

 

The only slight issue I had with Benn was that whenever he was debating on TV he came across as smug and patronising, like he had an arrogant unshakeable belief he was always right, but in fairness it was a minor irritation.

 

What a hypocrite.

[Barry Sanchez]

Nah, just a shame is all.

 

These two boys were the instant reply to anyone who thought that Euro-scepticism was the sole preserve of the right wing.

 

To be fair I mentioned left wing and euro sceptic on here on a long time ago and it was an alien thought, one or the other nothing else.

[Hockey_saint]

This thread is starting to get pretty tiresome. A man has died, whatever your political views, he died....do not mock the dead, for soon we'll be one of them.

[Jonnyboy]

Can someone explain how privatising the banks, electricity, water etc etc has improved things other than for a few at the top?

[Barry Sanchez]

Can someone explain how privatising the banks, electricity, water etc etc has improved things other than for a few at the top?

 

Only the ones who bought the silverware or the council houses from the people.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anthony Wedgewood Benn was educated at Westminster and New College, Oxford, so naturally with his egalitarian leftie principles, he didn't like it to be known that he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a member of the aristocracy, educated amongst the sons of other toffs.

 

I remember him well as Postmaster General in Harold Wilson's government and I'm not going to lose any more sleep over his passing than I will when Roy Hattersley and Dennis Healey pop their clogs. They're next and no doubt similar platitudes will be trotted out about what splendid fellows they were too.

 

Spot on. Some of the posters could do with a life on mars experiance and be transported back to the early 70's. Wedgie Benn wasn't some sort of Owen Jones boy next door leftie to be indulged whilst the big boys get on with running the country. He was a dangerous loon, hell bent on changing our already ****ed society into some sort of socialist republic. People like him, foot and jack Jones weren't friendly cuddly national treasures at all, they were muddled loons preaching sheite at a very dangerous time in the world. Their ideology and politics was defeated and rejected by the British people thankfully. New Labour was the final confirmation of that. Benn even commented that the 1981 election result was a "start" and that rather than a humiliation for the party , was great because millions had voted for their socialist ideals. Luckily sanity ruled and even the old windbag Kinnock could see they needed to move on from the bennitte curse.

[Verbal]

Spot on. Some of the posters could do with a life on mars experiance and be transported back to the early 70's. Wedgie Benn wasn't some sort of Owen Jones boy next door leftie to be indulged whilst the big boys get on with running the country. He was a dangerous loon, hell bent on changing our already ****ed society into some sort of socialist republic. People like him, foot and jack Jones weren't friendly cuddly national treasures at all, they were muddled loons preaching sheite at a very dangerous time in the world. Their ideology and politics was defeated and rejected by the British people thankfully. New Labour was the final confirmation of that. Benn even commented that the 1981 election result was a "start" and that rather than a humiliation for the party , was great because millions had voted for their socialist ideals. Luckily sanity ruled and even the old windbag Kinnock could see they needed to move on from the bennitte curse.

 

You're wrong. However you may wish to characterise Benn, he was never 'dangerous' - neither when he was in power, nor afterwards, when he demonstrated his other weakness, an inability to forge alliances of power.

 

This 'dangerous' guff is a knuckle-headed right-wing myth which conceals a more depressing reality - that Benn as a government minister was spectacularly ordinary, verging on useless. The highlights of his Cabinet career were campaigning against offshore pirate radio, the opening of the Post Office Tower, and Girobank. He always attributed his move to the Left as a response to the way he felt imprisoned as a Cabinet minister by the civil service. But the fact is, he had not a single important piece of liberalising legislation to his name, in an age when the world was your liberalisng oyster.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Of course he was frigging dangerous. All this CND and anti NATO guff in the middle of the cold war was extremely dangerous had loons like him and Foot got into power. Add to that his economic plans and we'd have ended up a basket case of a country. Foot and Jones were borderline traitors, Benn misguided, but he'd would have had these commie useful idiots alongside him.

 

Whose next for the Lady Di BBC tributes, who is the next great leftie that our esteemed state broadcaster bestows greatness upon despite being wrong time and time again. Skinner , springs to mind. Another "national treasure".

[TopGun]

Whatever your views, a good interview about Benn conducted with 96 year old Denis Healey today.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26588662

[Verbal]

Of course he was frigging dangerous. All this CND and anti NATO guff in the middle of the cold war was extremely dangerous had loons like him and Foot got into power. Add to that his economic plans and we'd have ended up a basket case of a country. Foot and Jones were borderline traitors, Benn misguided, but he'd would have had these commie useful idiots alongside him.

 

Whose next for the Lady Di BBC tributes, who is the next great leftie that our esteemed state broadcaster bestows greatness upon despite being wrong time and time again. Skinner , springs to mind. Another "national treasure".

 

Good grief. Lenin was dangerous. Stalin was dangerous. Mao was dangerous. Pol Pot was dangerous. Kim Jong Un is dangerous. Benn was a Sunday chapel preacher born with a silver spoon etc - who was useless in government. Foot was the author the 'longest suicide not in history' - the 1983 Labour election manifesto - and was never going to get sight of Downing Street. Calling him a 'Commie' is equivalent to calling you a Nazi.

[Barry Sanchez]

Of course he was frigging dangerous. All this CND and anti NATO guff in the middle of the cold war was extremely dangerous had loons like him and Foot got into power. Add to that his economic plans and we'd have ended up a basket case of a country. Foot and Jones were borderline traitors, Benn misguided, but he'd would have had these commie useful idiots alongside him.

 

Whose next for the Lady Di BBC tributes, who is the next great leftie that our esteemed state broadcaster bestows greatness upon despite being wrong time and time again. Skinner , springs to mind. Another "national treasure".

 

Skinner is a legend, for the people always, I dont agree with his rabid republicanism but he is a joy to watch and listen to over the pale Eton mess of Jeremys and Tarquins.

[Wes Tender]

Whose next for the Lady Di BBC tributes, who is the next great leftie that our esteemed state broadcaster bestows greatness upon despite being wrong time and time again.

 

It's probably Dennis Healey or the tub of lard, Hattersley.

 

I didn't mind Skinner. He was just the court jester, an irreverent clown. Nobody took him seriously and he had zero hope of achieving any position of power and influence and he was useful in deflating over-weening egos.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Good grief. Lenin was dangerous. Stalin was dangerous. Mao was dangerous. Pol Pot was dangerous. Kim Jong Un is dangerous. Benn was a Sunday chapel preacher born with a silver spoon etc - who was useless in government. .

 

Leaving Nato and getting rid of our nuclear weapons unilaterally, was profoundly dangerous during the cold war.

[Lord Duckhunter]

. Calling him a 'Commie' is equivalent to calling you a Nazi.

 

I didn't pass information on to the Nazi's.

 

According to Anatoly Chernyaev, the Soviet Union's contact man with the West during the cold war, Foot passed information on to help defeat the "common enemy" (The Torys) and Jones was paid by the USSR.

[View From The Top]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/15/10-of-the-best-tony-benn-quotes-as-picked-by-our-readers?CMP=twt_gu

[Verbal]

I didn't pass information on to the Nazi's.

 

According to Anatoly Chernyaev, the Soviet Union's contact man with the West during the cold war, Foot passed information on to help defeat the "common enemy" (The Torys) and Jones was paid by the USSR.

 

I didn't pass information on to the Nazi's.

 

According to Anatoly Chernyaev, the Soviet Union's contact man with the West during the cold war, Foot passed information on to help defeat the "common enemy" (The Torys) and Jones was paid by the USSR.

 

 

On the same basis, if I say you passed information to Hitler then you did.

 

You live in a world of delusions and demons.

 

Harold Wilson was also accused of being a Soviet spy by another senior Soviet figure (and later defector) Anatoliy Golitsyn. This was retailed in Peter Wright's Spycatcher. You'd think - as Wright as an assistant director of MI5 - that this would mean it was true. Unfortunately, Wright was pap writ large. Just as his accusation that Sir Roger Hollis was also a Soviet mole (the 'fifth man') turned out to be utter tosh, so too did his guff about Wilson - guff which nonetheless was taken up by the Daily Mail and others in a smear campaign. These accusations against Labour politicians and trade unionists were two-a-penny from the late sixties to the late eighties. Nothing has ever gone beyond whispers - no evidence, nothing.

 

Leaving Nato and getting rid of our nuclear weapons unilaterally, was profoundly dangerous during the cold war.

 

The demons are getting the better of you. When was Benn EVER in a position to implement a NATO exit or UND? As I've said, he was a hopeless policymaker, and by the time he moved to the left and advocated these policies he was nowhere near the levers of power and was reduced to being the Enoch Powell of the left.

[Jonnyboy]

Can someone explain how privatising the banks, electricity, water etc etc has improved things other than for a few at the top?

 

Forget nuclear weapons. How has privatising everything improved the nation?

[Jonnyboy]

Duckhunter would've had the CIA assassinate Wilson I expect.

[sebastian firefly]

The crusty old c**t never fitted or properly aligned with any political affiliation, in my opinion; he followed the causes that fitted with his personal beliefs.

 

For that, he has a lot more respect from me than that pr*ck Crowe.

 

The only slight issue I had with Benn was that whenever he was debating on TV he came across as smug and patronising, like he had an arrogant unshakeable belief he was always right, but in fairness it was a minor irritation.

 

smug and patronising anyone born from "the upper classes" always sound smug and patronising they hold firm the lable of the ruling class anyone not conforming to the stereotype yet still manages to string a coherent sentence together just confuses the **** out of people who are generally encouraged to remain ignorant.

[tony13579]

If nationalising the banks was mad, how mad was it to leave it in the hands of the fools who Mis-sold PPI, packaged junk mortgages as prime, manipulated the Libor rate, sold 125% LTV mortgages, lent huge amounts to the feckless on self certified mortgages. And then when all this foolishness was known kept giving them money as quantitive easing on the promise they would lend to businesses (which they didn't do).

 

I have met him, he knows what he is talking about. He knew the back story, and the history behind the back story. If Cameron wasn't too busy having "date nights" and playing "fruit ninja" he might have time to notice the Somerset levels flooding six weeks earlier and remember to take his kids home from the pub!

 

There are very few politicians with the depth and insight today.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Forget nuclear weapons. How has privatising everything improved the nation?

 

I don't know how old you are Jonny but I suspect the 1970's are a era you were either too young to properly remember, or perhaps you were not even born then.

 

The history of the state control of industry in this country is a long and complex one. This history was rooted in a era of relative national decline while at the same time working people were gradually gaining the degree of power and self confidence required to object to the appalling conditions there were then expected to endure. Millions laboured under outdated working practises and a lack of sufficient vision and investment. The (many) consequences of both the 20th Century's cataclysmic world wars and a widespread desire to see all that sacrifice result in a better world cannot be discounted either.

However it is sometimes now forgotten that this vision of a better (state controlled) future led to nationalisation being extended far beyond the boundaries of what were once known as the 'public utilities' and into diverse areas such as vehicle manufacture, coal and steel production, and even the road haulage industry of all things. Now to be fair there were some success's - for example the state stepping in to save Rolls Royce jet engines at a crucial moment in that firms history springs to mind - but overall the record of politicians attempting to control business was not a happy one. For instance £millions must have been wasted in a forlorn attempt to save shipbuilding in this country, and those old enough to remember the days of British Rail will confirm it wasn't all that great a service either. Political decision making is afterall driven by the pressing needs of the electoral cycle while business is (or should be) concerned with longer term growth and making a proper return on investment for shareholders.

 

As for the world of finance, although in the past there was a greater degree of state regulation in place the banks themselves were never formally part of the state sector per se (pre the 2008/9 crash that is) so to criticise their "privatisation" is to misunderstand the facts of the matter. Okay for obvious reasons giving bankers a good metaphorical kicking has become something of a national sport of late, and many of them deserve it, but I don't remember quite so many objecting during the decades when the financial sector of this economy was racking up huge annual profits and making a substantial contribution to the national exchequer in the process. Surely the root cause of the banking problem is not that our banks were free from public ownership, but rather the lack (and difficulties of imposing) effective cross boarder regulation on a incredibly complex and confusing international financial marketplace that I seriously doubt anyone fully understood in the first place.

 

There are good reasons why all over the world (North Korea excepted) nationalisation is on the wane and privatisation is in vogue. The explanation for this phenomena being that time and time again nationalisation, and the ensuring lack of a profit motive, has proven to be a inefficient method motivating people to perform at their best. The state has an valid and important role to play in society - markets must be effectively regulated for instance - but owning and running business is not part of that role.

So as for the question; has privatisation improved this nation? Well I think back to the dark days of Leyland Motors producing shoddy built and highly unreliable cars at the taxpayers expense. I remember British Steel racking up annual losses so huge they were almost incomprehensible to the man in the street and the only answer I can see is 'yes'.

Edited 16 March, 2014 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[bridge too far]

However, when you consider the inexorable privatisation of the NHS and, to some extent, education you have to say it's looking like an unmitigated disaster.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

However, when you consider the inexorable privatisation of the NHS and, to some extent, education you have to say it's looking like an unmitigated disaster.

 

What measure are we employing here to prove that the (still fundamentally Public Sector) state Health and Education services in this nation are manifestly inferior today compared to what they were in the past? For instance has life expectancy fallen, or are exam results worse?

 

Hey 'Mid Staffs' was a utter scandal and getting a doctors appointment these days can be a bit of a bugger too. But rest assured I know for a fact that the Comprehensive School I attended back in the 70's was about as 'bog standard' as it could possibly be and my poor old uncle left Hospital after a hernia operation back in 1977 with brain damage.

 

The past of our memory may be a comforting place, but in truth it was not always a better one.

[Batman]

However, when you consider the inexorable privatisation of the NHS and, to some extent, education you have to say it's looking like an unmitigated disaster.

 

the NHS is going to come to a head sooner or later

when my missus can earn circa £75 an hour as an agency nurse.....that is surely unsustainable

[bridge too far]

What measure are we employing here to prove that the (still fundamentally Public Sector) state Health and Education services in this nation are manifestly inferior today compared to what they were in the past? For instance has life expectancy fallen, or are exam results worse?

 

Hey 'Mid Staffs' was a utter scandal and getting a doctors appoint these days can be a bit of a bugger too. But rest assured I know for a fact that the Comprehensive School I attended back in the 70's was about as 'bog standard' as it could possibly be and my poor old uncle left Hospital after a hernia operation back in 1977 with brain damage.

 

The past of our memory may be a comforting place, but in truth it was not always a better one.

 

I'm not talking about way back when. I'm talking about now. Of course life expectancy and standards of treatment have improved - due to research and constantly increasing knowledge. I'm talking about increased unaccountability of (private) providers to end users. And you only have to look at the passing of the emergency legislation on Clause 119 last week to see that you and I have very little say in how our treatment is managed these days. Not to mention lengthening waiting lists. Recently I had an accident that resulted in knee reconstruction. I've no complaint about the standard of care I received from the emergency services but, even though I live in a large town near to a motorway network, I had to be treated about 20 miles from my home. Fine in itself but I simply could not get back to the treating hospital for physio (it was not my local Trust). So I had to be referred to a local provider (privately run service contracted to the NHS). It took 6 weeks - yes 6 weeks - to get this sorted and that's with me, one who knows her way around the NHS and therefore badgered constantly. My injury required immediate post-discharge physio. Fortunately, as a former fitness instructor, I was able to do some work myself but I really was scared that I might do more damage!

 

As far as education is concerned I can now only relate to what's happening where I live. We still have the 11+ here and increasingly the grammar schools are selecting either children from private junior schools in county or even loads from out county to the detriment of local stated educated children. A recognised measurement is the number of children receiving free school meals going to grammar schools. This number has fallen significantly year on year. Even the local Academies are now selecting, leaving a good number of children struggling to find secondary places.

 

When essential services are driven by the bottom line rather than by excellent standards there exists a conflict. You only have to look at the number of MPs who have vested interests in private healthcare companies or education providers to question their motives in voting through these damaging changes.

 

http://socialinvestigations.blogspot.co.uk/p/key-facts-of-lords-and-mps-connections.html

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I'm not talking about way back when. I'm talking about now. Of course life expectancy and standards of treatment have improved - due to research and constantly increasing knowledge. I'm talking about increased unaccountability of (private) providers to end users. And you only have to look at the passing of the emergency legislation on Clause 119 last week to see that you and I have very little say in how our treatment is managed these days. Not to mention lengthening waiting lists. Recently I had an accident that resulted in knee reconstruction. I've no complaint about the standard of care I received from the emergency services but, even though I live in a large town near to a motorway network, I had to be treated about 20 miles from my home. Fine in itself but I simply could not get back to the treating hospital for physio (it was not my local Trust). So I had to be referred to a local provider (privately run service contracted to the NHS). It took 6 weeks - yes 6 weeks - to get this sorted and that's with me, one who knows her way around the NHS and therefore badgered constantly. My injury required immediate post-discharge physio. Fortunately, as a former fitness instructor, I was able to do some work myself but I really was scared that I might do more damage! ...

 

 

I'm not sure whether your complaints re today's NHS are founded on the manner in which it is currently organised, or more on the level of public resources it has devoted to it. A mixture of both perhaps. But if you object to the way it is run today I can only conclude from that that you therefore believe it was a better, more accountable service at some point in the past.

 

I'm see no evidence to support this hypothesis.

 

For example twenty years ago if a patient were as dissatisfied with their treatment as you seeming are today do you really think that the old NHS would in have in any practical sense been a noticeably more responsive organisation to deal with? Perhaps you might have had a more local healthcare service available, but whether that local clinic/hospital would have been properly staffed and equipped with the latest equipment and whether in truth it would have provided shorter waiting times for patients are matters that seem arguable at best. In a era of ever more sophisticated (and thus expensive) heathcare, the undoubted inconvenience of increasing centralisation and specialisation of NHS services may just be the price we have to pay to see improving outcomes.

 

If on the other hand you want more of the nations resource's devoted to the state healthcare sector so that you can 'have it all' as it were then in a democracy all you need to do is vote for a party that will deliver that and if enough voters agree with you then your desire may prevail. I must say this in itself raises a whole series of interesting questions as to what area of state expenditure you intend to divert scarce public money away from to fund that ambition ... pensions, defence, housing, the social services?

 

It seems to me that today's NHS has grown to become a Frankenstein-like hybrid of state provided healthcare services competing within a kind of pseudo internal marketplace, this amalgamated with some private enterprise involvement on the margins to further confuse matters. This may not be a satisfactory organisation providing the nation with a truly world class service, but the reasons it has developed into this monster are that the old ways of doing thinks were widely held to be utterly unsatisfactory too. If you really want to go 'back to the future' to find a way forward then fine, that however seems to be a easy answer to a complicated problem my way of thinking.

Edited 16 March, 2014 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[bridge too far]

My concerns for the future of the NHS are simple. 20 years ago (and I've worked in the NHS for over 20 years) people knew how to raise and concerns and with whom. The NHS was accountable to its end users and to those who managed the service. Today it isn't. With an increasing number of providers from the private sector, the accountability is to the shareholders of that provider.

 

Yes there are contracts stating KPIs but the monitoring resources are inadequate for the job in hand. Many CCGs were struggling half way through the financial year leading to a limit to the availability of some services. They were struggling because they didn't have the expertise to manage and monitor contracts - contracts that didn't need to be outsourced. There have been lots of stories about, for example, poor out-of-hours services and increasing use of A&E because the public can't access GP care (the same GPs who run the CCGs).

 

I need to know who to contact if I have a concern about my local health service. Short of contacting my MP (who hasn't been at all helpful to his constituents in the past) it's tough to know where to go.

 

I understand the need to rationalise major trauma treatment and specialties - what I don't understand is the ability of unaccountable providers (and the useless Secretary of State) to make important decisions without consulting the very people they are supposed to serve.

[Johnny Bognor]

My concerns for the future of the NHS are simple. 20 years ago (and I've worked in the NHS for over 20 years) people knew how to raise and concerns and with whom. The NHS was accountable to its end users and to those who managed the service. Today it isn't. With an increasing number of providers from the private sector, the accountability is to the shareholders of that provider.

 

Rose tinted spectacles. If you tried to make a complaint 20 years ago, you would get absolutely nowhere. As the complaints handlers were employed by the NHS and often defended the organisation. So the NHS was not accountable to its end users. It was a monopoly service and there was nothing you could do.

 

Page 45 kind of explains how complaints used to be handled:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=F3UBcGPhXlgC&pg=PA45&dq=Complaints+to+the+NHS+in+the+1980&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lgImU-umFqaR5ASn5YHgCw&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Complaints%20to%20the%20NHS%20in%20the%201980&f=false

 

Like it or not, the compensation/claim industry has made the NHS accountable, as a mishap means large compensation payouts. This actually keeps both the NHS and private sector in check.

[bridge too far]

JB the link refers to the 1980s - 30 years ago. I joined the NHS in 1991 and one of my colleagues managed the PALS service for the hospital (Patient Liaison Service). Back then, the hospital had 14 days to respond to a complaint / query and faced reprimands if it didin't. This coincided with the ending of Crown Immunity

[Johnny Bognor]

JB the link refers to the 1980s - 30 years ago. I joined the NHS in 1991 and one of my colleagues managed the PALS service for the hospital (Patient Liaison Service). Back then, the hospital had 14 days to respond to a complaint / query and faced reprimands if it didin't. This coincided with the ending of Crown Immunity

 

If you read on further, the report goes on to discuss how things weren't much better in the 1990's. The NHS were never accountable then, with the selective way in which they dealt with complaints. It's only now, out of fear of litigation, that they are actually held accountable.

 

The NHS can't be held up as a beacon to excellence in customer service (BTW I am not saying that front line staff don't do a sterling job). This is true for nearly every monopoly (both public and private) for one simple reason. They don't have to be.

[pap]

On the same basis, if I say you passed information to Hitler then you did.

 

You live in a world of delusions and demons.

 

Harold Wilson was also accused of being a Soviet spy by another senior Soviet figure (and later defector) Anatoliy Golitsyn. This was retailed in Peter Wright's Spycatcher. You'd think - as Wright as an assistant director of MI5 - that this would mean it was true. Unfortunately, Wright was pap writ large. Just as his accusation that Sir Roger Hollis was also a Soviet mole (the 'fifth man') turned out to be utter tosh, so too did his guff about Wilson - guff which nonetheless was taken up by the Daily Mail and others in a smear campaign. These accusations against Labour politicians and trade unionists were two-a-penny from the late sixties to the late eighties. Nothing has ever gone beyond whispers - no evidence, nothing.

 

The demons are getting the better of you. When was Benn EVER in a position to implement a NATO exit or UND? As I've said, he was a hopeless policymaker, and by the time he moved to the left and advocated these policies he was nowhere near the levers of power and was reduced to being the Enoch Powell of the left.

 

Please:-

 

1) refrain from using me in your "arguments"

2) stop nicking my put-downs, ta. The use of "demons" has been trademarked on this site for another, highly specific use.

[Hockey_saint]

Someone asked me what Socialism was the other day and I found the interview recorded with Tony Benn on it interesting, where he describes it as "democracy" or though I'd think it would be more succinct to say it's simply attempting not to "take a crap on the poorest of society" (clean version) I think most people (centre people, people not as right as some on here) would be shocked a comparison of Thatcher and Benn was even suggested.

 

So I'd have to be honest and say that I find some views on this board as very much less than saintly with a distinct lack of empathy for the poorest people in society being slaughtered by our lovely Eton-educated (Gove's words) friends. But yes, both Thatcher and Benn were stuck in their views and both thought they were right (except on the face of it one was looking out for the poorest in society whilst the other the richest.)...

 

[Barry Sanchez]

The lack of empathy with others on here sometimes is very worrying, the anti gay feeling I read on a thread a while back was depressing as well, maybe as a club we have the highest % of middle class non caring **nts, we would be up there for the title I would say.

[Bearsy]

try and show more empathy for the middle classes barry, they can't all be homphobic non-caring c*nts. There must be a few good ones, even without the benefit of living on council estate or working down mine which naturally inclines you to be respectful of gay culture.

[Barry Sanchez]

try and show more empathy for the middle classes barry, they can't all be homphobic non-caring c*nts. There must be a few good ones, even without the benefit of living on council estate or working down mine which naturally inclines you to be respectful of gay culture.

 

I said % Bearsy not all.

[Bearsy]

what % do you reckon barry? Let's start taking names! You've met pap, is he middle class?

[Wes Tender]

But yes, both Thatcher and Benn were stuck in their views and both thought they were right (except on the face of it one was looking out for the poorest in society whilst the other the richest.)...

 

 

Ironic really that Thatcher was the daughter of a grocer, Grammar School educated until University, whereas Benn was a member of the aristocracy and educated at one of England's top Public Schools.

 

But your view couldn't really have been much more simplistic.

[Barry Sanchez]

Ironic really that Thatcher was the daughter of a grocer, Grammar School educated until University, whereas Benn was a member of the aristocracy and educated at one of England's top Public Schools.

 

But your view couldn't really have been much more simplistic.

 

It strengthens his point if you think about it.

[Hockey_saint]

Ironic really that Thatcher was the daughter of a grocer, Grammar School educated until University, whereas Benn was a member of the aristocracy and educated at one of England's top Public Schools.

 

But your view couldn't really have been much more simplistic.

 

And John Major was working class and brought up in Brixton (although his current views now he's retired appear much more critical of the Conservatives). Yes, there is a point there, you could suggest that Tony Benn was very much a champagne socialist but his actions....and continued actions when in the house as a government minister or member of the opposition kinda suggest that he firmly believed what he said and in that respect, yes, Thatcher and Benn were similar.

 

Maybe I am being far too simplistic.

[Wes Tender]

It strengthens his point if you think about it.

 

How? The toff was obviously going to wish to look after the poor, whereas the PM from a commoner's background would naturally want to look after the rich?

[Hockey_saint]

How? The toff was obviously going to wish to look after the poor, whereas the PM from a commoner's background would naturally want to look after the rich?

 

You could, with that say (if you were being cynical) "well, it just goes to show that some toffs cared about their fellow man whereas some poor people didn't give a rats backside and would prefer to get a leg up whilst shafting the people they grew up with".

[buctootim]

Its far more principled to argue against your own interests (redistribution when you're wealthy) than for your own interests (get rich screw everbody) when you're poor.

Edited 17 March, 2014 by buctootim