bridge too far Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/07/senior-doctors-assess-governments-record-on-nhs-letter-in-full Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 Lol - Great analogy (And that is not taking the ****) There is no point in trying to explain, or justify my position or thoughts. Your politics are entrenched (As are many) and I doubt whatever the Tories ever did, you could ever bring yourself to support or acknowledge. As you said. Not really worth expressing an opinion if someone is so utterly entrenched and biased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/07/senior-doctors-assess-governments-record-on-nhs-letter-in-full The erosion of the NHS without actually saving any money is a remarkable blunder. If Labour focus on this and keep banging that drum we could well see Ed as PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 As you said. Not really worth expressing an opinion if someone is so utterly entrenched and biased. The way debate normally works is that you offer your own points in opposition to the argument you disagree with. Of course, some people are incapable of framing such an argument, and humourously throw their toys out of the pram, such as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 (edited) The way debate normally works is that you offer your own points in opposition to the argument you disagree with. Of course, some people are incapable of framing such an argument, and humourously throw their toys out of the pram, such as they are. History shows that if someone tries to debate with you then you get personal, make petty snipes about intelligence and then run off saying you have 'won.' I suspect that most don't see mainstream political parties as evil like you do. Most people have no real affiliation with any party and tend to make their mind up based on what they see and read and then their own experiences and those of the people around them. If someone wants to vote labour now then that's fine with me as long as their reasons are honest and sincerely held. Same with someone voting Tory. I'm not going to exaggerate things, insinuate that most Tories are paedos etc to make a political point. You continue to see things in black and white terms and post your witty pictures though if you like. I'm sure that will do much to sway the vote. At least bridge too far tends to make proper arguments despite being hopelessly biased. Edited 7 April, 2015 by hypochondriac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/07/senior-doctors-assess-governments-record-on-nhs-letter-in-full So business leaders write a letter saying how much they have loved the Tories, yet doctors, nurses and those at the heart of our NHS reply with quite the opposite. Who'd have thought it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 I love these letters. i am pretty sure if I looked hard enough I could find 100 business leaders who support labour and 100 doctors who support the Tories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 I love these letters. i am pretty sure if I looked hard enough I could find 100 business leaders who support labour and 100 doctors who support the Tories. Don't tell our Jeff. He was frigging himself off about the news-worthiness of the businessmen-in-the-Telegraph letter like it was the effing moon landing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 History shows that if someone tries to debate with you then you get personal, make petty snipes about intelligence and then run off saying you have 'won.' I suspect that most don't see mainstream political parties as evil like you do. Most people have no real affiliation with any party and tend to make their mind up based on what they see and read and then their own experiences and those of the people around them. If someone wants to vote labour now then that's fine with me as long as their reasons are honest and sincerely held. Same with someone voting Tory. I'm not going to exaggerate things, insinuate that most Tories are paedos etc to make a political point. You continue to post your witty pictures though if you like. I'm sure that will do much to sway the vote. Given that post #1952 is essentially you deciding to take the man on instead of any of his points, I'm mildly amused at your insistence that I might make it personal. We'll leave that there. I'm not insinuating that most Tories are paedos, or indeed, that this vile behaviour is the sole preserve of the Conservative Party. I do think it's worth mentioning that one of the Conservative Party's greatest icons shielded paedophiles in her midst, and repeatedly tried to get the most infamous knighted, despite almost certainly having received informal advice about what he was. Some of the alleged paedophiles held offices of state which couldn't be more incompatible with their reported proclivities, and this was tolerated. More recently, one of Cameron's aides was arrested for having child pornography on his computer. In any other business where an employee was charged with such a crime, the likelihood is that the employee will immediately be marched from the premises and swiftly erased from company history. Patrick Rock was given a week to get his affairs in order before the OB even got a chance to arrest him. A cynical man might reflect that a week's grace might be awfully handy for limiting the scope of any incriminating evidence, but let's just leave such speculation aside and just say it was bloody irregular and that it wouldn't have taken the OB a week to nick a nonce on a sink estate. If what Verbal said about UKIP earlier is true, and that voting is about the company you keep, then surely that principle applies even more to politics when choosing trusted confidants, and even more so when it's the PM doing the choosing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 More recently, one of Cameron's aides was arrested for having child pornography on his computer. In any other business where an employee was charged with such a crime, the likelihood is that the employee will immediately be marched from the premises and swiftly erased from company history. Patrick Rock was given a week to get his affairs in order before the OB even got a chance to arrest him. A cynical man might reflect that a week's grace might be awfully handy for limiting the scope of any incriminating evidence, but let's just leave such speculation aside and just say it was bloody irregular and that it wouldn't have taken the OB a week to nick a nonce on a sink estate. I was interested bout this cos it sounds scandal, but your statements do not reconcile with the news reports Do You Have Secret Infos Bout This? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 I was interested bout this cos it sounds scandal, but your statements do not reconcile with the news reports Do You Have Secret Infos Bout This? Bear, you're correct to question because although I'm an entrenched f**ker incapable of changing an opinion, I've got the details slightly wrong here. Rock got notice of his arrest and was allowed to resign the day before he was arrested. Day, not week. Bad pap. However, Cameron kept the story out of the news for three weeks. Backbencher John Mann MP said said it was “mysterious” that the situation had not emerged earlier. “There has been a bodged attempt at media manipulation which is wholly unacceptable from 10 Downing Street,” he said. “Of course they should have revealed it proactively.” And he told the Telegraph: “It gives the impression of a clumsy attempt at a cover-up. If Mr Rock was told [of the allegations] before his arrest it an issue, it would interfere with the justice system.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/downing-street-accused-of-coverup-over-senior-aide-patrick-rocks-arrest-on-child-abuse-images-allegations-9169818.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 He was questioned by Police a few hours after Downing Street discovered the material and reported it. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/senior-tory-adviser-patrick-rock-arrested-on-child-pornography-allegations-9166837.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 April, 2015 Share Posted 7 April, 2015 http://may2015.com/ideas/election-2015-new-academic-forecast-predicts-labour-win-most-seats-and-take-power/ Alternative poll has Labour forming a rainbow coalition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 No comment of your own on non-doms then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 No comment of your own on non-doms then? Nope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/07/senior-doctors-assess-governments-record-on-nhs-letter-in-full http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/healthcare/private-parts-of-the-nhs-say-the-nhs-should-not-be-privatised/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Finger on the pulse.... http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/12876418.Prime_Minister_under_fire_after__embarrassing__Southampton_seat_spelling_error/?ref=mmp&ref=mmsp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 The non dom system is a bit of a joke and we have some of the softest laws on this. My view is this - if you live and work in the country then all uk derived income is taxable from day 1 - once you hit two years then you are resident and your worldwide income should fall under the tax system - It is not going to be too disastrous for the rich as we have double tax agreements with a lot of countries that gives credit for any tax paid in the originating country. Ed Balls has caused himself to look a bit daft given that not only he has reversed his position, he has changed the anticipated outcome to suit his message. FWIW I would implement this even is it costs a bit of money as there has to be a sense of fairness that everyone is treated the same by the tax system and the Non- dom rule clearly does not do this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 I see Sturgeon got boo'd by suggesting there could be another referendum up there after 2016. She said that it is up to the people but then dismissed it when it was pointed out to her that the people spoke and she lost despite the ducks all lined up for her lot to win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Finger on the pulse.... http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/12876418.Prime_Minister_under_fire_after__embarrassing__Southampton_seat_spelling_error/?ref=mmp&ref=mmsp This will be an interesting watch on election night. Presently a Denham held Labour seat with a very slim majority, do the locals vote for Southampton born and bred Royston Smith, who has been involved in local politics for a long time as well as disarming a mad sailor and saving lives, or do they vote for a young, pretty(ish) Labour candidate, parachuted into the ward to cover for Denham's imminent retirement? Can't ignore the Lib Dems, but they will probably come in 3rd although the hand-wringers may boost the Labour vote? Who knows. But it will be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 This will be an interesting watch on election night. Presently a Denham held Labour seat with a very slim majority, do the locals vote for Southampton born and bred Royston Smith, who has been involved in local politics for a long time as well as disarming a mad sailor and saving lives, or do they vote for a young, pretty(ish) Labour candidate, parachuted into the ward to cover for Denham's imminent retirement? Can't ignore the Lib Dems, but they will probably come in 3rd although the hand-wringers may boost the Labour vote? Who knows. But it will be interesting. Well, frankly I'm amazed that Labour have chosen to put one of their preferred children into such an important seat. They do it all the time up here, knowing they've got a 10K majority cushion in a load of places. Marginals? Madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Well, frankly I'm amazed that Labour have chosen to put one of their preferred children into such an important seat. They do it all the time up here, knowing they've got a 10K majority cushion in a load of places. Marginals? Madness. It does seem a bit strange, pap. Smith will be a strong candidate, no doubt and despite the odd indiscretion (driving w/o insurance) he's a recognisable local figure with a strong background in local politics who had a good showing in the last election. On the face of it you would think that Labour should have selected a stronger candidate to replace the popular Denham, but fair play to Davis, she has been very active locally and seems to be getting on local radio a fair bit too. May have too much ground to catch up on Smith though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Not being a local anymore I hadn't paid attention to the Labour candidate for Southampton Itchen. She seems nice and is one of those slightly quirky Labour/Co-op candidates, whatever the hell they are. I remember Stroud used to have a Lab/Co-Op MP for many years. I imagine they get a discount on funerals or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Also, she's given her mobile number out on video via her twitter feed. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/healthcare/private-parts-of-the-nhs-say-the-nhs-should-not-be-privatised/ Most GPs want to be employees and not contractors so they spend more of their time with patients and less on IT systems, receptionists reviews, getting the guttering cleared etc. Why should they not speak out against privatisation? Tim Worstall is disengenuous (a UKipper who'd have thunk?) by saying those mired in the current setup are hypocritical for wanting to change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 (edited) one of those slightly quirky Labour/Co-op candidates, whatever the hell they are. I remember Stroud used to have a Lab/Co-Op MP for many years. I imagine they get a discount on funerals or something. They get dividend stamps per vote. They can then cash them in at the House of Commons and save on expenses. Seems a fairer system to me. Edited 8 April, 2015 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Most GPs want to be employees and not contractors .... Source? ...so they spend more of their time with patients and less on IT systems, receptionists reviews, getting the guttering cleared etc. That's exactly what GP Practice Managers are there for. GPs themselves don't get involved in this and suggesting they do is a nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 1. How big a GP practice do you think you need to be to be able to employ support staff who have IT, building management, staff management, clinical administrative (eg booking specialist clinics, referrals) and liaising with social services home care, not to mention people skills? Clue. Its far far more than the average practice size. Most 'practice managers' are in reality relatively low level admin staff and as a result the partners get involved in all significant aspects. 2. Obviously I dont know all GPs, but I know enough to have an informed opinion having worked in Health Authorities, GP commissioning and a teaching hospital for many years. GPs want to practice medicine, not run a business / bureaucracy. The introduction of the internal market 25 years ago started a process of gradually introducing more form filling and data collection which has only grown with each subsequent review. Somehere around 40% of a GPs time is spent on admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Blimey. Tory non-dom "smoking gun" decommissioned immediately. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/08/labour-accuses-tories-of-editing-ed-balls-non-dom-video-to-mislead-voters Thought the angle was problematic enough, what with most people not knowing what a non-dom is. The wánkers actually had to lie to get it to stick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Red Ed on the Non-Dom tax situation:- Why should there be one rule for some and another for everybody else? It is not fair, it is not just, it holds Britain back. We will stop it," Labour leader Ed Miliband said in a campaign speech. "We will replace it with a clear principle: Anyone permanently resident in the UK will pay tax in the same way." What a bloody hypocrite the man is. Bleating on about what is fair and what is not and that everybody should pay tax in the same way on the one hand, and then trying to screw the wealthier taxpayers left right and centre with punitive higher rates. If everybody paid tax in the same way, that would mean that all tax payers paid the same percentage rate. What he seems incapable of understanding is that there comes a point when the tax revenue declines because the wealthy leave these shores and take their wealth invested here elsewhere. There have been plenty enough instances of this happening historically with successive Labour governments, but lessons are never learned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 If everybody paid tax in the same way, that would mean that all tax payers paid the same percentage rate. So because we don't have the flat rate tax system you prefer its okay to let the super rich not pay tax? Stellar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Red Ed on the Non-Dom tax situation:- What a bloody hypocrite the man is. Bleating on about what is fair and what is not and that everybody should pay tax in the same way on the one hand, and then trying to screw the wealthier taxpayers left right and centre with punitive higher rates. If everybody paid tax in the same way, that would mean that all tax payers paid the same percentage rate. What he seems incapable of understanding is that there comes a point when the tax revenue declines because the wealthy leave these shores and take their wealth invested here elsewhere. There have been plenty enough instances of this happening historically with successive Labour governments, but lessons are never learned Has there? I was under the impression the number of non-doms increased under the last Labour government? The problem with non-doms is surely not that they are being screwed by higher rates, more that some pay no tax at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 "Why should there be one rule for some and another for everybody else? It is not fair, it is not just, it holds Britain back. We will stop it," Labour leader Ed Miliband said in a campaign speech. Like one rule for some people who happen to live in an expensive house, and one for everybody else, Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 (edited) Blimey. Tory non-dom "smoking gun" decommissioned immediately. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/08/labour-accuses-tories-of-editing-ed-balls-non-dom-video-to-mislead-voters Thought the angle was problematic enough, what with most people not knowing what a non-dom is. The wánkers actually had to lie to get it to stick How does omitting the line: “But I think we can be tougher and we should be and we will.” alter the meaning/intent of the earlier line: "if you abolish the whole status then probably it ends up costing Britain money because there will be some people who will then leave the country."? (fwiw, all the clips of the Balls interview I've seen on TV today have included the "omitted" sentence.) Stories like this can obviously be spun whichever way one chooses, but the fact is that Labour have gone from Balls saying that it will probably cost the economy money to Miliband saying that it will add "several £100 million" to the economy. Which is it? p.s. No doubt if this was a story about a muddled Tory policy we'd be arguing the opposite side of the coin Edited 8 April, 2015 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 1. How big a GP practice do you think you need to be to be able to employ support staff who have IT, building management, staff management, clinical administrative (eg booking specialist clinics, referrals) and liaising with social services home care, not to mention people skills? Which is exactly why these specialist skills are often outsourced to the private sector, to ensure that the specialists supply the wide range of skills required. Then all you need is someone to manage them, not actually do the work themselves. But that's privatisation, and that's bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 How does omitting the line: “But I think we can be tougher and we should be and we will.” alter the meaning/intent of the earlier line: "if you abolish the whole status then probably it ends up costing Britain money because there will be some people who will then leave the country."? (fwiw, all the clips of the Balls interview I've seen on TV today have included the "omitted" sentence.) Stories like this can obviously be spun whichever way one chooses, but the fact is that Labour have gone from Balls saying that it will probably cost the economy money to Miliband saying that it will add "several £100 million" to the economy. There is a world of difference between being tougher and abolishing the whole status. Abolishing non dom status would cost money reforming it could generate money. There is no contradiction. We arent talking about a relatively few mega rich foreign citizens having a base here. There are around 115,000 non doms in this country, a status you can inherit from your father or grandfather, even if you have lived here all your life. Its a corrupt and outdated system which needs reform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 (edited) There is a world of difference between being tougher and abolishing the whole status. Abolishing non dom status would cost money reforming it could generate money. There is no contradiction. Isn't the contradiction in all this that Balls said he wouldn't advocate abolishing it whereas Miliband says he will? We arent talking about a relatively few mega rich foreign citizens having a base here. There are around 115,000 non doms in this country, a status you can inherit from your father or grandfather, even if you have lived here all your life. Its a corrupt and outdated system which needs reform. I agree the ability to inherited non-dom status isn't right. I heard a stat earlier that c.90% of non-doms stay in the country less than 7 years (i.e. they are classed as "temporary") and their net contribution to the economy is greater than if they weren't here setting up and growing businesses in the UK in the first place. Until one sees the evidence that abolishing non-doms will have a postitive effect on the economy then the jury is out, for me, on whether or not its a good policy. Btw, the number of non-doms doubled over the course of the last Labour government. But Blair and co were only Tory-lite of course.... Edited 8 April, 2015 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Candidate for photo of the day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 (edited) Which is exactly why these specialist skills are often outsourced to the private sector, to ensure that the specialists supply the wide range of skills required. Then all you need is someone to manage them, not actually do the work themselves. But that's privatisation, and that's bad. We arent talking about someone coming in to update windows. Patient Administration Systems are hugely complex and need to communicate confidential information securely on a national basis. The history of IT in the NHS is a minefield because its so complex - and its complex largely because it needs to support the fundamentally flawed internal market governments of successive shades have introduced. Both Labour and the Conservatives have wasted billions on systems which dont work. However the hidden cost is the amount of time clinicians have to put into to supporting the designing of the systems because no matter how competent IT contractors dont understand clinical practice and what clinicians need the system to be able to do. At least two private sector computer systems for the NHS have failed to work in the past 20 years and been scrapped after years in development. When I ran medical specialties at a teaching hospital in London probably 30% of my time and that of the Clinical Director (a senior consultant being paid £150,000pa) was occupied for two years trying to get Mcdonnell Douglas employees to understand issues like why a meatal lesion was different to a meatal ulcer and why it was important that it was possible to code separately (it meant the hospital got paid nearly double the amount per procedure). The system never did work and was scrapped. Off course the NHS got the blame, not McDonnell Douglas. Edited 8 April, 2015 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 (edited) Red Ed on the Non-Dom tax situation:- What a bloody hypocrite the man is. Bleating on about what is fair and what is not and that everybody should pay tax in the same way on the one hand, and then trying to screw the wealthier taxpayers left right and centre with punitive higher rates. If everybody paid tax in the same way, that would mean that all tax payers paid the same percentage rate. What he seems incapable of understanding is that there comes a point when the tax revenue declines because the wealthy leave these shores and take their wealth invested here elsewhere. There have been plenty enough instances of this happening historically with successive Labour governments, but lessons are never learned Bless your little cotton socks, Les. A brilliant, gravity-defying leap of logic there. So because Miliband believes that anyone who effectively lives in the UK should pay tax in the same way necessarily means he should support the same rate of tax for all Edited 8 April, 2015 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 8 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 8 April, 2015 I can't work out if this is genius or bonkers....or both.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Isn't the contradiction in all this that Balls said he wouldn't advocate abolishing it whereas Miliband says he will? I agree the ability to inherited non-dom status isn't right. I heard a stat earlier that c.90% of non-doms stay in the country less than 7 years (i.e. they are classed as "temporary") and their net contribution to the economy is greater than if they weren't here setting up and growing businesses in the UK in the first place. Until one sees the evidence that abolishing non-doms will have a postitive effect on the economy then the jury is out, for me, on whether or not its a good policy. Btw, the number of non-doms doubled over the course of the last Labour government. But Blair and co were only Tory-lite of course.... I do understand the logic of a system which attracts new foreign money to this country and the associated benefits they bring. We should aim to keep those seriously wealthy people who would otherwise live elsewhere -although there is a danger of repeating the issue with corporation tax where countries vie with each in a race to the bottom to offer the lowest possible tax rates. If people are leaving after seven years when they become liable for the £30,000pa tax levy then fine imo. It shows they weren't really wealthy and were therefore not making an exceptional contribution to the economy to justify their status. Good summary here http://news.sky.com/story/1460806/everything-you-need-to-know-about-non-doms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 1. How big a GP practice do you think you need to be to be able to employ support staff who have IT, building management, staff management, clinical administrative (eg booking specialist clinics, referrals) and liaising with social services home care, not to mention people skills? Clue. Its far far more than the average practice size. Most 'practice managers' are in reality relatively low level admin staff and as a result the partners get involved in all significant aspects. 2. Obviously I dont know all GPs, but I know enough to have an informed opinion having worked in Health Authorities, GP commissioning and a teaching hospital for many years. GPs want to practice medicine, not run a business / bureaucracy. The introduction of the internal market 25 years ago started a process of gradually introducing more form filling and data collection which has only grown with each subsequent review. Somehere around 40% of a GPs time is spent on admin. Don't agree with these points. We've built and extended a number of "average" GP Surgeries over the years and without exception all the Practice Managers I have met (and there have been a few) are very switched on people. The average size Surgery is a very capable place than can cope with all the challenges you list (and more) and is generally full of talented people that are dedicated and proactive professionals. Partners get involved because they "own" and direct the business, so they have to get involved, it's par for the course and of them, most of them are happy to do so. Of the GP's I have met, i'd say roughly 30% are not interested in the wider aspects of running a "business", but the ones that are have told me they find it a very enjoyable part of their routine. In fact some of them feel constrained and would like to widen their revenue stream or expand their services, if only they were able. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Don't agree with these points. We've built and extended a number of "average" GP Surgeries over the years and without exception all the Practice Managers I have met (and there have been a few) are very switched on people. The average size Surgery is a very capable place than can cope with all the challenges you list (and more) and is generally full of talented people that are dedicated and proactive professionals. Partners get involved because they "own" and direct the business, so they have to get involved, it's par for the course and of them, most of them are happy to do so. Of the GP's I have met, i'd say roughly 30% are not interested in the wider aspects of running a "business", but the ones that are have told me they find it a very enjoyable part of their routine. In fact some of them feel constrained and would like to widen their revenue stream or expand their services, if only they were able. I wasnt denigrating the quality of the staff, far from it. Torres claimed you can contract out and leave them to get on with it. My point was contracting out requires a lot of time spent by NHS staff to shape and inform the process. Your post confirms that, it unavoidable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Bless your little cotton socks, Les. A brilliant, gravity-defying leap of logic there. So because Miliband believes that anyone who effectively lives in the UK should pay tax in the same way necessarily means he should support the same rate of tax for all We are talking semantics here, Shylock. Red Ed obviously doesn't mean that everybody should pay taxes in the same way, as his sobriquet infers he is a leftie whose inclinations are not that everybody be treated equally, but that those who often earn much more through their own skills should be taxed punitively. I'm quite OK with the concept that Non-Doms pay the equivalent rate of tax here as everybody else on what they earn here, or on money they bring in from their wealth abroad. This is already quite tightly regulated by changes made in 2008. Where they cross the line for me is with their presumption that they should pay tax here on their Worldwide earnings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Red Ed obviously doesn't mean that everybody should pay taxes in the same way, as his sobriquet infers he is a leftie whose inclinations are not that everybody be treated equally, but that those who often earn much more through their own skills should be taxed punitively. The Tories, UKIP, Lib Dems and everybody else agree with him. Red Dave, Red Nige, Red Nick, lefty b'stards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 More recently, one of Cameron's aides was arrested for having child pornography on his computer. In any other business where an employee was charged with such a crime, the likelihood is that the employee will immediately be marched from the premises and swiftly erased from company history. Patrick Rock was given a week to get his affairs in order before the OB even got a chance to arrest him. A cynical man might reflect that a week's grace might be awfully handy for limiting the scope of any incriminating evidence, but let's just leave such speculation aside and just say it was bloody irregular and that it wouldn't have taken the OB a week to nick a nonce on a sink estate. Pap , the employer would normally suspend someone in such cases where there is an ongoing investigation Like wise that maybe the case even if charge . The deciding fact is where the employee is found guilty and at the point the employee is well and truly like to be dismissed So by your viewpoint you would have expected Dave Jones to be Sacked when he was charged Deal with the Facts Pap instead of taking a blinkered approach to fuel your pro left wing and labour agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 We arent talking about someone coming in to update windows. Patient Administration Systems are hugely complex and need to communicate confidential information securely on a national basis. The history of IT in the NHS is a minefield because its so complex - and its complex largely because it needs to support the fundamentally flawed internal market governments of successive shades have introduced. Both Labour and the Conservatives have wasted billions on systems which dont work. However the hidden cost is the amount of time clinicians have to put into to supporting the designing of the systems because no matter how competent IT contractors dont understand clinical practice and what clinicians need the system to be able to do. At least two private sector computer systems for the NHS have failed to work in the past 20 years and been scrapped after years in development. When I ran medical specialties at a teaching hospital in London probably 30% of my time and that of the Clinical Director (a senior consultant being paid £150,000pa) was occupied for two years trying to get Mcdonnell Douglas employees to understand issues like why a meatal lesion was different to a meatal ulcer and why it was important that it was possible to code separately (it meant the hospital got paid nearly double the amount per procedure). The system never did work and was scrapped. Off course the NHS got the blame, not McDonnell Douglas. All of which may be true, but it's not the domain of your average family GP, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 8 April, 2015 Share Posted 8 April, 2015 Don't agree with these points. We've built and extended a number of "average" GP Surgeries over the years and without exception all the Practice Managers I have met (and there have been a few) are very switched on people. The average size Surgery is a very capable place than can cope with all the challenges you list (and more) and is generally full of talented people that are dedicated and proactive professionals. Partners get involved because they "own" and direct the business, so they have to get involved, it's par for the course and of them, most of them are happy to do so. Of the GP's I have met, i'd say roughly 30% are not interested in the wider aspects of running a "business", but the ones that are have told me they find it a very enjoyable part of their routine. In fact some of them feel constrained and would like to widen their revenue stream or expand their services, if only they were able. I wasnt denigrating the quality of the staff, far from it. Torres claimed you can contract out and leave them to get on with it. My point was contracting out requires a lot of time spent by NHS staff to shape and inform the process. Your post confirms that, it unavoidable. You claimed that GPs were too busy worrying out who was going clear dead leaves form the guttering every autumn to care for their patients, which is patently nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now