Jeremy Hunt and the demonisation of the NHS

[Batman]

I think it depends on what changes are proposed. If the people who work in the NHS think they wont work why not criticise the proposals?

 

those in the industry usually say big change will not work. I know full well how the fire-fighters felt towards big change in their field and they were shown up in a huge way.

The police heckled the home secretary at the annual get together. She forced through change against huge criticism and was proved right. They sat in silence to her a year later.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I think it depends on what changes are proposed. If the people who work in the NHS think they wont work why not criticise the proposals?

 

The BMA critised the setting up of the NHS in the first place .

[buctootim]

No... Because less weekend bed blocking.

 

How does that work? How will more weekend staffing reduce bed blocking?

 

Having most elective work done during the week gives economies of scale and reduces anti social hours payments. If you start re-rostering to have clinics at the weekends you will increase costs (anti social hours payments, additional receptionists, record clerks, medical secretaries etc) for no additional capacity and reduce medical cover during the week.

[Batman]

How does that work? How will more weekend staffing reduce bed blocking?

 

Having most elective work done during the week gives economies of scale and reduces anti social hours payments. If you start re-rostering to have clinics at the weekends you will increase costs (anti social hours payments, additional receptionists, record clerks, medical secretaries etc) for no additional capacity and reduce medical cover during the week.

many of these nurses and doctors will do the work at Weekends, for private agencies on say, £50-£150 per hour, working within the NHS.

The government are trying to cut costs by not making that possible

so, those costs are there and are not going away unless something changes

[buctootim]

god knows what is the right answer, the NHS is heading on a path that means it will collapse I guess.

The spending v the huge increases in population means something big has to change

 

trouble is, anyone goes near it and attempts any form of change, they get absolutely slaughtered.

 

 

Its not the NHS which is the problem - its the cost of healthcare increasing as better medicine enables people to live longer, but live longer with more illnesses which need to be treated. Its not an NHS issue, its a developed world issue.

[sadoldgit]

many of these nurses and doctors will do the work at Weekends, for private agencies on say, £50-£150 per hour.

The government are trying to cut costs by not making that possible

 

Yes you have said this before but it seems odd given that they are saying that it is about working too many hours as it is? If that is the case why isn't Hunt making more of it in support of his plans?

[Batman]

Its not the NHS which is the problem - its the cost of healthcare increasing as better medicine enables people to live longer, but live longer with more illnesses which need to be treated. Its not an NHS issue, its a developed world issue.

 

well, when NHS trusts have god knows how many senior nurses and doctors on near on circa £1000 a day per person working for private agencies....then something surely has to give, right?

[buctootim]

many of these nurses and doctors will do the work at Weekends, for private agencies on say, £50-£150 per hour, working within the NHS.

The government are trying to cut costs by not making that possible

so, those costs are there and are not going away unless something changes

 

I dont see how these reforms will reduce use of agency staff, and afaik they arent intended to.

[buctootim]

well, when NHS trusts have god knows how many senior nurses and doctors on near on circa £1000 a day per person working for private agencies....then something surely has to give, right?

 

Thats a supply issue - train more staff so there is more availability and reduce the need for expensive agency staff. Its a different issue to increasing demand (although obviously increasing demand creates need for more staff)

[Batman]

I dont see how these reforms will reduce use of agency staff, and afaik they arent intended to.

 

they will have more NHS coverage at weekends/unsociable hours.

there will still be a need for staff working for private agencies but the costs for those agencies providing bods over a weekend is incredible. Dont even look at the figures for bank holidays. More than likely, far less 'shifts' available to agenciesat weekends, day or nights will be the case under the new proposals.

which in turns saves an incredible amount that could be used elsewhere in the system

[buctootim]

they will have more NHS coverage at weekends/unsociable hours.

there will still be a need for staff working for private agencies but the costs for those agencies providing bods over a weekend is incredible. Dont even look at the figures for bank holidays. More than likely, far less 'shifts' available at weekends, day or nights will be the case under the new proposals.

 

That doent make any sense. If you increase the required staffing complement at weekends but dont increase the number of doctors overall you will increase costs - it wont reduce the requirement for weekend agency staff.

[Batman]

That doent make any sense. If you increase the required staffing complement at weekends but dont increase the number of doctors overall you will increase costs - it wont reduce the requirement for weekend agency staff.

 

at the moment, many of the 'gaps' at weekends that need filling by 'junior doctors' (according to the government) are filled by the very same junior doctors working for agencies getting circa £1000 per shift.

 

obviously, that is completely unsustainable.

 

if those 'gaps' were reduced at weekends and appeared on say, EG a Tuesday/Wednesday. That would be far more cost effective for NHS trusts.

[buctootim]

at the moment, many of the 'gaps' at weekends that need filling by 'junior doctors' (according to the government) are filled by the very same junior doctors working for agencies getting circa £1000 per shift.

 

obviously, that is completely unsustainable.

 

if those 'gaps' were reduced at weekends and appeared on say, EG a Tuesday/Wednesday. That would be far more cost effective for NHS trusts.

 

But thats down to whoever does the rosta for the local trust. If the local managers doing the rostas aren't able to fill the gaps at the weekends currently they sure wont be able to if you increase the number of staff required to be on duty. As I said if anything it will increase the bill for agency staff.

[Batman]

But thats down to whoever does the rosta for the local trust. If the local managers doing the rostas aren't able to fill the gaps at the weekends currently they sure wont be able to if you increase the number of staff required to be on duty. As I said if anything it will increase the bill for agency staff.

 

believe it or not, there are bods who work at my missus place who dont do weekends as it is not in their contract. (but they do elsewhere for agencies)

that will have to change for them if this new proposal comes through

[Weston Super Saint]

I read somewhere today - I forget where - that working 1 Saturday in 4 is considered as 'unreasonable' for junior doctors and thus triggers a 30% pay rise.

 

To me - having worked in hospitality for 18 years and working nigh on every weekend [Friday, Sat & Sun] except for holidays - it seems incredible that this would apply! Ask any of the people you meet who are working at the weekend, from the person who sells you some milk on a Saturday morning to the bar person who pulls you a pint on Saturday night or Sunday lunch and every single one of them would LOVE a 30% increase for working at the weekend! The issue is, they won't get it. The reason they won't get it is because they knew what they were getting in to before they took the job! Just like the doctors do. They know that evening and weekend work will be required.

 

I'm not complaining that they get the 30% pay rise. I am complaining that they are not happy about it! To me, having given up 18 years of weekends - which was my choice to do so! - they are an awful lot luckier than pretty much everyone else that works at the weekend. Most of those will be on little more than minimum wage...

[Chez]

"if 1 doctor works just 1 hour over the maximum shift length it can trigger a 66% pay rise for all doctors on that rota." is this true? If so I don't understand how something so strange finds its way into a national pay structure.

[Chez]

what will happen if the junior doctors start working to rule? The example on page one is a guy working 12 hours (25%) unpaid. Is that typical? Because if you get rid of the good will that seems to hold the NHS together, and perhaps the junior doctoers work to rule, then there could be a huge gap in man hours and no finances to plug that gap.

[trousers]

"if 1 doctor works just 1 hour over the maximum shift length it can trigger a 66% pay rise for all doctors on that rota." is this true?

 

This is the crux of my original post on this thread (post #7). Until we (Joe Public) know what is true, and what isn't, about both the existing contract and the new contract, how is any layman in a position to debate what is unfair/unreasonable about the new contract? It would seem that people in general prefer to argue about headlines rather than actually delve down into the facts. As I say, I've no idea who's right or wrong, so I've no idea whether I should be joining the Jeremy Hunt witch hunt brigade or backing the government on this.

 

Is there a factual summary of the contract somewhere online, or do we only have headlines and opinionated newspaper reports to go on?

[Lord Duckhunter]

what will happen if the junior doctors start working to rule? The example on page one is a guy working 12 hours (25%) unpaid. Is that typical? Because if you get rid of the good will that seems to hold the NHS together, and perhaps the junior doctoers work to rule, then there could be a huge gap in man hours and no finances to plug that gap.

 

Don't know about Doctors , but I know midwives do a lot of hours over , you can hardly be easing the babies head out and suddenly declare " I'm off now , I've finished my shift " . They don't get paid for it , however they do book the extra hours and they can get the time back.

[Seaford Saint]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/jeremy-hunt-timeline-of-shame/

 

 

In 2009, Hunt had to repay £9,500 of taxpayers’ cash in claims for his second home expenses.

In 2010, Hunt gave a civil service job to the daughter of a friend – a Conservative Lord who’d been the director of one of Hunt’s companies.

In 2010, as Sports Minister Hunt blamed ‘hooligans’ for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster – in which 97 Liverpool fans died, a third of them children or teenagers.

In 2010, Hunt was caught hiding behind a tree trying to avoid being spotted going into a private dinner with the Murdoch’s.

In 2012, Hunt and his advisors were caught leaking sensitive information to Rupert Murdoch’s office when Hunt was supposed to be handling the company’s bid to take over BSkyB.

In 2012, Hunt was caught dodging more than £100,000 in tax in a property deal.

In 2012, Hunt was in charge of the Olympics security fiasco, in which he paid millions of taxpayers’ money to private company G4S who were so incompetent the army and police had to step in.

In 2013, the British Medical Association said Hunt displayed “complete ignorance” after saying he thought the abortion limit should be changed to 12 weeks.

In 2013, Hunt used £4,000 of taxpayers’ money to pay for language lessons so he could learn his Chinese lover’s lingo.

In 2016, thousands of junior doctors plan to quit NHS after Hunt imposes new contracts

[badgerx16]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/jeremy-hunt-timeline-of-shame/

 

 

In 2009, Hunt had to repay £9,500 of taxpayers’ cash in claims for his second home expenses.

In 2010, Hunt gave a civil service job to the daughter of a friend – a Conservative Lord who’d been the director of one of Hunt’s companies.

In 2010, as Sports Minister Hunt blamed ‘hooligans’ for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster – in which 97 Liverpool fans died, a third of them children or teenagers.

In 2010, Hunt was caught hiding behind a tree trying to avoid being spotted going into a private dinner with the Murdoch’s.

In 2012, Hunt and his advisors were caught leaking sensitive information to Rupert Murdoch’s office when Hunt was supposed to be handling the company’s bid to take over BSkyB.

In 2012, Hunt was caught dodging more than £100,000 in tax in a property deal.

In 2012, Hunt was in charge of the Olympics security fiasco, in which he paid millions of taxpayers’ money to private company G4S who were so incompetent the army and police had to step in.

In 2013, the British Medical Association said Hunt displayed “complete ignorance” after saying he thought the abortion limit should be changed to 12 weeks.

In 2013, Hunt used £4,000 of taxpayers’ money to pay for language lessons so he could learn his Chinese lover’s lingo.

In 2016, thousands of junior doctors plan to quit NHS after Hunt imposes new contracts

 

Jeremy Hunt, the only man who is his own rhyming slang.

[Hockey_saint]

Read the first paragraph of this:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_Act_2012

 

Particularly the following line:

 

"It removed responsibility for the health of citizens from the Secretary of State for Health, which the post had carried since the inception of the NHS in 1948"

 

This is what this is about, readying the contracts and making them more appealing to private firms...or he'd have to sack all doctors and re-employ them on new contracts. So yeah....cheers right-wingers for voting in a government who basically wanted to kill the NHS off and sell it to private companies all along.

[hutch]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/jeremy-hunt-timeline-of-shame/

 

 

In 2009, Hunt had to repay £9,500 of taxpayers’ cash in claims for his second home expenses.

In 2010, Hunt gave a civil service job to the daughter of a friend – a Conservative Lord who’d been the director of one of Hunt’s companies.

In 2010, as Sports Minister Hunt blamed ‘hooligans’ for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster – in which 97 Liverpool fans died, a third of them children or teenagers.

In 2010, Hunt was caught hiding behind a tree trying to avoid being spotted going into a private dinner with the Murdoch’s.

In 2012, Hunt and his advisors were caught leaking sensitive information to Rupert Murdoch’s office when Hunt was supposed to be handling the company’s bid to take over BSkyB.

In 2012, Hunt was caught dodging more than £100,000 in tax in a property deal.

In 2012, Hunt was in charge of the Olympics security fiasco, in which he paid millions of taxpayers’ money to private company G4S who were so incompetent the army and police had to step in.

In 2013, the British Medical Association said Hunt displayed “complete ignorance” after saying he thought the abortion limit should be changed to 12 weeks.

In 2013, Hunt used £4,000 of taxpayers’ money to pay for language lessons so he could learn his Chinese lover’s lingo.

In 2016, thousands of junior doctors plan to quit NHS after Hunt imposes new contracts

Well you certainly wouldn't catch me signing a contract with all those nasty conditions in it.

[Batman]

Read the first paragraph of this:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_Act_2012

 

Particularly the following line:

 

"It removed responsibility for the health of citizens from the Secretary of State for Health, which the post had carried since the inception of the NHS in 1948"

 

This is what this is about, readying the contracts and making them more appealing to private firms...or he'd have to sack all doctors and re-employ them on new contracts. So yeah....cheers right-wingers for voting in a government who basically wanted to kill the NHS off and sell it to private companies all along.

the NHS is not going to be killed, it is not going to be sold

 

it does however, need some serious change otherwise it will pop

[Whitey Grandad]

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2016/02/12/jeremy-hunt-timeline-of-shame/

 

 

In 2009, Hunt had to repay £9,500 of taxpayers’ cash in claims for his second home expenses.

In 2010, Hunt gave a civil service job to the daughter of a friend – a Conservative Lord who’d been the director of one of Hunt’s companies.

In 2010, as Sports Minister Hunt blamed ‘hooligans’ for the 1989 Hillsborough disaster – in which 97 Liverpool fans died, a third of them children or teenagers.

In 2010, Hunt was caught hiding behind a tree trying to avoid being spotted going into a private dinner with the Murdoch’s.

In 2012, Hunt and his advisors were caught leaking sensitive information to Rupert Murdoch’s office when Hunt was supposed to be handling the company’s bid to take over BSkyB.

In 2012, Hunt was caught dodging more than £100,000 in tax in a property deal.

In 2012, Hunt was in charge of the Olympics security fiasco, in which he paid millions of taxpayers’ money to private company G4S who were so incompetent the army and police had to step in.

In 2013, the British Medical Association said Hunt displayed “complete ignorance” after saying he thought the abortion limit should be changed to 12 weeks.

In 2013, Hunt used £4,000 of taxpayers’ money to pay for language lessons so he could learn his Chinese lover’s lingo.

In 2016, thousands of junior doctors plan to quit NHS after Hunt imposes new contracts

 

So what's your point?

 

Honestly, what he does in his spare time is none of my business.

[buctootim]

So you don't care if a government minister is corrupt, untrustworthy and leaks information to favourite businesses?

[Weston Super Saint]

So you don't care if a government minister is corrupt, untrustworthy and leaks information to favourite businesses?

 

I've always assumed that this was their 'modus operandi'.

[bridge too far]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/solomonhughes/nhs-contract-stoke#.ir2jVpZ5b

[sadoldgit]

the NHS is not going to be killed, it is not going to be sold

 

it does however, need some serious change otherwise it will pop

 

It really does need to change in many areas. extra funding would be a good start! I don't know how you can say it will not be sold.

[bridge too far]

It really does need to change in many areas. extra funding would be a good start! I don't know how you can say it will not be sold.

Exactly - it's happening - see my link above. It's being done by stealth

[Jonnyboy]

So what's your point?

 

Honestly, what he does in his spare time is none of my business.

 

Half on that was on taxpayers time.

[Verbal]

Exactly - it's happening - see my link above. It's being done by stealth

 

One of the great problems with the NHS and public debate about it is that it's a hall of mirrors. You'd never know from current debates, especially from the Left, but the most invasive privatisation of the NHS was done at its inception, when the BMA flat-out refused to support its creation without the ability of its senior members to continue their private practice within the NHS itself - hence private beds, still the most visible evidence of privation within the service.

 

Since then, the politics of the NHS gave been buried in a Byzantine maze of accounting procedures and obscure reorganisations, many concealing hugely powerful interests - the BMA, the drugs companies, health providers (including private hospitals), PFI financiers, medical-technology corporations - all extracting huge charges from the NHS for their inclusion and cooperation.

 

That these interests, unlike in the US, are able to operate mostly off the radar in public debates about health provision is made possible in part by a largely uncritical adoration of the NHS. Whenever anyone raises criticisms they risk being cast as surreptitious privateers, and the political damage just isn't worth it. If we perhaps treated the NHS a little less like an untouchable jewel we might get something that worked a lot better, including for junior doctors.

[Whitey Grandad]

Half on that was on taxpayers time.

 

A minister is 24/24 on taxpayer's time. They don't work fixed hours.

 

 

Unlike some doctors.

[Whitey Grandad]

So you don't care if a government minister is corrupt, untrustworthy and leaks information to favourite businesses?

 

Par for the course, I'd be surprised if they didn't. And that applies to all political persuasions.

[Jonnyboy]

A minister is 24/24 on taxpayer's time. They don't work fixed hours.

 

 

Unlike some doctors.

 

Then it should be illegal for them to have other interests or employments whilst they are MPs.

[Jonnyboy]

Par for the course, I'd be surprised if they didn't. And that applies to all political persuasions.

 

I think you'll find Jeremy Corbyn is one of the least crooked out there. Thread closed.

[Whitey Grandad]

Then it should be illegal for them to have other interests or employments whilst they are MPs.

 

And all doctors should work exclusively for the NHS?

[Whitey Grandad]

I think you'll find Jeremy Corbyn is one of the least crooked out there. Thread closed.

 

What was that business with Diane Abbot et al.?

[Jonnyboy]

And all doctors should work exclusively for the NHS?

 

Within the hours they are paid for that work. Yes.

[Lord Duckhunter]

One of the great problems with the NHS and public debate about it is that it's a hall of mirrors. You'd never know from current debates, especially from the Left, but the most invasive privatisation of the NHS was done at its inception, when the BMA flat-out refused to support its creation without the ability of its senior members to continue their private practice within the NHS itself - hence private beds, still the most visible evidence of privation within the service.

 

Since then, the politics of the NHS gave been buried in a Byzantine maze of accounting procedures and obscure reorganisations, many concealing hugely powerful interests - the BMA, the drugs companies, health providers (including private hospitals), PFI financiers, medical-technology corporations - all extracting huge charges from the NHS for their inclusion and cooperation.

 

That these interests, unlike in the US, are able to operate mostly off the radar in public debates about health provision is made possible in part by a largely uncritical adoration of the NHS. Whenever anyone raises criticisms they risk being cast as surreptitious privateers, and the political damage just isn't worth it. If we perhaps treated the NHS a little less like an untouchable jewel we might get something that worked a lot better, including for junior doctors.

 

Great post

[Whitey Grandad]

One of the great problems with the NHS and public debate about it is that it's a hall of mirrors. You'd never know from current debates, especially from the Left, but the most invasive privatisation of the NHS was done at its inception, when the BMA flat-out refused to support its creation without the ability of its senior members to continue their private practice within the NHS itself - hence private beds, still the most visible evidence of privation within the service.

 

Since then, the politics of the NHS gave been buried in a Byzantine maze of accounting procedures and obscure reorganisations, many concealing hugely powerful interests - the BMA, the drugs companies, health providers (including private hospitals), PFI financiers, medical-technology corporations - all extracting huge charges from the NHS for their inclusion and cooperation.

 

That these interests, unlike in the US, are able to operate mostly off the radar in public debates about health provision is made possible in part by a largely uncritical adoration of the NHS. Whenever anyone raises criticisms they risk being cast as surreptitious privateers, and the political damage just isn't worth it. If we perhaps treated the NHS a little less like an untouchable jewel we might get something that worked a lot better, including for junior doctors.

 

Very true.

[Jonnyboy]

One of the great problems with the NHS and public debate about it is that it's a hall of mirrors. You'd never know from current debates, especially from the Left, but the most invasive privatisation of the NHS was done at its inception, when the BMA flat-out refused to support its creation without the ability of its senior members to continue their private practice within the NHS itself - hence private beds, still the most visible evidence of privation within the service.

 

Since then, the politics of the NHS gave been buried in a Byzantine maze of accounting procedures and obscure reorganisations, many concealing hugely powerful interests - the BMA, the drugs companies, health providers (including private hospitals), PFI financiers, medical-technology corporations - all extracting huge charges from the NHS for their inclusion and cooperation.

 

That these interests, unlike in the US, are able to operate mostly off the radar in public debates about health provision is made possible in part by a largely uncritical adoration of the NHS. Whenever anyone raises criticisms they risk being cast as surreptitious privateers, and the political damage just isn't worth it. If we perhaps treated the NHS a little less like an untouchable jewel we might get something that worked a lot better, including for junior doctors.

 

I agree, time to nationalise it completely.

[Whitey Grandad]

I agree, time to nationalise it completely.

 

You couldn't afford it.

[Colinjb]

One of the great problems with the NHS and public debate about it is that it's a hall of mirrors. You'd never know from current debates, especially from the Left, but the most invasive privatisation of the NHS was done at its inception, when the BMA flat-out refused to support its creation without the ability of its senior members to continue their private practice within the NHS itself - hence private beds, still the most visible evidence of privation within the service.

 

Since then, the politics of the NHS gave been buried in a Byzantine maze of accounting procedures and obscure reorganisations, many concealing hugely powerful interests - the BMA, the drugs companies, health providers (including private hospitals), PFI financiers, medical-technology corporations - all extracting huge charges from the NHS for their inclusion and cooperation.

 

That these interests, unlike in the US, are able to operate mostly off the radar in public debates about health provision is made possible in part by a largely uncritical adoration of the NHS. Whenever anyone raises criticisms they risk being cast as surreptitious privateers, and the political damage just isn't worth it. If we perhaps treated the NHS a little less like an untouchable jewel we might get something that worked a lot better, including for junior doctors.

 

Quite right, especially the bit in bold. Superb post Verbal.

[Jonnyboy]

Quite right, especially the bit in bold. Superb post Verbal.

 

A massive contradiction. It's not untouchable, it's tinkered and reshaped every year.

[Verbal]

A massive contradiction. It's not untouchable, it's tinkered and reshaped every year.

 

That's not the point I was making. As a public we're almost always do nothing much more than reacting to politicians 'tinkering' - saying 'no' to this or that hospital closure, or 'no' to radical change in contracts (GPs, junior doctors, etc) . We say no so much we never get around to having a proper debate about what we actually want. We're the ones treating the NHS as untouchable, not the constantly 'reforming' politicians. ('Reform' is what politicians do which makes them think they're managing. Mostly they're not).

 

Your solution of nationalising it all wasn't even possible for Aneurin Bevan in far more favourable circumstances, so that's out - unless I'm missing something and you can make an argued case for its working in practice. I'm not aware of even Corbynists making the case for this.

[Wade Garrett]

I believe the French health service is a public/private organisation that is held in extremely high regard. I know people who have been treated amazingly quickly and well under their care.

 

I have personal experience of the U.S. private health service, and it was an absolute shambles charging totally exhorbitant prices.

 

I would hate us to have a U.S. style health service, but we could possibly learn a thing or two from the French model.

 

Jeremy Hunt seems a touch untrustworthy to me.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I believe the French health service is a public/private organisation that is held in extremely high regard. I know people who have been treated amazingly quickly and well under their care.

 

I have personal experience of the U.S. private health service, and it was an absolute shambles charging totally exhorbitant prices.

 

I would hate us to have a U.S. style health service, but we could possibly learn a thing or two from the French model.

 

Jeremy Hunt seems a touch untrustworthy to me.

 

Statistics are a notoriously tricky subject of course. However, if France does indeed boast a superior healthcare system compared to the UK, then that may well be because the French opt to spend rather more than we do in this area:

 

http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/health-care-spending-compared

[Jonnyboy]

You couldn't afford it.

 

No but the tax havens have literally trillions of pounds stashed away for a rainy day.

[Hockey_saint]

I know a fair few junior doctors and we've discussed this quite a bit. What Jeremy basically wants is the French model, which, initially will cost an absolute bomb but will involve more private business picking up the slack for a taxpayer funded system.

 

What I gather from the above article and from these friends is that Jezza absolved his health sec. duties in 2012 and needs to remove these arduous contracts to make them more attractive to companies like Virgin Health but he can't very well sack every junior doctor and re-employ them because they may just bugger off to another countries' healthcare system for more money.

 

I suspect this is also why consultants and senior doctors are backing the hard-working juniors ones....they realise their contracts will probably be next.

 

I mean, the book Jeremy co-wrote makes this a serious conflict of interest but then this government are used to those, what with the housing bill being written largely by private landlords.