To ask- what do you think is actually happening when you hear "they are privatising the NHS"

[Arelen]

I keep seeing memes and petitions posted by friends who are concerned about privatisation of the NHS, or that the NHS is being sold off.
I wonder what people imagine is happening when they see or post these messages?

Even if I, as a nurse, have to work until 65, I defend the right of ambulance staff and fire fighters to retire early. Do people realise how much those jobs exert a strain on people's bodies?

3littlefrogs, until their precious kit indicated there might be an actual problem with the patient; who do they tell then? Who actually has to go out and see the patient? Plus the fact that AT is generally set at an absurd trigger point, such as SPO2 reading 96% instead of 97%, because untrained staff in a call centre are monitoring it.

And what do private companies do when they aren't getting the profit they need? They fuck off sharpish, leaving the NHS to pick up the pieces. Just like private hospitals have done for ever; "oh shit, he's deteriorated, take him to A&E quick". Just like Circle did at Hitchingbrooke. Just like Southern Cross.
Do you think that the politicians that are pushing through privatisation ever use it, or ever intend to use the NHS? You have only to look at their business interests to see that they have vested interests. Their noses are firmly in the trough.

In a way, I can understand those with vested financial interests in Circle, Virgin Care etc being in favour of privatisation. It's cynical and pretty evil, but it kinds of makes sense. If you're a proponent of NHS privatisation otherwise, then you're an 'useful idiot' (in the phrase of that old villain Lenin).

Food for thought. bit.ly/1C5NK57

I've never rally understood the cost arguments about outsourcing/privatisation/etc. Surely, if a service costs the state £xxx per year to run properly on a non-profit basis, it's going to cost a private company the same to run properly - but they have to deliver a profit to shareholders as well. So, either the state pays the same £xxx to outsource the service, but this has to support a profit element which can only be generated by the outsourcer providing a cheaper/lesser service, or it pays £xxx for the same service level plus an exrra £yyy for the profit. Either way we, the people, lose out. Or am I missing something?

Carabos - I love that!
Am sick of the media fiction that all that is needed to fix the NHS is more nurses. Proper managers, who get recognition that they do an incredibly difficult job and paid accordingly (and easier performance management processes to get shot of the bad ones) should be feted not held in contempt.

Someone up thread said it isn't privatisation. Of course it's privatisation. An external company winning the tender to provide MRI scans, that's privatisation!

I fear that it means that the needs of the patient will now be second to the needs of big business. That there is no longer any part of human life in the UK that isn't commodified.

I think the very foundations that the NHS was built on are being eroded and I think it's a result of our society becoming more selfish.

Some services just SHOULD NOT be profit driven. Healthcare is one of them.

QuinionsRainbow, I've had the same operation on both knees in the last 18 months. The first was on the NHS. My GP told me the cost (I asked her) was £3,150. The second was done privately and cost me £1,750. I know we have to be careful about comparing apples with apples but the difference is still pretty staggering.

Interesting.

Although that wasn't the cost, of course, it was the price. Ie how much A decides to charge B; not how much it costs A.

As soon as you start selling items between entities, all sorts of trading forces come into play. (In my workplace it used to be, "Fuck, we've undercharged for this contract, but it's made the client think we're great so we'll recover it by overcharging them on the next contract.")

grovel probably because the NHS hospital was more likely to have adequate staffing. Private hospitals are run on skeleton staff, cos if anything bad happens, they take you to A&E.

From a report from the cross-bench Centre for Health and the Public Interest:

"The report reveals that over 800 people have died unexpectedly in private hospitals in England during the last four years. Private hospitals are not required to make data on hospital deaths publicly available – unlike their NHS counterparts – making it difficult for the public to understand how safe private hospitals are.

The CHPI report for the first time brings together what is known about patient safety in private hospitals in England:

Between October 2010 and April 2014 802 patients died unexpectedly in private hospitals, and there were 921 serious injuries.

The majority of private hospitals have no intensive care beds, some have no dedicated resuscitation teams, and surgeons and anaesthetists usually work in isolation – without assistant surgeons and anaesthetists in training present.

Although the private hospital sector now gets over a quarter of its income from treating NHS-funded patients, there is significantly less information available to patients about the performance of private hospitals than about the NHS.

It is not possible to establish whether all private hospitals providing NHS care are fulfilling their legal obligation to publish Quality Accounts letting the public know how they are performing.

The report also confirms that the NHS serves as a ‘safety net’ for the private sector. Thousands of people are regularly transferred to NHS hospitals following treatment in private hospitals, with over 2,600 emergency NHS admissions from the private sector in 2012-13."

NHS hospitals kill people - Staffordshire?

Quinions The key point about your post is properly. The idea behind competition, in any market, is that there is continual pressure to mke things more efficient and/or innovate new solutions.
In medicine, what is the pressure to develop things, such as keyhole surgery, which saves lives and money?
Also investment in technology for appointments, such as text reminders and easy ways for people to cancel. In the new QE in Birmingham, they have self registration for appointments, so saving admin staff, although they have helpers for those who need/prefer to deal with a person.
There is considerable debate about how much 'waste' is in public services nd how easy it is to get rid of.

Also investment in technology for appointments, such as text reminders and easy ways for people to cancel. In the new QE in Birmingham, they have self registration for appointments, so saving admin staff, although they have helpers for those who need/prefer to deal with a person.

But the QE is an NHS hospital, which has innovated WITHIN the NHS.

In medicine, what is the pressure to develop things, such as keyhole surgery, which saves lives and money?

The NHS has always innovated here too; one of the problems facing the NHS is that people live so long nowadays, partly due to new medical techniques.

To those that say it is scare mongering - sexual health service have already been privatised, a huge amount of laboratory services have been privatised, there has been a £460 million sell off of the backlog the backlog due to cost cutting, and cancer treatment in Staffordshire have been privatised.

It isn't scaremongering - it's already happening...

Random I was giving examples. Many innovations are developed outwith the UK.

That private companies are providing NHS services. And those who understand what is happening, know this is having a negative impact on services.

caroldecker, coincidentally I was in the QE outpatients recently too. I was very impressed with the new system. I was in and out in no time, although the letter scanner wouldn't work.

So one previously NHS service which I am well aware of, has now been tendered out and delivered by a private company. The service is significantly more poorly delivered in practice. However the proxy measurements used, show a different picture.

And friends who have had NHS operations in private hospitals have had varying experiences, from very good, to terrifyingly poor nursing care. The idea that private is automatically better, is naive in the extreme.

I worry that the NHS will disappear bit by bit and we'll have to pay for healthcare that used to be free, while still paying just as much tax as before. and the companies are driven by profit not by providing a service.

The loss of the NHS terrifies me. Government keeps floating ideas such as paying towards GP visits. For people with ongoing health issues like me, I am scared that at some point in the future, I am not going to be able to afford to pay for the healthcare I need.

No-one is saying private is automatically better, but no-one is out-sourcing all services and no-one is suggesting charging for services (except dental and opticians - which were changed by the Labour party in the 50/60's).

Around 60-70% of the NHS budget currently goes to private companies and self-employed individuals.

Trying some more private out-sourcing to see whether it can be done more cheaply for the same or better service is not a bad idea.

Again, services and trusts run by the NHS can provide a rubbish service as well

caroldecker - Except that is not what is happening. This is being led by political belief, not what is best for the services. And I have seen the difference in services being provided by the NHS, and now a private company. And the service has deteriorated.

mariamin, I seem to be wandering from thread to thread agreeing with you.