Tories aren’t even bothering to hide their NHS privatisation plan anymore

[Letshaveablackcelebration2022]

I think it was possible Noam Chomsky who said that the route to all privatisation of services was that first they run it totally into the ground and then they offer up a private model as a solution . It’s actually tedious in its predictability. Pillaging everything good from the country- Royal Mail, water, utilities, rail network, even housing via private landlords - everything to make profit.

And of course as predicted, the NHS was the final prize.

Yep. YANBU. We can see the Tory vultures circling our dying public health system.

Really sad that it's come to this. Hope the fight back starts soon.

"And anyone who quotes the US as an example of privatisation clearly doesn't actually understand what privatisation means."

Correct up to a point. The Conservatives are not suggesting privatisation of the NHS because no business wants to take on a universal healthcare system (unless it comes with huge government grants, and unless the contract is so constructed that the providers can walk away if they cannot turn a profit - see for example the disaster that is rail privatisation).

What is happening is that the private providers are looking to cherry-pick the profitable bits of healthcare provision, or serve those patients that can afford healthcare, while staying far away from the difficult, unprofitable areas such as long-term conditions or mental health, or disqualifying anyone who they deem to be "unprofitable" such as people with certain pre-existing conditions.

Agree with pp re PFI but expanding is a better way to put it

Swiss model is appealing.

How can it be private yet still free at the point of access?
How will privatisation make access to the NHS better overnight?

I'm an NHS worker and none of this makes sense. Moving to a private system will take decades for the money to trickle down to improved infrastructure, technology and mostly staff training and retention to provide an actual private system people will be happy to pay for. As is, people will have to pay for exactly the same offer as the NHS is giving now. There's no untapped health buildings and staff all waiting for Rishi's call.

Correct, but the Conservatives are not proposing a European-style mutual insurance, and this entire thread was started on the basis of the idiotic proposals made by Javid for "rationing by price" healthcare. Why does the 5th/6th/7th wealthiest country on the planet need to ration healthcare and how did the UK ever get into this situation? Without addressing the root causes of the problems, any proposed solutions are bound to fail.

It is impossible to take the politics out of the debate as long as the chief architect of the current problems, Jeremy Hunt (the longest-serving Health Minister that the UK has had) sits on the Government front bench and tells everyone that there is no money available and that things will only get worse before they get better, and as long as those repeatedly making the poor decisions are not impacted by the consequences of their decisions.

Stop being so dramatic. The NHS is not totally broken. You sound ridiculous and fairly ignorant. There's are huge areas of the NHS that are working very well indeed. Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean the whole system has fallen apart.

Hate the Tories with every inch of me. NHS needs to be protected from this scum, it's free at the point of service and that's how it should stay.

Cannot wait for these c to be voted out, I despise them, corrupt little men

Aside from this you do see that a model created with different demographics will be under strain today

How would you solve that?

I think some people are thinking it would be like the USA if the NHS was privatised.
Let’s say the NHS was privatised, it means companies would be paid to run services.
It would still be payed for through taxes. You wouldn’t have to get your cheque book out after going to hospital.

Some prisons for example are run by the private sector. They don’t charge the prisoners money to pay to stay because they’re private !

@KnickerlessParsons "What is the problem with privatisation? As long as it remains free at the point of access I don't understand everyone's reluctance. The NHS would become more efficient and easier to access almost overnight."

Evidence from other privatisations suggests that the service does NOT "become more efficient or easier to access overnight." See UK railways, utilities, Royal Mail and others - all stolen by the politicians and sold off to the private sector which either runs them into the ground or extracts huge profits and receives billions in government (i.e taxpayer) support which benefits the shareholders rather than the customers. When the money dries up, the services are handed back to the government (the taxpayer) who then have to pay to sort out the mess.

I think some people are thinking it would be like the USA if the NHS was privatised.

That is obviously the aim of the Tories though. Profit driven rather than patient driven.

@MarshaBradyo Aside from this you do see that a model created with different demographics will be under strain today.
How would you solve that?

The model created 70 years ago should have moved with the times (and in many cases has) but clearly the politicians in charge have not been willing to spend the time and resources on ensuring that the NHS has remained at the forefront of healthcare, preferring instead to keep taxes low and continue to promote the myth that the NHS is the envy of the world. It cannot come as a surprise that the population demographics are different today to what they were in the 1940s - and the politicians have had the birth rates, disease rates and mortality statistics at their fingertips for decades.

Now that the results of this policy are glaringly obvious for all to see, the politicians are busy covering their arses and blaming patients for getting ill (or for abusing the system), blaming nurses and doctors for being uncaring, inefficient, greedy and for putting lives at risk and generally blaming anyone and everyone except themselves and their own poor decisions.

One way of solving the issue would be to remove the politicians who have made some of the worst decisions - starting with Hunt - and having a grown-up debate about what a modern, wealthy country should expect from a healthcare service and how best to afford this. But no political party wants to address this for fear of frightening the voters and losing the next election - so the misery will likely continue for years to come.

And how much tax do you pay at present? Are you a net contributor and to what degree?

@Havanananana show me the Tory proposal for the privatised service then…I’m interested to see it.

Sahid Javid’s proposals are not idiotic. They would reduce abuse of the system whilst generating extra cash.

He also stressed that those on low incomes would be protected…you forgot to mention that didn’t you?! Of course you did, it doesn’t fit your narrative.

All alternatives amount to a tax so the simplest solution is to tax more, especially the businesses not paying their share and the wealthy. Focus more on improving public health, make better an more affordable sport facilities.

"And how much tax do you pay at present? Are you a net contributor and to what degree?"

A red herring. At various times in an individual's life, they can be net contributors or net recipients, dependent on earnings and stage of life (child, student, apprentice, non-working parent, worker, pensioner etc) and health.

It costs the country millions to have people off sick or not performing at their best due to sickness, injury, worry about themselves or their loved ones. Whether this is private-sector production effort that is lost (along with the profits and taxes generated) or public sector service levels that are lost, sickness contributes to a loss of GDP and thus the loss of tax revenue.

I read yesterday that for every European citizen who reaches 18, they give them a free interailing pass to see all of Europe for free. Not our UK kids anymore. It made me very sad.

Excellent politicians response and a complete and utter failure to answer the question.

Nowhere else in Europe are people dying in hospital car parks after waiting hours for an ambulance to arrive. Nowhere else has 12% of the population waiting months for a hospital appointment. In many EU countries, GPs can be seen just by walking in, and waiting lists for treatment are all but unknown

Umm, yes. Maybe because many of these systems buy healthcare from PRIVATE companies........

The Conservatives are not going to privatise the NHS. They believe in the free market and are driving those who can pay towards a private healthcare service that can cherry-pick which patients to accept and which treatments to offer.

At the same time they continue to underfund the NHS and blame the staff and patients for all of the problems being encountered rather than their own poor decisions (although there is an argument that says these decisions are deliberate). The result will be what some people on this forum are already suggesting as a viable alternative - the NHS is reduced to a bare bones service treating emergencies and critical cases only and there is no preventative healthcare service, no health education service etc.

You repeat the false accusation that the NHS is being abused, and that by targeting this abuse, the waiting lists and other issues will disappear as if by magic.

A charging system will not generate more cash - it will cost more money to administer than it will bring in. More importantly, you seem to be supporting a system of rationing by payment (Javid also uses the idea of "rationing") - the fact that someone is suggesting that there should be rationing of a vital service shows how far the UK has fallen and how conditioned the public has become to accepting a healthcare service that would be deemed totally unacceptable anywhere else in the developed world (with the possible exception of the USA).

I have never missed out the statement that "those on low incomes will be protected". I just don't believe that this will happen. It didn't happen with the NHS dentistry changes - those who can afford to pay can find a private dentist, but for millions of people the promised back-up of NHS dentistry simply does not exist. And again, implementing such a system will a) cost money (which could be better spent actually delivering the care) and b) simply won't make any difference if a significant number of people are deemed to be unable to afford healthcare and either those who can afford it are charged more (through higher taxation) or the poor are simply left to fend for themselves.

"Maybe because many of these systems buy healthcare from PRIVATE companies........"

Healthcare in Europe is provided by a mixture of public, private, non-profit/mutual and charity providers. The mix varies from country to country, but many EU countries also have publicly run services (just like the NHS) that do not have waiting lists or people waiting hours for an ambulance.

Most EU countries have compulsory healthcare contributions, paid for by employees and employers - so not unlike the UK National Insurance. Unlike the UK, these funds are usually Mutual Funds run for the benefit of the stakeholders (i.e. the insured patients) and are NOT under the control of politicians. In addition the funds are ringfenced for healthcare and not subject to the policy whims of politicians (of whatever persuasion).

The NHS also buys from private companies. For example, almost all GP surgeries are private companies, which work under contract to the NHS.

One way of solving the issue would be to remove the politicians who have made some of the worst decisions - starting with Hunt - and having a grown-up debate about what a modern, wealthy country should expect from a healthcare service and how best to afford this. But no political party wants to address this for fear of frightening the voters and losing the next election - so the misery will likely continue for years to come.

What would this debate look like? Who would take part? How would the result (if such a conclusion was reached) be enforced? Would it be cross party? I’m a bit sceptical when people say ‘we need to have a conversations about X’ because of these questions.

Secondly, it’s abundantly clear from how people neglect their health and the level of entitlement and personal responsibility shirking that what people expect is a loooooong way from what is actually possible or workable.

Take obesity. I have heard very few people admit they’re overweight because they eat too much and don’t move enough. It’s always ‘mental health’, ‘not my fault’, ‘I don’t have enough support’ and they expect a series of costly psychology appointments to ‘find out why they have unhealthy attachments to food’ when the truth is simply greed and poor food choices. Everything is turned into a mental health issue to deflect blame and dodge the onus to actually do anything about it.

Okay that brings me on to mental health. It’s become popular to endlessly introspect one’s feelings to a degree that they actually feel bigger than they are. The best mood lifter is fresh air, exercise and simple self care like keeping your house tidy, eating healthy food and getting enough sleep. But now we just seem to medicate people while encouraging them to close the curtains and lie down when they ‘cant face the world’.

I could go on. But we all need to start pulling our fingers out when it comes to our own physical and mental health, and not just rocking up at the GP expecting treatment when we haven’t taken basic steps to help ourselves.

The ‘ODFOD’ replies I get will prove this.

Exactly. This seems to be the only issue which when we moot following the system of other European countries, we’re accused of ‘being right wing’ and ‘money centric’ and ‘just like USA, wanting poor people to die’. It’s ludicrous.

A hybrid model would be the best way.