NHS reforms- anyone else as disbelieving as I am?

[nowwearefour]

What on earth is going on here? Privatisation by stealth? I know what- let's take the focus off the patients and the healthcare and put it on re-organising ourselves.AGAIN. how brilliant. anyone care to help me see what the benefits are of this?

Dont, i will hear if is till have a job after 21 years at the same hospital, in Feb.

fighting for my job....what has GB come to?

Not GB, Brokenoven - not in Scotland, definitely England, and not sure about Wales/N. Ireland

Some things I've just heard on the News.

DC is dismantling the NHS. Even the BBC is confident enough to say this. It's official. (Yes I know. I was desperately hoping it was all some horrid mistake).

NHS managers are going to be put under a lot more stress, because, wait for it: as well as having to provide high quality care while cutting costs, they also have to be competitive! Competitive? Who with? Private companies and charities. So these companies are going to compete for the right to treat patients. Why? Because there's profit for them in it. Where does the profit come from? Well I can only guess that their profits will come straight out of our pockets, as tax payers.

Then the presenter said that some services (camera shot of a children's ward) will be 'protected.' So if these services are protected, that means that others are unprotected. Against who or what? Private companies? Why should we need protection against companies fighting over setting our broken leg or our heart-bypass surgery?

There is going to be no limit to the amount of private healthcare provided by our NHS hospitals using the equipment we pay for.

I think this is going to be like dentists. Yes, you can find an NHS dentist, but you'll have to wait while the private patient goes first.

And last but not least, the best and most dedicated staff will be sucked out of the NHS (where wages will fall and conditions worsen) into the private companies. The NHS will fall apart and we'll have an American system.

Sorry, Nowwearefour. Really upset about this. I'll go away now.

Its just England I'm afraid. Why can't the Labour party be a bit more robust in saying that this is not necessary? DC is very very clever - he is managing to close down debate by suggesting that structural reform is essential to improving outcomes. it really isn't.

Another NHS person here. I'm in despair.

Apparently one of the reasons for this is that the government don't want to be held accountable for mistakes made in hospitals.

Great vote of confidence in the NHS from Cameron. Just leaving us to the mercies of for-profit companies.

I work in the NHS

I don't understand it

I don't want it

I despair about it

I was never asked if I thought reform was a good idea or if it was, how to go about it

These reforms (started under New Labour and then stalled as a result of TB's fear of GB) are long overdue.

AF - I take your opposition to these ideas as an affirmation of their being a bloody good idea!

really pascoe ?

how odd that you should take one post from me as some yardstick to measure a whole system of reforms

here was me thinking I was just some irrelevant internet pixie...when really I have been informing public opinion on the running of the NHS

< cough > muppet < cough >

The NHS was cobbled together at the outset without very much thought at all. One minute we had lots of independent doctors, hospitals and other care providers and, literally overnight, they all became 'the NHS'. We've been trying to design an efficient system since. It's all back to front. State-run monopolies are rarely well-managed but there are better models, even within the rest of Europe. Having had excellent and terrible experiences within the health service I'd like to see what the reforms mean in practice and will listen to the debate with interest.

It makes me sad and horrified, not only about the future of the NHS, all though God knows that is terrifying enough, but also about the sate of our democracy. A party with a very small share of the vote and a minority of MPs can push through a piece of extreme and ideological reform that was not mentioned in its manifesto despite having promised in the election campaign that there would be no reorganisation of the NHS. There is no electoral demand for this reform; there is a massive consensus against it from health-professional bodies and relevant unions. THe only impetus in its favour, apart from pure ideology, is the expensive and unaacountable lobbying industry working hell-for-leather upon government in the pursuit of the interests of private companies looking to provide healthcare at a profit. It is heartbreaking, but our democracy is so poor that we are powerless to prevent it.

During the election campaign the idea of profound changes to the way Parliament and elections work was a big theme. But that has now degenerated into a completely half-hearted sop towards AV and a few unasked for populist gimmicks like elected chief constables and parliamentary bills derived from e-petitions. We need a better democracy -- one that would prevent a slick PR man getting into power and enacting a completely unasked for agenda.

Riven, there are no more PCTs for it to work with. They are already being closed down, and will be gone by 2013. That's what GPs in charge means. And the GPs will be bringing in private companies to tell them what services to commission, how to do it and, to a greater or lesser extent, to do it for them. All tax payer-funded profits being found from somewhere. Oh yes, efficiency savings. Right.

I work in public health - at the moment we do a fair bit of figuring out what is needed (needs assessments) and whether it's being provided (equity audits). That's going to councils, partly, and to GP consortia.

The whole thing is an experimental nightmare.

But then I'm biased, because I do a bloody good job inside the NHS and have no desire at all to move to the political minefield of a local council (who have already publicly objected to employing me and my colleagues) and trying to get my job done.

Privatisation by stealth. I despair.

When you look at the wave of fondness expressed for the NHS when the Americans were going through their healthcare debate, you've got to wonder how Andrew Landsley and the Tories missed it. They are not exactly showing themselves as people with their finger on the pulse of public opinion are they?

Whilst reluctant to get into the middle of this hate-fest... as long as the principle remains that healthcare is free at the point of need (prescription charges excluded), does it matter if it's provided by a private company? From the interviews I've been hearing, bodies representing health professsionals seem happy that this is the 'right thing to do' & that it has to happen quickly and are more concerned with the method of implementation & making sure everyone is involved.

GP's professional bodies and the BMJ have spoken firmly against the reforms, I think Chil.

There is a good comment piece here, making the point that, not only must GP consortia commission 'any willing provider' on the basis of unfettered price competition, but also that such price competition has already been shown in academic research to have adverse survival rates in hospitals.

'Profit' isn't necessarily a dirty word. Profits can be invested back into technology and equipment to make something run better & cheaper. I can't actually remember a time when the NHS didn't say it was underfunded & lacking investment and without investment we get a poor service and higher costs.

I totally agree Eleison with your point about democracy. No one wants this, it is just one man (Lansley) with a bee in his bonnet. It's utterly depressing

i am so ANGRY about this. maybe some form of reform is necessayr but NOT privatisation by stealth. if it goes the way of the dental system we are SCREWED.