My feed

to access all these features


Healthcare Reform

11 replies

LadyBlaBlah · 20/01/2011 23:21

Genuine question.............what is the problem that is being solved by these reforms?

When you make proposals, you are looking to solve a problem. I am not clear what the proposals are trying to solve. Anyone?

OP posts:
longfingernails · 20/01/2011 23:27

The problem is the NHS. It will be (partially) solved with these reforms.

Labour poured money in but didn't improve efficiency. There is no more money, thanks to Gordon Brown - so more efficient commissioning, delivering better value for money, is an absolute priority.

Not to mention the fact that the NHS is a colossal blunder. Why on earth should the government run a hospital?

No other country in the world has copied this model. I want universal healthcare, but not state provision of healthcare.

LadyBlaBlah · 20/01/2011 23:49

So it is a privatisation measure pure and simple

The lack of efficiency you talk of surely depends on your definition of efficient. Most treatments are better in the NHS than they used to be - so treatments are more efficient, and more people are happy with the NHS. Is that not a definition of efficient?

OP posts:
longfingernails · 20/01/2011 23:58

Efficiency is getting desired outcomes at the cheapest possible price.

longfingernails · 21/01/2011 00:02

Yes, it is a privatisation of the health service - a long overdue privatisation. Of course, for political reasons, no-one in the government will say this, unless there is a Lord Young or Howard Flight figure around - and in any case, the three little blue letters will stay, and the public will still get universal healthcare, free at the point of use.

It is only doing more of what Tony Blair was doing though. I didn't hear the howls of anguish from Labour supporters when foundation hospitals were established...

LadyBlaBlah · 21/01/2011 00:14

Your definition is not the definition of efficient. There is a fundamental difference in right leaning / left leaning values on what efficiency means. You provide an economic lead definition of efficient and that is your priority, however for a lot of people the market should be kept out of healthcare, and the definition of efficient is being able to accomplish a purpose - the purpose being healthcare for all delivered fairly. Cost obviously comes into this, but the thought of private companies paying shareholders and company directors bonuses out of NHS money makes me rather nauseous.

OP posts:
longfingernails · 21/01/2011 00:26

Fair enough.

The problem is, my definition of efficient is what works, whereas your definition of efficient is what you dream of.

newwave · 21/01/2011 01:07

The simple truth is that in 5 years time is that private company profits will be more important that patient care.

GP's and their private company partners will be rationing treatment to maximise profits. Sorry Mrs Smith we cant afford your hip replacement as we have run out of money for this year, whats that you say Mrs Smith? oh yes my new top of the range BMW is rather nice it was bought from the drug companies kick backs.

Chil1234 · 21/01/2011 17:29

"Mrs Smith we cant afford your hip replacement as we have run out of money for this year...."

And how is that materially different from PCT managers who say the same thing before jumping in the flash cars driven by their publicly-funded, rather inflated salaries?

newwave · 21/01/2011 22:06

Chil, because EVEN MORE money will be racked off to give shareholders a return.

More money for shareholders=less money for patient care, it's not rocket science.

No fat cat private involvement in the NHS is the best policy

Chil1234 · 21/01/2011 22:26

And you don't think there will be an ombudsman operating restrictions on the amount of profits, required levels of reinvestment etc.? More money for reinvestment = better patient care. I don't think that's too big a stretch of the imagination either.

newwave · 21/01/2011 23:00

Chil, what! like Ofcom and the energy omdudsman, just window dressing. It will be a cut throat rip as much money out of the public purse as possible for the lowest possible investment.

The railways are a good example of the rip off of the public.

You seem to forget that the Tories want this outcome for their fat cat friends and relations.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.