Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Wymsey

The NHS (National Health Service) Thread

By Wymsey, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

RobHawk

RobHawk

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jeremy Hunt - The man who co-authored a book calling for the NHS to be replaced - In my opinion cannot be trusted to look after the NHS.

 

Today's strike could easily have been cancelled just with a little compromise and going back to the negotiation table. He wanted this strike to go ahead, purely in the hope that it will turn the rest of the UK against the junior Drs and not him.

 

Don't believe the propaganda people - If you want an NHS - you need people to staff it. It says it all that this is the first time in history that a strike has included emergency provision.

To further my attack on Hunt, he is clearly a liar and is desperate for the public to turn against the Drs so he can have his way. Yesterday, I saw him on BBC Breakfast say that everything in the contract was agreed except 1 final criteria which was pay. By the end of the day he was on news night admitting there were several still to agree too. He's a liar and a con artist!

I don't know enough about the NHS to be able to comment on the specifics, only what I see. But I am more knowledgeable about the proposed changes to the funding for NHS students - the future of the NHS. To cut a long story short, the Consultation is based on the premise of NHS students receiving the same student funding as all other students. That means that a future student nurse will go from leaving uni with around £7500 student debt to a around £40,000. Makes sense when we need more nurses, I'm sure you'll agree - it really is just another way to lower their pay.

All I can say about the consultation proposal overall, is given the info I've provided above, I have never read such a skewed, one sided and ridiculous report in all my life. Who would believe that the terms debt or student debt didn't appear once in the whole document?

 

This government really are something else - they will do what they want regardless im sure!

Edited by RobHawk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strokes

Strokes

Posted
Posted

Why are you so bitter?

Of course they ran quicker, fewer people attended and no patient had to wait for consultant review, they got them instantly because they weren't in clinic.

Perhaps you could strike more often, we could save a fortune.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobHawk

RobHawk

Posted
Posted

An odd footnote at the end of that Hunt interview, saying that it was his idea to conduct the interview standing up.

 

As Hunt is very tall, presumably he felt this would make him seem commanding and authoritative?

Interesting observation Alf, if that was the thinking, it didn't work. Did make the interview seem more confrontational though which again didn't play into Hunts hands either. He really was floundering for the first few minutes, at one point I noticed a massive gulp, he was clearly shitting it as the interviewer had clearly done his homework too.

He was more comfortable towards the end, no doubt the topic allowed him to get back on script!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobHawk

RobHawk

Posted
Posted

Perhaps you could strike more often, we could save a fortune.

We could just let people die, that would save even more!

Don't forget the amount of appointments cancelled over the last 2 days. Just because emergency provision ran ok, don't mean the strike didn't have an effect!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bryn

Bryn

Posted
Posted

And then what happens when the consultants all die, and no junior doctor has had any exposure to medicine and has no experience? As it is, we are spending too much time on service provision and missing our educational targets and in the long run this will lead to an erosion of experience and skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

Whatever your views on whether the strikes are right or wrong who is actually making the decisions on the strike dates? Every time they do it it coincides with a massive news story that takes it off the front pages and it barely gets a mention on the news, it happened last time (was it the budget?) and this time around it clashed with the Hillsborough verdict.

 

They'll probably organise the ones over the summer on days England are playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobHawk

RobHawk

Posted
Posted

Whatever your views on whether the strikes are right or wrong who is actually making the decisions on the strike dates? Every time they do it it coincides with a massive news story that takes it off the front pages and it barely gets a mention on the news, it happened last time (was it the budget?) and this time around it clashed with the Hillsborough verdict.

 

They'll probably organise the ones over the summer on days England are playing.

I'd guess its because they want to cause maximum disruption, with minimum publicity. They know that if the publicity turns bad - they are done for! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest MattP

Guest MattP

Posted
Posted

I'd guess its because they want to cause maximum disruption, with minimum publicity. They know that if the publicity turns bad - they are done for! 

 

Surely the idea of going on strike is to cause attention? What's the point of doing it if you are being pushed into the last slot on the slot of page 16 of the rags?

 

There was barely any disruption anyway according to most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobHawk

RobHawk

Posted
Posted

Surely the idea of going on strike is to cause attention? What's the point of doing it if you are being pushed into the last slot on the slot of page 16 of the rags?

 

There was barely any disruption anyway according to most.

 

There certainly was disruption - just not to emergency services as the Daily Mail tried to scare people to believe before the strike. A lot of appointments were still cancelled, more so than the other strikes as further emergency provision was required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted

Just coincidence I think.

The media have been quiet on it, there's been marches with tens of thousands of people on them in London that didn't register. Part of that is probably lack of media skill on our part.

No, the big reasons was you were let down by Corbyn - he should have brought it up at PMQ's.

The first strike day got reasonable coverage, especially in the morning, but then got swallowed by the Hillsborough verdict. You may as well not bothered with the second day as that was completely lost behind further Hillsborough stuff and then the beginning of the antisemetic mess labour was getting itself in.

However, I sense you were getting through. Just before PMQ's, Dr Liam Fox was on the Daily Politics and he suggested the 7 day NHS was about improving emergency care, which to me seemed a change of stance, but he wasn't pressed on this after because then the subject had moved.

Any idea what the next step is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bryn

Bryn

Posted
Posted

It's not a change of stance, they just don't know what theyre talking about. They're conflating emergency and elective care, as they have from the start. There's no plan, no numbers have been crunched, they don't know what they want to achieve. They just now can't back down on yet another issue, and probably won't.

What happens next is a big question. The DoH are banking on us blinking first, primarily because we don't want to put patients at risk but also because we can't afford to strike indefinitely. I suspect they might be right. Trying to fill rotas in August will be super fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted

It's not a change of stance, they just don't know what theyre talking about. They're conflating emergency and elective care, as they have from the start. There's no plan, no numbers have been crunched, they don't know what they want to achieve. They just now can't back down on yet another issue, and probably won't.

What happens next is a big question. The DoH are banking on us blinking first, primarily because we don't want to put patients at risk but also because we can't afford to strike indefinitely. I suspect they might be right. Trying to fill rotas in August will be super fun.

Certainly does feel like a Mexican stand-off.

It feels like you may have played your trump card too soon which is no doubt why the DofH will continue to hold out - the only thing that I sense that would be acceptable to the public and top the most recent strike would be to join up with another significant sector, say the teachers / head teachers union who also have a bit of an axe to grind with the government at the moment.

One thing that is worth keeping in mind - there's bound to be a reshuffle after the EU referendum, so that's potentially in your favour. Cameron may see as an opportunity to change course with these plans without losing face.

I agree with you on no-one really knowing what this 24/7 NHS should look like - there's less meat on the bone for this policy than the Brexit campaign!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Webbo

Webbo

Posted
Posted
A Department of Health spokesperson said: "This study actually adds to the evidence of variation in care across the week because it indicates there is a higher level of sickness required for patients to actually be admitted at the weekend.  
 
"No-one seriously disputes the established consensus from eight studies in the last five years that the 'weekend effect' exists, and the Government makes no apology for acting on our ambition to create a safer seven day NHS.
 
“Disputes about precise methodology risk obscuring the established consensus of a weekend effect. Of course, we’ve always been clear that death rates are higher following admission at the weekends -- this is in part because some patients are sicker, but even adjusting for that experts have been clear that other factors including staffing levels and diagnostic availability are part of the problem."

 

Not proof at all, just a difference of opinion .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bryn

Bryn

Posted
Posted (edited)

What?

Have you read the article?

The mortality rate is less at the weekend.

The Government rightly say they have a problem with only the sickest patients being admitted at weekends. They want elective services at weekends. That's fine, but there aren't enough of us.

Elective services have nothing to do with mortality.

Junior doctors already provide 24/7 emergency care.

Why is this so hard?

Edited by Bryn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...