Guest Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 44 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said: Welcome to the world of the party hardliner: If it works it's because of the party, if it's shit it's because nobody could have done it. You get them all over the spectrum. It is noticeable that, much like the party itself, non of the right leaning commentators on here have much positive to say policy wise - only negativity around the opposition.
Webbo Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 1 minute ago, toddybad said: It is noticeable that, much like the party itself, non of the I'vet leaning commentators on her e have much positive to say policy wise - only negativity around the opposition. You'd think that tory supporters would have nothing but praise for labour and jeremy corbyn. Ive noticed all the good things you've said about the conservative party.
Jimothy Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 2 minutes ago, Webbo said: You'd think that tory supporters would have nothing but praise for labour and jeremy corbyn. Ive noticed all the good things you've said about the conservative party. Christ! Seriously? It's obviously the lack of positive talk about what they'd do coupled with the negative talk about the opposition that he's criticising. Obviously we don't expect Tory commentators to talk up Labour, or Labour commentators to talk up Tories but we do expect them each to talk up their own sides policies. That's clearly something he feels isn't missing from the right leaning commentators. You know like Remain was constantly lambasted for doing during the EU referendum. Come on Webbo, you're smarter than this, it's really not hard to understand.
Webbo Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 What will the tories do? We'll know better after the manifesto is published but the main thing they'll do is deliver brexit and stop labour fcking the economy.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 2 hours ago, toddybad said: This is complete bollocks. If you're suggesting insurance of some sort that still means the public paying for it so why not just add a bit to tax or spend a bit less elsewhere? The Tories reorganised the NHS creating an unholy mess and then won't give them the money that's needed to run it. Their health secretary has created bad blood with virtually the entire workforce and vacancies are significant. You only have to go back a decade to find an NHS that didn't have these problems and its quite obvious what the change has been - a government intent on cutting due to its ideology. Yeah let's go back a decade...oh yeah the height of the failings at Mid Staffs. Wasn't the only case either. 4 hours ago, sphericalfox said: You have no idea what you're on about. Serious unfunding and constant deckchair shuffling are the real problems with the NHS. Yes it does need efficiency measures and better innovative thinking, but as huge entity it needs to be measured and done at the right pace. The Tories have literally put in black and white that their intentions is to sell off the NHS. Whilst it's nearly impossible to privatise the NHS, if your strategy is to allow private companies to cherry pick the most lucrative contracts, you simply underfund, and make out that you are pumping in billions, when in actuality you are not, and are crippling the service to then make out that it'd be better run under privately led contracts. The King's Fund would suggest most of that is conjecture. And the idea that they are the sole real problems is exactly why things won't get better. 1 hour ago, The Doctor said: Really? So, which ever party was in charge would have appointed a **** like Hunt to drive staff out in droves? Public attitudes towards health, and visiting A&E at the slightest thing is a problem, but it's naive to think that the current mess isn't on the head of a government who have been hell bent on destroying it with their actions over the last 7 years. I said it would have/will get worse no matter who is in charge, I didn't say that government actions over the last 7 years haven't caused problems. The point was it will get worse no matter who runs the thing until attitudes and ideas change. 1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said: Welcome to the world of the party hardliner: If it works it's because of the party, if it's shit it's because nobody could have done it. You get them all over the spectrum. That would be a valid point if I was in any way a party hardliner. I despise a lot about the Conservatives, especially right now, but I will vote for them because that's my only option. I'm not a fan of party politics.
Guest Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 8 minutes ago, KingGTF said: Yeah let's go back a decade...oh yeah the height of the failings at Mid Staffs. Wasn't the only case either. The King's Fund would suggest most of that is conjecture. And the idea that they are the sole real problems is exactly why things won't get better. I said it would have/will get worse no matter who is in charge, I didn't say that government actions over the last 7 years haven't caused problems. The point was it will get worse no matter who runs the thing until attitudes and ideas change. That would be a valid point if I was in any way a party hardliner. I despise a lot about the Conservatives, especially right now, but I will vote for them because that's my only option. I'm not a fan of party politics. Sorry but, as I've said before, i work in the nhs and have access to the top brass at a significant number of nhs trusts. It is failing due to this government's policies. You can stand on the outside and try to believe you have some more significant knowledge of what is happening but you'd be wrong.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 Just now, toddybad said: Sorry but, as I've said before, i work in the nhs and have access to the top brass at a significant number of nhs trusts. It is failing due to this government's policies. You can stand on the outside and try to believe you have some more significant knowledge of what is happening but you'd be wrong. Yes that's a really admirable way of ignoring the problems the NHS faced prior to 2010
Guest Kopfkino Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 I've just seen a piece Matthew Parris wrote about Macron and France which he also applies to the NHS. It is in essence the point I've tried to make. Still I'm sure it will be dismissed cos he's an ex-Conservative MP etc Cometh the hour, cometh the man, but it’s impolite to arrive early. That is true even when the appointment is with history. The hour is not yet come in France: the man cometh too soon. So, though Emmanuel Macron will surely reach the Élysée Palace next month, after that he will flounder. France knows that change must come but I see no sign she’s ready to embrace it today, when there’s always tomorrow. The French have yet to reach the end of their tether. Nations, like people, are subject to mental illnesses. Depression, paranoia, crazy confidence, self-destructive bellicosity, denial, displacement activity . . . all these insanities, small and large, can afflict the crowd as well as the individual. One such is procrastination. Of course putting things off until tomorrow is sometimes rational, but we all recognise the individual (often ourself) who needs to face up to the fact that things will get only worse if a nettle is not grasped. In such cases only a serious crisis can — if we are lucky — shock us into action before it’s too late. Many a health scare has jolted someone into a change of lifestyle that they’ve known for years, deep down, was needed. Likewise with nations. A shock is usually necessary. Buffers must be hit. Ditches must be crashed into. No Britain other than a Britain that by the end of the 1970s had come close to despair would have elected the grating Margaret Thatcher as its prime minister. National ruin seemed to threaten. “There is no alternative” became the buzz-phrase. Only Tina explains Margaret. Has France come yet to that? In the year 2000 I spent four months in the Antarctic winter in the company of 58 young Frenchmen on their country’s remote Southern Ocean island of Kerguelen. Named Desolation Island by Captain Cook, this trackless place was utterly isolated, a week’s sailing from anywhere, so I was immersed in the company and thinking of liberal, intelligent, independent-minded postgraduates doing national service. I will summarise brutally their attitude to their country: deeply patriotic, uneasy that France’s greatest days seemed to lie behind, very conscious that all was not well with governance and society, aware that a swollen public sector and mulish French trade-unionism hurt their economy, and dimly conscious that change must come — but entirely unprepared to accept the essentials of that change when they were spelt out. These were young people whose chances of a first job were being hurt by job-protection, taxation, stifling bureaucracy, and all the costs of rigid French employment regulation. Some would end up in London where a flexible jobs market offered opportunity. But, still, they spoke (and thought) as though there were something sacrosanct about the French way of doing things — sacrosanct at least for France. They were nowhere near their Tina moment. And these were modern, educated urbanites. I pretend to no in-depth knowledge of French industrial relations or proposals for (or resistance to) Thatcherite reform. Specialist colleagues on The Times have described the resistance. But I gained then, and whenever I’m in France still gain, a clear impression that Macron’s hour has not yet arrived, even if Macron has. The French have a habit of waiting for the icy breath of despair on their necks before lurching in a new direction. You can see it with their 18th-century revolution. The absurdities of the ancien régime, its brutality, its feudalism, its manifest injustice, brought centuries under the royal boot. The monarchy never changed fast enough. The bodies of French peasants littering their history attest to that: so too the headless corpse of Marie Antoinette in the Place de la Révolution in October 1793. Time and again France has ignored the rising water until it broke the levee. Blood-soaked revolution then juddering chaos finally swept Napoleon to power, but now the nation faced new horrors unfolding under a new imperium. The revolution, just like the ancien régime, tangled itself into a Gordian knot that could only be cut. About-turns and headlong charges pockmark French history: the restoration of the Bourbons, the July revolution of 1830, the Orléans monarchy, the revolution of 1848, the Second Empire under Napoleon III, and finally the creation of the Third Republic following his deposition . . . it’s like those battery-operated toy puppies that go in one direction until they hit the wall and go in another. Britain’s most exciting constitutional development, the Reform Act of 1867, pales by comparison. Obstinacy in the face of inevitable change characterises most nations’ politics but France stands out. Under the failed Fourth Republic, with 21 administrations in 12 years, France put up with tottering governments until that republic was broken on the anvil of the Algerian war of independence: itself a consequence of trying to hang on for too long. As Macron has found out, France does not like to talk about Algeria. Generations younger than mine have forgotten what a catastrophe the Algerian revolution proved for her and for north Africa. An eight-year war brought mass torture and the deaths of 300,000, forcing nearly a million Arabs and Europeans to flee to France. The dark legacy of that desperate brutality, as France refused to let go, echoes down the decades. A domestic revolution — and the birth of the Fifth Republic under Charles de Gaulle — was needed before, on the question of empire and Algeria, France reached her Tina moment. So perhaps you think the way 21st-century France clings to rigid 20th-century ideology contrasts with a British openness to experiment and change? Sometimes, yes, but if you want an example of worshipful adherence to an outdated idea, look no further than to our National Health Service: a telling guide to French political thinking. We British and our beloved NHS have yet to reach our Tina moment. For all the headlines about crisis we are a long way short of crisis-point. Only catastrophe, only ambulance queues stretching down streets, only “no further admissions today” signs hung on A&E doors will give political cover to confront the impossibility of a health service that is both top-class and totally free at the point of use. What Britain needs to kick us into action on health, France needs to kick off her calcified attitude to the role of the state. Until the moment when the problematic becomes catastrophic, humans and their nations tend to plough on. That moment has yet to come for France. It is discourteous of Emmanuel Macron to turn up some years before his beliefs’ appointed place in French history.
Jon the Hat Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 23 hours ago, toddybad said: Yup, sell off the NHS and only have good schools for rich kids. Ah yes of course. That old chestnut. Find us a policy document which suggests selling off the NHS then.
The Doctor Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 52 minutes ago, KingGTF said: I said it would have/will get worse no matter who is in charge, I didn't say that government actions over the last 7 years haven't caused problems. The point was it will get worse no matter who runs the thing until attitudes and ideas change. And the simple facts are that it's got far worse under the tories than it ever has under labour. Take Friday - Some systems will have to use XP still, simply because software needed on them is not compatible with later versions; which is precisely why the NHS had a custom support contract with Microsoft to keep patching those exploits; one of which was used by the ransomware infection (which was patched for supported OS two months back). Have a guess which party, with their constant false economy approach, decided to pull that contract?
Sharpe's Fox Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 Also Fallon is a knobend and a liar http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39913552 The claim: The Conservatives pledged to build up the size of the army to 82,000 by 2020. Reality Check verdict: The actual manifesto pledge was to not let the size of the army fall below 82,000. It currently stands at nearly 78,500 so that pledge has been broken. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was asked on the Andrew Marr Show about the Conservative Party's manifesto pledge on army numbers from the 2015 election. "We said we would build the army up to 82,000 by the year 2020," he replied, adding that the number was currently just over 79,000 but pointing out that it was not yet 2020. But Mr Fallon was mistaken about what his party had promised to do two years ago. The actual pledge from the manifesto was: "We will maintain the size of the regular armed services and not reduce the army to below 82,000." The Ministry of Defence publishes monthly figures for the size of the armed forces, the most recent of which are for March this year. They show that in May 2015, at the time of the last election, the number of full-time, trained staff in the army was 81,935, having dropped from 98,418 in the previous three years. It has fallen gradually in the two years since then, so that it now stands at 78,432.
sphericalfox Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said: Ah yes of course. That old chestnut. Find us a policy document which suggests selling off the NHS then. Have a look at the contributors, then go straight page 74. Black and white, http://www.douglascarswell.com/downloads/upload13.pdf
Jon the Hat Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 1 hour ago, sphericalfox said: Have a look at the contributors, then go straight page 74. Black and white, http://www.douglascarswell.com/downloads/upload13.pdf Not a policy document as you well know.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 3 hours ago, Webbo said: What will the tories do? We'll know better after the manifesto is published but the main thing they'll do is deliver brexit and stop labour fcking the economy. Whilst picking out a couple of Labours former policies!
Guest Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 3 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Whilst picking out a couple of Labours former policies! They're good ideas now though...... apparently
ajthefox Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 2 hours ago, sphericalfox said: Have a look at the contributors, then go straight page 74. Black and white, http://www.douglascarswell.com/downloads/upload13.pdf A 12 year old document that says the Tory Party is broken and is in fact an agenda for a new party? That's a pretty weak source.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 14 May 2017 Posted 14 May 2017 38 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: Not a policy document as you well know. Thatcher's 1983 manifesto as per extract below? There's been gentle nods in this direction in others, but this seems to be the more transparent shift in direction. http://www.conservativemanifesto.com/1983/1983-conservative-manifesto.shtml Partnership in Care Conservatives reject Labour's contention that the State can and should do everything. We welcome the growth in private health insurance in recent years. This has both made more health care available, and lightened the load on the NHS, particularly for non-urgent operations. We shall continue to encourage this valuable supplement to state care. We shall promote closer partnership between the State and the private sectors in the exchange of facilities and of ideas in the interests of all patients. We also welcome the vital contribution made by voluntary organisations in the social services. We shall continue to give them strong support. The Conservative Government has already made many radical changes in law and taxation which have greatly improved the way charities and voluntary bodies are financed. The terms governing gifts under covenants have been much improved, and the liability to capital taxation has been lightened or swept away. We shall continue to support our highly successful 'Opportunities for Volunteering' scheme. In the next Parliament, we shall develop other new ways to encourage more private giving.
Guest Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 Is Labour's manifesto living in fantasy land? Quite the opposite https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/14/is-labour-manifesto-fantasy-land-quite-the-opposite
Webbo Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 6 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Whilst picking out a couple of Labours former policies! Ive already said i don't agree with the energy price cap. I'm against most state intervention in industry. What am I going to do, vote labour instead? At least with the conservatives you know the country is being run by grown ups.
davieG Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 A long read but some 'facts' for anyone who's interested NHS Confederation / Resources / Key statistics on the NHS Key statistics on the NHS Health expenditure (medical services, health research, central and other health services) per capita in England has risen from £1,868 in 2010/11 to £2,057 in 2014/15. The NHS net deficit for the 2015/16 financial year was £1.851 billion (£599m underspend by commissioners and a £2.45bn deficit for trusts and foundation trusts). The most recently published national surveys of investment for mental health found there had been real terms reductions of 1 per cent for working age adults and 3.1 per cent for older people in 2011/12. Providers and commissioners of NHS services There are currently in England: 209 clinical commissioning groups (including 199 authorised without conditions) 136 acute non-specialist trusts (including 84 foundation trusts) 17 acute specialist trusts (including 16 foundation trusts) 55 mental health trusts (including 43 foundation trusts) 34 community providers (11 NHS trusts, 6 foundation trusts and 17 social enterprises) 10 ambulance trusts (including 5 foundation trusts) 7,674 GP practices 853 for-profit and not-for-profit independent sector organisations, providing care to NHS patients from 7,331 locations NHS staff In 2015, across Hospital and Community Healthcare Services (HCHS) and GP practices, the NHS employed 149,808 doctors, 314,966 qualified nursing staff and health visitors (HCHS), 25,418 midwives, 23,066 GP practice nurses, 146,792 qualified scientific, therapeutic and technical staff, 18,862 qualified ambulance staff and 30,952 managers. There were 32,467 additional doctors employed in the NHS in 2014 compared to 2004. The number has increased by an annual average of 2.5 per cent over that time. There were 18,432 more NHS nurses in 2014 compared to ten years earlier. The number has increased by an annual average of 0.5 per cent over that period. There were 5,729 more GPs and 1,688 more practice nurses employed by GPs in 2014 than ten years earlier. There were 12,432 more qualified allied health professionals in 2014 compared to 2004. However the number of qualified healthcare scientists has declined for each of the past five years, with the number in 2014 874 below that of 2004. 51.5 per cent of NHS employees across HCHS and GP services are professionally qualified clinical staff. A further 26.6 per cent provide support to clinical staff in roles such as nursing assistant practitioners, nursing assistant/auxiliaries and healthcare assistants. An NHS Partners Network survey shows that more than 69,000 individuals are involved in providing front-line services to NHS patients among their membership. Approximately two-thirds are clinicians. Between 2009 and 2015 the number of professionally qualified clinical staff within the NHS has risen by 3.9 per cent. This rise includes an increase in doctors of 8.9 per cent; a rise in the number of nurses of 0.7 per cent; and 6.8 per cent more qualified ambulance staff. Medical school intake rose from 3,749 in 1997/98 to 6,262 in 2012/13 - a rise of 67.0 per cent. Management Managers and senior managers accounted for 2.35 per cent of the 1.318 million staff employed by HCHS and GP services across the NHS in 2015. The number of managers and senior managers increased slightly in 2014 and 2015, having declined in each of the previous four years. However 30,952 was the second lowest total since the new dataset starts in 2009. In 2008/09 the management costs of the NHS had fallen from 5.0 per cent in 1997/98 to 3.0 per cent. International comparisons In comparison with the healthcare systems of ten other countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland and USA) the NHS was found to be the most impressive overall by the Commonwealth Fund in 2014. The NHS was rated as the best system in terms of efficiency, effective care, safe care, coordinated care, patient-centred care and cost-related problems. It was also ranked second for equity. However in the category of healthy lives (10th), the NHS fared less well. Current health expenditure in the UK was 9.78 per cent of GDP in 2015. This compares to 16.91 per cent in the USA, 11.08 per cent in Germany, 11.01 per cent in France, 10.76 per cent in the Netherlands, 10.59 per cent in Denmark, 10.16 per cent in Canada, 9.05 per cent in Italy and 9.00 per cent in Spain. Current expenditure per capita (using the purchasing power parity) for the UK was $4,015 in 2015. This can be compared to $9,451 in the USA, $5,343 in the Netherlands, $5,267 in Germany, $4,943 in Denmark, $4,614 in Canada, $4,415 in France, $3,272 in Italy and $3,153 in Spain. The UK had 2.8 physicians per 1,000 people in 2015, compared to 4.1 in Germany (2014), 3.9 in Italy (2014), 3.8 in Spain (2014), 3.5 in Australia (2014), 3.4 in France, 3.0 in New Zealand and 2.6 in Canada (2014). The UK had 2.7 hospital beds per 1,000 people in 2014, compared to 8.2 in Germany, 6.2 in France, 3.0 in Spain, 2.8 in New Zealand and 2.7 in Denmark. Average length of stay for all causes in the UK was 6.9 days in 2014. This compares to 16.9 in Japan, 9.0 in Germany, 7.8 in Italy, 7.6 in New Zealand (2013), 6.6 in Spain and 5.6 in France. Patient experience In the 2015 Care Quality Commission inpatient satisfaction survey 84 per cent of c83,000 respondents rated their overall experience as 7 or more out of 10. 84 per cent felt that they were always treated with dignity and respect while using inpatient services. 83 per cent felt they were 'definitely' provided with enough information about their condition by the person that referred them. 98 per cent felt their hospital room or ward was 'very' or 'fairly' clean. 82 per cent and 79 per cent 'always' had confidence and trust in the doctors and nurses treating them respectively. In the 2011 Care Quality Commission outpatient survey 95 per cent of people using outpatient services reported their care as being excellent (44 per cent), very good (39 per cent) or good (12 per cent). 89 per cent of people agreed that they were treated with dignity and respect at all these times while visiting outpatient services. 65 per cent of respondents to the CQC's community mental health services survey for 2016 rated their experience between 7 and 10 out of 10. 70 per cent 'definitely' felt listened to carefully and 56 per cent 'definitely' felt as involved as they wanted to be in agreeing the care they received. Both of these percentages were unchanged on the previous year's community mental health survey. In September 2016 95.41 per cent of 212,630 inpatients treated by NHS trusts and foundation trusts would recommend their provider to friends or family (23.9 per cent response rate). For 17,749 inpatients treated by independent sector organisations, the proportion was 98.74 per cent (38.3 per cent response rate). Aggregated GP Patient Survey results from January-March 2015 and July-September 2015 found that 84.9 per cent of respondents rated their overall experience at the GP surgery as 'very good' or 'fairly good.' 84.9 per cent felt their GP was good at treating them with care and concern. 73.3 per cent rated their overall experience at making an appointment as good. 67.0 per cent stated their overall experience of out-of-hours GP services was good. NHS activity The NHS deals with over 1 million patients every 36 hours. In 2015/16 there were 40 per cent more operations ('procedures and interventions' as defined by Hospital Episode Statistics, excluding diagnostic testing) completed by the NHS compared to 2005/06, with an increase from 7.215m to 10.119m. There were 16.252m total hospital admissions in 2015/16, 28 per cent more than a decade earlier (12.679m). The total annual attendances at Accident & Emergency departments was 22.923m in 2015/16, 22 per cent higher than a decade earlier (18.759m). The proportion of patients seen within 4 hours at A&E departments in 2015/16 was 87.9 per cent in major (type 1 units) and 91.9 per cent overall. The total number of outpatient attendances in 2014/15 was 85.632m, an increase of 4.4 per cent on the previous year (82.060m). In the 2015 calendar year, 482,120 NHS patients were admitted to independent providers for their elective inpatient care. There were 802,949 referrals made by GPs to independent providers for outpatient care during the same period. There were 1.836m people in contact with specialist mental health services in 2014/15. 103,840 (5.7 per cent) spent time in hospital. There were 21.034m outpatient and community contacts arranged for mental health service users in 2014/15. 58,399 people were detained under the Mental Health Act in 2014/15. There were 3.140m category A calls (Red 1 and Red 2) that resulted in an emergency response in 2014/15, 9.3 per cent more than the previous year (2.872m). 71.9 per cent of Red 1 ambulance calls were responded to within eight minutes in 2014/15. At the end of September 2016, there were 3.703 million patients on the waiting list for treatment. 348,542 (9.4 per cent) had been waiting for longer than 18 weeks, compared to 247,388 (7.5 per cent) at the same point in 2015. The number of patients waiting longer than a year for treatment declined from 20,097 in September 2011 to 214 in November 2013, before increasing again. In September 2016 the number stood at 1,181. Over the past three years, the number waiting in excess of 26 weeks has increased from 48,769 to 108,459 in September 2016. 85.6 per cent of people with admitted pathways (adjusted) were treated within 18 weeks of referral in September 2015, compared to 88.3 per cent a year earlier. That was the last month for which this target was applied. 90.3 per cent of people with non-admitted pathways were treated or discharged within 18 weeks of referral in September 2016, compared to 93.7 per cent a year earlier. In September 2016, 77.5 per cent of service users who had completed their care pathway were seen within two weeks of referral under the new Early Intervention in Psychosis access standard. At the end of September 2016, 882,312 patients were on the waiting list for a diagnostic test. Of these, 1.5 per cent had been waiting in excess of six weeks. Health and population Life expectancy for English men in 2013-15: 79.4 years. Life expectancy for English women in 2013-15: 83.1 years The UK population is projected to increase from an estimated 64.6 million in mid-2014 to 69.0 million by 2024 and 72.7 million by 2034. The UK population is expected to continue ageing, with the average age rising from 40.0 in 2014 to 42.9 by 2039. The number of people aged 60 and over is projected to increase from 14.9m in 2014 to 21.9m by 2039. As part of this growth, the number of over-85s is estimated to more than double from 1.5 million in 2014 to 3.6 million by 2039. The number of people of State Pension Age (SPA) in the UK exceeded the number of children for the first time in 2007. By 2014 the disparity had declined to 0.2 million. The ONS currently projects that this situation will have reversed by 2019, with 0.5 million more children than those at SPA, but will then revert back by 2029 with 0.5 million more pensioners than children. There are an estimated 3.0 million people with diabetes in England (2016). In England the proportion of men classified as obese increased from 13.2 per cent in 1993 to 24.3 per cent in 2014 (peak of 26.2 in 2010), and from 16.4 per cent to 26.8 per cent for women over the same timescale (latter is the peak for the period covered). The proportion of boys aged 2-10 classified as obese has increased from 10 per cent in 1995 to 16.8 per cent in 2014 and for boys aged 11-15 the proportion has risen from 14 to 21.7 per cent (peak of 24 in 2004 and 2011) over the same period. The proportion of girls aged 2-10 classified as obese has increased from 11 per cent in 1995 to 14.1 per cent in 2014 (peak of 17 in 2007) and for girls aged 11-15 the proportion has risen from 16 to 18.5 per cent (peak of 27 in 2004) over the same period.
Webbo Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 When they say that health expenditure in Germany is higher is that all from govt funds? I believe in Germany you have to pay to see a GP , is that money counted into the overall expenditure?
Guest Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 24 minutes ago, Webbo said: When they say that health expenditure in Germany is higher is that all from govt funds? I believe in Germany you have to pay to see a GP , is that money counted into the overall expenditure? I'm not answering the question as I don't know the answer... Personally think for all state linked services people need to move away from state/individual cost ad just think about overall total. It isn't helpful to talk about reducing costs if all that is happening is that costs are being passed on from government to its citizens. This is what is happening with the deficit - when government shrinks and put less money into the real economy (for example through capital investment which provides finance directly to companies and workers, allowing increased personal expenditure and therefore economic growth) then growth comes about through increased personal credit being used to fund personal expenditure. Essentially, public debt is being shifted into personal debt.
Jon the Hat Posted 15 May 2017 Posted 15 May 2017 7 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Thatcher's 1983 manifesto as per extract below? There's been gentle nods in this direction in others, but this seems to be the more transparent shift in direction. http://www.conservativemanifesto.com/1983/1983-conservative-manifesto.shtml Partnership in Care Conservatives reject Labour's contention that the State can and should do everything. We welcome the growth in private health insurance in recent years. This has both made more health care available, and lightened the load on the NHS, particularly for non-urgent operations. We shall continue to encourage this valuable supplement to state care. We shall promote closer partnership between the State and the private sectors in the exchange of facilities and of ideas in the interests of all patients. We also welcome the vital contribution made by voluntary organisations in the social services. We shall continue to give them strong support. The Conservative Government has already made many radical changes in law and taxation which have greatly improved the way charities and voluntary bodies are financed. The terms governing gifts under covenants have been much improved, and the liability to capital taxation has been lightened or swept away. We shall continue to support our highly successful 'Opportunities for Volunteering' scheme. In the next Parliament, we shall develop other new ways to encourage more private giving. Saying people have the right to pay for their own private care though Health Insurance, and recognising that this saves the NHS money is not privatising the NHS. Noting that if there is a private hospital next door, it might be a lot cheaper to share facities with it that building a new operating theatre is not privatising the NHS. You think the NHS should have a monopoly on providing healthcare?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.