Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Buce]

 

Unfortunately, the lack of an integrated transport system in this country makes car ownership essential.

[davieG]

6 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Unfortunately, the lack of an integrated transport system in this country makes car ownership essential.

.....and the City of Leicester is a fine example.

 

Private bus companies chasing each other down the same route at the same time.

Private bus services based on what seems no more than political dogma and serving no real purpose or improvement and yet still subsidised by the tax payer.

24hr bus lanes with no buses

Park & Rides in the wrong location

Two bus stations so near yet so far.

An inner ring road cutting the railway station off from the town.

 

Planned chaos.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, davieG said:

.....and the City of Leicester is a fine example.

 

Private bus companies chasing each other down the same route at the same time.

Private bus services based on what seems no more than political dogma and serving no real purpose or improvement and yet still subsidised by the tax payer.

24hr bus lanes with no buses

Park & Rides in the wrong location

Two bus stations so near yet so far.

An inner ring road cutting the railway station off from the town.

 

Planned chaos.

 

Where I live is just 3 miles to where my mother-in-law lives, yet to get there by public transport requires catching two buses with an hour and a half journey time.

 

A complete joke.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

12 hours ago, toddybad said:

So, very nearly 100 pages down and so far we've had arguments, apologies, deep discussions and bad tempered repartee. What we haven't had is anybody change their mind about anything......kinda gotta wonder if there's really any point to this 

 

Anyway, i would really like to see this be party apolitical but i think this is a brilliant piece by monbiot. One of my biggest concerns now is the environment. If you don't understand why i urge you to read the un reports and other recent scientific papers and you'll understand how hideously we've ****ed things up and how quickly we need to respond. Anyway:

 

The car has a chokehold on Britain. It’s time to free ourselves

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/01/car-chokehold-britain-polluted-inefficient-transport-system-motor-industry?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Its useful to see other peoples viewpoints, and just sometimes something might be said that you happen to agree with. To be honest I believe there is no one on this planet who wants everything to be shit, people just have different beliefs on how you reach that goal, most of the beliefs are flawed by one common thing.. human actions and the inbuilt function to survive at all costs, when they get into positions of power they get greedy that's when every system falls apart and not one is sadly perfect or ever likely to be.

 

Public transport has been a sham in this country for many many years! No party has a plan or has ever delivered. Since some short sighted clown decided it was a good idea to rip up all the electric tramways installed in pretty much all cities by the Victorians and in the early 1900s and replace them with stinking diesel burning buses! Then Beaching ripped up the then under user railways like the Great Central which were running huge steam trains just before small more efficient Diesel trains allowed trains to run differently. Had the great central still been in place we wouldn't even need HS2.

 

I am not sure electric cars are the future at present, there is A LOT of technological improvement to be done. One batteries are crap, really crap, they last about 5 years maximum, then the battery has to be changed at a cost of around £2000, who the hell is going to do that and where the heck do you put all the dangerous large used batteries? The other issue is range, in a petrol car at he weekend I can fill it up and drive 600 miles without issues, in a electric car you are lucky to get 70miles. In the next 20 years there are a lot of issues to solve. Also for the government where do you fill the massive budget hole left by the massive duty on petrol!

 

One thing I think most people can agree on is that we need infrastructure projects, especially with Brexit. We desperately need sustainable power generation, I fully support the idea for a world leading tidal barrage in the seven estuary, we need housing, we need better public transport outside London and we must continue to electrify rail, the policy to cancel this project is a sham. We also need to stop foreign state run companies profiteering from our infrastructure.

Edited 2 August 2017 by Foxin_mad

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

Careful @Foxin_mad - that sounds like a socialists paradise!

[davieG]

16 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Also for the government where do you fill the massive budget hole left by the massive duty on petrol!

 

 

You could alter the vehicle tax to a user based charge the more you travel on the roads the more you pay, roads could be graded etc. With all the technology out there it should be easy to manage.

 

Life is full of yin and yangs where there's a loss there's usually a gain if you look hard enough and Governments are fairly good at finding things to tax.

[Buce]

8 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Careful @Foxin_mad - that sounds like a socialists paradise!

 

And a surprisingly reasonable post.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

No not at all I haven't said we need to lock up the rich, take all their money, burn down their businesses and redistribute the wealth! I think that most people can agree we need proper sustainable infrastructure projects.

 

The state can have a useful function, it just needs to do it efficiently. I was reading an article yesterday about testing for a cancer treatment that saves money and increases survival rates, this is the kind of thing we need. We can not just keep throwing endless supplies of money at things, we have to accept the world has changed and services set up in the 1930s need to be adapted. Public services need a serious independent review many are offering services we don't even need over crucial services. There are vast efficiency saving s to be made, again no government has done it properly or probably ever will.

Edited 2 August 2017 by Foxin_mad

[Guest Foxin_mad]

4 minutes ago, davieG said:

You could alter the vehicle tax to a user based charge the more you travel on the roads the more you pay, roads could be graded etc. With all the technology out there it should be easy to manage.

 

Life is full of yin and yangs where there's a loss there's usually a gain if you look hard enough and Governments are fairly good at finding things to tax.

I would be happy for that to happen but, I think fuel duty must be a massive income generator at present, I hope someone has figured how to deal with this out (probably not).

 

I am sure all cars could be fitted with some black box that tracks your every movement and issues speeding fines instantly

[davieG]

1 minute ago, Foxin_mad said:

No not at all I haven't said we need to lock up the rich, take all their money, burn down their businesses and redistribute the wealth! I think that most people can agree we need proper sustainable infrastructure projects.

 

The state can have a useful function, it just needs to do it efficiently. I was reading an article yesterday about testing for a cancer treatment that saves money and increases survival rates, this is the kind of thing we need. We can not just keep throwing endless supplies of money at things, we have to accept the world has changed and services set up in the 1930s need to be adapted. Public services need a serious independent review many are offering services we don't even need over crucial services. There are vast efficiency saving s to be made, again no government has done it properly or probably ever will.

Governments of all hues have continually and some might say incessantly reviewed public services and implemented so called improvements sadly most are based on political dogma and not what's best for that service. The continual changes have themselves have often increased costs and caused inefficiencies.

 

One of the biggest problems with public services is politicians can't leave alone they think they know best (when they have little or no knowledge of the service they are responsible for) when they really should leave it to those running these services and give them a free none political interference reign to get on with the job to make them successful.

 

In my Dreams!

[davieG]

Just now, Foxin_mad said:

I would be happy for that to happen but, I think fuel duty must be a massive income generator at present, I hope someone has figured how to deal with this out (probably not).

 

I am sure all cars could be fitted with some black box that tracks your every movement and issues speeding fines instantly

...and governments would love that but it seems inevitable whether it's for taxing purposes or not.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

 

You're more socialist than you care to admit @Foxin_mad 

 

Your riposte is far more left leaning than right. Right wing thinking determines that the market will take care of all the things you point too and that a government shouldn't be involved with any of that. 

[Kopfkino]

15 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

You're more socialist than you care to admit @Foxin_mad 

 

Your riposte is far more left leaning than right. Right wing thinking determines that the market will take care of all the things you point too and that a government shouldn't be involved with any of that. 

 

Well then Hayek was a socialist, being as he says in The Constitution of Liberty that services such as sewage and roads are, once provided, sufficient for all and the provision of such is a public effort because the right to a share in them is part of the protection of one's liberty. I don't think many sane folk believe that any market actor should just be able to build a road or decide to build a new railway through the Chilterns on a whim. Maybe that makes us all 'infrastructure socialists'. 

[Captain...]

2 hours ago, Foxin_mad said:

The state can have a useful function, it just needs to do it efficiently.

That is the problem, the things that need to be run by the state can't be run efficiently, if they could be then we can leave it to the free market.

 

Healthcare cannot be left to the whims of the markets, because human life cannot be costed, likewise transport links, it is totally inefficient to provide public transport that accesses remote villages with small populations on a regular basis, but that needs to be done to provide a quality of life to the people that live out there. Water, electricity, gas all come from the same source and priorities need to be on maintaining supply not limiting supply to make the process more efficient.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

11 minutes ago, Captain... said:

That is the problem, the things that need to be run by the state can't be run efficiently, if they could be then we can leave it to the free market.

 

Healthcare cannot be left to the whims of the markets, because human life cannot be costed, likewise transport links, it is totally inefficient to provide public transport that accesses remote villages with small populations on a regular basis, but that needs to be done to provide a quality of life to the people that live out there. Water, electricity, gas all come from the same source and priorities need to be on maintaining supply not limiting supply to make the process more efficient.

Of course they can.  We can not spend infinite amounts. You have to question for starters whether as hospital needs for example the following jobs are a small cross section of the type of non jobs on offer at NHS trusts across the country (Source TAX PAYERS ALLIANCE):

 

• energy management manager
• a commissioning Support Unit with many PR Staff
• curator and programme manager
• community outreach coordinator
• green staff
• equality and diversity staff
• spin doctors

You have to question whether hospitals need any of these functions or if they should just get back to the basics of providing care.

 

None of these jobs existed before 1997, they are not needed. We have this problem up and down the country in Public sector organisations.

 

[Captain...]

Just now, Foxin_mad said:

Of course they can.  We can not spend infinite amounts. You have to question for starters whether as hospital needs for example the following jobs are a small cross section of the type of non jobs on offer at NHS trusts across the country (Source TAX PAYERS ALLIANCE):

 

• energy management manager
• a commissioning Support Unit with many PR Staff
• curator and programme manager
• community outreach coordinator
• green staff
• equality and diversity staff
• spin doctors

You have to question whether hospitals need any of these functions or if they should just get back to the basics of providing care.

 

None of these jobs existed before 1997, they are not needed. We have this problem up and down the country in Public sector organisations.

 

Sounds familiar that: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/467993/NHS-scandal-of-one-thousand-non-jobs-that-cost-taxpayers-46-million

 

Wonder what the tory cuts have done to that in the last 3 years?

 

I don't disagree that we could be more efficient, but you can bet that some of those roles have been brought in on the back of reviews on how to be more efficient. Energy management manager is almost definitely a cost cutting role, spin doctors and PR personnel should be nowhere near the NHS, but the battering it takes in the press for closing units it needs a PR team to justify the decisions made.

 

Nobody will argue that we need to get rid of layers of middle management and get more doctors and nurses in, but it is a massive organisation and it requires a lot of staff operating in a lot of fields that you and I may not consider essential but they do a valuable job. "Green" staff, focussing on environmental issues are not necessarily waste, community outreach programmes that focus on the health and well being of high risk communities as preventative care is clearly beneficial, but there is no monetary value in it.

 

Healthcare is more than just doctors and nurses.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

2 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Sounds familiar that: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/467993/NHS-scandal-of-one-thousand-non-jobs-that-cost-taxpayers-46-million

 

Wonder what the tory cuts have done to that in the last 3 years?

 

I don't disagree that we could be more efficient, but you can bet that some of those roles have been brought in on the back of reviews on how to be more efficient. Energy management manager is almost definitely a cost cutting role, spin doctors and PR personnel should be nowhere near the NHS, but the battering it takes in the press for closing units it needs a PR team to justify the decisions made.

 

Nobody will argue that we need to get rid of layers of middle management and get more doctors and nurses in, but it is a massive organisation and it requires a lot of staff operating in a lot of fields that you and I may not consider essential but they do a valuable job. "Green" staff, focussing on environmental issues are not necessarily waste, community outreach programmes that focus on the health and well being of high risk communities as preventative care is clearly beneficial, but there is no monetary value in it.

 

Healthcare is more than just doctors and nurses.

Probably nothing. The number of non jobs in the public sector is as bad as its ever been. Generally poor management decisions have been made in these organisations to cut frontline services and protect the back office, of course the management making these decisions have a vested interest.

 

None of these roles used to exist and the NHS used to be a much more streamline organisation, I think a lot of these jobs need a serious independent review on what value they add. Of course it will never ever happen and we will just keep throwing more and more money into the NHS. Perhaps if the NHS trust managers wages were performance related they might perform better and find more cost savings. There is so much waste for example I had a family member who needed their legs bandaged but they were latex intolerant, the NHS sent out a box of latex based bandages, to be told they were wrong, they were never opened but they told us to destroy them as they are contaminated, a whole box! obscene.

 

 

[leicsmac]

Headline of the Daily Mail today: "Shambles at EU Airports: Holidaymakers queue for hours as Brussels imposes tough passport checks - and British families suffer most."

 

Um..I thought tougher border controls was what the Mail and most of their readership wanted? Or is that just tougher border control for everyone apart from British citizens?

[ajthefox]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Headline of the Daily Mail today: "Shambles at EU Airports: Holidaymakers queue for hours as Brussels imposes tough passport checks - and British families suffer most."

 

Um..I thought tougher border controls was what the Mail and most of their readership wanted? Or is that just tougher border control for everyone apart from British citizens?

Ridiculous. Voting to leaving the EU and these tougher border controls are completely unrelated. This is the fault of the EU bureaucrats!

[Captain...]

17 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

There is so much waste for example I had a family member who needed their legs bandaged but they were latex intolerant, the NHS sent out a box of latex based bandages, to be told they were wrong, they were never opened but they told us to destroy them as they are contaminated, a whole box! obscene.

That is exactly my point, you can't compromise on safety regardless of how wasteful or inefficient it is, as soon as the bandages or anything leave the NHS they are compromised and can't be used on another patient.

 

Did you destroy them?

[DJ Barry Hammond]

1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

There is so much waste for example I had a family member who needed their legs bandaged but they were latex intolerant, the NHS sent out a box of latex based bandages, to be told they were wrong, they were never opened but they told us to destroy them as they are contaminated, a whole box! obscene.

 

 

 

The original mistake may be annoying, but can happen - but worth considering the potential costs involved with returning an item;

• Postage
• Wage costs for organising / acknowledging receipt;
• Checking condition of returned item(s);
• Returning item to stock / destroying as appropriate

For an item that is low cost and in plentiful stock, asking you to destroy may actually have been the more efficient move. 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

59 minutes ago, Captain... said:

That is exactly my point, you can't compromise on safety regardless of how wasteful or inefficient it is, as soon as the bandages or anything leave the NHS they are compromised and can't be used on another patient.

 

Did you destroy them?

They were no opened though they are in sealed plastic shrink wrap packaging, you can clearly tell if the item has been tampered with. Maybe they shouldn't send in bulk if they have the potential for errors.

 

Eventually they were destroyed after much deliberation and annoyance.

 

9 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

The original mistake may be annoying, but can happen - but worth considering the potential costs involved with returning an item;

• Postage
• Wage costs for organising / acknowledging receipt;
• Checking condition of returned item(s);
• Returning item to stock / destroying as appropriate

For an item that is low cost and in plentiful stock, asking you to destroy may actually have been the more efficient move. 

I would have happily taken it back for them. It didn't look like a particularly cheap box, there were quite a large number of bandages inside. It would easily have cost £100 I would say.

 

This is just one example, procurement is another big issue with different trusts procuring items locally, why is this not done on a national level? There was one trust spending more on bulk toilet rolls that the cost of buying them from the local Tesco. There are major issues across the sector that should really be addresses before we start throwing even more money at it.

[davieG]

2 hours ago, Foxin_mad said:

Of course they can.  We can not spend infinite amounts. You have to question for starters whether as hospital needs for example the following jobs are a small cross section of the type of non jobs on offer at NHS trusts across the country (Source TAX PAYERS ALLIANCE):

 

• energy management manager
• a commissioning Support Unit with many PR Staff
• curator and programme manager
• community outreach coordinator
• green staff
• equality and diversity staff
• spin doctors

You have to question whether hospitals need any of these functions or if they should just get back to the basics of providing care.

 

None of these jobs existed before 1997, they are not needed. We have this problem up and down the country in Public sector organisations.

 

A lot of these non-jobs exist due to the over reaction to minor/rare events where the media and the public, even more now than ever with social media demand it must never happen again even though they were probably one offs to start with and the result is further layers of employees.

 

We've become a nation where, in almost every aspect has 'gone too far' beyond any real need.

[davieG]

17 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

They were no opened though they are in sealed plastic shrink wrap packaging, you can clearly tell if the item has been tampered with. Maybe they shouldn't send in bulk if they have the potential for errors.

 

Eventually they were destroyed after much deliberation and annoyance.

 

I would have happily taken it back for them. It didn't look like a particularly cheap box, there were quite a large number of bandages inside. It would easily have cost £100 I would say.

 

This is just one example, procurement is another big issue with different trusts procuring items locally, why is this not done on a national level? There was one trust spending more on bulk toilet rolls that the cost of buying them from the local Tesco. There are major issues across the sector that should really be addresses before we start throwing even more money at it.

Because they are often told to by a higher authority often at the behest of government.

 

it even happens in private industries, I've worked in both and during that time they both moved from using local suppliers for individual items to using large multi-goods suppliers.

For them it meant a reduction in people buying, reduced paper work, timed deliveries to name but a few. the result often meant the cost of the item went up but the overall costs associated with it went down more.

 

At one organisation we had a team of 10 buyers including a manager and Senior Buyers, this was reduced to two buyers and merged with the production engineering department.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

British economy set to surge....

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/aug/02/uk-economy-surge-life-leading-forecaster-jagjit-chadh

 

 

P.S @Alf Bentley I haven't seen you for a while, give us all a toot to confirm you are still around and presumably in good health.