Funding the NHS?

papaoscar Fri 20-Jun-14 20:41:52
I was thinking, 3AHM of William Beveridge, wartime Liberal architect of the welfare state and the NHS,... groundwork done by that great Liberal leader Lloyd George in 1911. We owe those two an enormous debt. The present so-called Liberals are beneath my contempt, and I used to be a member of the party.
Then, P O, we are indeed in agreement.
Lloyd George has been much maligned, and badly represented, mainly by the Tories and their ever-so-close supporters in the Press. As you and I clearly understand the roots of the Welfare state, and the NHS, were planted, fed and watered by Dafydd.
Yes, the 1911 legislation was the bedrock on which the Welfare State, and the NHS would be founded - tho' some still see it as a ploy to undermine more radical moves by an increasingly powerful working class.
Dafydd's Postwar [W W 1] social reforms should shine as brightly as the Post W W 2 reforms by the Attlee Gov't, Those 1945 - wonders were brought in in the face of that drunken oaf Churchill, and his hysterical claim that Labour would have to "... fall back on some kind of Gestapo" to implement its policies.
Yes, I knew that you'd play the Beveridge was a Liberal card - and all credit to him (and you). Without his clear vision, and skilled presentation of the appalling facts, the triumvirate of Churchill, the BMA and the Tory Press Barons would have used the ''We're too poor to afford this extravagance now.'' argument to block progress.
Sounds like they haven't changed their tune much as they sell off everything we have to non-residents, tax dodgers, and Sovereign Wealth Funds [Nationalized - but by another State ? ? ]
I won't intrude on your private grief v-a-v your last sentence. [He, he ]
Kindest regards.

If any of my grandchildren needed lifesaving operations, they would be done in an NHS hospital, Ana. Private hospitals do not do lifesaving. Anyone in a private hospital whose life needs saving gets sent to the nearest A&E. Verging on a personal attack there, Ana.

AAAHappyMan I do realise that the NHS is not actually 'free', yes, we do pay for it through our taxes, but not everyone pays any taxes anyway, older people may not and the unemployed/disabled etc. However I meant of course free at the point of need. We all want to save the NHS, it is marvellous [or was] however, when it was set up , those running it could not forsee how the population of this country would increase.It was never designed to cope with mass immigration, firstly from India and Pakistan, the West Indies, and now from Europe and Eastern Europe.Yes, we do generate more taxes from working people, but the NHS cannot do all it needs to do, for the sheer number of patients wanting things from it.So, something does need to change, it's just what?

AAA, I wrote an assignment on that Humpty Dumpty quote at college.
Got a grade A for it, and the comment that it was wonderful to read as the last one of that particular lecturer's career. Can't for the life of me remember what I wrote, though.

Would you stick to those principles even if was one of your grandchildren whose life could possibly be saved by private treatment, durhamjen?

Holly, how do you know what I can and cannot afford?
As it happens, I can afford to jump the queue if I need to, but I do have some principles left.

I was thinking, 3AHM of Wiliam Beveridge, wartime Liberal architect of the welfare state and the NHS, following the groundwork done by that great Liberal leader Lloyd George in 1911. We owe those two an enormous debt. The present so-called Liberals are beneath my contempt, and I used to be a member of the party.

Re charges, 3AHM, yes, you make a very sound point. The creeping, insidious and devious extraction of fees and charges for various NHS charges is a disgrace. I was thinking more of some means of preventing or limiting the activities of time-wasters and free-loaders, by applying a small front-end charge for basic medical services, with a corresponding reduction in NH charges on the employed.

papaoscar Fri 20-Jun-14 19:00:10
I suppose the miracle is that we have the NHS at all. I have read that its introduction was stoutly resisted by the wealthy and medical authorities of the day, ...
Too true, too true and to buy off the Meds, 'Nye' granted them Contractors to the NHS status, and disastrously, their right to ride the two competing horses of the NHS, and Private practice.
...and that it was only the determined efforts of Labour and Liberal politicians who pushed it through against all odds.
As with the curates egg?
Given that the party distribution in the 1945 Parliament was :
Lab = 393
Con = 197
Lib = 12
National Lib = 11 [Cons in disguize]
it might be a moot point as to whether the Libs had any influence at all.
Given their present craven, lick-spittle stance on the privatization of the NHS - if they did have any claim to fame, they've sold it for Mr Clegg's position in Gov't and annihilation at the next General election.
[Lloyd George really did know my grandfather.]

papaoscar Fri 20-Jun-14 18:17:03 Rosesarered, sadly if something is free it will be abused whether we like it or not so we have to bite the bullet and start charging.
One can but assume that you are referring to the NHS :
1)....Treatment by the NHS is not free. How could it be? It's not charged for at the point of need. It's paid for by us in our taxes.
2)....Not everything provided by OUR=NHS is so provided; prescriptions; eye tests, lenses and frames; dentistry; even carparking for people visiting patients with long term, and maybe terminal, illnesses.
3)....OK, OK - there are certain categories who are exempted from certain charges, but that doesn't alter the case that the the NHS is not free

I suppose the miracle is that we have the NHS at all. I have read that its introduction was stoutly resisted by the wealthy and medical authorities of the day, and that it was only the determined efforts of Labour and Liberal politicians who pushed it through against all odds. I do not trust the Tories with it and I am very suspicious of the gathering crowd of greedy private-sector and foreign sharks circling what they see only as a great dying beast to be picked clean. You only have to look at the disgrace of public medical facilities in the USA to see what awaits the NHS if the Americans get their hands on it.

You're right, Rosesarered

Many private hospitals and clinics do not have access to life-saving equipment in the event of an emergency and precious time may be wasted rushing a patient to an NHS hospital.

Of course, paying privately does mean that a person can get a consultation and treatment much quicker, the environment is likely to be more "plush", and appointments and admissions can be arranged at the convenience of the "customer". I don't think that necessarily means that basic care is better across the board. Many of the current private providers only carry out certain "routine" procedures, rather than treat more complex/chronic conditions, whereas the NHS cannot "cherrypick" in this way and therefore patient "outcomes" are likely to appear less positive than those in the private sector.

Whereas Freedom of Information requests can be made to the NHS regarding matters such as staffing ratios, numbers of complaints, performance, etc. etc., the Freedom of Information Act does not apply to private sector providers and it is legally entitled to withhold information, on the grounds of "commercial secrecy".

'Should' may be the operative word, papaoscar

Durhamjen, much as I despise many politicians they do have a problem - the five year period between elections. It's just not long enough for any government to make and put into place strategic national decisions on things like defence, power, water, transport, and of course the NHS. And these things must all be protected from day-to-day meddling politicians and predatory private sector interests.

Rosesarered, sadly if something is free it will be abused whether we like it or not so we have to bite the bullet and start charging. As regards EU citizens, their medical costs are already reoverable from their country of origin so no problem there, and non-EU users should be required to pay up-front anyway. That should all be taking place now.

janeainsworth Thu 19-Jun-14 23:01:56
When I said NHS report, I meant the NHS report of the research project, ie the NHS's interpretation, as opposed to the Daily Telegraph's.
"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.''
Got that?
It looks suspiciously like you haven't, J A.

I see that Holly and it can be a problem. I have said to Gp's in the past, would there be anything I could do [paying privately] or buy, and they are reluctant to tell you. My daughter has always suffered badly with psoriasis, and I remember it was so difficult for them to diagnose [in Heavens name why?] I knew it was psoriasis ,other family members have it, and it looked so obvious as well.What they do, is when they [reluctantly] give a diagnosis, start you off on the mildest cream possible, and you then progress slowly up the strongest [in DD's case] tablets.Like you, she tries not get stressed, but life is stressing sometimes.

Holly - I thought the IOM health care system wasn't part of the NHS?

One of the problems I have with the NHS rosesarered is that they don't always tell you of alternative treatments if they are expensive; I can understand that the NHS cannot supply everyone with everything, every time they need it - but why does that stop them from telling patients that a certain treatment exists that is only available on private prescription? At least patients would have a choice.

I have psoriasis on my forearms when I get stressed out (hence, I rarely allow anything to stress me out) and the cream given by the NHS was uselss - they didn't even manage to diagnise what it was even though I knew! I went privately for the 'official' diagnosis and was told about a treatment and that if my GP wouldn't prescribe it, let them know and they would prescribe it (he was trying to avoid my having to pay for a private prescription when this gel was available on the NHS) but clearly, from his comments, GPs and NHS doctors are reluctant to give it).

and when you're anesthetized HD, how do you know who's doing the job?

You have no idea who is performing your operation under the NHS either - neither do you know what other procedures students are permitted to practice on your anesthetized body without your consent (known as 'medicines dirty little secret' - I hope this link works because you can choose which country to read about it, it happens in all of them. https://www.google.com/search?q=medicines+dirty+little+secret&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&channel=np&source=hp#channel=np&q=medicines+dirty+little+secret+students+practice+on+anethetised+patients&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official

If a surgeon, privately, prides himself on his work - he is hardly likely to risk running foul of a law suit which would spell the end of his private work should he be shown to be passing over to someone else.

Surely the good thing about the government of the day being in overall control of the NHS is that the government can be changed every few years[ditto the policies.]Democracy allows us to change things [even though the civil servants stay the same.] I would feel unhappy about the NHS being in the hands of any other group who may soothingly say 'we will decide everything.' The NHS may well have to make changes but I believe it should be, free and available to all British subjects.I don't know if there are any charges for anyone from the Eurozone [but there should be] ditto ecomonic migrants from elsewhere.As the population grows, we would have to make some charges. It would be unfair to charge everyone so many pounds for hospital stays/visits.Most of us on this forum have already paid in over the years from our salaries.

durhamjen - I am quite able to compare costs that the NHS charge for private work against what the private sector cost, just as I am able to compare and contrast costs in Europe with what is charged in the UK.

Of course I'm prepared to pay what the ask if the circumstances demand it - are you telling me you wouldn't if you could afford it and your treatment, actually diagnosis, had taken 6 months with no diagnosis in sight? Of course you'd go private under those circumstances as would anyone if they could get the money. My financial situation was different then and it was my belief that if you can pay then you should pay and not take resources away from those who can't afford it. My venture into private medicine was brought about by NHS (Manx) inefficiency.

Surgeons are the same ones? Well well well, who would have thought! The difference is: I could choose which surgeon I had - one that was more than competent as opposed to having to put up with whoever they could get to work here.

.... and when you're anesthetized HD, how do you know who's doing the job?

How do you know they do not rip people off? Private medical companies do not have to give financial details because of commercial confidentiality. What you mean is that you are prepared to pay what they ask because you can afford it. Lots of people cannot.
By the way, the surgeons are often the same ones.

I didn't say they didn't make a profit - I highlighted the fact that they do not rip people off the way they are all accused of doing.

I've had more procedures go wrong on the NHS than I have in private medicine - I know who I trust more because one allows me to choose my surgeon and the other doesn't. I just wish I could still afford that choice.

Wouldn't be private sector if they were not out to make a profit for their shareholders, would it? Still do not trust them.