People's Assembly Against Austerity

April the 1st we will no longer have our NHS ....all of it will be put out to tender.

I cannot argue with that comment as I may have missed something but I think that is so extreme a comment I can't wait for April 1st to come to see what happens.

Are you seriously saying every part of the NHS will be privatised on that date?

I have just looked at the link and, to be honest, I could not see how this group differed from SWAN or several other parties that have tried their luck on Gransnet.

It is a list of calls to action that are admirable but I cannot find anything on the site about how all these aims would be financed, how they would deal with our massive foreign debt or anything else remotely dealing with the fiscal implications of their policies. It reminds me of the way politicians ran the Greek economy, or the Italian or the Spanish, promise the world and to h**l with how it is to be paid for.

These are the economics of madness and would end with the country having the IMF forcing on us the kind of desperate cuts to welfare and benefits that Greece has had to face, with children being put into care by parents who can no longer afford to feed them and wuith pensioners begging in the streets.

I have just looked at the link and, to be honest, I could not see how this group differed from SWAN or several other parties that have tried their luck on Gransnet.

It is a list of calls to action that are admirable but I cannot find anything on the site about how all these aims would be financed, how they would deal with our massive foreign debt or anything else remotely dealing with the fiscal implications of their policies. It reminds me of the way politicians ran the Greek economy, or the Italian or the Spanish, promise the world and to h**l with how it is to be paid for.

These are the economics of madness and would end with the country having the IMF forcing on us the kind of desperate cuts to welfare and benefits that Greece has had to face, with children being put into care by parents who can no longer afford to feed them and wuith pensioners begging in the streets.

Flickety

OK OK I agreed with you the first time.

Me too

Flickety I seem to recall that the SWAN posting was a list of proposals to be incorporated into the manifesto of a new party. No details were provided as to who was initiating the proposed movement or what organisations or individuals were supporting it. I believe the post and any related threads were deleted by Gransnet.

The People's Assembly describes itself as aspiring to build a movement for social justice and to provide a forum to develop links between a variety of like-minded organisations. The Assembly has clearly identified its current supporters, which include MPs, trades union leaders, journalists, doctors, charity heads, peace campaigners, etc., etc.

POGS You have no doubt read that a huge number of medical and nursing staff, together with health journalists and academics, have grave concerns about what will happen to the NHS when it becomes a market place. You obviously find it hilarious, but many people don't.

This article demonstrates the grave concern being expressed by mainstream and fairly conservative medical bodies.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/02/doctors-bemoan-nhs-privatisation-by-stealth

No idea how the repeat happened, a hand tremor perchance, or I thought I hand hadnt clicked properly and did it again, my apologies.

Eloethan, it is not the organisation of these two organisations that are so similar but there wonderful aspirational ideas, that few would argue with, but they never give any details about how much these aspirations would cost and how they would be financed. Phrases like 'Tax the rich'. Tax the bank' sound good but even if you could do these things without destroying the importance of London as a financial centre, and it is a major export and currency earner for the UK, the sum these taxes would bring in would be insignificant in comparison with the cost of these policies.

I've read back, but can't find any remarks to indicate hilarity by Pogs. Mild lightheartedness at most.

There are always medics opposed to change - they are only human and it's generally human nature to resist change. However, I too have heard nothing to indicate privatisation of the NHS on 1st April. But then I gave up reading national newspapers several years ago as they are all so outrageously biased and alarmist it's nigh on impossible to assertain the truth.

Eloethan

I'll take a lot of stick on here but where on earth you come up with accusing me of finding the subject of the NHS 'HILARIOUS' I do not know.

If you have read my thread on the North Staffordshire Hospital Report you would note that it is a subject quite close to my heart. I sure as hell DO NOT find the subject remotely hilarious.

You made a very strong 'statement' when you said as of "April the 1st we will no longer have our NHS - ALL of it would be put put to tender". I thought my link was a fair point to make and I still do.

I did read today that April 1st is supposed to be the date that the NHS Helpline number 111 is supposed to replace the NHS Direct line for out of hours medical advice. Apparently it's been tested in certain areas in the UK and has been a resounding failure, but no one seems to know whether it's still going ahead nationwide or not...

POGS I did not make the statement "April the 1st we will no longer have our NHS ...". In fact, it was blueskies. The comments she made, whether you agree or disagree with them, were made with a great deal of sincerity and reflected a growing anxiety about the sort of situation that may await our children and grandchildren. I felt your response had an unnecessarily sarcastic undertone.

NFK I agree, probably most people within any organisation are initially resistant to change, particularly if they fear such change is going to adversely affect them. However, the sheer volume of people, including people who are not employed by the NHS, either directly or indirectly, who are expressing concern about the opening up of the NHS to more extensive privatisation must surely raise some doubts in your mind?

Eloethan

I apologise, my original post was to blueskies.

I do not apologise for the other part of my post. I admit I responded too quickly but I was so cross you said you thought I found the subject of the NHS 'Hilarious'. Now you think I was using a sarcastic undertone.

I guess some of us just rub one another up the wrong way.

Two grans have registered for People's Assembly and booked B&B in London. Any like minded gran care to join us for a bite to eat on the Friday evening before the big day?

As far as I'm concerned anything with tony benn in it should be taken with a long spoon. I loathe that man. I consider him a hypocrite of the first water. I know he was very comfortably off and yet was intrinsic in demolishing the grammar school system( which allowed people like my father and father in law drag themselves out of the poverty In which they were born) and yet which his granddaughter is able to choose to go into one of the few Grammar schools available ( st Albans) with the intention of going straight from university into politics and she will use her grandfathers name regardless of ability. There are s o many people who are trapped because of the narrow minded left wing we must keep everyone down rather than we must let people soar.

Wow Stansgran I could not agree more. Pious hypocrisy of the highest order. Only a few can soar now, those with money or connections.

Could not agree more Stansgran!!!!!!

I loved the grammar school system: I just scraped through my 11+ and loved the school I went to. My husband just failed his - he was allowed to sit it again but his gran, who brought him up said no - and he went to a dreadful, useless school.

I think those who pushed the comprehensive school system wanted to avoid that huge gap in opportunity between those who passed and those who failed. Tony Benn and the others got it wrong of course - they should have kept the grammar school system alongside comprehensives, giving the later developers the same opportunities as those who did well at age 11.

Sorry Sel - I think pious hypocrisy is much more of a right wing thing, such as cutting benefits while piously declaring it will push those undeserving poor into getting jobs - when there aren't enough jobs to go round.

Looking forward to hearing how the assembly went.

The grammar school system was brilliant for those of us who went to grammar school which were very much a minority. The secondary modern schools were often extremely poor in terms of facilities, curriculum etc. And those were the schools that served the majority. And they only educated to 14.
It took a while for the comprehensive system to establish itself but there are now many brilliant comprehensives that are giving excellent education to the brightest without limiting opportunity and aspiration at the age of 11 for others. Many now go to university that would have failed the 11 plus.
I am confident that there are no comprehensives that are as awful as many secondary moderns were in the 50s and many of them are brilliant.
The school where I was governor for 10 years serves a seriously deprived area. It is now doing a really good job for its students, they have a wide range of opportunities, great facilities (much better than the tatty grammar school i went to), and harder working teachers (who would be sacked if they tried conducting all lessons by dictating a set of notes.) Every year the achievement is improving. No comparison to the meagre secondary education that would have been available in the area 50 years ago.
I regret that Benn and co did not go the whole hog and ban private schools - if they had done this we would have an even better comprehensive system as the wealthiest in society would have a vested interest in them.

To have grammar schools alongside comprehensive schools is a clear nonsense - if the comprehensive school is deprived of the most academically able it is obviously going to be disadvantaged in any league tables.
Grammar schools in most areas catered for 15% of the population, and many of the 'failures' felt it was not worth trying any more. Other countries manage with completely comprehensive systems and achieve results as least as good as the UK. I speak as someone who benefited from the grammar school system as my Catholic elementary school in Salford was appalling but that does not make me willing to exclude 85% of other children from the better staffing ratios, buildings and facilities that I enjoyed.

I wonder why the words 'communist', or 'left wing' are never defined but just used in a derogatory fashion?

I note that one of the aims of the government is to make sure that nobody is better off on benefits than in work. Here is a revolutionary suggestion - why not pay the workers more?

No, higher education is not the complete answer to all ills as there are now tens of thousands of unemployed graduates who were told that studying for three years or more and getting deeply into debt would guarantee them a successful job. And, before anybody leaps in to condemn them, they are not all insisting on high-status jobs - many would take any they could find. It is not hard to understand, is it, that in some areas, such as Hull, there are not enough vacancies for everybody to get a job. So now we will be told the unemployed should be ready to relocate, leaving families, friends and homes behind. This is simply not practical for many people with commitments - unless the whole family were able to move, the worker would have to pay rent in the new location and travel costs to see their family. If they are on the basic wage, that would not be possible.

I am heartened by the approach of many churches - they have not always been seen to be on side of the underprivileged - I believe the church of england was known as the conservative party at prayer.

It was stated on BBC news this morning that there are 180,000 people set to be have their benefits cut because they have too many bedrooms, but there are only 80,000 smaller homes available for rental. When challenged, the government spokesman waffled about how many more homes they had built than the last Labour government but avoided the issue of the extra 100,00 people who will simply be worse off. Savings will be minimal, hardship may be great.

Private Eye, which I trust, has been pointing out for months that many MPs of all shades have financial links to the companies that will receive very lucrative contracts for health care. Cynical? You bet.

My figures for Bedroom Tax refer to London.

Well said Greatnan. I would have said the same, but you said it better.

Thanks for putting it so eloquently Greatnan. I agree with you MiceElf

Good post greatnan - 15% passed the 11 plus was it? I seem to remember it varied a bit between boroughs but I was wondering what the average was. And in some of them there were more grammar school places for boys than girls
Bedroom tax would seem to be another example of a "bright idea" that ministers think will play well with their core vote, but was not thought through in terms of "would it actually work". They are very good at coming up with these.
The last government had some of these as well - child credit for instance. Tax chaos for all those whose income changed during the tax year.

Greatnan just read your post. I'm wondering if you were being tongue in cheek when you said "here's a revolutionary idea, why not pay the workers more?" That's kind of a blanket statement. Do you mean across the board both private and public sector. As far as the private sector goes, some firms are struggling to keep their head above water they simply wouldn't be able to pay more, probably some can't even afford to pay them at all. "Pay them all more" implies that we live in an ideal world it reminds me of when my children were young and if I said that I had run out of money they would say "get some out of the hole in the wall". You've got have the money there in the first place, can't draw what you don't have!

Agree with you about bedroom tax, the government know that there aren't enough properties to trade down to, it just comes across as punitive. London's a bit of a special case insomuch as we suffer from a dire shortage of affordable property to rent and landlords can charge what they damn well like.