NHS

The first step towards protecting the NHS is stop blaming a political party in particular - they all want to trim back state involvement:

Above all, it is the government’s slashing of NHS funding that has caused the crisis. It has imposed £20 billion of “efficiency savings” to the £108 billion NHS budget. These cuts, first proposed and begun under the previous Labour government, are resulting in the closing of dozens of NHS hospitals and A&E units across the country, ignoring the massive opposition from the working people living in the surrounding areas and health workers who work in those hospitals.

Giving examples of proposed NHS patient payment schemes, it continued, “Earlier this year the King’s Fund, an influential think tank, argued for charges from £10 to £25 for doctors’ appointments and to attend A&E department. Lord Warner, a health minister under [former Labour Party prime minister] Tony Blair, has backed a £10-a-month NHS ‘membership’ fee.”

www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/07/09/heal-j09.html

In a link I gave on another thread, it stated that this slashing of [all] public services is happening all across the EU as it is part of the overall aim to reduce government expenditure and put essential services into the private domain; think carefully before voting to remain within the EU.

I'm not sure why the blame is being put on the Tories when these cuts were first proposed by Labour - it is the cuts that need to be challenged, not who is proposing them.

We need to get real

It was never foreseen when the NHS was created that this level of service would be expected from it. Successive governments have tried to balance demand against services against cost.

To keep costs reasonable services need to be pruned or clients convinced of ways not to put excessive demands on the system.

Or if we accept that services ought not to be cut then we are going to have to pay more, either in taxes or through some other means.

It's quite simple really. But it's an issue that all parties need to agree and act on or we will never get it right. The nation's health ought to transcend party politics - fat chance.

And getting rid of some of the flipping 'managers' would help. Or have I said that before.

Peanuts Kitty they don't get paid £1,000,000 an hour which is the cost of....?

There are thousands of them shuffling bits of paper, being obstructive and making up petty rules to make themselves feel important.

OK they can go. First up against the wall come the revolution sister comrade

Aka I agree with you. This level of service was never expected. How many people from the EU are now living in this country. Those of us who are getting older now expect to live longer and families who once used to be close at hand can't help with looking after the elderly as they are now living and working further away. This is a totally different world from when the NHS first started and it can't cope with all these costs. But having said all that Kittylester is right, too many managers - bring back Hattie Jaques that's wot I say (sorry I mean matron)

Okay, let's lose the NHS.

Perhaps you could try and see the bigger picture, durhamjen, rather than just tory-bashing? There's no easy answer to the problem of a growing, ageing population and the need for medical care.

As the old pop song goes "You don't know what you've got till it's gone".

It seems obvious to me that we can't expect the NHS to be all things to all people. But it needs to be rethought not tinkered with!

As far as Tory bashing is concerned - a lot of the NHS's problems started with Patricia Hewitt although I have to agree the Tories haven't managed to sort the mess out!

GP services are under pressure, but it is the hospitals that are the "controllable cost".
You say managers are a problem but they have been under pressure to make efficiency savings every year since I was working for the NHS 20 years ago. And not an easy job managing all those different professions including the consultants who don't like being managed. And trying to buffer the hospital from all the external forces. I heard a hospital manager speak once who said they were under constant demands from the dept of health to answer questions and provide data.

The brutal truth is that unless the British are willing to cough up more in tax to pay for a world class free service, and to start looking after their own health a bit more, then services are going to be cut. In fact given the cuts that Osborne has got planned for the next few years, cut a great deal.
And it is the managers who will have to implement these cuts - I don't envy them one bit.

I see we agree on this issue Jess

The brutal truth is exactly right.

From the coal face Jess, there is too much interference by people who have little or no knowledge or experience of actually treating patients as individuals but who see them only as 'units of activity'.

I agree with your point about having to pay more but someone has to be brave enough to come up with a whole new model rather than tinkering round the edges.

Yes, this is a national debate we need to have and soon.

One of the things the government could do is remove from the NHS the burden of interest payments to private sector partners for buildings This looked like a good wheeze at the time to avoid committing huge amounts of public money to rebuild crumbling hospitals - and schools. The people who set it up knew they would be far down the road with their substantial pensions by the time the pyramid collapsed. But even if they did, it would only be sticking plaster. A serious national discussion is needed. Do taxpayers go on paying for fertility treatment? Cosmetic plastic surgery? Multiple abortions for the same individual? Self-inflicted injury and illness through over-eating, alcohol and substance abuse? Or engaging in dangerous activity? Everyone will have their own list.

Has the NHS always struggled financially?

How did it fare until these problems arose?

Although there is an ageing population (as there always has been), all those baby boomers paid into the system so wouldn't the system have had more money than it normally would have if the baby boom hadn't occurred?

I don't know the answers to the above so I'm hoping someone can answer (I can't say that I fully understand it all).

I still think that trimming back what the NHS actually offers is the best way to go and that they always put life saving ahead of all else. What could be viewed as tertiary healthcare should carry a personal cost?

And attract some tax relief possibly, Holly?

Now there's an idea kitty! I'm sure that if incentives were given, people would accept the possibility of paying for some treatments instead of expecting everything free (you know what I mean by that). What about the government offering pledging to meet some of the annual costs of health insurance for people?

Not sure it would go down well across the board Holly

Anyone live in Shropshire? What do you think of the idea of a private health company making a profit from running cancer care and end of life care?

I think private health companies are very competent. My GP Practice outsources some treatments and diagnostic scans. I've had my last three DEXA scans at a private facility and have been delighted with the efficiency and friendliness of the staff. I was seen exactly at the appointed time, treated like an intelligent human being and had instant feedback.

Compare that with a recent lung X-ray at my local hospital. The first appointment letter arrived the day after the appointment. Trying to reschedule it was a nightmare. When I eventually arrived at the hospital I was kept waiting 30 minutes in a tiny cubicle as I'd been 'forgotten'. The radiologist was curt and I'm still waiting for the results four weeks on.

If the private company can compete at this level and still make a profit and it is offering it's facilities to the NHS at a competitive price then I say why not?