Looks like it could soon be 'RIP the NHS'?

A good article here by Diane Abbott.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-hunt-nye-bevan-both-8751231

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hypocrite-david-cameron-complains-nhs-8756564

Hard to believe, isn't it? Next he'll be complaining there aren't enough junior doctors at the weekends.

I don't know whether more consultants at weekends would improve patient care, but if more are needed, more need to be employed, unless it's accepted that patient care during the week will suffer.

I nearly said something about perhaps there being a need for more consultants in hospitals at weekends.

Quite Daphnedill - the areas with the highest numbers of older people in need of care are in the areas with less council tax income.
The NHS needed extra money every year, because:
baby boomers are getting to the age when they need more services
and
increasingly unhealthy lifestyles are causing more diabetes etc
Instead Hunt, Cameron and Osborne have squeezed expenditure and then had the cheek to talk about the need for "efficiency savings" - another word for cuts.

@dj

The FullFacts article fullfact.org/health/spending-english-nhs/ is interesting, because it shows that taxpayers are already paying a top up for the NHS, but through the back door.

£3 billion is being 'saved' on education, training and social care - except that it's not being 'saved'.

The education and training saving is being paid for by student nurses, who now have to take out a student loan rather than being supported by the NHS. The responsibility for social care and public health has been transferred to local authorities, who have been told that they can raise council tax 2% to cover social care, but not for public health.

The £3 billion saving is part of the money which the NHS is being given as an 'extra'. Some local authorities, particularly those with a high percentage of elderly and/or vulnerable, are going to struggle to raise the money from council tax. May's announcement about eradicating health inequalities sounds very hollow, especially as there is no funding for public health.

Apparently, there's some doubt about the statistics. I read somewhere or other that hospital patients are more likely to die on a Wednesday. Patients admitted over the weekend are more likely to be very ill, because they're admitted as emergencies or they couldn't access GP care.

It isn't just about renumeration. Hunt is trying to spread out the existing staff over more days for routine appointments as well as emergencies and critical cases, which means there won't be as many staff for weekdays. They won't be able to provide full service care without all the support staff, who will be next in line for contract change.

Bags the evidence is still not at all conclusive that there is a need for major changes to provide more service at weekends.
It has long been the case the SHOs and registrars work at weekends in areas where they are needed - emergency admissions, wards where people are very sick, maternity etc. It is possible that they need more consultant cover at weekends in some areas but Hunt has not chosen to tackle this issue.
Other than that, there is no urgent need. Some people might like to have an outpatients appointment at weekends - but there is no urgency about this. Any changes will have inevitable cost implications.
The "junior" doctors (i.e. anyone who works in a hospital below consultant level) are incensed in part because they are very bright people who can see no logic or benefit to anyone in Hunt's attempts to re-arrange the way they work.
It is already a difficult and demanding job, with the requirement that they move hospitals every year (with little or no choice about where in their region they are sent) and the requirement that they keep doing exams through their 20s and beyond in order to get to the stage where they can apply to a consultant post in a hospital of their choice - when they get into their 40s.
This is incredibly disruptive for any woman wanting to have a family, or a settled family life. Hunt's contract changes, they argue, will make life more difficult for women doctors to work and to progress in their careers.
I am not surprised that many of them have concluded that Hunt is attempting to undermine the NHS with this policy. Along with others, such as removal of bursaries for nursing students and cutting the amount of money hospitals need to operate effectively.

Ah, but the junior doctors said it isn't about money, blinko

Statistically patients simply don't do as well at weekends and this is what the government wants to change, so that care does not depend on what day of the week it is. Although there are doctors and nurses on duty at weekends, perhaps there aren't enough.

Going by anecdotal experiences locally (West Midlands), people are being offered appointments on both days at weekends. As far as I'm aware, this appears to be widespread and has been for some time. So the assumption must be that staff at all grades are already rostered over seven days, which is what HMG says it wants. As I have remarked on another thread a while ago, this appears to boil down to remuneration.

Junior docs have always had to work long hours. It's not a new thing caused by the current government.

Off to the hospital now. I expect I'll be seen by a very tired junior doctor.

As one might expect, it's a complex issue. Neither side is all right or all wrong.

I read an interesting article the other day that increased my sympathy for the junior doctors' case (being moved around too much, lack of team support), but I also see what the government is trying to do (improve weekend care because people treated, or not treated, as the case may be, at weekends fare less well than those threated during the week) as reasonable.

Ana asked you DJ if you still supported the junior doctors strike. The answer is 'yes, no or maybe' I'd gave thought.

I asked a simple question, I didn't give an opinion so I don't know what relevance your first sentence has.

fullfact.org/health/junior-doctors-pay-short-introduction-dispute/

Do you only support democratic voting when it suits you, as in Brexit?
BMA junior doctors had a democratic vote and voted to strike because of the imposition of the new contract.

So you're still supporting the junior doctors' strike are you, durhamjen?

Anyone who wants to lobby at the Tory conference will be able to on payment of £3000+.
That's to have lunch with Theresa May. I thought she wanted to be different to Cameron.

"record levels of funding on the NHS", she has just said.

fullfact.org/health/spending-english-nhs/

This just shows how you can use any figures you want to make that claim.

In November there is going to be a cap on benefits, making another half million children at risk of homelessness.
There is going to be a new pay-to-stay for people in social housing if they earn more than £40,000 per household in London, and £31,000 outside London.

www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/aug/31/pay-to-stay-social-housing-hit-low-earners

Really raising standards of living....

Perhaps she thinks that raising standards of living, which I understand is what she wants to do for poorer people*, is what will make the difference.

* I think one can believe that whether or not one's political outlook is aligned with hers.

Strangely enough, NHS never passed her lips in that speech. I wonder why not!

Theresa May needs to be continually reminded of her words during her first speech after becoming PM:

"That means fighting against the burning injustice that, if you’re born poor, you will die on average 9 years earlier than others."

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/statement-from-the-new-prime-minister-theresa-may

In that case, obie, we need to spend more money on the NHS.

Has anyone else had a petition from AgeUK about the Attendance Allowance?
Something else that is going to rely on councils having money to pay, despite the fact that they have had their money cut by the government.
Another postcode lottery.