NHS

For anyone on twitter.

nhap.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=937c3e62bc24fa37708920cc9&id=df110be6bc&e=814ede4ddc

I shall look him up. Thanks LG.

Paul Williams GG

Thanks for that link durhamjen. If I'd seen it before my reactive comment, I'd have posted less positively about Sarah Wollaston. I don't understand how anyone in her line of work can vote against support for people in poverty, especially given the obvious and well documented links with poor physical and mental health.

Does anyone know who the LP MP was on DP today? He was a doctor and seemed a good new MP coming forward. I do like seeing the new faces.

Very interesting dj. It's a pity she doesn't recognise the link between poverty and ill health. We have just chosen a prospective PLP candidate who is a doctor so hope she does better when she gets in. We have a Tory MP at the moment but I am optimistic, roll on next election.

Lazigirl, I agree with you about Sarah Wollaston. I almost wish she'd start a new party - then I remember she's a tory and very unlikely to do so. Im sure she won't join the LP with its current leadership. Apologies for going off piste and yearning for a party that could represent the many, not the few

www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24761/sarah_wollaston/totnes/votes

This is why; taxes and benefits.

I don't know what Sarah Wollaston is doing in the Tory party .

I think the Tories are very foolish to ignore someone like Sarah Wollaston, the chair of the Health Select Committee and someone who basically became an MP to fight for the NHS and health matters.

5 members of the cabinet, including the clown Johnson are insisting that Maybot focuses more on the NHS by promising £100million per week in recognition that Labour has the baton on this and is disappearing into the distance with the NHS. Tories see the NHS as the main problematic issue rather than any other including Brexit.

There was some talk on one of the news programmes this morning Morgana and apparently (?) the Cons are aiming at the things they think will appeal to the young - hence the rush to be green, etc., - but don't think investing time or money in the NHS will help them because, apparently "Labour will always win on the NHS". I have no idea if this is true but it did seem to be going the rounds as something the journalist were hearing.

I cannot understand why this government is convinced that we will not notice the mess they are making of the N.H.S. Do they not want to be elected again?

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/01/21/theresa-may-faces-cabinet-demands-pledge-100m-extra-per-week/

After Brexit will be too late.
Gavin Barwell showed MPs a chart that put Labour well ahead on the issue of the NHS. I am surprised he needed a chart.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2018/01/03/the-threat-to-the-nhs/

The Breit effect ensures that the good investigative journalism hardly gets a mention.
Allyson Pollock has done a lot of that, but rarely gets a mention, even in the Guardian.

The increased use of secondary legislation is one of the reasons why the Queen's speech didn't contain as many new Bill for big pieces of new legislation.

That makes a lot of sense WMKF. It is just so undemocratic and I worry they will actually get something through without enough people noticing in time to stop them. We have so much more 'news' these days but it is all headline stuff. This needs a good presentation of some good investigative journalism.

"Is cross-party working on the NHS a pipedream? Yesterday, the PM sent what appeared to be a ‘thanks but no thanks’ response to a pre-Budget letter from Tory Sarah Wollaston, Lib Dem Norman Lamb and Labour’s Liz Kendall, calling for a non-partisan convention to look at funding of the NHS and social care. Some 90 MPs had signed the letter days, from former Tory policy chief George Freeman to Treasury select chair Nicky Morgan.

The PM yesterday said Jeremy Hunt would write to set out the next steps but revealed little other than ‘we are committed to engaging with all parties’. Yet what most struck me yesterday was the vehemence of the Tory responses to May’s response. Johnny Mercer said it was ‘disappointing’ and warned his party would get “a reality check at the ballot box” unless it sorted the health service. Heidi Allen added “We have waited since 18 November for this reply? Not good enough”. Wollaston called on May to ‘reconsider’.

Ex minister Nick Boles last night piled in to say he shared the dismay. And Boles spoke for several Tories disillusioned at the way the year had started, with this Friday evening Tweet: “There is a timidity and lack of ambition about Mrs May's Government which means it constantly disappoints. Time to raise your game, Prime Minister”. Boles pointed to reports that the PM’s chief of staff Gavin Barwell felt the Tories couldn’t compete with Labour on NHS funding. Boris Johnson thinks he has backing from Hunt, Gove, Grayling and Mordaunt in demanding £100m extra a week for health post-Brexit ahead of a Cabinet meeting on the issue tomorrow. Philip Hammond has been notably quiet on Hunt's 10-year funding idea, though that doesn't mean it won't happen.

On Radio 4’s Westminster Hour last night, ex party chairman Grant Shapps said ‘nothing’ had changed his view since conference that May should go (he also, intriguingly said that vice chair Ben Bradley’s controversial blogposts were ‘an issue’ and his continued role was ‘for him to consider’). Another former minister Ed Vaizey added: “It won’t harm the prime minister if she comes out more boldly with what she wants to see”. Matt Hancock is being radical with plans to slash fixed odds betting terminal stakes from £100 to £2 (bookies’ shares all plunged this morning). But on the really big stuff like the NHS, perhaps the real reason for No10 timidity is simple: the last time the PM really was bold, and went for a snap election and backed a radical social care manifesto idea, things didn’t turn out too well."

From Huffpost.
Doesn't sound too good, does it? For the NHS or the Tories. Maybe they think if we go down we'll take the NHS with us.

And it's well camouflaged by the Brexit furore.

*Bills

You'd hope the Carillion crisis would have an impact on other current plans for privatisation, but the serious drawback to Carillion having an impact on the NHS changes is the use of secondary legislation.

Major - and I mean major - changes to the NHS under consideration will be implemented using secondary legislation i.e. delegated legislation (usually Statutory Instruments (SIs) introducing new regulations or amendments to existing regulations) .

Delegated legislation is intended to allow the Government to make a small change to the law without having to introduce an entirely new Bill to Parliament. But Hunt is using secondary legislation to push through changes to the NHS and these don't go before Parliament. It's all done in Committee.

The increased use of secondary legislation is one of the reasons why the Queen's speech didn't contain as many new Bill for big pieces of new legislation.

Yes, haven't quite worked out whether they can stop him.
He was going to start ACOs this month. I hope he has been stopped until it goes to court. Sarah Wollaston's letter should help, but I don't think he's ever taken any notice of the health committee.

The crowd-funding seems to have reached it's second target but I do think this needs watching. The Conservatives don't seem to understand parliamentary democracy.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/stephen-hawking-nhs-privatisation-lawsuit-jeremy-hunt-a8100931.html

Stephen Hawking has joined doctors to sue Hunt.
It's being crowdfunded.

www.crowdjustice.com/case/jr4nhs-round2/

Anyone on facebook or twitter please share it.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/justin-madders/nhs-privatisation_b_11388948.html

It's been known about since 2016 at least. MSM seem content to ignore it.