Our bloated NHS - it’s beyond ridiculous now.

Didn't it have an overhaul when the coalition Government came in. The "top down" overhaul that David Cameron said was not going to happen.
Before the coalition the country was very positive about the NHS, about 75% wasn't it.
So let's think what has possibly happened since then.

It's all very well people saying 'throwing money at it isn't the answer' BUt they are saying that about a service which has been underfunded for the last 12 years.

I suggest that it should have its funding returned to its proper level, recruit back to its proper staffing levels ,and be allowed to run like that for a few years before making any decisions about radical change.

Shortage of funding causes inefficiency. It's so blindingly obvious that I can't see how people manage to miss it. Unless they are ignoring it to suit their political agenda.

I don't doubt that we need change and we also need to make up for all the cash starving that has gone on over the last 10 or 12 years.

When it comes to the standard of IT, I think it's amazing that the staff manage as well as they do with such a clunky system. It did remind me about how long it to the Police to get "Holmes" in place. That took years, didn't it?

I would like them to look at cutting down the individual sizes of any one enterprise but centralising all records. I know there are data problems with that but where there's a will, etc.

I am far from being an expert where the NHS is concerned. However, a bit of organisational behaviour insight would help. Someone I knew, who had set up many a successful company in his day, said that once a company gets over about 30 people (it's not an exact figure) it stops being dynamic. This was because people stopped working for My Company PLC and started working for the Accounts Department, Sales Department, etc. I think this is often the case in huge hospitals, schools, etc.

I have to admit I don't know the answer but I do believe it has to be divided down in some way - and perhaps some of it become more community-based. Working from or near to home seems to be a movement in our economic development, perhaps it should apply to health too.

But the one thing that stands out is that without sufficient funding and a government that believes in the NHS principles and is not blinkered by its adherence to free-markets (that's not capitalism by the way), the NHS doesn't stand a chance.

Chewbacca

^My opinion on the NHS is that it does need a complete overhaul. A great behemoth that has run out of control. Unfortunately it is a political hot potato and god help any party that tampers with it.^

I agree with you.

I agree too.

The NHS is the largest employer in Europe and the largest employer of qualified professionals.
As a result of its growth it may have become unwieldy and does require skilled managers.

But yes, there are inefficiencies, over-spends (even being defrauded by supply firms) and it needs an overhaul. Successive governments are scared to tackle it and changing political dogma is neither productive nor conducive to efficient practice.

It is also properly funded in France Joseanne. I think the 30% top-up insurance that is paid by everyone apart from those on the lowest income, demonstrates a fine socialist principle in action.

Yes Joseanne along with a proportion paid by a health insurance by those who can afford it.

Free for those on lowest incomes.

Chewbacca &’LauraNorder I agree and posted as much yesterday only to be told I didn’t know what I was talking about…

westendgirl

I do agree that we should look at the way health is managed in other countries.I don't hear my french friends moaning about
their service.
It's no good just throwing money at the service and hoping the problems will go away.

That's because in France they successfully marry the concerns of the medical profession with the views of government to achieve the best possible result.

My opinion on the NHS is that it does need a complete overhaul. A great behemoth that has run out of control. Unfortunately it is a political hot potato and god help any party that tampers with it.

I agree with you.

If this thread was a mouthful of teeth, with all the gaps now it’d be requiring a set of dentures!
?

GNHQ at its worst. News and Politics, robust discussion, a few insults exchanged, so what.
We’re not delicate flowers that need protecting. I for one am sick of being policed in this way.
If we are offended by a post or poster we can say so and move on or we can leave the thread and look elsewhere for our entertainment.
Please GNHQ, unless a post breaks a law, let it stand instead of spoiling good robust debate with daft deletions.
My opinion on the NHS is that it does need a complete overhaul. A great behemoth that has run out of control. Unfortunately it is a political hot potato and god help any party that tampers with it.

I do agree that we should look at the way health is managed in other countries.I don't hear my french friends moaning about
their service.
It's no good just throwing money at the service and hoping the problems will go away.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Refers to deleted post

Urmstongran

I defend my position on this ladies. If the NHS was so wonderfully managed there wouldn’t be so many instances of bad practice being complained about, both on here - with real life tales of what went awfully wrong in their experience and also in the press.

The NHS is woefully run in my opinion. Private CEOs probably have their heads in their hands over the shambolic way it is delivered to a public who have little choice but to accept what they are given.

It doesn’t have to be this way. We could start looking at best practice in Europe. A mixture of private & public money.

I agree with this post Urms there have been numerous high profile cases along with the not so high profile ones were the NHS has been negligent.

Each time we get the empty promises that this will not happen again, unfortunately it does.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Quotes deleted post

I defend my position on this ladies. If the NHS was so wonderfully managed there wouldn’t be so many instances of bad practice being complained about, both on here - with real life tales of what went awfully wrong in their experience and also in the press.

The NHS is woefully run in my opinion. Private CEOs probably have their heads in their hands over the shambolic way it is delivered to a public who have little choice but to accept what they are given.

It doesn’t have to be this way. We could start looking at best practice in Europe. A mixture of private & public money.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Thanks Casdon

It’s difficult to discuss the difficulties facing the NHS when the OP is deliberately provocative and divisive
It becomes impossible when genuine criticisms of views thst dismiss the evidence are dismissed and deleted

As for the suggestion politicians should keep off the NHS - that would be a plan if it was keep politicians who are gradually privatising the nhs away from it

Good post Casdon.

Urmstongran

DaisyAnne

Urmstongran

I’m allowed to have a different opinion DaisyAnne. There is no slur. Just that I disagree with the usefulness of all this within the NHS. Patients are not happy these days with aspects of the NHS and all the HR spin and tick boxing isn’t going to make them like how it’s gone.

It is not a "different opinion". It is nothing to do with an opinion. You are questioning the probity of two people and suggesting that because they are knowlegable in the subject they are reporting on, they will not produce a factually correct and properly argued report. You are happy to malign the reputation of two people simply because they know about an area you wish to deride.

Just as many do on these threads on other topics!
Pritti Patel and Rwanda anyone?
Of course people have ‘opinions’. And by all accounts these very often are at odds of those with the expert knowledge and full facts. ?

Pritti Patel is not an expert on Rwanda "UG* She attempts to be an expert on far-right politics, as you do.

The subject these people were tasked to report on was their area of expertise. They do not deserve your attempts to heap ridicule on them. Slandering others, particularly about the area where they have expert knowledge on while you do not, is not putting forward "facts". It is a standard, far-right method that attempts to destroy belief in facts and truth by putting authoritarian populism forward and disrupting normal debate.

I could wonder if it is not an attempt to suggest all experts are part of an anti-right conspiricy. There are enough "we are not treated as we should be" conspiricy theories out there and enough people trying to spread them for that to be a possibility. These people can certainly not defend themselves on here, can they? So you choose to ridicule their hard gained knowledge.

You, I assume, have no idea of the actual worth of what they wrote, as you have made no attempt whatsoever to comment on that, given no opinion on the content, only on the fact that they are experts in the field of discussion.

Thanks casdon I'd given up on this thread.

DaisyAnne

Urmstongran

I’m allowed to have a different opinion DaisyAnne. There is no slur. Just that I disagree with the usefulness of all this within the NHS. Patients are not happy these days with aspects of the NHS and all the HR spin and tick boxing isn’t going to make them like how it’s gone.

It is not a "different opinion". It is nothing to do with an opinion. You are questioning the probity of two people and suggesting that because they are knowlegable in the subject they are reporting on, they will not produce a factually correct and properly argued report. You are happy to malign the reputation of two people simply because they know about an area you wish to deride.

Just as many do on these threads on other topics!
Pritti Patel and Rwanda anyone?
Of course people have ‘opinions’. And by all accounts these very often are at odds of those with the expert knowledge and full facts. ?

Joseanne

I read this thread, both yesterday and this morning. I was going to comment about my own experiences of being a private paying patient all my adult life and how running a business like BUPA appears to not only be profitable, but is also efficient, streamlined and highly successful. I refrained from posting though because I don't have enough facts and figures about the organisation, and comparison with the NHS is futile anyway.

I also refrained from posting because I noticed the thread turned so aggressive. I'm not sure that the initial dig about recognising the OP's style was such a nasty comment, (in fact it might have been tongue in cheek!), but it was probably the catalyst for the pile on and far worse personal attack by another poster on Urmstongran who is not "full of tripe". What a shame on an interesting discussion, but it now seems inevitable when certain posters make their comments.
By the way, I did not report the aggressive posts which got deleted. More long standing members have taught me that it is better to let them remain for all to see because the issue is with them and their own resentment.

I refrained from posting too Joseanne, even though I worked in a senior role in the NHS, know where to look for evidence, and am not usually backward at coming forward, but because I’ve realised that deliberately inflammatory posts, often from Urmstongran, are just that, designed to get people irate, and to provoke an argument. These posts are instantly recognisable by the title - you don’t post ‘Our bloated NHS - it’s beyond ridiculous now’ unless that’s your design, it’s not an attempt to get a meaningful discussion with all perspectives considered.

I’ve decided it’s just a waste of time and energy participating.

That would be an interesting thread.