The NHS is gone ...

Callistemon21

Casdon

Zoejory

Very true, Callistemon. Tony Blair was very keen to utilise private healthcare alongside the NHS. This from 2004.

Tony Blair today welcomed 11 private healthcare providers into the "NHS family", as he promised them the chance to gain a stronger foothold in the NHS

Predicting that the private sector would soon provide up to 40% of NHS operations, Mr Blair said the independent providers could help drive up the quality of service to patients which he said was the "most important thing"

www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

It’s important to understand context. Labour inherited long waiting lists in 1997, and managing them to bring the service back to a state of control was the priority. Using private healthcare to support activity within the NHS is a very different ideological concept to the public paying for treatment. Fundamentally that is the difference between the two parties, Labour have never supported an NHS which is not free to all at point of use.

PFIs have cost the NHS more in the long run.

John Major introduced them but Tony Blair expanded them.

Of course, there are no PFIs in Wales but Wales is no better than England for healthcare.

There are still PFIs in Wales Callistemon21, but a diminishing number, some of the PFI contracts have very long terms.

PFIs do cost the NHS more in the long term, and they can outlive their usefulness as health needs change over time. PFI was unchartered waters for the NHS when it started, and I’m sure many lessons have been learned in the interim.

This isn’t about healthcare being no better in Wales than the rest of the UK though, it’s about a different ideological approach to how services should be set up and run.

We had private health care when working but as soon as DH retired his premiums shot up by....wait for it.....500%!!! Yep so guess what? We cancelled it. We now have a semi private insurance at very little cost that speeds up diagnostics and things like physio , with major stuff only being private if NHS waiting is much longer, it's always been NHS for my ops. Three major surgeries since 2006, half and half is ok but only for those able to afford. Nobody should be able to opt out of NHS, and if they want to have private then it's their choice, their money.

PFIs brought privatisation into the NHS and costs many many more billions to pay back
Jeremy Corbyn said this was a bad idea for the NHS and he was right.

UK: Starmer pledges Labour’s support for NHS privatisation

www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/01/22/jsic-j22.html?fbclid=IwAR1RDObDOuuHocNrNK8ymWNiK4hFwvmGLm31HjBUH561cUjOkfmYcRHgHpk

Mokeswife

The rot was set by Maggie Thatcher when she introduced private health care companies into the UK with an eventually outcome that we would have health care as they have in the US - because, of course, it works so well there, doesn't it!

I firmly believe that that ....woman and her appalling decisions are still damaging our country today! She destroyed all industries, sold us utilities that we already owned!! Opened the floodgates to filthy rotten money in an attempt to become the money laundering capital of the world- in fact that the ONLY success story in whole damning saga!

The vast majority of PFIs were for buildings and facilities staffing Grany, not for clinical services. I’m not defending them, I think they were a bad idea in hindsight - but they were not about privatising patient care in the NHS.

Casdon

The vast majority of PFIs were for buildings and facilities staffing Grany, not for clinical services. I’m not defending them, I think they were a bad idea in hindsight - but they were not about privatising patient care in the NHS.

bringing PFIs brought about shortage of beds says Dr Bob Gill

m.youtube.com/watch?v=E_9FJeL5v2M

Our NI contributions of 13.25% of your weekly earnings between £242 and £967 (2022/23) 3.25% of your weekly earnings above £967. is lunacy. In Germany new rules are that As of 2022 residents in Germany covered under the statutory health care scheme have to share 14.6% of their gross salary for the common public health insurance fund. Given that, it means the cost of public insurance depends on one's earnings. But it's a flat rate so the mahoosively rich pay same proportion of earnings as the poorest, fair. As usual we have everything weighted heavily in favour of the "haves" lots of countries have managed public health schemes the NHS is no longer unique other than our system has been abused and no longer works...... Why do they try to trick us into thinking it's a sacred unique system envied by the world? It's not, and they don't! Austrian relatives (Brits) say they'd rather stagger back home than trust NHS if they fell ill while here! Our reputation is gone

Casdon

The vast majority of PFIs were for buildings and facilities staffing Grany, not for clinical services. I’m not defending them, I think they were a bad idea in hindsight - but they were not about privatising patient care in the NHS.

The problem with PFIs is that

1) They were predicated on the mistaken belief that the UK can run short of money, so economies had to be made in the public sector. Tony Blair must have learned his economics at Thatcher's knee...

2) The civil service who set up the contracts were clearly completely outmanoeuvred by the companies they dealt with which had far more experience and access to expertise in drawing up very complex contracts. The complete dissonance between a private company's objective to maximise profits and the 'state's' to maximise value for money should have been obvious from the start.

Well, Gabrielle, that's a rant (10.31) that I completely disagree with

Casdon

Callistemon21

Casdon

Zoejory

Very true, Callistemon. Tony Blair was very keen to utilise private healthcare alongside the NHS. This from 2004.

Tony Blair today welcomed 11 private healthcare providers into the "NHS family", as he promised them the chance to gain a stronger foothold in the NHS

Predicting that the private sector would soon provide up to 40% of NHS operations, Mr Blair said the independent providers could help drive up the quality of service to patients which he said was the "most important thing"

www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

It’s important to understand context. Labour inherited long waiting lists in 1997, and managing them to bring the service back to a state of control was the priority. Using private healthcare to support activity within the NHS is a very different ideological concept to the public paying for treatment. Fundamentally that is the difference between the two parties, Labour have never supported an NHS which is not free to all at point of use.

PFIs have cost the NHS more in the long run.

John Major introduced them but Tony Blair expanded them.

Of course, there are no PFIs in Wales but Wales is no better than England for healthcare.

There are still PFIs in Wales Callistemon21, but a diminishing number, some of the PFI contracts have very long terms.

PFIs do cost the NHS more in the long term, and they can outlive their usefulness as health needs change over time. PFI was unchartered waters for the NHS when it started, and I’m sure many lessons have been learned in the interim.

This isn’t about healthcare being no better in Wales than the rest of the UK though, it’s about a different ideological approach to how services should be set up and run.

I thought there were PFIs in Wales, Casdon but some time ago, when I mentioned it on GN, I was told quite firmly that there was only one!
lesson learned about anything you read on GN 😄

Casdon

The vast majority of PFIs were for buildings and facilities staffing Grany, not for clinical services. I’m not defending them, I think they were a bad idea in hindsight - but they were not about privatising patient care in the NHS.

Yes, that is true.

It was a way of getting new hospitals built and maintained at minimal cost to the government of the day. It was a very clever move especially if they realised they might be voted out at some point.
Short-term gain, long-term pain.

MaizieD

Casdon

The vast majority of PFIs were for buildings and facilities staffing Grany, not for clinical services. I’m not defending them, I think they were a bad idea in hindsight - but they were not about privatising patient care in the NHS.

The problem with PFIs is that

1) They were predicated on the mistaken belief that the UK can run short of money, so economies had to be made in the public sector. Tony Blair must have learned his economics at Thatcher's knee...

2) The civil service who set up the contracts were clearly completely outmanoeuvred by the companies they dealt with which had far more experience and access to expertise in drawing up very complex contracts. The complete dissonance between a private company's objective to maximise profits and the 'state's' to maximise value for money should have been obvious from the start.

2) is still very pertinent MaizieD. Double glazing salesmen had nothing on PFI companies. One of the biggest failures was in negotiation of buyout arrangements - no health services stay the same for 25, 30 or longer years which were the terms negotiated for some PFIs.

It was a way of getting new hospitals built and maintained at minimal cost to the government of the day. It was a very clever move especially if they realised they might be voted out at some point.
Short-term gain, long-term pain.

Well, see my last post!
The private companies involved ran rings round the civil servants when negotiating the contracts....

Here's one author's take on PFI

lowdownnhs.info/private-providers/unhealthy-profits-pfi-in-the-nhs/

Note, PFI was promoted by the tories, too...

Callistemon21

Casdon

Callistemon21

Casdon

Zoejory

Very true, Callistemon. Tony Blair was very keen to utilise private healthcare alongside the NHS. This from 2004.

Tony Blair today welcomed 11 private healthcare providers into the "NHS family", as he promised them the chance to gain a stronger foothold in the NHS

Predicting that the private sector would soon provide up to 40% of NHS operations, Mr Blair said the independent providers could help drive up the quality of service to patients which he said was the "most important thing"

www.theguardian.com/society/2006/feb/16/health.politics

It’s important to understand context. Labour inherited long waiting lists in 1997, and managing them to bring the service back to a state of control was the priority. Using private healthcare to support activity within the NHS is a very different ideological concept to the public paying for treatment. Fundamentally that is the difference between the two parties, Labour have never supported an NHS which is not free to all at point of use.

PFIs have cost the NHS more in the long run.

John Major introduced them but Tony Blair expanded them.

Of course, there are no PFIs in Wales but Wales is no better than England for healthcare.

There are still PFIs in Wales Callistemon21, but a diminishing number, some of the PFI contracts have very long terms.

PFIs do cost the NHS more in the long term, and they can outlive their usefulness as health needs change over time. PFI was unchartered waters for the NHS when it started, and I’m sure many lessons have been learned in the interim.

This isn’t about healthcare being no better in Wales than the rest of the UK though, it’s about a different ideological approach to how services should be set up and run.

I thought there were PFIs in Wales, Casdon but some time ago, when I mentioned it on GN, I was told quite firmly that there was only one!
lesson learned about anything you read on GN 😄

I found this article which compares PFI initiatives across the UK. There are apparently 23 PFI initiatives in Wales, across all sectors (not just Health). That pales into insignificance compared with over 500 in England. I’m out of touch a bit with Health PFIs now, I’ll see if I can find out how many there are still in existence.
www.bevanfoundation.org/views/how-wales-escaped-the-pfi-legacy/

This is the only list of PFI schemes for Wales that I could find online - there are some very random schemes, and it was dated 2005 so some will have ended, and new ones come on board. I’d imagine though that some of these are still running as they would be long term contracts.
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/billion-pound-pfi-debt-mortgaging-future-2400417
It’s not an area with much transparency of information to the public, that’s for sure.

Thank you Casdon

There are more PFI schemes per capita in Wales than in England.
I didn't know that - how did I not know? 😲

I accomplish USA brother's records, he has no time for such. His private insurance to medicare (usa elderly health insurance, I believe) is 188 usa dollars a month. I don't find that price exorbitant, he gets in quickly, and receives excellent care. I may be missing the negative facets to their system.

Callistemon21

Thank you Casdon

There are more PFI schemes per capita in Wales than in England.
I didn't know that - how did I not know? 😲

Number of schemes, not value per scheme. What surprised me about the Welsh list was how low the value of some schemes is/was - with hindsight, more capital investment into services would have been a much cheaper long term option.
The longer term problem for the whole of the NHS now is how to replace the thousands of buildings that require upgrading and replacement, as the promised capital schemes haven’t come to fruition, UK wide..

This was the NHS just 10 years ago.

My goodness the Tories have done an efficient job of trashing it haven’t they?

First, PFI was invented by the Tories and in my opinion the contracts overly benefited the private lenders and contractors. There were examples published of post-construction servicing costs disproportionate to the actual work done: changing a light bulb was expensive and only to be done by the contractor.

Second, let's not confuse the absence of PFI in Wales with Welsh government management of their NHS and general underfunding by the Tories (and the Lib Dems in coalition).

Third, Labour under Blair and Brown continued PFI even though it would prove more expensive in the long run in order to keep costs off the government's accounts (as the Tories had done) so they could claim taxes were kept down (despite Brown's 'stealth' taxes.

In my view PFI was and is a disaster financially for the burden it puts on NHS finances. Both major Parties are responsible for it and they should find a way of terminating the costs to the NHS.

Third, Labour under Blair and Brown continued PFI even though it would prove more expensive in the long run in order to keep costs off the government's accounts (as the Tories had done) so they could claim taxes were kept down (despite Brown's 'stealth' taxes.

Statements like this sadden me so much. Because, of course, all this manipulation of spending was to feed the political power of the idea that taxation funds spending and that high state spending is being profligate with 'taxpayers' money'.

There are sound reasons for taxation, but that it 'funds spending' isn't one of them. If voters understood the huge economic and social benefits of state spending, and politicians weren't so constrained by the false belief about taxation which dominates questioning about their spending proposals at general election time, we might get to a state where bad policies like PFI don't need to be implemented.

‘Second, let's not confuse the absence of PFI in Wales with Welsh government management of their NHS and general underfunding by the Tories (and the Lib Dems in coalition).’
Who do you think is confusing those issues Grantanow?

Twitter post - bit sweary but I absolutely agree with the sentiment.

“The Tories plan for the NHS is "hospitals at home" it’s like an outtake from The Thick of It. Who will staff this? People can’t be sent home from hospitals due to no social care! People are literally freezing to death in their own homes. Gove is off his tits.

Fucking insanity.”

Has anyone seen the interview on Sky News with the retired teacher who has Parkinson’s and needs a new hip and knee. He’s been sent home from hospital, not poor enough to qualify for free social care but obviously not well off. I’ve seen the interview several times and each time it upsets me even more. There’s no mention of him having family to help him but I hope someone will. I wish I could do something. I think I’ll try to contact Sky and request that they give us an update on him.

Whitewavemark2

Twitter post - bit sweary but I absolutely agree with the sentiment.

“The Tories plan for the NHS is "hospitals at home" it’s like an outtake from The Thick of It. Who will staff this? People can’t be sent home from hospitals due to no social care! People are literally freezing to death in their own homes. Gove is off his tits.

Fucking insanity.”

I think there is something in this idea. Just because it comes from people whose politics you oppose doesn't mean we shouldn't look at it.

The issue would be with the people whose politics you oppose running this. This particular party (12 years of government) has not given us any reason to believe they could do it with competence, nor would they even try. They seem not to believe in basic nursing - now generally lumped in with "social care".

We can't expect the NHS to run the same way it has in the past. We can't expect the NHS to survive under this group of so called Conservatives. We can - or I do - expect people to write as if they have a least a couple of brain cells to rub together. That cannot be said of that tweet Whitewave.