Labour and the NHS a disaster in Wales. I can understand how a doctor can be an MP as well, because you can’t get to see a. Doctor here.
Can You Name 5 More Songs? (Number 3)
Gransnet forums
News & politics
Labour and the NHS
(48 Posts)I have just read the Observer’s article about the Doctor who has left the Tory government and joined Labour in the commons.
Of course Labour policy regarding the NHS has been gradually maturing over the past few months although you would never know it listening to Tories who mantra “Labour has no plans” is trotted out every time a subject is debated in parliament or talked about in the media - regardless of the topic.
So - education? - Labour has no plans
Defence? - Labour had no plans
Immigration? - Labour has no plans
The Economy? Labour has no plans.
NHS? - Labour has no plans.
It is as if the Tories are afraid to debate the actual labour plans that anyone with half a brain and has learned to read can easily discover for themselves - although you won’t find them in the Tory media of course because they are parroting the Tory party. It is clear, that anyone who parrots the Tories/media have given it zero thought at how ridiculous it is.
The main opposition party who may well be the next government, so it is patently absurd to insist that it has no plans.
But now listen to Poulter who has defected to Labour
In the case of the NHS, he said, the party’s focus on preventive care, child health and the social causes of poor health were key.
“One of the things I really like about Labour party policy on the NHS is the focus on the social determinants of poor health and actually recognising that tackling poverty, poor housing, all those issues, particularly giving children from poorer backgrounds better chances and focusing on child health,” he said. “That is something Labour understands that the Conservatives really don’t – and that, for me, is something that makes the Labour party the party that can be trusted with delivering the reforms that are needed to get the NHS back on its feet.”
Now look in more depth at the Labour plans and policies and recognise the Tory mantra for what it is - an easy mantra that they are pushing for all they are worth that could so easily describe the Tory party.
MaizieD The Rwandan policy has been delayed and is yet to be enforced. It is the policy of the government of the day for right or wrong. It is a bit of a moot point as to whether or not it will stop more people turning up here without correct paperwork. My thoughts are that we can’t judge its effectiveness until it has been implemented for at least six months.
Parliamentary democracy is a strange concept at the best of times.
How anyone can think it’s ok to deport asylum seekers to a country from which we accept asylum seekers is a puzzle to me 😂
ronib
MaizieD The Rwandan policy has been delayed and is yet to be enforced. It is the policy of the government of the day for right or wrong. It is a bit of a moot point as to whether or not it will stop more people turning up here without correct paperwork. My thoughts are that we can’t judge its effectiveness until it has been implemented for at least six months.
Parliamentary democracy is a strange concept at the best of times.
That response doesn't have anything to do with the question I asked you.
Wyllow3
Pouter worked 20 night shifts in the last year. Enough to stay on the doctors register and not too many to interfere with MP work.
I agree in general by elections should always be held, but with a GE so close I don't see how it can benefit the constituency in terms of the everyday work of supporting constituents.
Aways useful to have a doc sister and BiL.
BTW, my BiL went on that particular political journey himself living not too far away from Pouter whilst a consultant in the NHS.
I don’t think any of it is okay Iam64 All I know is that nothing has happened despite a lot of money being spent and no one knows if this policy is any kind of deterrent since it is yet to happen.
If you listen to migrants waiting to try again to get to the uk, they tell you it’s no deterrent
It’s so clear,it’s an international problem that can only get worse. It needs European co-operation
MaizieD okay. Obviously parliamentary democracy whatever that means is allowed to block and delay legislation proposed by the elected government of the day.
Do you think being the government of the day should mean that it can do whatever it likes, whether in the manifesto on which they were elected or not, with no inbuilt checks and balances ronib?
Casdon government seems cripplingly slow to do anything these days. Living in the UK sometimes feels like living on an ice float. - no sense of direction, no real achievements and just muddling along.
ronib
MaizieD okay. Obviously parliamentary democracy whatever that means is allowed to block and delay legislation proposed by the elected government of the day.
You need a history lesson.
It's staggering the number of people who think that the government should have unrestricted power.
MaizieD this government has not had unrestricted power. It wouldn’t know what to do with it even if it had it….. it does however have a large majority.
You haven’t actually said whether you personally think the government should have unrestricted power or not ronib, you’re skirting around it.
ronib
Casdon government seems cripplingly slow to do anything these days. Living in the UK sometimes feels like living on an ice float. - no sense of direction, no real achievements and just muddling along.
The (unwritten) British constitution does not give any government a mandate to do whatever it wants. If it did, it would mean that any government with just a majority of one could introduce all kinds of outrageous laws. Is that really what you want?
I like and want sprinkles on ice cream. I don’t know what my personal preferences, if I have any, have to do with this particular thread.
You’re not Jeremy Paxman ronib. There’s little point asking leading questions and then refusing to state your own position so you are able to play an equal part in the debate.
Casdon my position therefore is that I am amazed that a government starting out with a majority of 80 seats has ended up where it is today. Unelectable, undesirable and incompetent. What a mess. Does this help?
ronib
Casdon my position therefore is that I am amazed that a government starting out with a majority of 80 seats has ended up where it is today. Unelectable, undesirable and incompetent. What a mess. Does this help?
your response has nothing to do with your assertion that the government has been 'thwarted' in the passage of the Rwanda bill. Which I read (and forgive me if I'm wrong) as disapproval of the 'thwarting' and, by extension, a belief that a government should not be 'thwarted' when trying to pass legislation. Perhaps I shouldn't have made the latter assumption, but I've seen that belief so often on this forum.
Unfortunately, however 'unelectable, undesirable and incompetent' a government is we're stuck with them until either it looses a vote of no confidence or the PM decides to call a general election.
MaizieD DH agreed that thwarted wasn’t the right word to use in this context. So I guess stating that it took 2 years from first reading of the bill to enactment is okay? That’s not thwarting just the amount of time it took.
Two years does seem a long time to me however to pass a bill. It started back in the day when BJ was pm.
I think it just demonstrates that the will of the sovereign Parliament doesn't agree with the will of the government.
Parliament is sovereign, not the government.
The Lords did have it in their power to hold it up, yet again, but I think they decided that, as the subordinate house, they couldn't do it any longer.
Well said MaizieD
Iam64
How anyone can think it’s ok to deport asylum seekers to a country from which we accept asylum seekers is a puzzle to me 😂
... me, too.
I believe the numbers from Rwanda will be small - however, why are we deporting asylum seekers to a country from which others will seek asylum?
There must be some logic in there somewhere, but on the face of it - it does seem rather strange.
As for the effect it will have on numbers crossing boats to the UK, some appear to think we should wait and see. Not being an expert in these matters my POV is purely subjective, and that is - it will have no major impact, and the agencies will strill struggle to process the claims. Apparently, it's a bit of a grim job and staff turnover is quite high leading to less well-trained staff taking on the roles.
Maybe taxpayers' money would've been better spent on significant improvements to staffing levels, and drawing up a proper procedure for failed asylum seekers. Numbers and statistics - accurate ones - are hard to come by, but it does seem that the claims are being processed so very slowly. It's all been so very half-hearted and this popular Rwandan scheme won't really solve a problem that is, in essence, a global problem. People have migrated around the globe since - well, they first decided to walk from one place to another, and it's not going to stop any time soon. It needs a global get-together of the great-and-the-good to hammer out a realistic policy to deal with the matter.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »