Labour to get back to an 18 week waiting list within the first term

🤣🤣🤣

Just like that! Brilliant. They’ve been keeping that little nugget quiet haven’t they? Fancy not sharing these plans earlier to help everybody 🤔

Greciangirl

So, what’s the alternative?
Another fourteen years of Tory austerity.

I’d rather take my chances with Labour any day.

Careful what you wish for. My brother had a 6 month wait for ankle surgery,not bad, considering the Tories have cut back. My Grandson also waiting for surgery, will be done in Sept, at his request. Of course we could go down the continental route, and have health insurance, paid by all, where better off pay more, private working alongside state input. Oh but isn't that what happens here??

Starmer today is pledging to cut net migration so where does that leave the staffing of the NHS? Perhaps he will have exemptions?

Of course we could go down the continental route, and have health insurance, paid by all, where better off pay more, private working alongside state input.

That is what NIC was supposed to be for. Though of course it doesn't work that way.

However, I will repeat what I said, on another thread, about the French health service. Despite the fact that there is an insurance element to their system the French government still funds its health service by more money per head of population than does the UK government.
It makes little difference where the money comes from, their over all funding is more than the UK's.

MaizieD
When we were in France last year, the newspapers were full of the shortage of doctors and nursing staff, despite the funding you describe. It isn’t just happening here.

Mollygo

MaizieD
When we were in France last year, the newspapers were full of the shortage of doctors and nursing staff, despite the funding you describe. It isn’t just happening here.

Which just backs up my point, really. The insurance element of the French funding model isn't making any difference to that particular problem.

However, the posters on here who live in France are giving a picture of an over all better service. If ours were funded to the same extent it would surely do better.

MaizieD. Okay funding may be slightly higher in France for healthcare but is delivery private? I think the vast bureaucracy of the NHS and its aim of offering best value per buck is part of the problem. I think the Uk spends around the average amount on healthcare.

I suggest you stop 'thinking' and start googling for expenditure comparisons, ronib.

I'd also suggest you read some well researched reports on the NHS.

Oh but I did MaizieD

MaizieD
However, the posters on here who live in France are giving a picture of an over all better service. If ours were funded to the same extent it would surely do better.
I don’t know what % of posters on here are experiencing healthcare in France and whether all French people feel as positive about their health care.
I do know that how any better funding is used is what would make the difference.

Personally I'd be willing to make a contribution to my healthcare as they do in France, but many people are not in a position to do that are they?
I'm not sure exactly how it works now, but you used to have to pay for the French equivalent of a GP's appointment and got a refund if it was justified. This could certainly cut the number of people going to the GP unnecessarily, but wouldn't make a difference to waiting lists.
The NHS is just such a large and cumbersome organisation, many think it has too much management and I tend to agree. Maybe there is a way of taking more parts of it out and running them separately? This is what they've done in many places with cataract surgery, and other procedures now done privately but paid for by the NHS. We're told this is cheaper and that it is done because there is insufficient operating space within the NHS. In my case the procedures were done mid-week by consultants who normally worked full time for the NHS. I'm not sure how taking consultants out, mid-week, it cost effective?
I know that many people see this as creeping privatisation, but if it is more cost effective it is hard to argue against it.

maddyone

I hope you haven’t got a pension pot. Labour raided the private pensions in the first budget of it’s last term. That was one way they funded public spending.

He can it be possible for ANYONE to raid “private pension pots” ?

Sorry “how”

I think that this “pledge” is extremely optimistic and tbh no govt could do this in one term.

I have a British friend, now a Spanish Citizen, living in Southern Spain. She has a part funded insurance policy and her treatments over the last 5 years have been exceptional, including a recent knee replacement. She uses a combination of private healthcare, some is funded as she’s a citizen and the rest comes from private healthcare insurance. Seems to work for her.

ronib

Starmer today is pledging to cut net migration so where does that leave the staffing of the NHS? Perhaps he will have exemptions?

There have to be exemptions, I don't think people are bothered by immigrants who are trained, and a points system like that used in Australia and other countries seems to work well for such skilled people who are employable. It's the untrained illegal migrants that are the problem surely and it's hard to see how he can to cut their numbers.
I don't know how NHS staffing works in your areas, but locally here you see few ethnically British people working at higher levels as technical or nursing staff. Most are either from the Far East or from Europe. Doctors tend to be Asian. Obviously we can't know how many are immigrants and how many were born here.
We all know that the care system is also heavily reliant on immigrants in most places.

Cossy

maddyone

I hope you haven’t got a pension pot. Labour raided the private pensions in the first budget of it’s last term. That was one way they funded public spending.

He can it be possible for ANYONE to raid “private pension pots” ?

That is exactly how Gordon Brown's imposition of taxes on pension pots is often described.

MaizieD

I suggest you stop 'thinking' and start googling for expenditure comparisons, ronib.

I'd also suggest you read some well researched reports on the NHS.

Is it necessary to be so rude MaizieD? People are allowed to have different opinions to you, and many do.

The NHS is just such a large and cumbersome organisation, many think it has too much management and I tend to agree.

I know that the popular belief is that there is too much management in the NHS, but is it founded on fact? I don't believe it is, and this page of search results says it isn't true:

duckduckgo.com/?q=does+the+nhs+have+too+many+managers&t=chromentp&ia=web

Some research reports even conclude that the NHS is undermanaged.

The NHS is very short of the technical equipment it needs, which, of course, increases waiting times as people have to wait until diagnostic equipment is free. Hence the shuffling them off into the private sector.

But, even though this is good news for people whose waiting time is shortened by this (and I'm a fine one to talk as I'm taking advantage of this to get a hip replacement) but I can't help feeling that when you consider that doing this is contributing to private sector profits and to shareholders dividends, it would be better for the NHS, from a financial point of view, to cut out the middle man and be enabled to do these procedures themselves.

A small point to consider is that the private sector isn't geared up to deal with complications or emergencies. These get sent back to the NHS...

when you consider that doing this is contributing to private sector profits and to shareholders dividends,

I know there are people who would see nothing wrong with this, but my small experience of 'privatisation' in the past with hospital cleaning services and school meals provision was not good. In both cases standards went down because profit had to be costed in, which meant skimping in other directions.

ronib

Oh but I did MaizieD

So how about sharing some links, then?

Not comparisons with 'Bulgaria' either, please...

Cossy
Have you truly forgotten how Gordon Brown raided the private pension pots of millions of people in his first budget. You seem like a savvy person so I wonder how you can have forgotten.
Basically the investments the pensions were in were making really good returns and so he taxed the dividends being paid. Unfortunately investments didn’t do so well after that and the pension pots never recovered. This meant that many people received lower pay outs/pensions than anticipated. Government gave compensation to some but it didn’t cover the losses. People on this thread have said this happened to them. I know a man who it happened to and it severely affected his pension. I’m lucky, I have a teacher professional pension. Because that’s a public pension it was not affected.

I'm not going to hold my breath.

As an expert patient having had 24 surgeries, actually in 2010 it was getting to be quite good. A 4 hour wait max in A&E (which if they listened to me I could manage) and the 18 weeks from GP to treatment to home. I needed on of my surgeries urgently, and the wait would have meant t was 36 weeks, but I spotted that my local hospital was sending it's KPI stats to the govt stating that everyone in Orthopaedics was being sorted within the 18 weeks, which was rather a porky pie! So I wrote to the CEO of the trust, and amazingly the consultant came in on his golfing day to sort me! Nowadays they don't really care. I do think though that Labour WILL go down the private healthcare route. Hopefully it will be just to rid us of the backlogs, but I doubt it!

maddyone

Have you truly forgotten how Gordon Brown raided the private pension pots of millions of people in his first budget.

In his March 1999 Budget speech the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, announced that MIRAS would be abolished from April 2000. That was a double whammy for us. An instant issue and the pension pot issue which affects us now.

maddyone

Cossy
Have you truly forgotten how Gordon Brown raided the private pension pots of millions of people in his first budget. You seem like a savvy person so I wonder how you can have forgotten.
Basically the investments the pensions were in were making really good returns and so he taxed the dividends being paid. Unfortunately investments didn’t do so well after that and the pension pots never recovered. This meant that many people received lower pay outs/pensions than anticipated. Government gave compensation to some but it didn’t cover the losses. People on this thread have said this happened to them. I know a man who it happened to and it severely affected his pension. I’m lucky, I have a teacher professional pension. Because that’s a public pension it was not affected.

Ah yes of course, now I understand and and recall this. In fact I too, along with DH, were affected on our private pensions.

I seem to be suffering from mid term memory loss.

No, I would not like to see this happen again. It penalises too many people.

Thanks for the reminder.