Sunak V Starmer

Katie590

Specialist education makes an enormous difference Richard Branson who is dyslectic is a prime example, parents could afford the cost and we know the result. His headmaster thought he might end up in prison as a lot of those with learning difficulties do, there should be much more specialist education.

My husband has a GS with dyslexia, he did go to a specializing private school, at 21 he’s a computer wizz.

I suspect that most of us know that but the majority cannot afford to pay for specialist education. Furthermore from what I've heard from friends and acquaintances there is a shortage of specialist teachers.

At the independent school I worked at in London, I'm sure several children had SEN provision paid for by the local authority. The school came to an agreement with the authority to only accept a small amount of the funding, and paid for the SEN staff itself to help out with the budget.

I don’t know growstuff, but Starmer’s plans mean the school can’t afford to remain open. There are certainly fee-paying non-SEN pupils.

MaizieD

I'm happy with using private care as a stop gap while investing in restoring the NHS to health. I don't want it to become a substitute.

MaizieD I guess you have the approval of the Godfather in your own family to use private healthcare? Or perhaps he’s not standing for public office?

Specialist education makes an enormous difference Richard Branson who is dyslectic is a prime example, parents could afford the cost and we know the result. His headmaster thought he might end up in prison as a lot of those with learning difficulties do, there should be much more specialist education.

My husband has a GS with dyslexia, he did go to a specializing private school, at 21 he’s a computer wizz.

I've no problem in using private hospital's spare capacity provided a) the cost is similar to the NHS cost (that's generally how the contract is agreed) and b) the standard of care is the same. With regard to b) I'm not sure it is as good as in most private hospitals the medical cover at night is pretty basic and there is rarely any access to good emergency treatment should a patient have an unexpected adverse outcome eg a stroke after an operation or a haemorrhage. Also there's often less flexibility with regard to when the patient is discharged.

Germanshepherdsmum

A private school in my county, which has a large proportion of SEN pupils, is having to close because of the intention to charge VAT on fees and full business rates. Lord knows how these children will find suitable places in the state sector or how they will be affected by the disruption. It is shameful, as Sarnia says.

Are the pupils self-funded or are local authorities paying the fees, as happens with many SEN places in private schools?

A private school in my county, which has a large proportion of SEN pupils, is having to close because of the intention to charge VAT on fees and full business rates. Lord knows how these children will find suitable places in the state sector or how they will be affected by the disruption. It is shameful, as Sarnia says.

I'm happy with using private care as a stop gap while investing in restoring the NHS to health. I don't want it to become a substitute.

Sir Kier Starmer and his aim to charge VAT on private schools is not properly thought out. He should make an exception where a private school is delivering a specialist education. Children who attend these schools are there because mainstream education cannot deliver an education for them. Some will be able to afford the fees. Others need help from their families to pay them but many will be funded by the local authority. If 20% VAT is added then some families will be unable to meet those increased fees. That will leave them with a decision to remove their child from a specialist education back to mainstream that couldn't deliver in the first place. Also many will apply to their local authority for funding, meaning that ultimately, the tax payer picks up the bill. This proposal clearly hasn't been thought through and if it is put in place after the GE it will be a shameful way to treat children who are entitled to a specialised SEND education.

It makes sense to me, and I've known a good few people who have had NHS treatment in private hospitals.

The only person I've known to object was my mums gp.

I see no reason why the NHS should not use private hospitals . It makes sense - but how often have we seen that criticised as ‘privatisation’?

Another 5m was a accepted by Sunak from the man who said Dianne Abbott "should be shot", and has just come to light.

In 2011 Cameron made £20 BN worth of cuts to the NHS including reducing beds at a drastic rate.

This has continued year on year.

It is going to take an enormous effort to get the NHS back to its 2010 level let alone improve on that.

The priority will be to get people treated to reduce waiting lists. So many NHS beds have been closed under the Tory watch that I don’t see that using beds in private hospitals for NHS treatment in the short term is an issue. It’s a contract between the NHS and the private sector - but what is the alternative ronib, waving a magic wand to create more NHS staff to enable people to be treated in NHS hospitals in the same timescale? I think and hope Labour will be pragmatic and will continue to use the private sector to treat NHS patients until the NhS has the capacity it needs.

ronib

*Wwm2*. Not forgetting that no member of Starmer’s family is allowed to have life saving medical treatment paid for privately.
Presumably it’s okay for NHS funded treatment in a private hospital to go ahead?
High moral compass? Or something else? Something else I think.

I’m having surgery in our local private hospital, under an NHS referral in an attempt to reduce waiting lists. I wish our NHS hadn’t been so badly affected by the government and hope the Labour govt is elected and things slowly can begin to be re-built
Who knows whether Starmer would accept treatment in a private hospital in similar situations to me and thousands of others. I do believe Starmer has a decent moral compass, unlike Sunak and co

I am totally unclear about what you are saying tbh.

You have no idea whether Starmer would prevent a member of his family seeking private medical care.

You post is ridiculous.

Wwm2 I was replying to your post about we all share one time etc.
I would not stop any family member from getting private health care.
I have not used private healthcare in my life.
We don’t operate a Mafia type family structure and we have no Dons saying what we can and can’t do in the naked pursuit of political ambition and power in our family.

ronib

*Wwm2*. Not forgetting that no member of Starmer’s family is allowed to have life saving medical treatment paid for privately.
Presumably it’s okay for NHS funded treatment in a private hospital to go ahead?
High moral compass? Or something else? Something else I think.

I’m not sure which of my posts you are answering?

But to reply to your post.

That is Starmer’s choice and he is free to do so.

Just as you are free to make your choice.

As far as I am aware, he is not prepared to take that choice away!

So choose away, you are very lucky to be able to afford to have that choice.

Most people don’t.

Wwm2. Not forgetting that no member of Starmer’s family is allowed to have life saving medical treatment paid for privately.
Presumably it’s okay for NHS funded treatment in a private hospital to go ahead?
High moral compass? Or something else? Something else I think.

We all share the same time/era on this world and it is poor dos if we can’t care both for our world and each other whilst we are on this earth.

Not close to champagne either. Prosecco or cava for me.

I’m not quite (not even close!) to champagne socialist territory, but I’m fortunate enough to be doing okay, having grown up during a period when the state supported social mobility in dozens of ways, big and small, for those in a position to make the most of those opportunities.

But I know - and knew then - that not everyone was, and that now those doors are slammed and locked.

Therefore I always make my decision about how to vote by thinking of the most vulnerable people I know, and doing my damndest to elect a government that would help them.

I cannot believe that the LP would be so crass, so uncaring as to ignore the plight of the poorest in the country.

Although my health is not too good at the moment, I am still fairly comfortable. Pension poor so continuing to work aged 77. I'm lucky - sitting at a desk and doing something I enjoy and helping others whose work I enjoy.

I would like everyone to be able to work for a good reward, or get decent health or social care if necessary, good education and housing.

The majority of my friends and acquaintances are similar to me but better off. That majority are left centre and also want the same as me for others. Yet we are decried by many of the right for trying to achieve that aim - champagne socialists as we are described. What's so wrong with that?

I agree MayBee