Reform. 140,748 members and counting. The Tories are well and truly in trouble!

MayBee70

Aren’t Labour committed to more of a preventative approach to health. Which isn’t going to be a quick fix but a long term project?

I’m sure they are, but that requires the population to cooperate, judging by the obesity we have today it’s a distant dream.

Aren’t Labour committed to more of a preventative approach to health. Which isn’t going to be a quick fix but a long term project?

There are far too many advanced treatments available to everyone for free, the NHS will never be able to treat all on demand because demand is unlimited. Pensions the same there are not enough of us working to pay a universal pension whether we need to or not.

Sooner or later means testing will have to be introduced

MaizieD

Mamie

MaizieD

growstuff

MaizieD

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

No idea.

But so many posters seem to think that that's what it would take. If only we paid some insurance like the French do, then the NHS would be wonderful... 🙄

I won't bother to repeat my earlier explanation of how top-up mutual insurance boosts revenue in the French system and how it has nothing to do with queue jumping or the models that exist in the USA.
Overall France has years of health investment at high levels, far greater investment in preventative care and ancillary support and probably a healthier diet.
The gap between rich and poor is far narrower here and above a certain income you contribute more.
Not sure where Reform would start with any of that. I can only assume that quoting the French system is an ill-informed soundbite. Or perhaps they are closet socialists. 😂

I think you misunderstand the point I am trying to make. We have had discussions about the NHS time and time again on this forum. There are always some posters who have the mystical belief that if only there was some sort of paid insurance element in our NHS funding, like other countries do, the NHS would be miraculously better. There is no logic to this.

Boosted revenue, increased employment etc. is a consequence of increased funding, it is the funding that is relevant, not the source of it. ‘..years of health investment at high levels…’ is the clue to the apparent superiority of the French system.

Our problem is that for the past 40 plus years our economy has been mostly driven by the premise that state investment is akin to pouring money into a bottomless black hole from which it will never emerge again and that state support of its citizens causes loss of moral fibre and induced helplessness when they should be standing on their own two feet and straining every nerve to be self supporting. (Much the same sort of belief that drove the punitive Victorian Poor Law). Consequently the NHS, like all state funded enterprises, has been expected to run on a shoestring.

I am not disagreeing with you. I know very well it is about years of underfunding in the NHS, Tory governments and "reforms" that benefit external sources. It needs investment and that means people contributing more in taxes, whatever the system.
I wasn't suggesting for one minute imposing the French system on the UK, just clarifying how it works, which is definitely not like America.

Mamie

MaizieD

growstuff

MaizieD

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

No idea.

But so many posters seem to think that that's what it would take. If only we paid some insurance like the French do, then the NHS would be wonderful... 🙄

I won't bother to repeat my earlier explanation of how top-up mutual insurance boosts revenue in the French system and how it has nothing to do with queue jumping or the models that exist in the USA.
Overall France has years of health investment at high levels, far greater investment in preventative care and ancillary support and probably a healthier diet.
The gap between rich and poor is far narrower here and above a certain income you contribute more.
Not sure where Reform would start with any of that. I can only assume that quoting the French system is an ill-informed soundbite. Or perhaps they are closet socialists. 😂

I think you misunderstand the point I am trying to make. We have had discussions about the NHS time and time again on this forum. There are always some posters who have the mystical belief that if only there was some sort of paid insurance element in our NHS funding, like other countries do, the NHS would be miraculously better. There is no logic to this.

Boosted revenue, increased employment etc. is a consequence of increased funding, it is the funding that is relevant, not the source of it. ‘..years of health investment at high levels…’ is the clue to the apparent superiority of the French system.

Our problem is that for the past 40 plus years our economy has been mostly driven by the premise that state investment is akin to pouring money into a bottomless black hole from which it will never emerge again and that state support of its citizens causes loss of moral fibre and induced helplessness when they should be standing on their own two feet and straining every nerve to be self supporting. (Much the same sort of belief that drove the punitive Victorian Poor Law). Consequently the NHS, like all state funded enterprises, has been expected to run on a shoestring.

MaizieD

growstuff

MaizieD

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

No idea.

But so many posters seem to think that that's what it would take. If only we paid some insurance like the French do, then the NHS would be wonderful... 🙄

I won't bother to repeat my earlier explanation of how top-up mutual insurance boosts revenue in the French system and how it has nothing to do with queue jumping or the models that exist in the USA.
Overall France has years of health investment at high levels, far greater investment in preventative care and ancillary support and probably a healthier diet.
The gap between rich and poor is far narrower here and above a certain income you contribute more.
Not sure where Reform would start with any of that. I can only assume that quoting the French system is an ill-informed soundbite. Or perhaps they are closet socialists. 😂

You get the same doctors here with private and public but private is a lot quicker. A friend had to wait several months for treatment for cancer in the public system but in the private it would be only a week or two at most. As you get older you really need private cover for this reason alone. It ain’t cheap ! Public is great if you break an arm or leg or something like that where waiting isn’t feasible. We have a Labor government just now who are quite good and are opening some free clinics for non life threatening events . Funny how they differ- I voted for our lot but I wouldn’t vote for Starmer and co. ( even though I actually have a vote these days for some obscure reason) .

nanna8

A two tier health system on its way, perhaps ? There is a two tier precedence.

I think there is one already.
We had occasion to visit a private hospital the other week and was astonished to see how busy it was.

There is a new NHS hospital not far away where private procedures are also carried out.

petra

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Maybe better, robust, joined up IT? This fragmented nonsense we have currently where Trusts don't ‘talk’ (share info) with one another is SO frustrating.

joined up IT
I can assure you that a program is being tested as of now. My daughter is testing it.
She has nothing to do with how it will work only that the program she was given to test will work.
I only hope that she gets more co-operation than she does from the home office.

Is this what she is testing out, petra?

www.england.nhs.uk/digitaltechnology/nhs-federated-data-platform/#:~:text=Contact%20us-,NHS%20Federated%20Data%20Platform,costs%2C%20and%20improve%20patient%20outcomes.

(thank you for DD)

A two tier health system on its way, perhaps ? There is a two tier precedence.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Maybe better, robust, joined up IT? This fragmented nonsense we have currently where Trusts don't ‘talk’ (share info) with one another is SO frustrating.

joined up IT
I can assure you that a program is being tested as of now. My daughter is testing it.
She has nothing to do with how it will work only that the program she was given to test will work.
I only hope that she gets more co-operation than she does from the home office.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Maybe better, robust, joined up IT? This fragmented nonsense we have currently where Trusts don't ‘talk’ (share info) with one another is SO frustrating.

If the tories hadn't spent the last decade and a half buggering about with the organisation of the NHS and keeping it short of funding it might be in a better state. It might have been able to afford to spend money on up to date integrated IT systems for a start...

So what magic wand is Reform going to wave to put it all right?

growstuff

MaizieD

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

No idea.

But so many posters seem to think that that's what it would take. If only we paid some insurance like the French do, then the NHS would be wonderful... 🙄

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Maybe better, robust, joined up IT? This fragmented nonsense we have currently where Trusts don't ‘talk’ (share info) with one another is SO frustrating.

But that doesn't need a change to an insurance model. It needs better internal systems.

MaizieD

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

No idea.

Maybe better, robust, joined up IT? This fragmented nonsense we have currently where Trusts don't ‘talk’ (share info) with one another is SO frustrating.

Put it another way, if we all paid a bit of health insurance how would it make the NHS any better?

Boz

growstuff

Boz

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Why is that? It's queue jumping, pure and simple.

A Company needs to know where it is. You don't want your workers called to hospital as and when. you need firm dates which can be got when going private.

I still don't understand the connection of the 'insurance' model with 'improving' the NHS. How does a bit of paid for queue jumping improve the NHS?

Some big Companies will continue with PH cover for its retired staff with some Nursing Home cover also.

growstuff

Boz

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Why is that? It's queue jumping, pure and simple.

Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Yes, but will be of little benefit to those who are already retired though?

Private health insurance 'works' best surely for those who are comparatively young, fairly affluent and nominally healthy?

If you're not in that category, I'd imagine it's a bit of a minefield both financially and emotionally.

Boz

growstuff

Boz

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Why is that? It's queue jumping, pure and simple.

A Company needs to know where it is. You don't want your workers called to hospital as and when. you need firm dates which can be got when going private.

It's still queue jumping.

growstuff

Boz

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Why is that? It's queue jumping, pure and simple.

A Company needs to know where it is. You don't want your workers called to hospital as and when. you need firm dates which can be got when going private.

Yes, logic, if it were an even playing field, delays would also be equal.

Boz

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.

Why is that? It's queue jumping, pure and simple.

It produces quicker results. Big Companies offer private health insurance to get it's workers through quickly.