For balance heres the alternative view
A letter to my MP
- Thread starter Dutto
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
The historical average is for NHS spending to increase by 4% per year; since 2010 it has averaged only 1%.
The increase has always been necessary as life expectancy has always increased and people are living longer with complex medical needs. Between 2003/4 and 2015/16, the number of admissions to hospital increased by 3.6 per cent a year.
Having said this, for the first time since records began, under Tory austerity, life expectancy has actually dropped.
The increase has always been necessary as life expectancy has always increased and people are living longer with complex medical needs. Between 2003/4 and 2015/16, the number of admissions to hospital increased by 3.6 per cent a year.
Having said this, for the first time since records began, under Tory austerity, life expectancy has actually dropped.
Saisonator
Landlord.
Not forgetting net migration has been between 250,000 and 350,000 per year and no extra funding to cover, that alone could eat up the extra 1%.
Lifestyle choices are also having a big effect on life expectancy, especially obesity.
I suggest you read my earlier post where I check the effect of population growth Vs budget.
There is growth in the budget after both inflation and population growth.
I suggest you read my earlier post...
“The historical average is for NHS spending to increase by 4% per year; since 2010 it has averaged only 1%.
The increase has always been necessary as life expectancy has always increased and people are living longer with complex medical needs. Between 2003/4 and 2015/16, the number of admissions to hospital increased by 3.6 per cent a year.
Having said this, for the first time since records began, under Tory austerity, life expectancy has actually dropped.”
Will post my MP’s reply & response when TalkTalk get their finger out and get a new Router to me!
Off-line for nearly four days now!! Luckily contract ends on May 17th so will maybe cancel TalkTalk altogether.
Can hardly see the phone ‘cos of cataract op!
Off-line for nearly four days now!! Luckily contract ends on May 17th so will maybe cancel TalkTalk altogether.
Can hardly see the phone ‘cos of cataract op!
It’s a bit of a sop from my MP but at least he got an immediate reaction from me; to which he in turn responded; and on a Saturday!!
The cataract op is fantastic thanks! As it was done on my “bad” eye I can now see just how bad my “good” eye is!! (If you can understand that bit of bad English!) :headbang:
I’ve taken the left lens out of my specs, it’s that good!! :thumb:
The cataract op is fantastic thanks! As it was done on my “bad” eye I can now see just how bad my “good” eye is!! (If you can understand that bit of bad English!) :headbang:
I’ve taken the left lens out of my specs, it’s that good!! :thumb:
Ajhutch
Landlord.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2016
- Messages
- 2,329
- Reaction score
- 1,256
Wow, that’s a game changer. Anything they can do to your bad good eye?!
Apparently, the next step is that Mr. Ahmed will do a cataract operation on what used to be my "good" eye!
The genuinely scary thing is that last November I broke my specs over in France and drove all the way home, at night most of the way, on the basis that I could read a Number Plate at 25 yards without them!
Without my specs, I could definitely pass the UK sight test for driving (this was confirmed by the Optician who booked me in for the cataract consultation) but I still had to ask SWMBO things like "What did that sign say?"; and the thought that thousands of other people are still driving around using the same criteria is terrifying!
At the moment, apart from seeing the fine print on a package, I don't need any spectacles for my left eye (the one with the new lens) so I'm quite looking forward to getting the right one done; and praying that Mr. Ahmed hasn't been sent back to Pakistan and is still here to do the operation! :thumb:
The to and fro of my letter is as follows:
From Mr. Warman MP:
"Thank you for your email regarding private sector involvement in the NHS.
I can assure you that I believe fully in the NHS and its values and the Government is committed to protecting the NHS and that is why NHS spending has increased and Ministers have guaranteed that it will always provide treatment free at the point of need, regardless of ability to pay. The Government will not privatise the NHS.
The use of private providers and the voluntary sector in the delivery of NHS services is not a new concept. The Labour Government between 1997 and 2010 introduced the independent sector and competition into the NHS. The focus throughout the NHS is to provide the highest quality of care to patients at the best value to taxpayers - and that is completely shared by the Government.
You may find it of interest to know that the use of private providers in the NHS represents just over seven pence in every pound the NHS spends, an increase of just two and a half pence in the pound since 2010, and a slower rate of growth than under Labour. Charities and social enterprises, such as Macmillan Nurses, continue to play an important role in the NHS, as they have done for many years.
What the Government's health reforms actually do is provide the framework to enable patients to be treated by the providers best able to meet their needs and give patients greater individual choice and control over their care. I think that it is right for local doctors and nurses to decide who provides the best care for patients. In fact, under the Health & Social Care Act 2012, it would be illegal for the Secretary of State to try to deliberately increase the share of private sector work carried out at the expense of other providers.
The NHS compares well with the best health systems around the world. This year's Commonwealth Fund report put the NHS at the top of its league table of health systems, repeating its success in 2014. Whilst there is no room for complacency, I am encouraged that the NHS is performing well, despite many years of difficult financial circumstances.
The NHS is something to be valued and protected which is why I support the Government's commitment to increase NHS spending in England by a minimum of £8 billion in real terms over the next five years. This will enable the NHS to implement its own plan for the future to further improve health care in the Five Year Forward View.
I trust this clarifies the Government's position that competition in the NHS should act as a means to an end in improving services for patients, never as an end in itself. I do think it is worth pointing out that all GP practices are private providers; much of their work is amongst the NHS’s most efficient. More pragmatism and less ideology strikes me as no bad thing across the public sector.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me."
As I hadn't mentioned the Labour Party or the previous Government in my request I responded as follows:
From Me:
Mr Warman,
"Dear Sir,
In my original email I requested your assistance as follows:
“I therefore request that, on my behalf, you oppose any proposal put forward by the Secretary for Health that increases the privatisation of NHS management and services; with particular regard to any proposal that may allow or encourage overseas companies to bid for work within the NHS.”
I was as appalled as you are that Privatisation was introduced by a Labour Governmenr which is why I made my request.
The introduction of Privatisation by the previous Government was “the thin end of the wedge” and the fact that you are using this as an excuse is exactly why I opposed it at the time!
As a child, I often pleaded for mercy from my Mum on the basis that my friends had also committed whatever “crime” I was to be punished for. Her reply was always “If they jumped off a cliff would you follow them?”
Believe me, to use the transgressions of the previous government to justify the actions of the current Secretary for Health is very similar; except the cliff is much higher and the damage may be irreversible!
As a member of your constituency, my original request therefor still stands.
Best regards,"
From Mr. Warman MP:
"Thank you for your further email.
While I take your point, I would reiterate the approach I outlined in my original reply. In short, for the good of the taxpayer and the NHS as a whole, I think we should assess any proposal on its merits, rather than to simply assume that all private sector involvement in the NHS is bad. We should surely bear in mind, for instance, that almost all GP practices are private businesses, but that is certainly not incompatible with their making an enormous contribution to the NHS.
My personal commitment to doing all I can to support our brilliant NHS staff, and a free at the point of use service, is of course immovable.
All the best,
Matt"
I particularly didn't like the sentence that says we should assess any proposal on its merits as my original letter was that there were no merit to what the Secretary of State for Health was proposing so ....
From Me:
"Matt,
In 2003 (15 years ago) you were a cub reporter for the Daily Telegraph. Think what has happened in your own life and you may better appreciate that 15 years is a hell of a long time!
However, according to what I have read, that is exactly the length of time that The Secretary of State for Health is planning to offer for NHS contracts to multinational companies!
Fifteen years is much too long fior a “service” contract and I have no personal knowledge of anything even remotely similar. (The most I have ever seen was 20 years for the provision of gas to British Gas back in 1972. To fulfil the contract required massive investment by both the Contractor and British Gas.)
The other argument is that of offering contracts to multinationals. Only last Thursday, your colleague Mr Gove (Environment Secretary) was complaining about the profits being made by Water Companirs; on which they paid no taxes and which were removed from the UK.
Do you believe that a multinational company that wins a 15 year contract with the NHS will behave any better? Personal experience has taught me to not be so trusting of multinational companies!
Even looking at Privatisation as being of benefit to the NHS, I can still see no merit in the proposals being put forward by the Secretary of State for Health.
I thereforr sincerely hope that you take my opinions to heart and try to stop, or at the very least, severely limit the length of any contract, that is being proposed during this particular stage of NHS privatisation.
Best regards,"
I think it is true irony that I should be quoting Mr. Gove to support my case; because I regard him as one of the more odious members of this Government and about as trustworthy as Boris; or a snake, take your pick! :thumb:
From Mr. Warman MP:
"Thank you for your email regarding private sector involvement in the NHS.
I can assure you that I believe fully in the NHS and its values and the Government is committed to protecting the NHS and that is why NHS spending has increased and Ministers have guaranteed that it will always provide treatment free at the point of need, regardless of ability to pay. The Government will not privatise the NHS.
The use of private providers and the voluntary sector in the delivery of NHS services is not a new concept. The Labour Government between 1997 and 2010 introduced the independent sector and competition into the NHS. The focus throughout the NHS is to provide the highest quality of care to patients at the best value to taxpayers - and that is completely shared by the Government.
You may find it of interest to know that the use of private providers in the NHS represents just over seven pence in every pound the NHS spends, an increase of just two and a half pence in the pound since 2010, and a slower rate of growth than under Labour. Charities and social enterprises, such as Macmillan Nurses, continue to play an important role in the NHS, as they have done for many years.
What the Government's health reforms actually do is provide the framework to enable patients to be treated by the providers best able to meet their needs and give patients greater individual choice and control over their care. I think that it is right for local doctors and nurses to decide who provides the best care for patients. In fact, under the Health & Social Care Act 2012, it would be illegal for the Secretary of State to try to deliberately increase the share of private sector work carried out at the expense of other providers.
The NHS compares well with the best health systems around the world. This year's Commonwealth Fund report put the NHS at the top of its league table of health systems, repeating its success in 2014. Whilst there is no room for complacency, I am encouraged that the NHS is performing well, despite many years of difficult financial circumstances.
The NHS is something to be valued and protected which is why I support the Government's commitment to increase NHS spending in England by a minimum of £8 billion in real terms over the next five years. This will enable the NHS to implement its own plan for the future to further improve health care in the Five Year Forward View.
I trust this clarifies the Government's position that competition in the NHS should act as a means to an end in improving services for patients, never as an end in itself. I do think it is worth pointing out that all GP practices are private providers; much of their work is amongst the NHS’s most efficient. More pragmatism and less ideology strikes me as no bad thing across the public sector.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me."
As I hadn't mentioned the Labour Party or the previous Government in my request I responded as follows:
From Me:
Mr Warman,
"Dear Sir,
In my original email I requested your assistance as follows:
“I therefore request that, on my behalf, you oppose any proposal put forward by the Secretary for Health that increases the privatisation of NHS management and services; with particular regard to any proposal that may allow or encourage overseas companies to bid for work within the NHS.”
I was as appalled as you are that Privatisation was introduced by a Labour Governmenr which is why I made my request.
The introduction of Privatisation by the previous Government was “the thin end of the wedge” and the fact that you are using this as an excuse is exactly why I opposed it at the time!
As a child, I often pleaded for mercy from my Mum on the basis that my friends had also committed whatever “crime” I was to be punished for. Her reply was always “If they jumped off a cliff would you follow them?”
Believe me, to use the transgressions of the previous government to justify the actions of the current Secretary for Health is very similar; except the cliff is much higher and the damage may be irreversible!
As a member of your constituency, my original request therefor still stands.
Best regards,"
From Mr. Warman MP:
"Thank you for your further email.
While I take your point, I would reiterate the approach I outlined in my original reply. In short, for the good of the taxpayer and the NHS as a whole, I think we should assess any proposal on its merits, rather than to simply assume that all private sector involvement in the NHS is bad. We should surely bear in mind, for instance, that almost all GP practices are private businesses, but that is certainly not incompatible with their making an enormous contribution to the NHS.
My personal commitment to doing all I can to support our brilliant NHS staff, and a free at the point of use service, is of course immovable.
All the best,
Matt"
I particularly didn't like the sentence that says we should assess any proposal on its merits as my original letter was that there were no merit to what the Secretary of State for Health was proposing so ....
From Me:
"Matt,
In 2003 (15 years ago) you were a cub reporter for the Daily Telegraph. Think what has happened in your own life and you may better appreciate that 15 years is a hell of a long time!
However, according to what I have read, that is exactly the length of time that The Secretary of State for Health is planning to offer for NHS contracts to multinational companies!
Fifteen years is much too long fior a “service” contract and I have no personal knowledge of anything even remotely similar. (The most I have ever seen was 20 years for the provision of gas to British Gas back in 1972. To fulfil the contract required massive investment by both the Contractor and British Gas.)
The other argument is that of offering contracts to multinationals. Only last Thursday, your colleague Mr Gove (Environment Secretary) was complaining about the profits being made by Water Companirs; on which they paid no taxes and which were removed from the UK.
Do you believe that a multinational company that wins a 15 year contract with the NHS will behave any better? Personal experience has taught me to not be so trusting of multinational companies!
Even looking at Privatisation as being of benefit to the NHS, I can still see no merit in the proposals being put forward by the Secretary of State for Health.
I thereforr sincerely hope that you take my opinions to heart and try to stop, or at the very least, severely limit the length of any contract, that is being proposed during this particular stage of NHS privatisation.
Best regards,"
I think it is true irony that I should be quoting Mr. Gove to support my case; because I regard him as one of the more odious members of this Government and about as trustworthy as Boris; or a snake, take your pick! :thumb:
Similar threads
