# The NHS bill



## BritStops (Mar 3, 2011)

I don't normally do petitions, and wasn't sure where this post should go anyway, but after reading some positive stories in this forum, I thought I'd post it here.

I'm not sure these e-petitions actually achieve anything, but the NHS is something about which I feel quite strongly, and I'd hate to see it sold down the river.

All the evidence I've seen so far is that no doctors support it, the lords (ok, I'm in two minds about them anyway, but hey) have knocked it back twice, many conservative mps are against it, and the only people likely to benefit are the private health insurers and providers.

Anyway, here's the link if you feel like adding your name (it's dead easy):

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22670

Steve


----------



## Grizzly (May 9, 2005)

A little more about the instigator of the bill and his views:

http://www.leftfootforward.org/

( about half way down the page)

One other thing that those who feel strongly about this bill can do is to write to their MP and tell them so.

G


----------



## BritStops (Mar 3, 2011)

Thanks, Grizzly.

Just to clarify - the article Grizzly is referring to is not halfway through the first article, but half way down the page you land on after clicking her link (the sixth article). I struggled to make sense of that at first!  :lol:

Ben Goldacre also summarises it well here: http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/what-will-happen-with-the-nhs-bill-in-5-tweet

And this graphic from the independent NHS support federation shows why Lansey is wrong about doctors supporting the bill: 
http://www.nhscampaign.org/NHS-reforms/size-matters.html

Steve


----------



## BritStops (Mar 3, 2011)

A table showing who is and who isn't invited to David Cameron's emergency summit meeting about the NHS Bill:

http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/who-is-and-is-not-invited-to-camerons-emergen

I'm not a statistician, but I think I can work out the pattern...

Steve


----------



## patnles (Oct 26, 2006)

Although I have had certain doubts about it, I just do not believe much of the scaremongering concerning the nhs bill, which tries to make us believe that the government wants to destroy the basic tenet of the nhs of free treatment for all who need it.

Scrapping the bill now might do more harm than good. This article puts the case far more convincingly than I could.

http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/Dit...aking-things/story-15265497-detail/story.html

Pat


----------



## Solwaybuggier (Mar 4, 2008)

patnles said:


> Although I have had certain doubts about it, I just do not believe much of the scaremongering concerning the nhs bill, which tries to make us believe that the government wants to destroy the basic tenet of the nhs of free treatment for all who need it.
> 
> Scrapping the bill now might do more harm than good. This article puts the case far more convincingly than I could.
> 
> ...


Pat, I think the argument from Bronze8 on the forum you referred to makes the case very well as to why this bill has been brought - and why it *must* be scrapped. And Cameron not inviting the BMA, the RCGP and the RCN to a meeting gives the game away completely!


----------



## BritStops (Mar 3, 2011)

Ok, so I realise I am now officially beating a drum while standing on a soap box :roll: , but this was quite interesting I thought (it's a list of those lords and MPs who stand to benefit from the bill going through):

http://socialinvestigations.blogspot.com/2012/02/nhs-privatisation-compilation-of.html

Maybe the government doesn't want to destroy the basic tenet of the NHS, but I think it does want to make sure its mates benefit financially from it.

Steve


----------



## UncleNorm (May 1, 2005)

Pat stated: _*"the government wants to destroy the basic tenet of the nhs of free treatment for all who need it."*_

I don't do politics nowadays but, hey-ho....

I'm not sure that it's the TREATMENT side of the NHS that is under threat. Perhaps it's more to do with the CONTRACTING OUT of the CARE and RECOVERY side. The surgeon who operated on me in September 2010 was extremely concerned at some of the things that were happening to his patients, of whom I was one.

According to this gentleman's understanding of the current situation, the NHS would be no longer responsible for the aftercare of patients; it would be simply responsible for PROVIDING that care, mainly by putting many elements out to tender in the private sector.

My man would prefer to see all elements of the NHS, through diagnosis, treatment and aftercare, all kept in-house. I think he would have matrons keeping the hospitals shipshape; he would have nurses in wards and sidewards, being aware of the needs of the patients and looking after those needs.


----------



## peribro (Sep 6, 2009)

BritStops said:


> All the evidence I've seen so far is that no doctors support it,.....


Which probably means that the proposed measures are a good idea.

The doctors' contracts were renegotiated a few years ago with the result that they earn more and work less so I'm sure they won't want to risk anything that may change that. All I know is that we seem to have an inefficient state healthcare system in this country compared to the majority of other western European countries yet the cost to the country is higher. I think we can and should be doing a lot lot better than we are.


----------



## Rosbotham (May 4, 2008)

I remember going through a change initiative a few years ago. One of the analogies used was to compare the organisation with a barbeque. The basic premise was that when seeking to get the fire going, it was pointless throwing the cold coals into the hot ones, as they would douse it. Instead stoke the warm/smouldering ones into the fire.

Seems to me that this meeting tomorrow is about implementing the bill (whether it's right or wrong). Having a set of organisations with folded arms who've made it clear that they will oppose everything about its implementation is like throwing the cold coals in. And there's a further issue that whle the organisations (supporting and opposing) are monolithic, the situation is far more nuanced as there'll be members of each who hold opposing positions to that put forward by their "union".

So the question is what the purpose of the meeting is...get everyone on side, or accept that there's a set of opposition and work with those who do support.

I make no judgement on the bill...my experience is there's so many vested interests it's all but impossible for me as an outsider to get a true report of the situation. What I would say is that I want my NHS to be paid for via taxation and free at the point of use : that does not _necessarily_ equate with state-owned/operated, and there are plenty of countries that prove this.


----------



## Coulstock (Sep 2, 2008)

For those with time on their hands and can watch BBC Parliament there's an Early Day Motion being tabled by a Labour MP on Wednesday 22nd Feb requesting the Goverment release the finding of a report called the Risk Register compiled by the Civil Service in 2011 - essentially a Risk Analysis of the NHS Bill. Despite FOI requests the Government has refused to release the reports finding hence the EDM on Wednesday

I understand that the report findings ( almost a year ago) are not particularily complimentary on the NHS reform.

Harry


----------

