The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[markavfc40]

When you consider the shit show of the last 13 years not one single PM since has shown themselves to have been fit to lace his boots and had an ounce of his integrity 

 

 

[Demitri_C]

7 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

When you consider the shit show of the last 13 years not one single PM since has shown themselves to have been fit to lace his boots and had an ounce of his integrity 

 

 

 

The economy was in a absolute state back then as well. In 2009 the opinion polls on brown were at a unprecedented  low between 16 and 22%. Although i guess to be fair it was his mate bliar that shafted him as labour were becoming unpopular due to the pathetic iraq war that he took us into (although brown didnt vote against it)

Nhs was better far better than what it is now. 

I think if brown had been in starmers position now and didnt have the negativity from day one when he took office (much like sunak) then he probably could have become a very good PM

[ml1dch]

While it's still a step away from being actual policy, there's plenty of stuff here which I reckon should interest the "no difference, Starmer-the-Tory" crowd.

Rail nationalisation, House of Lords abolition and votes for 16 year olds probably being the headline grabbers.

[Demitri_C]

This part on nhs how ??

The tories been saying this was last 12 years its all good saying this is what you plan to do this? Nothing in there saying increase pay for nursing staff to attract them to sector

[Straggler]

34 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

This part on nhs how ??

The tories been saying this was last 12 years its all good saying this is what you plan to do this? Nothing in there saying increase pay for nursing staff to attract them to sector

The scary bit for me is this....

Use spare capacity in the independent sector to treat NHS patients and bring waiting lists down.

Want to see what privatisation of the NHS looks like under this labour party, here it is. All of the Labour objectives can be completed by leaning on the private sector. 

Equally what I don't see and what screams at me from it's omission is a commitment to keep the NHS in public hands. If the use of the private sector is temporary with the plan to invest in capacity and then move away again they really need to be clear as I suspect this is not the case.

They have instead specifically dropped the commitment to reduce outsourcing. I get in the short term we have a health crisis to navigate, but there needs to be an overarching set of principles for the long term and if Labour can't provide them I'm entirely disappointed.

[Demitri_C]

23 minutes ago, Straggler said:

The scary bit for me is this....

Use spare capacity in the independent sector to treat NHS patients and bring waiting lists down.

Want to see what privatisation of the NHS looks like under this labour party, here it is. All of the Labour objectives can be completed by leaning on the private sector. 

Equally what I don't see and what screams at me from it's omission is a commitment to keep the NHS in public hands. If the use of the private sector is temporary with the plan to invest in capacity and then move away again they really need to be clear as I suspect this is not the case.

They have instead specifically dropped the commitment to reduce outsourcing. I get in the short term we have a health crisis to navigate, but there needs to be an overarching set of principles for the long term and if Labour can't provide them I'm entirely disappointed.

Its nothing new this we are already doing this under the tories- out sourcing to manage our waiting lists. They basically confirming they will copy what the tories are doing.so why they feel the need to put this in i have no ideA? 

If there was anything specific in terms of which services they should explain it in more depth.

Your concerns in my opinion are warranted.  I feel that both of the major parties think the nhs is too expensive and the tories will just try profit by selling more of the services off to private sector. Was hoping labour would put something saying protect nhs and promise not to privatise. But can't see it on here.

[Davkaus]

Putting aside the parties/people involved, there's probably an argument to be made for an increased partnership with private providers to bring down our enormous waiting lists, while waiting for increased capacity to kick in from more doctors, nurses, x new hospitals, etc. The alternative is just saying "it'll be alright in a few years, sucks for the people trapped on the waiting lists now though".

Do I trust that's the intent here? Not so much.

Whenever I read a manifesto and think "ok, there's some good stuff here", I'm reminded that you used to be able to say the same if you read large parts of the BNP manifesto without knowing anything else about them.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Davkaus

[LondonLax]

Surely the goal is to improve the service without losing the ‘free at point of use’ model? 

There may well be a roll for the private sector in that? A mixture of public/private works in other places and sectors. 

[markavfc40]

There are 140000+ vacancies currently in the NHS many of those drs/nurses that you can't just train and magic up overnight. The Tories have spent the last 13 years discouraging people from training to be nurses by firstly getting rid of the bursary and then charging people tens of thousands of pounds in student fees to train to become a nurse. It was basically setting the NHS up to fail and failing it undoubtedly now is.

No party inheriting the result of the last 13 years (be over 14 years come the next election) can fix the NHS quickly. Some quick fixes will need to be found by utilising provision in the private sector whilst the thousands of drs/nurses needed within the NHS are trained which will take years.

The NHS was in a mess when Labour inherited it in 1997 and they improved waiting times/treatment times/time it took to see a GP, cancer survival rates.  I am confident that given time, and due to the wilful neglect of our NHS since 2010 it will take time, that Labour can again turn our NHS around.  The other option of course is giving the Tories more time to stick the final few nails in the coffin.

[Davkaus]

46 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Surely the goal is to improve the service without losing the ‘free at point of use’ model? 

There may well be a roll for the private sector in that? A mixture of public/private works in other places and sectors. 

Agreed that is the most important thing to national health.

For there to be a real benefit of private supplementation for the long term (i.e., as something other than and aid to "clear down the waiting lists" and help us cope until there are better levels of service directly within the NHS), you'd want some sort of justification for introducing a profit margin into the equation, which is where we'd be looking for private sector efficiencies, competition and innovation to make their inclusion worthwhile. It rarely seems to really work like that though.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Davkaus

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, LondonLax said:

Surely the goal is to improve the service without losing the ‘free at point of use’ model? 

There may well be a roll for the private sector in that? A mixture of public/private works in other places and sectors. 

 

18 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Agreed that is the most important thing to national health.

For there to be a real benefit of private supplementation for the long term (i.e., as something other than and aid to "clear down the waiting lists" and help us cope until there are better levels of service directly within the NHS), you'd want some sort of justification for introducing a profit margin into the equation, which is where we'd be looking for private sector efficiencies, competition and innovation to make their inclusion worthwhile. It rarely seems to really work like that though.

 

Both correct - the most important thing is that the public have access to "free" healthcare; but there's always a horrible road to be trodden when it comes to the private sector and a need for profit margins.

[LondonLax]

18 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Agreed that is the most important thing to national health.

For there to be a real benefit of private supplementation for the long term (i.e., as something other than and aid to "clear down the waiting lists" and help us cope until there are better levels of service directly within the NHS), you'd want some sort of justification for introducing a profit margin into the equation, which is where we'd be looking for private sector efficiencies, competition and innovation to make their inclusion worthwhile. It rarely seems to really work like that though.

I think the U.K. seems to think that the only alternative to the government run NHS is a USA model.

There are more variants around the world between those two extremes though. 

[Rolta]

6 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

This part on nhs how ??

The tories been saying this was last 12 years its all good saying this is what you plan to do this? Nothing in there saying increase pay for nursing staff to attract them to sector

The Tories idealogically have no love for the NHS and that anytime so with them it's all lip service right? They say things just to get people who aren't really paying any attention to continue voting for them.

Labour are actual social democrats, so you'd hope a public health system is a massive part of that worldview and they'd treat it with the same investment they did last time they were in power.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Rolta

[Chindie]

The problem with adding in true private sector stuff to the NHS is the private entities only want to pick up the profitable bits of the medical industry, which then fuels further issues.

The most commonly cited example is for cataract surgery. Cataract surgery is one of the 'easier' opthalmic surgeries and it's one of the most common surgeries done. As a result its the one that private companies want. The theory is this is great, we open up capacity for the NHS by farming out a simple and common surgery. In reality, what happens is they take that work, pinch staff the NHS has trained to do it, charge the NHS for the privilege of doing the service, taking a greater proportion of funding out of the system, and because it's profit driven they encourage staff to do more and more private work because it pays more, which leads to shortages in staff for the NHS itself to do the harder more complicated treatments.

It's essentially the same thing that has caused the dental crisis. The money is in the private work so more and more capacity goes to that world, and the NHS side of thing gets drained into a husk.

Of course, it's all part of the plan.

[LondonLax]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

The problem with adding in true private sector stuff to the NHS is the private entities only want to pick up the profitable bits of the medical industry, which then fuels further issues.

The most commonly cited example is for cataract surgery. Cataract surgery is one of the 'easier' opthalmic surgeries and it's one of the most common surgeries done. As a result its the one that private companies want. The theory is this is great, we open up capacity for the NHS by farming out a simple and common surgery. In reality, what happens is they take that work, pinch staff the NHS has trained to do it, charge the NHS for the privilege of doing the service, taking a greater proportion of funding out of the system, and because it's profit driven they encourage staff to do more and more private work because it pays more, which leads to shortages in staff for the NHS itself to do the harder more complicated treatments.

It's essentially the same thing that has caused the dental crisis. The money is in the private work so more and more capacity goes to that world, and the NHS side of thing gets drained into a husk.

Of course, it's all part of the plan.

There must be a way of transitioning to a Germany/Australia/Canada public/private model without that happening though? 

It would be up to the Labour Party to decide which parts the private sector was allowed to compete with the NHS on. 

[The Fun Factory]

On 11/05/2023 at 07:55, Demitri_C said:

 

The economy was in a absolute state back then as well. In 2009 the opinion polls on brown were at a unprecedented  low between 16 and 22%. Although i guess to be fair it was his mate bliar that shafted him as labour were becoming unpopular due to the pathetic iraq war that he took us into (although brown didnt vote against it)

Nhs was better far better than what it is now. 

I think if brown had been in starmers position now and didnt have the negativity from day one when he took office (much like sunak) then he probably could have become a very good PM

Nah he was the wrong personality. He has to micro manage everything and couldn't see the big picture.  He spent over 10 years brooding to become PM when he got it he had no big idea. That is why he was a good chancellor and chesire cat tony was the ideal leader. Until he started on illegal invasions

[Jareth]

Labour are the real conservatives - says Starmer today. But of course they’re nothing like the tories. 

[bickster]

20 hours ago, Jareth said:

Labour are the real conservatives - says Starmer today. But of course they’re nothing like the tories. 

You really should stop reading things in the media and believe them without checking

Here is the relevant section of the speech. You'll note he didn't say that and that in context what he said isn't anywhere close to what is being said by the media

Quote

But this ambition must never become unmoored from working peoples’ need for stability, for order, security.

We must understand that there are precious things – in our way of life, in our environment, in our communities – that it is our responsibility to protect and preserve, to pass on to future generations.

If that sounds conservative, then let me tell you: I don’t care.

Somebody has got to stand up for the things that make this country great and it isn’t going to be the Tories.

Has taken an axe to the security of family life.

Has trashed Britain’s reputation abroad.

Has totally lost touch with the ordinary hope of working people.

The Conservative Party can no longer claim to be conservative.

It conserves nothing of value – not our rivers and seas, not our NHS or BBC, not our families, not our nation.

But the lesson for progressives must be that if a tide of change threatens to sweep away the stability working people need, we have to be in there - fighting for security just as fervently as we fight against injustice.

It’s not our job to lecture working people that change is coming – it’s our job to lead them through it. To bring people together and chart a new course. To use the power of government to help, support, protect and lift up.

Meanwhile, idiots shout Keith because it's cool

[Jareth]

30 minutes ago, bickster said:

You really should stop reading things in the media and believe them without checking

Here is the relevant section of the speech. You'll note he didn't say that and that in context what he said isn't anywhere close to what is being said by the media

Meanwhile, idiots shout Keith because it's cool

"If that sounds conservative, then let me tell you: I don’t care."

Not for me. 

[bickster]

28 minutes ago, Jareth said:

"If that sounds conservative, then let me tell you: I don’t care."

Not for me. 

You realise the non-capitalised c makes a huge difference. 

I can only assume, you've stubbornly not read it. You seem to want to be against what he's saying because he used the word conservative. I'm sorry but that is idiotic