killer_clank
Member
Ugh. I like how Cameron tries to act like all the other privatisations went so damn well he just has to copy them for the roads. This government is truly dire in almost every conceivable way.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
Ugh. I like how Cameron tries to act like all the other privatisations went so damn well he just has to copy them for the roads. This government is truly dire in almost every conceivable way.
Starwolf_UK
Member
So privatized roads eh? Just when I thought there no more services left to privatize*...only took what, 2 years to find that one? Anyone got any other ideas, spare us the wait and send them to 10 Downing Street...
*-Its a bit before my time (by a few years) but transport and utilities went under Thatcher...oh yes and council housing stocks leading to councils today being held hostage by private landlords (and paying the ransom too).
*-Its a bit before my time (by a few years) but transport and utilities went under Thatcher...oh yes and council housing stocks leading to councils today being held hostage by private landlords (and paying the ransom too).
Just think, one day our roads might be as efficient as our railways!
radioheadrule83
Banned
killer_clank said:
I know... all the 'get Britain moving' talk alongside it is like a bad joke as well. Geddit?!?! Get it moving? Like cars move? Locomotion?
A bit of poor traffic planning / management and that might not be that impossible. We'll probably have to pay £150 just to wait to get in our car, and when we do, we'll realise it only has 2 seats and has 5 other people already crammed in it, and it'll be late - both leaving and arriving.
Seriously speaking: why would anyone want to invest in our roads though? I'm not seeing the attraction.
Are they outsourcing the work, or just actually privatising the whole lot?
This company actually manages quite a busy dual carriage way in my area, they're doing a good job.
That said, the road is still under 10 years old, and I doubt things would scale up well.
This company actually manages quite a busy dual carriage way in my area, they're doing a good job.
That said, the road is still under 10 years old, and I doubt things would scale up well.
killer_clank
Member
Actual privatisation as far as I know. Companies having maintenence contracts is totally fine, but privatising everything just leaves me VERY uncomfortable.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
I didn't think Cameron could ever beat his glorious "sell off the forests" plan, but "sell off upkeep of the roads" is perhaps even better.
Budget deficit and social plans gone awry can be perhaps be laid at Labour's feet but bolstered by global economic downturn. The Tories generational fucking of things like the railways previously however and now cutting into the flesh of the NHS, crafting some kind of privatised roads nightmare and more are just fucking awful judgement calls and poorly conceived plans.
Wednesday feels like its going to be an absolute shit fountain.
Budget deficit and social plans gone awry can be perhaps be laid at Labour's feet but bolstered by global economic downturn. The Tories generational fucking of things like the railways previously however and now cutting into the flesh of the NHS, crafting some kind of privatised roads nightmare and more are just fucking awful judgement calls and poorly conceived plans.
Wednesday feels like its going to be an absolute shit fountain.
If they're putting toll roads on optional roads, like the M6 toll, then that's absolutely fine with me, those that really want to use them can pay for it.
But putting tolls on new roads that provide vital links to communities should be free.
It will be interesting to see the proposals, the M6 toll was a big success and it seems to work well in France.
But putting tolls on new roads that provide vital links to communities should be free.
It will be interesting to see the proposals, the M6 toll was a big success and it seems to work well in France.
J Tourettes
Banned
'Let's announce crazy shit while we're trying to force the NHS bill through'
yeah i'm on that page too. the road plans are too vague to be meaningful at this point and they embargoed the release instead of just having it be part of the budget, it's an excellent distraction from how devastating the nhs bill is for now then when it's passed people will be talking about the tax cut for the rich in the budget instead.
it's becoming increasingly obvious that this government doesn't have a legitimate plan for growth. everything they come out with seems to revolve around taking public assets and selling them off to the private sector and the most depressing aspect of it all is that they are hardly ever called out on this as they keep on harping on about the budget deficit and triple a rating and we'll become like greece if we don't take care of the deficit.
killer_clank
Member
The M6 toll is close to bankruptcy last I heard. They improved the actual M6, meaning lots of people stopped using it.
I would be able to support tolls to a certain extent if they were in public ownership and the profits could be used for a myriad of things, not going to private companies.
Thank god for devolution. none of this shit affects me, but it's terrible what this government is doing to England.
killer_clank
Member
Oh yeah, I've always wondered about how privatised water works, We don't have it up here, we just pay it with council tax, meaning students don't have to pay for it. Do you get exemptions from water bills if you're a student or something? And do you have a meter like electricity?
the other issue, as with the nice parallel of our horrifically botched privatized train system, is that the tolls on the m6 are expensive. £2 in 2004, £5.50 now which has it running at 1/3 capacity.
No.
Depends on the company and the house you're in. I've lived in houses both with water meter and simple flat monthly charges. If you live by yourself, a meter is cheaper. If you're with a group, flat charge almost always works out cheaper.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Not sure about this move. My worry is that the government will use this as an excuse to stop building new roads and give preferential treatment to private sector providers meaning most new roads built will have tolls on them.
My understanding is that no existing roads will be sold but new roads will now be put out to tender and the state will have to bid with other sectors. Improvements to existing roads will be carried out by the state or if a private provider is to do it no toll charges can be added and the state will foot the bill. I see it as a bad idea and the extension of PFI into road works. Since the government already has a £120bn off the books PFI liability I don't think adding to this is a particularly good idea.
My understanding is that no existing roads will be sold but new roads will now be put out to tender and the state will have to bid with other sectors. Improvements to existing roads will be carried out by the state or if a private provider is to do it no toll charges can be added and the state will foot the bill. I see it as a bad idea and the extension of PFI into road works. Since the government already has a £120bn off the books PFI liability I don't think adding to this is a particularly good idea.
Starwolf_UK
Member
Feasibility study...well theres still pain coming soon, budget.
But like the shadow transport secretary (and many others) pointed out does an old road become new because you add a junction?
But like the shadow transport secretary (and many others) pointed out does an old road become new because you add a junction?
Nope. However, access to clean water is considered a human right therefore you can not be cut off. Still it might burn bridges with landlords and water companies or get you in court. I heard a friend of a friend tried it and the former happened.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
So the Lords have passed the NHS fuckbullet. Is this really happening? Am I really the generation that has to watch this car crash occur before my very fucking eyes?
Will this be Labour's next election poster campaign?
Will this be Labour's next election poster campaign?
INITIATING FLUSTERED LIE WAY OUT SOMEHOW PROGRAMMING. BZZT. BZZT. SWEAT GLANDS MALFUNCTIONING.
On the NHS - I have no opinion
On the road "privatisation" - I have no opinion
I just don't feel comfortable in commenting on something which I don't understand or haven't researched. The "I hate the Tories and everything they do because they are right wing" bandwagon seems to have passed me by. There are many strong emotional reactions in this thread at the moment.
On the road "privatisation" - I have no opinion
I just don't feel comfortable in commenting on something which I don't understand or haven't researched. The "I hate the Tories and everything they do because they are right wing" bandwagon seems to have passed me by. There are many strong emotional reactions in this thread at the moment.
louis89
Member
Because it's easier to just get angry about anything the Conservative Party does and frame everything in terms of oversimplified left vs. right, investment vs. austerity, Tory vs. Labour ideology than to actually investigate what is really happening, read beyond headlines, do independent research and have an informed opinion. See: the poster above you who appears to believe that the government is cutting NHS spending.
I guarantee that a large amount of the most vociferous opponents to the proposals couldn't actually explain to you what they are in detail.
radioheadrule83
Banned
I do care who provides the service, because it can directly impact the quality of the service provided, if not the price. The motivations of the provider are important too.
They can fudge the figures and associative indexes all they want to reassure us spending is staying the "same in real terms" or "rising in real terms", but if this bill means the likes of Serco are allowed to take over on certain services and make a complete fucking mess of things like they already have with certain out of hours GP services and facilities contracts in other industries, then you can bet your bottom dollar that the election poster posted above WOULD make an effective campaign. The tories can ligitimately spend the same amount of money that labour would have, but if their competitiveness drive means the service degrades, or is even perceived to - they'll take a beating on it. Quite right too.
killer_clank
Member
It lays the groundwork for all sorts of nasty things, and there's no doubt in my mind it will lead to a two-tier health service, where the paying customer is king, and waiting times for 'free' patients become worse and worse. Even more than that, having private companies involved in delivering healthcare is morally repulsive to me.
That bill is totally dire, I don't see how anyone in their right minds could defend it.
That bill is totally dire, I don't see how anyone in their right minds could defend it.
J Tourettes
Banned
Plenty of interesting breakdowns of the bill (by docotrs etc) are avialble out there. My general feeling is that if near enough the whole medical establishment is against it, I'm inclined to believe them over the politicians.
http://www.allysonpollock.co.uk/administrator/components/com_article/attach/2012-03-08/BMJ_2012_Pollock_HealthSocialCareBill.pdf
Ben Goldacre has plenty of info on his secondary blog:
http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/what-do-doctors-nurses-say-about-the-nhsbill
Goldacre generally doesn't seem (to me) to have a political axe to grind, priasing many government initiatives and shitting over others.
http://www.allysonpollock.co.uk/administrator/components/com_article/attach/2012-03-08/BMJ_2012_Pollock_HealthSocialCareBill.pdf
Ben Goldacre has plenty of info on his secondary blog:
http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/what-do-doctors-nurses-say-about-the-nhsbill
Goldacre generally doesn't seem (to me) to have a political axe to grind, priasing many government initiatives and shitting over others.
Its the start of medical care for profit by the backdoor and sets a dangerous precedent.
KungFuBill
Member
The Goldacre link posted above pretty much sums it up in one shot.
http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/what-do-doctors-nurses-say-about-the-nhsbill
Professionals have had the oppurtunity to look at the proposals and if this is their view then I am more akin to trust THEM than the men insuits pushing the bill through. My boss is very active in voicing out against the reform bill and if you would like a further explaination then I'd be happy to share HIS thoughts?
Me? I just trust doctors, midwives, nurses and most of them are against this.
http://bengoldacre.posterous.com/what-do-doctors-nurses-say-about-the-nhsbill
Professionals have had the oppurtunity to look at the proposals and if this is their view then I am more akin to trust THEM than the men insuits pushing the bill through. My boss is very active in voicing out against the reform bill and if you would like a further explaination then I'd be happy to share HIS thoughts?
Me? I just trust doctors, midwives, nurses and most of them are against this.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
You do realise that private companies have been providing all kinds of healthcare ever since Blair and Brown part privatised NHS healthcare provisioning.
I have no opinion on the bill itself, it's not bad but it isn't great either as it introduces too much bureaucracy. My problem is with the politics, the Tories messing with the NHS was a bad idea and letting an idiot like Lansley present it was even worse. What makes all of this moot is Ed Miliband's ridiculous posturing on the subject, his whole "30 days to save the NHS" crap will ensure he grasps a defeat from the jaws of victory as the NHS is still going to exist in 2015 and will largely be the same for people who need treatment.
The problem is that the Tory proposals are just Labour one's on steroids so for EdM and the rest of the Labour front bench to suddenly be against them is political opportunism that will backfire. If Ed had sounded his displeasure with the bill and held consultations with union leaders etc... but not had the silly rhetoric of "xx many days to save the NHS" or "if this bill passes the NHS won't exist in xx many days" he could have had a win. Right now he doesn't unless people actually believe that the NHS won't be here (largely the same as now) in 2015. That we've had private provisioning of healthcare since 2003 and the stupid 11% premium for private companies since 2007 (to make contracts more competitive for them) mean that these changes won't make much difference. In fact getting rid of the 11% private sector premium will mean less private sector involvement as the public sector provision becomes more competitive again.
The bill itself won't really change much, PCTs will become CCGs, the 11% private sector premium goes away (which a lot of groups aren't happy about, unsurprisingly) and GPs (and now hospital based staff) will have a slightly larger say over where the money gets spent.
That precedent was set a long time ago by Labour.
travisbickle
Member
Opinions are based on past actions, ideologies, and the nature of the current situation and how the parties intend to deal with it.
This is politics, there's enough people writing, discussing, talking, documenting and predicting what has, can and may happen, so that everyone is able to have an educated opinion about it.
Posts like yours always sound like someone bailing out of a discussion because the party they support has done something stupid.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
And this is why its getting pushed through I guess. Because the general public is confused by it all and doesn't really understand the implications of gutting and completely changing the way the NHS is run from the top down, with little to no foresight in the sweeping change, and no way of ever returning to the previous model without another gigantic amount of unnecessary expense.
Worse still than expecting this kind of draconian madness from the boys in blue, this unwanted reform should have been the sticking point and dissolving point for the coalition if the Lib Dems wanted to scrape back a stance on anything ever again. Idly watching it get passed in while they make silent "hands are tied" motions is gutless politics at its absolute worst.
Duck houses from expense scandals, calling an old woman a bigot under your breath = national outrage.
Going against everything you promised in your election manifesto = we don't understand, mumble mumble mumble.
Worse still than expecting this kind of draconian madness from the boys in blue, this unwanted reform should have been the sticking point and dissolving point for the coalition if the Lib Dems wanted to scrape back a stance on anything ever again. Idly watching it get passed in while they make silent "hands are tied" motions is gutless politics at its absolute worst.
Duck houses from expense scandals, calling an old woman a bigot under your breath = national outrage.
Going against everything you promised in your election manifesto = we don't understand, mumble mumble mumble.
killer_clank
Member
I do indeed and I don't like that they did it either. Doesn't change the fact these proposals are much more terrible than anything Blair or Brown did to the NHS.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Please don't preach to people about not understanding something when it is quite clear that your understanding is not much better. The NHS bill actually changes very little and formalises how the NHS has been running since about 2008, it means that PCTs become CCGs. My worry is for NHS London which has done a terrific job in the last 10 years or so being disbanded and broken up into 32 different CCGs each with their own bureaucratic empire, but that is specifically a London concern and doesn't effect the rest of the country as no other NHS provisioning board is as large or complex.
The biggest opposition comes from the current private sector providers who have been getting a nice premium for their services and almost a monopoly for simple procedures. The bill allows the public sector to compete properly again and allows other private sector providers in as well, not just the large scale ones (Bupa, Assura/Virgin). The royal colleges will protest because some of the changes mean patients get more say in how they are treated, usually this means worse healthcare but more visibility from clinical staff. Patient involvement in healthcare provision is something I am against, but we'll see how it goes. In the US it doesn't work, but in Canada it does.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Well all this really does is open up private sector involvement to more companies and third sector providers. Basically it means that instead of just Bupa being able to bid for NHS contracts it means any private sector company can. That's probably a good thing, it also puts the public sector back on level terms with the private sector with the removal of the 11% premium introduced by Brown to entice more private sector providers in. I would say that in the short to medium term more healthcare will be carried out by the NHS in house, but longer term it means that private companies will creep into the system and drive down costs, one hopes that this will not lead to worse quality...
If we're going to have private sector involvement, which at this stage is unavoidable, I would rather it be on even terms with no silly premiums and with more companies rather than just two or three massive ones who get to charge whatever they want and rip off the NHS.
Lastly, as long as the NHS remains free at the point of use for all UK nationals I'm not particularly bothered about what goes on behind the scenes...
Which seems to be the crux of the problem. Quality of care in these countries have been eroded through decades of "behind the scenes" tweaks. The NHS has suffered constant private sector incursions which have done nothing to benefit patients and everything to benefit the business friends of the Political Class; as ever the only possible explanation for aping the developed world's most dysfunctional healthcare model is corruption. Which the right wave away with free-marketeer bullshit.
radioheadrule83
Banned
zomg, I'm sorry but I think you're wrong and I think we will notice a difference. If it changes nothing, why are doctors and nurses so against it?
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Labour can definitely be blamed for the trickle of private stuff into the NHS, but to nurses, doctors and managers alike it came under a sort of 'necessary evil' banner. The reform here just turns the tap on full-blast with no way to ever stop what happens next, there is literally no way back after this.
Perhaps you are surrounded by too many banker friends, zomg, but being surrounded by nurses, fresh GP's, and some family in the management side myself, the unilateral disgust at this 'reform' going through no matter how much it is unwanted and scorned is very real. That the general public at large still doesnt really know whats going on is a fault that should be slung at the media's feet because it doesnt fit a nice and neat story-based narrative and actually requires some depth to go into.
Either way, the government has crafted a fantastic platter of shit sandwiches this week so nobody can focus on one particularly disgusting flavour of turd amongst the rest.
Perhaps you are surrounded by too many banker friends, zomg, but being surrounded by nurses, fresh GP's, and some family in the management side myself, the unilateral disgust at this 'reform' going through no matter how much it is unwanted and scorned is very real. That the general public at large still doesnt really know whats going on is a fault that should be slung at the media's feet because it doesnt fit a nice and neat story-based narrative and actually requires some depth to go into.
Either way, the government has crafted a fantastic platter of shit sandwiches this week so nobody can focus on one particularly disgusting flavour of turd amongst the rest.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
On the whole I'm with zomg on this.
I don't necessarily give a whole bunch of credence to the health profession organisations' blanket condemnation of the Bill. It's the same sort of thing as asking lawyers' opinions on much-needed reforms to the legal system (they'll all say no to opening up the profession/improving access to the courts and so on) or teachers' opinions of reforms to the education system (they'll all say no and try to stack up the prerequisite academic qualifications to keep the shop closed).
Much of the criticism levelled at the Bill seems to be of one of two kinds: either it is "it sets a dangerous precedent" (without specifying or going into detail what it is supposed a dangerous precedent of or indeed why it is dangerous at all) or it will lead to a "two-tier health system" (without any analysis of why that might or might not be a bad thing).
As zomg has mentioned, much of this stuff is already in place and has been for a while - and the NHS didn't die then either, no reason it should die now. Some of what is proposed may act as a counter to the overprofessionalisation (and hence overexpense) of some aspects of healthcare.
Remember that these professional bodies are there for the benefit of their members. It was for example lobbying by the Royal College of Surgeons that many years ago effectively stopped most minor surgical procedures at GP surgeries, so condemning plenty of people would would not otherwise have had to wait at all to six-month waiting lists but incidentally enriching surgeons. It was lobbying by the RCN that effectively professionalised much of homecare and took large chunks of the voluntary sector out of operation.
As for two-tier - I can see arguments for and against. Against, obviously, is the idea that people get better treatment faster simply because they have the money - but we have that already (through private providers, many of which are staffed by moonlighting NHS employees and using NHS facilities) and all it does is sucj money and resources out of the NHS. For, though, is the fact that in the obsession to maintain a single-tier health system everyone gets treated the same - and that's a bad thing. Everyone goes to the end of the same waiting list regardless of clinical need and the impact on their lives (and I do recognise this is a gross oversimplification and is coloured by my own experiences), but there's a world of difference in the time pressure for the patient between, say, an 16-week wait for a gastroenterology appointment for maintenance of a known existing and managed condition, and a 16-week wait for the same appointment that would have been able to catch an early diagnosis and treatment of an unknown condition had it been held in 4 weeks but that at 16 weeks is too late.
travisbickle
Member
Boy, I wish there was a privatised health care system somewhere on the globe, that was open to competition from private industry, so we could really see how it would effect people that don't have high incomes or are in need of long term care. Shucks, I guess we'll have to go in blind and trust the conservative party. I guess we also have some GAFers here with anecdotal evidence of individual experiences under the current NHS we should change the system based on their experience.
my worry is that wait times will get worse. has anyone noticed that they seem to have increased sharply in the last couple of years? i went to a&e over the weekend and the wait time was close to 6 hours. a couple of years ago, the wait time was close to 2 hours in the same hospital. nothing noticeable has changed, so why have the wait times suddenly shot up by so much?
travisbickle
Member
20 billion pounds "austerity" and 300,000 jobs axed. And it was hardly like they were over-staffed and spending money on silk toilet paper with gold-leaf edging before.
Waits for zomg "that's only a reduction of 20%, did you feel there was a 35% improvement under the previous government who spent 64% more on PCT then the current coalition who are going to spend 32% less with a projected loss in productivity of only 24%!!!" post.
radioheadrule83
Banned
I do give the royal college type groups a lot of credence, because although they are functionally a lot like unions, they are comprised of the most esteemed and trusted people in the country - the people you trust with your health. When polled by their respective organisations, they are all saying the same thing - that this is a bad idea.
My criticism isn't that it sets a dangerous precident, its that it exacerbates and worsens one that has already been set. I mentioned Serco before - they won a contract to operate out of hours GP services in Cornwall in 2006, routinely missing nearly all of their targets in the years since, with woeful response rates to emergency call outs. They operated similarly crappy services in Wales. They've just taken over Defence Business Services, and they have their tentacles in tonnes of other public endeavours - especially in the MOD and Department for Transport. They derive 98% of their turnover and revenue from public business. They were branded "the unacceptable face of capitalism" by a commons select committee in reponse to one of their consortiums trying to swindle the taxpayer on a PFI hospital in Norwich. This is not the kind of company I want involved in the NHS, nor companies like KPMG or Babcock... and yet they are - heavily - and this will increase their reach and influence too. A small handful of companies and vested interests are practically taking over the running of the entire fucking country.
Accountability and motive are paramount in healthcare. A public worker and public body is a functional arm of government, the government is accountable. A company or GoCo type arrangement gives the government an opportunity to slope its shoulders, and the company faces the dual pressures of needing to make a profit, and needing to meet targets -- all of the pressure on costs is relentlessly downward, which in any non-essential public sector area, I might actually approve of - but in health care, it represents a threat to quality of care and a threat to standards.
J Tourettes
Banned
Bojo has got back his mojo:
I'd rather neither of the tossers but forced to choose I'd probably go Bojo as well. What a crock of shit.
I'd rather neither of the tossers but forced to choose I'd probably go Bojo as well. What a crock of shit.
J Tourettes
Banned
He has done some great stuff but he's falling short in a lot of areas too. Campaigning against the housing benefit cap, cycling safety (or lack thereof), fares increasing by a massive amount every year etc etc have all annoyed me.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...one-statement-revealing-tax-goes-welfare.html
this could be quite a devious plan from the conservative party.
with it broken down like the mail suggests, welfare, education, health etc, you know the instant assumption is omg all that money going on fat lazy chavs with their playstations quick hurry up with the dismantling of the welfare state.
this could be quite a devious plan from the conservative party.
with it broken down like the mail suggests, welfare, education, health etc, you know the instant assumption is omg all that money going on fat lazy chavs with their playstations quick hurry up with the dismantling of the welfare state.