UKIP's Steven Woofe in hospital after a fight...

[Neville's Breakfast]

During the Junior Doctor's dispute, did not Jeremy Hunt talk of a recoding from Bevan all those years ago bemoaning that fact that the doctors were dead against the idea, as they presumably thought that they could not cash in with private treatment? I did hear a doctor claim that the 4 year rule would be unfair as it would have to be applied to all professionals trained at public expense, and whilst if doctors were singled out, this might seem unfair, the solution would be to insist that if the taxpayer is paying, everyone has to do 4 years worth. Is this practical, wonder, as I am sure that is morally justifiable.

Indeed, doctors were totally against the creation of the NHS and had to be bought off post war with very generous contracts. I have enormous empathy with low paid workers in the NHS. I see no reason to believe well paid doctors over well paid politicians.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

As stated, I have read enough of your posts to fully believe you personally, but are you seriously of the view that everyone thinks like this. We had a workman here yesterday who charged us £20.00 less for a cash payment . .I too could afford to pay more for the NHS, and within reason don't begrudge them a few bob extra, but would also like to see evidence that the money would be spent wisely, and in a huge impersonal organisation where they think there is a bottomless pit, I am decidedly unsure that this would be the case. See my experience on post 76.

I understand what you are saying, my brother needs regular tablets for his growth, and my mum also has a range of tablets. The amount of cock ups and over ordering just for those two in a year must equate to quite a lot of money. If this happens to your wife as well, what's the whole bill like for the rest of the NHS. In regards of making additional payments to the NHS, I know not everyone is going to think like me, but if this NHS is struggling for money, and the government isn't putting anymore in, then the only other way is that we pay more, but like you say we would need some sort of evidence to make sure the money goes where it should.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Giving the Countryside alliance guy a couple of acres

Good for him - he should have followed up with a boot in the goolies.

 

[Hastings gull]

I understand what you are saying, my brother needs regular tablets for his growth, and my mum also has a range of tablets. The amount of cock ups and over ordering just for those two in a year must equate to quite a lot of money. If this happens to your wife as well, what's the whole bill like for the rest of the NHS. In regards of making additional payments to the NHS, I know not everyone is going to think like me, but if this NHS is struggling for money, and the government isn't putting anymore in, then the only other way is that we pay more, but like you say we would need some sort of evidence to make sure the money goes where it should.

The way things are going and the many reports that they are going bust etc will probably cause the government to put in more cash, and if it goes towards patients, then I am all for it, and think that probably most folk would say -Ok fair enough, within reason. But would it? Doubtless an extra scan machine or whatever at your local hospital would receive much local press coverage with a grinning MP there to bask in some glory, but what percentage of the extra expenditure would that be in practice. Throwing more money at something does not necessarily buy extra efficiency and politicians know that. Barely a day goes by without some organisation or charity claiming that they are under-resourced, and this may or may not be the case. But have you ever heard anyone in all your years on the box claim that if we worked rather more efficiently, this would help? "Lessons have been learned" is always trotted out after a catastrophe, when an organisation has finally run out of excuses and bluster.

 

[T.G]

Are things as you see them, or as you want to see them? It is rather pompous of you to say that you are able to se things others clearly cannot. I regret that you do come over as someone with rather extreme views. My son in law's dad earns in excess of £100,000 a year, which I am sure you would agree makes him by any standards wealthy. He elects to go private, but still pays taxes for the NHS, which he does not use - in other words he is paying for you and me as well as his family. Moreover, it is absurd to suggest that tax cuts here and there mean that the NHS is under-funded - the two points you make are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
This morning, yet again at the local pharmacy, and after several reminders at the local hospital treating my mum for Alzheimers, I refused to take out another batch of her tablets, which would last for 4 months and are sent there every month. If I take them out, as you probably know, the chemist will only get rid. If this happens to me, it is presumably happening to thousands of others, and the reaction of the pharmacist confirms this, as he shrugs his shoulders in despair. Irrespective of politicians, if the NHS were to be more efficient, then perhaps we would not be having this debate. It is fashionable to claim that you need more resources, and whilst in many areas this may be true to an extent, it is far easier to moan about lack of cash than tackle staff inefficiencies, wasteful work practices, and the various vested interests.

Unless your son in law's dad was born in the back of a fish shop I would guess he has had quite a lot of support from the NHS before he went private, Not that I want to get embroiled in a debate about a personal matter! I guess every large organisation can be run more efficiently, but thats not the issue. There is no moral justification for lowering the tax burden on the wealthy and denying appropriate funding to public services. If wanting equality and fairness is politically extreme then by all means call me that.

 

[ManOfSussex]

The fight has now been reported to the French police - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37773159