NHS
 

Is it just me , or is gov just desperate to hide the fact people are just going to have to pay more in / go private

or take a pay cut .

re 7 day week

Theresa May wants as many problems as possible in the NHS, then G4S will step in and run hospitals instead of the government

Guess who owns G4S?????

Theresa Mays husband :mad:

G4S is a public limited company - so I doubt "he" owns it

what are you sources btw

May's been in 'power' for months

I doubt she could have planned this


I mean Hunts been at this a while now ..

dont even start me on the nhs.

Me and my wife just moved to a new area so we was looking for a local doctors surgery.

Found out pretty much all of the surgery's in my area had closed their books. Found one eventually!, 25min drive away, so I phoned up the nhs complaints line and they basically told me to lump it, but I said to them what would happen if me and my wife fell very ill and we couldn't drive, their response was to get a taxi.

There must be thousands that far from a doctor ?

Its not a good thing is it ? We are paying for it through our taxes end of the day no matter what anyone says

Problem with the NHS is the influx of people entering into the UK.

Simply throwing cash at it solves nothing.

Nothing to do with the aging population then ?

Please don't blame the ageing population we have been contributing for many years !
Whilst consultants managers and senior staff can earn 250k a year
And non contributors get immediate treatment its not going to get better, unless you are happy to pay more tax , that's the real answere.

Ah yes , Johnny foreigner stealing our way life :(

Agree about managers though.

Probably half what they'd get outside nhs mind you ?

Isn't this roughly the same argument as the TUC coming up with

" GLobalisation has ruined life for the common man"

Thats not true

In simplistic terms the NHS doesn't have enough "stuff" to do everything that is being asked to do. Be that staff, wards, beds, money............

As no tax is hypothecated and tax revenue effectively spent in real time then all the contributions paid in the past have been spent and it will be incumbent on the (younger) working taxpers to pay more or the NHS does less.

Consultants earning £250k are very few and far between.

Shaun

The NHS started in 1948 when there was a smaller, younger population and there were fewer, less expensive treatments available. As the population has aged and grown, compounded with a greater number of more expensive treatments becoming available the strains can be seen. These are some parts of the problem. Value is placed on a service based on how its perceived by the people that use that service, as the NHS is perceived as "free" then we see a lack of value placed on its services - missed appointments, wasted time, etc. The service is far from free - tax to support it and paid prescriptions although this often is conveniently ignored. Another, acknowledged problem is the wastage within the system. As the service is publicly funded, there's no profit motive ie. no incentive to improve. The service will still be funded tomorrow, even if wastage continues. The final element I see as a problem is the holier than thou halo placed around the service as if it were the envy of the world. If it truly were the envy of the world then other countries would do the same, and they don't. If a model is broken and no longer fit for the purpose it was intended a new one is needed. If the UK can get away from the mental hang up that the NHS is the only way then it's on the way to solving its problems.

As far as make out the emmergrants use health service much less than the average bod.

Maybe the high earners should be made to pay for treatment

Last time I checked (a couple of minutes ago, on the gov.uk website), there was no cap on the amount of percentage rate NI that people pay in this country, so blatant fraudsters aside, the better-off already pay more into the NHS.

The NHS is not paid for by NI contributions. It does draw from NI funds as part of it's take from general taxation.

Yep, the more you earn, the more tax you pay and the more you contribute to the NHS (and everything else).

Shaun

I think there is a certain irony in that, in that those who contribute most in terms of tax revenue to run the sevice, are probably more likely to have or at least be able to afford private medical cover.

They do already. It's called TAX :brickwall:brickwall

I think you're wrong there. I work in Construction, and years ago when `New labour` came to power, they did 2 things with the NHS, which has a lot to do with what's wrong.

Firstly they came up with PFI. Need a new Hospital? That may cost £200m. Instead of paying for it ourselves, lets get a private company to pay for the Hospital, and we'll give them £30m a year for the next 30 years. Result? Ends up costing the Tax payer an extra £100m.

Above figures are only an illustration. But goes to show how much extra money we (the tax payer) are paying for our Hospitals, instead of that £100m going into equipment / nurses. And don't for one second think those hospitals were built to a budget, cos they weren't. We built a few with copper cladding, and Zinc cladding (very expensive materials)

Secondly. I was stood on site at a Hospital in Sheffield, when there was a major buzz about the place. After an hour or so, the news came around that labour injected soo much cash into the NHS, that all the consultants were being awarded with new contracts. Buzz was, that they were getting pay rises quite substantial. Maybe as said above, £250k a year. You could tell who some of them were, as they were practically doing cartwheels in the car park

There is an estate in the North East where al the footballers used to live. They've moved out, and quite a lot of very large and expensive homes are now owned by GP's and consultants.

Money was injected in, but it was grossly wasted by PFI and consultants contracts. Front line care probably saw very little extra.

Also under labour, a management structure was introduced (my friend is a nurse, so saw this happen) where, once she had a Matron/manager, she now had a ward manager, who reported to another manager, who reported to another manager etc etc.

I've sat in Design/construction meetings where these NHS managers have been involved (no reason for them to be there) and they are serial meeting holders. No kidding. Anything that needed a decision, was immediately pencilled into a diary for them to have a meeting about discussing the decision that needed making. Was ridiculous. :freak3: :Whatever_

While those who can't/wont work should get everything free?

Work hard, earn money for you and your family.......... pay for everyone else.

Briliant

the nhs is the best and worst thing for this country. it attracts alot of people for free medical care..on the plus side, they'll save your life no questions asked

If we are meaning consultants as in medics, they are exceptionally good value IMHO. The range is around 75 to 100k, and the average value of merit awards is not that high, the median is something like 11k.

Yep, I was talking about NHS Consultants as per John above.

Shaun

Exactly.

The only consultants earning more than that are doing greater than 5 days per week - either through the NHS or with private work. Of course there are those consultants that seem to be able to do their private work during their NHS time, but that's another matter.

Self employed consultants will earn more, but they take the risk of being contractors like in any other sector.

As for managers earning £250k? I work in an NHS organisation with a £1.1bn turnover and our Chief Exec is on something like £150k. Only the very top handful of managers earn £100k plus - eg Finance Director, HR Director.

The press really does love to provide some smoke and mirrors around NHS pay to whip up public reactions.