Poll: Who Will You Be Voting For In The Next General Election?

drbeat

SGE1 wrote: »

Under a PFI, the private sector provides infrastructure, and some basic operational services - the public sector retains control of the provision of core services.

But please, if you want to try to make out like I don't know what I've based my opinions on, keep banging your head against the wall! :T

What a load of boll0cks!!! Greedy corporations STILL profit from PFI and when they don't they simply put the partnership into liquidation and run with the money i.e. METRONET!

Get out more...you really are embarrassing yourself! You base your opinion on your Labour mates and those left wing lecturers that you idolised at that exclusive establishment. You mentioned earlier that you don't read The Sun but you probably had never heard of it until you were freed from that exclusive establishment!

SGE1

drbeat wrote: »

What a load of boll0cks!!! Greedy corporations STILL profit from PFI and when they don't they simply put the partnership into liquidation and run with the money i.e. METRONET!

Get out more...you really are embarrassing yourself! You base your opinion on your Labour mates and those left wing lecturers that you idolised at that exclusive establishment. You mentioned earlier that you don't read The Sun but you probably had never heard of it until you were freed from that exclusive establishment!

If you're going to rude about it, I don't see the point in having a discussion. You appear to have a chip on your shoulder, and this is evidently blurring you logic - on the one hand you accuse me of not having New Labour principles, then you accuse my New Labour "twaddle" of being offensive to you - make your mind up.

I never claimed that the private sector doesn't make a profit from PFI - of course they do, that is the very essence of the private sector - but you miss my point completely. The provision of essential services (such as healthcare, free for all at the point of use) are better done by the public sector - other services (like the cleaning of hospitals, to continue the NHS theme) can very well be performed by the private sector, and are, under many PFIs. My point never changed.

I disagree with you - get over it. I'm evidently not going to see things like you do, and if your only way to cope with that is by insulting me, so be it. You huff and puff about how I allegedly embarrass myself, and how I know so little, but forgive me for pointing out that I have never contradicted myself, and my principles are very clear, simple, and as a result, easy to explain, no matter how hard you try to pick holes in them - you insulting me repeatedly isn't going to change that. And please don't presume to know my background or how I came to believe that I believe - you are just highlighting your prejudice, probably more so that I will ever be able to.

mizzbiz

SGE1 wrote: »

If you're going to rude about it, I don't see the point in having a discussion. You appear to have a chip on your shoulder, and this is evidently blurring you logic - on the one hand you accuse me of not having New Labour principles, then you accuse my New Labour "twaddle" of being offensive to you - make your mind up.

I never claimed that the private sector doesn't make a profit from PFI - of course they do, that is the very essence of the private sector - but you miss my point completely. The provision of essential services (such as healthcare, free for all at the point of use) are better done by the public sector - other services (like the cleaning of hospitals, to continue the NHS theme) can very well be performed by the private sector, and are, under many PFIs. My point never changed.

I disagree with you - get over it. I'm evidently not going to see things like you do, and if your only way to cope with that is by insulting me, so be it. You huff and puff about how I allegedly embarrass myself, and how I know so little, but forgive me for pointing out that I have never contradicted myself, and my principles are very clear, simple, and as a result, easy to explain, no matter how hard you try to pick holes in them - you insulting me repeatedly isn't going to change that. And please don't presume to know my background or how I came to believe that I believe - you are just highlighting your prejudice, probably more so that I will ever be able to.

Oops, didn't mean to thank you...meant to press quote.

I was sent by the NHS to a private BUPA hospital for an ultrasound scan as the hospital either didn't have the equipment or have any space. This is quite unreported but happens to many people.

Perhaps this is Labour's quiet gateway into an NHS PFI?

steadysaver

Ali G In da House is on ITV1 later tonight. Now there is a man in politics I restecpa.

What a team him and Vince Cable would make.

drbeat

SGE1 wrote: »

If you're going to rude about it, I don't see the point in having a discussion. You appear to have a chip on your shoulder, and this is evidently blurring you logic - on the one hand you accuse me of not having New Labour principles, then you accuse my New Labour "twaddle" of being offensive to you - make your mind up.

I never claimed that the private sector doesn't make a profit from PFI - of course they do, that is the very essence of the private sector - but you miss my point completely. The provision of essential services (such as healthcare, free for all at the point of use) are better done by the public sector - other services (like the cleaning of hospitals, to continue the NHS theme) can very well be performed by the private sector, and are, under many PFIs. My point never changed.

I disagree with you - get over it. I'm evidently not going to see things like you do, and if your only way to cope with that is by insulting me, so be it. You huff and puff about how I allegedly embarrass myself, and how I know so little, but forgive me for pointing out that I have never contradicted myself, and my principles are very clear, simple, and as a result, easy to explain, no matter how hard you try to pick holes in them - you insulting me repeatedly isn't going to change that. And please don't presume to know my background or how I came to believe that I believe - you are just highlighting your prejudice, probably more so that I will ever be able to.

More twaddle! Your post about the BNP was typical NuLab twaddle that is spouted from NuLab everytime the BNP enters the debate. So I don't have to make my mind up about anything! Your posts are naive and condescending and you are VERY out of touch with reality.

PFI is a NuLab initiative that involves profit-seeking coporations who profit by providing a !!!! or non-existant service to the public sector! They haven't got the tax payer in mind because all they care about is the shareholder! Metronet was a perfect example of the failiure of the NuLab PFI and they are many others! Google it and don't rely on the on-message of your NuLab mates and former lecturers! Your point is invalid and you need to study PFI and reasses your views on the subject. PFI is a failiure and you know diddly-squat on the subject.

I disagree with you - so you get over it! But I'm glad that you pointed out my logic, however; I'm yet to recognise yours? You reply to anyone who disagrees with your views in a condescending and arrogant fashion? Why? You're too naive and short on life experience to have a chip on your shoulder - like me?

Also bear in mind that it was you that spouted out your background on these boards! It was you that told us how your career was laid out for you because you went to some exclusive establishment and were brainwashed by very out of touch individuals and out dated/disproven books! It was also you who had the cheek to tell the rest of us to study political theory? I presume nothing!

Your arrogance blinds you!

wigglebeena

"The provision of essential services (such as healthcare, free for all at the point of use) are better done by the public sector"

Except when GP's surgeries are taken over by American private medical insurance conglomerates? (Nu-Labour approved, no doubt after a nice wodging back-hander and the promise of a lucrative directorship...)

blue_monkey_2

overlander wrote: »

I do agree that i am also shocked how incompetantthe tories have been in exposing Browns part in this mess. How hard can it be they must have at least 20 different places to start, but no they just sit there saying nothing.

Have not read all of this thread yet (only on page 6) but wanted to comment on this. If it was me (LOL, as if) and I was leader of the Tory Party I'd be happy to sit and let Clown and his bunch of clowns sit and steam in his... brown stuff. The only ideas they come up with lately have been nicked from the Tory policy, if the Tories stay to the stum then Clown and Co have no idea what to do and just get deeper and deeper into the brown stuff.

This country was always going to be heading this way, Blair got out while he could as he saw this coming, he knew someone else wanted the job and was happy to hand over the wheel of a sinking ship while he sailed onto the next continent in a super fast speedboat - and we said the man was a fool...... Had he waited another 6 months I do not think anyone would have wanted to take over and he would have been stuck with being PM and dealing with this mess. No, he saw what was coming for sure!!

are people asking 'what would the Tories do?'. Why , I thought the Labour Party were in power - did I miss something overnight? - why should the Tories be telling us what they would do to get us out of Browns brown stuff? There is no election coming is there? So why should they? It is not their job to get us out of the crap, they can talk all they like but they can't do anything about any of this as they have no power to change anything - unless Labour want to nick more of their policies of course - but let's hope the Tories can do a better job of cleaning up the brown stuff as Clown and Co are spewing more out daily.

I said this months ago and I stand by it now, Clown does not give a toss about this country. He knows he is headed for the door but is prolonging it for as long as possible - possibly saving his cash in a nice off-shore bank account ready for the off and to pay the removal men. Heck, I bet he hasn't even unpacked, but he is making as much of a mess as possible so we can whinge about the next Elected Party for 4 years ruining the country while they try and bring it back off it's knees. People do have short memories these days.

There is probably a lot of pen pushers that are not neccessary so could cut Government Spending but then Labour would have no-one to vote for them and so they will leave it to the Tories to give them the push and look the bad guys. If GB gets rid of them it will mean he will lose those voters.

Can I be so cynical to say that he has also announced that our boys will be coming back from Iraq next June. Maybe to boost his rating in the polls? I think this is great - but I also think that these things are announced when GB is getting 'bad poll results'. Hmmmmm........

We might be wondering where the Tory Plicy is, but does it matter, they can tell us all they want what they are going to do but it matters not as they are not the ones in charge of this country. Labour are. Labour clearly cannot deal with the mess they have got us in so they should stand aside and let someone else have a chance to put things right before they get any worse.

wigglebeena

... with a fully experienced, qualified and able GP in the area bidding for the practice and unable to understand why it would be farmed out to the private sector - the US private sector, at that...

StevieJ

asandwhen wrote: »

I was wondering why the vote on this thread was 80% for the tory earlier this morning but has now gone down to 55%. Then I thought well it was started at 0830am and I suppose Labour voters dont get out of bed till lunchtime!

The only thing interesting about this post is the numpties who thanked it

blue_monkey_2

Also, there are lots of 'cutbacks' in the NHS that not everyone sees.

When I was pregnant the 2nd time - despite their being the space of 14 months between my kids I was seen just once before 28 weeks by the midwife..... no checks, just a hospital booking in appointment and then a scan, then it was 4 weeks to 36 weeks and then every week. Despite trying to book my home birth from being 16 weeks pregnant (when I first saw midwife) when I went into Labour 2 1/2 weeks early she had not 'booked me in' for a home birth.

When my son was born he was not responding after his birth and was resucitated - he was fine but I was supposed to see a midwife for 10 days at home.... I saw her 4 times.....

My son, now nearly 5, has recently been diagnosed with a form of Autism, he has been referred 4 times by 3 different doctors to the Children and Adult Mental Health Service. He has been refused 4 times. The last letter the doc showed me stated that due to 'cutbacks' they had to limit the amount of children they saw and so they had 'tightened their criteria'. Basically, when he had been expelled from school he could go back on their list....... Luckily he is at a good school who give him lots of understanding.

However, they have now cut statmenting (where a child gets 1:1 school help) in this area and the school has to apply for funding from a 'pot' if the money is there the child gets the help, if there is no money then your child gets no help......

And these are just the things I have seen, I am sure there are many more. But Labour have done a great job with the NHS, lots of shiny new hospitals to brag about - just no staff to run them properly and see the people that need to be seen. I am currently on an 18-24 month waiting list for an appointment for my son to go to the communication clinic.