Labour target cancer sufferers in new ad

ninky_2

dandy-candy wrote: »

I think what is so sad is that I'm sure Labour has achieved things over the years that they could be using to crow about in their campaigns which wouldn't upset people. I have to say that some posters views on this subject are strangely detatched. There is a very good ad running on TV at the moment by Macmillan Nurses saying "Today was a good day, today wasn't all about cancer" because the truth is for my mum we are keeping her busy and doing nice days out and little treats so she can put whats coming to the back of her thoughts and enjoy what is happening here and now. To have leaflets like this seems just so insensitive - and why do they post it through your door? To get your vote. Well to my mind that isn't a good enough reason to upset anyone no matter what % it is that are cancer patients who receive them in the random postings.

but the reality is the way you vote (or at least the outcome of the general election) will effect life and death issues. i don't think to say this issue is important enough to leaflet people about is detached. i think it is very attached.

tbh i'd really like to see a tory leaflet that spoke to me in some way that i felt passionate about. for all my life their messages have always just seemed negative towards me and things that are important to me. whether that was anti-immigration policies (i'm a direct result of immigration), to attacks on homosexuality (i was in a same sex relationship as a teen at the time of clause 28 and actually had it quoted to me by adults / teachers as a reason why it was acceptable that i should be spat at and bullied at school without them stepping in to help), to attacks on the right to roam in the tory criminal justice acts (i'm a keen walker and nature lover)....the list goes on.

LizEstelle

Alan_Cross wrote: »

Labour 'targets' voters with election material.

Shock, horror, probe, yawn.

Yep.

'The Tories are clutching straws at' - rearrange into a well known phrase or saying.

dandy-candy

ninky wrote: »

but the reality is the way you vote (or at least the outcome of the general election) will effect life and death issues. i don't think to say this issue is important enough to leaflet people about is detached. i think it is very attached.

tbh i'd really like to see a tory leaflet that spoke to me in some way that i felt passionate about. for all my life their messages have always just seemed negative towards me and things that are important to me. whether that was anti-immigration policies (i'm a direct result of immigration), to attacks on homosexuality (i was in a same sex relationship as a teen at the time of clause 28 and actually had it quoted to me by adults / teachers as a reason why it was acceptable that i should be spat at and bullied at school without them stepping in to help), to attacks on the right to roam in the tory criminal justice acts (i'm a keen walker and nature lover)....the list goes on.

I'm sorry that you had such a hard time - those must have been horrible experiences for you. I just feel that whatever goverment holds power it is really the people who swing things, that's why sometimes when a policy comes in if the public totally kick off then it get's quickly reversed. The cruel people who treated you badly could have been of any (or no) political persuasion. There are sadly too many people today who are still sexist/racist and they aren't all from one party or another. To say I hate this particular leaflet is purely because of the way it was done - it could have been produce by any party and I would feel the same. My voting throughout my life is fluid as I don't feel myself particularly strongly behind any party. I do see how your earlier experiences made you anti Tory. I hope things are happier for you now that people are more tolerant and understanding. I think it is advances in medicine that help peoples life spans improve and (as has happened in the past) knowing that there are drugs available that are being blocked (by what ever party is currently in power) is enough to make people and papers kick off enough to get changes made so I personally don't agree that one party will kill us while the other will save us.

LizEstelle

dandy-candy wrote: »

I personally don't agree that one party will kill us while the other will save us.

Agreed.

It's generally all to do with motivations and 'whose heart is in it'.

ninky_2

dandy-candy wrote: »

I'm sorry that you had such a hard time - those must have been horrible experiences for you. I just feel that whatever goverment holds power it is really the people who swing things, that's why sometimes when a policy comes in if the public totally kick off then it get's quickly reversed. The cruel people who treated you badly could have been of any (or no) political persuasion. There are sadly too many people today who are still sexist/racist and they aren't all from one party or another. To say I hate this particular leaflet is purely because of the way it was done - it could have been produce by any party and I would feel the same. My voting throughout my life is fluid as I don't feel myself particularly strongly behind any party. I do see how your earlier experiences made you anti Tory. I hope things are happier for you now that people are more tolerant and understanding. I think it is advances in medicine that help peoples life spans improve and (as has happened in the past) knowing that there are drugs available that are being blocked (by what ever party is currently in power) is enough to make people and papers kick off enough to get changes made so I personally don't agree that one party will kill us while the other will save us.

no they were tory. or kids of tories. it was a rural tory heartland (still is). the only people who offered any support were left of centre. likewise, all the members of the local anti-apartheid group were left of centre (a small clan of us). right wing people would criticise us and say how nelson mandela was a terrorist and deserved imprisonment.

vivatifosi

I thought it might be interesting to post the key tenets of Labour's health promises (from their manifesto) so that tomorrow we can compare with the Tory's version and the day after the Lib Dems. There are '50 steps for a future fair to all', these are the ones dealing with health:

16. Legally binding guarantees for patients including the right to
cancer test results within one week of referral, and a maximum 18
weeks’ wait for treatment or the offer of going private.
17. Preventative healthcare through routine check-ups for the over-40s
and a major expansion of diagnostic testing.
18. More personal care, with the right in law to choose from any
provider who meets NHS standards of quality at NHS costs when
booking a hospital appointment, one-to-one dedicated nursing for
all cancer patients, and more care at home.
19. The right to choose a GP in your area open at evenings and
weekends, with more services available on the high-street,
personal care plans and rights to individual budgets.
20. Access to psychological therapy for those who need it.

Kohoutek

You have to wonder whether any of these manifesto pledges (of any party) are anything more than fantasies - how is it going to be paid for?

Number 16 about 'legally binding guarantees for patients' is just bizarre. If it's legally binding does that mean you can sue the NHS if it's broken? It wouldn't exactly be a good use of NHS resources to have to defend more claims against it...

vivatifosi

Exactly. As I've already said, you can't promise diagnosis of cancer within 1 week because there are cases where second or third referrals take months. In my case I had to wait for a genetic test to become available before they could know with any certainty and I was something like the 70th person to be tested in the whole world. They are offering false promises they can't deliver on.

Still, as I said earlier, I'd really like someone who works in front-line health care to come on here and say what they think of the promises as only they will know what is truly feasible.

I'm not expecting much better from the other main parties either btw.

treliac

Wookster wrote: »

This is fear mongering. However low you thought they could go, Labour go lower.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Labour have gone down the route of scare tactics. There is a data protection issue here maybe also.

But the worst part is that they have also, whether accidental or not, targetted these scare tactics at those suffering, or having suffered in the past with cancer.

Terrible situation, and I hope it's accidental, or an oversight. However, as it only went to 250,000 people, there must have been some sort of targetted selection process.

It's vile, cheap, lowest of the low behaviour. I cannot possibly understand how anyone could defend it nor how Labour could even begin to think it an acceptable vote winning trick. If I had been targetted in such a way I would be looking at whether I could take legal action. There must be a breach of privacy/data protection involved.

ninky_2

vivatifosi wrote: »

Still, as I said earlier, I'd really like someone who works in front-line health care to come on here and say what they think of the promises as only they will know what is truly feasible.

the overwhelming majority of frontline staff (particularly nurses) support labour over the other parties. so you can only assume they think labour policies are preferable to conservative when it comes to the health service.