We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

BBC News Headines - Online

245

Comments

  • Cleaver
    Cleaver Posts: 6,989 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    StevieJ wrote: »
    Reading the comments maybe we should be getting rid of the GPs instead :eek:

    Well Cameron and Lansley have decided to give around £80 billion of the NHS annual budget and give it to GPs so that they can decide what to do with it, hence why all Primary Care Trusts will be closing over the next two or three years. So we can't really get rid of them yet. ;)

    I think a recent survey showed that the majority of GPs didn't want the responsibility of this new role and also felt that they didn't have the skills to commission the services in the secondary sector with the cash they're being asked to spend. So the NHS might be an interesting place in a couple of years time.
  • I was a bit worried to hear that NHS Direct is being replaced with the new 111 service. I've called NHS Direct a couple of times and found speaking to a nurse very reassuring. Not sure I would feel the same way about speaking to a call handler so I'm probably less likely to use the service. I've recently changed GP surgeries to one of the 'Darzi' type clinics and find it so much better than my previous, inflexible surgery. I guess that GPs will probably have to hire the people who work in the PCTs to do the same job they were already doing.
    From Starrystarrynight to Starrystarrynight1 and now I'm back...don't have a clue how!
  • A._Badger
    A._Badger Posts: 5,881 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    I used NHS Direct once- and it was a joke: a dangerous joke. True, one shouldn't generalise, but it was always a very poor substitute for proper out of hours care from GPs which (let's remind those Labour supporters here with short memories) was thrown away by the previous government.

    If the coalition wants to improve NHS care, one of the first things it should do is negotiate a better deal for the public with GPs.
  • Had a very bad experience with NHS direct - OH would have died if I had taken their advice!
  • HAMISH_MCTAVISH
    HAMISH_MCTAVISH Posts: 28,592 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    Cleaver wrote: »
    Do you rate the value of a public service based on whether you use it or not? I've never required cancer treatment, but I'm glad that people who need treatment have access and on this basis I wouldn't want cancer treatment centres closed down. A bit of an extreme example, but you get my point.

    So extreme an example as to be pointless.
    “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.

    Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

    -- President John F. Kennedy”
  • Cleaver
    Cleaver Posts: 6,989 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    So extreme an example as to be pointless.

    Well, not really. The point still stands that the validity of a public service shouldn't really be judged on whether you use it or not.
  • dopester
    dopester Posts: 4,890 Forumite
    I was a bit worried to hear that NHS Direct is being replaced with the new 111 service. I've called NHS Direct a couple of times and found speaking to a nurse very reassuring.

    I've rung NHS Direct once, a few years ago too. Can't remember exactly why now but remember being worried I was ill. Think my kidney(?) was inflamed and I was concerned.

    After ringing NHS Direct and talking to one of the nurses/medical people, I felt much more reassured. Just a short call and I remember being less concerned and happy I'd rung. I was ok within two days from doing nothing.

    Tbh - I think they should privatise NHS Direct. Like Camelot (lottery) put it to rival bidders to run, with a cap on charges, and take it outside the NHS. Can't understand why that's not been put forward. There must be some money making potential there.

    £1 annual subscription fee per year + £1 charge per call (for landlines), extra for mobiles.

    The NHS has improved a lot over the years (I'm not a doctor; I'm the ambulance driver) but some extras should be premium services. Additional services like NHS Direct, where you can telephone and talk to trained medical staff, should come at a very affordable premium.
  • fc123
    fc123 Posts: 6,573 Forumite
    I have used NHS direct a few times and found it good as I was reassured that whatever symptom wasn't something serious.

    I recall OH slipping on ice knocking himself out, coming round (he thinks he was 'out' for 10 mins) and carrying on into work......later he felt terrible so I called them rather than shut the shop and drag him to A+E. They told me the danger signs to look out for and it was really helpful plus saved a trip to A+E.

    Why is the 111 service different?
  • Cleaver wrote: »
    Well, not really. The point still stands that the validity of a public service shouldn't really be judged on whether you use it or not.

    No, but the numbers of people using a public service can certianly play a part in judging whether such a service is essential or merely desirable.

    And in a world of limited funding, there has to be a cost/benefit analysis involved, and whether sufficient numbers of people use a service absolutely has to play a part, along with the impact of that service on it's users.

    A cancer care treatment centre is probably something all would agree is needed, even though few use it.

    However the fact that some people use something does not in and of itself make it worthwhile.

    There are surely plenty of "services" that government provide that would be better left to the private sector, or paid for by the few users directly.
    “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.

    Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

    -- President John F. Kennedy”
  • I've never used it, so won't miss it.

    In fact, I've never used the vast majority of so called "public services", so wouldn't miss them either.

    14,000 people a day do/did use nhs direct

    As for you not needing public services perhaps you could confirm this next time your house catches fire??
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.