Can the UK afford the NHS (in its current form)?

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

I accept what you say. Most GPs offer early morning or evening appointments but I agree that working people have more problems accessing services. But that is true of lots of things. The plan to move to 7 day operations might help this.

People now work shorter hours than in years gone by. Yet find it more difficult? What's changed.

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

I guess mid staffs was the fault of private enterprise?
and I guess Rotherham's police, social services and local politicians were are outsourced too?

Generali wrote: »

And the Government never manages to screw things up?!

If you want to see the difference between state and private provision, look at telecoms. In the early 80s you had to wait 18 months just for the privilege of becoming a customer of BT if you didn't have a line.

I'm merely not suggesting that privatised alternatives are necessarily the panacea some might yearn for.

HornetSaver

Mistermeaner wrote: »

I would move to the us model of private / corporate insurance and tax bad life style heavily to subsidise

You can hardly accuse the current government of not trying to do the latter, what with the sugar tax, minimum alcohol price and smoking tax escalator.

They'd do the former if they thought their own voters would go for it.

kabayiri

zagubov wrote: »

I'm merely not suggesting that privatised alternatives are necessarily the panacea some might yearn for.

You mean things like paying for operating theatres on a 25 year PFI lease, for example?

Those theatres will barely see a decade before needing reinvestment.

I've worked with people whose job it was to maximise profit from these contracts, be it from the NHS or Education.

You'd be amazed how much profit you can squeeze out of a mundane desktop PC, or the cash cow which is the office printer/photo-copier.

The people procuring these products on behalf of the NHS simply did not understand or worry about the contract details which turn something seemingly efficient into a serious cost drain.

I worry that the burden of PFI will weigh down heavily on organisations like the NHS for years to come.

Pennywise

kabayiri wrote: »

The people procuring these products on behalf of the NHS simply did not understand or worry about the contract details which turn something seemingly efficient into a serious cost drain.

Let's hope they've been sacked and never work within the public sector again then if they're so incompetent, and likewise the numpties in HR/management who recruited people without a clue.

michaels

Pennywise wrote: »

Let's hope they've been sacked and never work within the public sector again then if they're so incompetent, and likewise the numpties in HR/management who recruited people without a clue.

Well you can bet if it had hapened in the private sector there would have been consequences for the individuals. Public sector? not so much......

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

I'm merely not suggesting that privatised alternatives are necessarily the panacea some might yearn for.

yes of course, you were merely giving both sides of the story in an even handed way.

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

yes of course, you were merely giving both sides of the story in an even handed way.

Irony can be very lost on some people I suppose

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

Irony can be very lost on some people I suppose

a complex post

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

I'm merely not suggesting that privatised alternatives are necessarily the panacea some might yearn for.

I wouldn't argue that either but I do think that the NHS manages to provide a terrible service at a price that is escalating alarmingly basically because of a dogmatic adherence to a model of delivery.