Lib Dems hope to finally kill health reforms

Liberal Democrat activists will defy Nick Clegg over the Government’s controversial health reforms by seeking to “kill” them at a party policy-making conference next week.

Rebel party members are not satisfied with the concession read more

Posted in blog archive, Uncategorized
4 comments on “Lib Dems hope to finally kill health reforms
  1. Leon says:

    I hope you do because you really have not come up to scratch since you went into coalition, you could have killed off this bill a long time ago but instead chose to frighten the life out of many citizens including myself.

    I voted for liberal democrats because I knew there would be no change in the conservatives, how true was I only you have given too many concessions to them also and I was wrong to vote for you.

    Never again will I vote liberal democrat indeed you had a golden opportunity as a party to proof yourselves that you could hold governance and you have just thrown it away for short term gain.

    When will you learn that full scale privatisation in the nhs will not work, it is a well known fact that NHS money will be diverted away into the pockets of the shareholders past privatisations has proved that just look at the shambles of the energy market and the waste with ATOS.

    Finally, yes we all like to reap the rewards of profit it is what makes a growing nation but some things are sacred and profits and NHS do not mix every penny pound for pound must be targeted at patient care.

    I hope you do the right and just thing at the conference next week and drive further nails in this bill.

    Regards

  2. Morgan says:

    @Leon Thanks for your vote in 2010 and continuing to be interested in the actions of the party. We have done many great things in coalition; raising the basic tax threshold; making university education funding cheaper for the poorest; creating the pupil premium scheme to replace EMA; scrapping ID cards; banning wheel clamping on private land; and increasing CGT for higher rate tax payers, to name just a few things.

    Of course, we won’t have got everything right for everyone, (this is politics!) which is why we as a party debate at conference and listen to our members. Our conference structure is unique in British politics for the power of the members. Instead of removing your vote and throwing the baby out with the bathwater, why not join the party, get involved, and add your name and membership number to this motion going to conference?

    Join in & make things better. For everyone.

  3. Andy says:

    I am glad that you have not been hoodwinked by ‘concessions’, they are just another con trick. No-one can stop this evil juggernaut of a bill except the LibDems.

    Another example of the potential consequences of the Health and Social Care Bill:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9122052/Public-health-could-be-devastated-by-NHS-reforms-warn-doctors.html
    This is just the begining if the bill is not defeated.

    Lansley is determined to weaken the NHS at any cost.

  4. David Barer says:

    I’m a doctor, not a politician, but it seems clear that Cameron has decided to make a stand and defend Lansley and the Bill despite overwhelming evidence that:
    • The “case of need” is almost entirely bogus: the evidence suggests that NHS is at least in the top 2 most cost-effective health systems in the OECD **
    • Nobody wants it apart from a few GPs (and some surgeons) who’ve convinced themselves either that they can make it work while doing their clinical jobs on the side (they won’t) or that, as providers as well as commissioners, they’ll be onto a nice little earner – provided they can find a way to get all those people with expensive chronic conditions, mental illness and the over-75s off their books…
    • It’s a completely uninterpretable, monstrous mess, which won’t achieve any of the stated aims apart from providing endless confusion and work for lawyers
    • There’s no evidence that a competitive market works in health care. The much quoted LSE study “Does Competition Improve Public Hospitals’ Efficiency?” suggests that some services in “high provider density” areas may be more efficient. As any hospital doctor will tell you, “efficiency” as measured has nothing to do with competition between providers and everything to do with the obsessive pressure to drive down costs and length of stay, which dominates our lives in the budget-capped but “non-competitive” NHS. If we want a competitive US-style system, we’d better be prepared to pay the crippling financial and political costs!
    • Even if a “competitive, high provider density environment” were desirable, where would we get all the extra doctors and nurses from – Greece? or relax immigration controls again so we can steal them from really poor countries?
    • There was never any electoral mandate, the changes are already being forced through by the back door and now the Lib Dems are being strong-armed as well, for fear of losing any vestige of influence within the Coalition. You must NOT be party to this outrage against democracy!

    I agree that the organisational changes that are already happening are probably irreversible, but the pace of change is disastrous. Vital service improvement plans, developed over years, have been thrown into chaos as nobody knows who’ll be responsible for what in 6 months’ time. Senior managers are already getting redundancy packages and then fixing themselves up with jobs in CCGs, CSUs etc. etc. You can bet that any funds they control in their present jobs will not be left lying around for the next lot of managers’ spending plans…

    Shirley Williams seems to think that the main battle over price-based competition has already been won, but it is dangerously naïve to think that financial deals – however cleverly disguised – will not be the major factor in choosing service providers. Why else would commercial companies be interested in tendering? There is NO reliable way of judging relative quality from the bids anyway, or even from outcome data, where available – that’s the whole problem with health care “markets”. How does European competition law work with non-price-based competition?

    Regulation?? Do the DH and the regulators understand the meaning of “conflict of interest”?:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2109907/NHS-fairness-tsar-urged-quit-doctors-conflict-following-799-000-payment-U-S-private-health-giant.html

    Clegg and Williams claim they’ve drawn enough poison out of the Bill to make it acceptable and not worth the political risk of killing it – and possibly the Coalition too. Are they being conned? Look at the tactics being used to fend off awkward enquiries:
    http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2012/02/23/peter-bailey-poisoned-chalice/

    To me the electoral fall-out of being associated with this disaster – which will inevitably be focused on the Lib Dems – looks far worse.
    Good luck for Friday!

    **Key conclusions from Commonwealth Fund studies analysed in last week’s BMJ: http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e1079?sso=
    • The NHS outperforms other high income countries on many measures despite spending much less than most of them
    • It enjoys the highest levels of public confidence and satisfaction of all the countries studied
    • The effects of increased investment and policy improvements over the past decade are clearly visible
    The results … do, however, cast serious doubt on any claim that there is widespread popular support for radical reform. Improvements are needed, but continuation and expansion of the measures already set in motion—more of the same—seems to be a better formula than totally rebuilding a system that, by international standards, already works remarkably well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Follow us on Twitter

Blog archive