Jacob":1wxfd8pg said:
Cheshirechappie":1wxfd8pg said:
.....
Where's the 'exploitation'?
The exploitation comes after creating a climate of dissatisfaction (with the help of the media esp. the Daily Moan) and so reducing resistance to privatisation. Given a boost by cack handed re-organisations, tightened budgets, blame culture etc etc.
Run the thing down, denigrate and demoralise the staff, flog it off, flog off the assets, get taxpayers money to run an inefficient private sector service at much greater cost. When they go bust more taxpayers money goes to bail them out. Gravy train!
Lobbyists do this sort of thing for a living. Look how effective they have been on the booze and nicotine front recently. "Unpaid" parliamentary advisers getting mega bucks from the companies they lobby for. It's blatantly obvious that Lynton Crosby (and the others) have no interest in democratic politics for the public good. At least union lobbyists represent a fair chunk of the working population, not just distant big businesses and shareholders.
"....creating a climate of dissatisfaction...." - Jacob, we've had the Maidstone scandal, the Mid Staffs scandal, the Redditch scandal, the care of the elderly scandal, the West Cumbria scandal and most recently the 'up to 13000 unnecessary deaths across 14 NHS Trusts' scandal. There's no need to create a climate of dissatifaction, because the NHS clearly isn't universally as good as it should be. Staff are demoralised already, there's no need to demoralise them further. Quite the reverse, in fact.
What politicians SHOULD be doing, on our behalf, is not having stupid political arguments about who said what when. They should be co-operating to find out WHY the NHS isn't as universally good as it should be, and doing something about setting things right.
I moved house in 2005, and consequently had to register with a new dentist. It was difficult finding an NHS dentist willing to take new patients at that time, but I found one. A few months later, said dentist decided to go private (as many did in 2006, following changes made to NHS dental contracts by the DofH.) Not wishing to go through the rigmarole of finding yet another dentist, I signed up for private dental insurance, though not particularly willingly at the time. Best thing I ever did, dentally. The standards of care by the same dentist and hygenists, in the same clinic, are markedly better than anything I've ever had from the NHS. Private care, when it's done properly, does work very well, I've found.
The same may well be true for other parts of the NHS. Opposing private sector involvement out of blinkered political ideology may well be condemning us to the worst sort of Eastern Bloc mediocrity, because such an organisation has no incentive to 'serve' anybody but it's own interests.
I don't care how healthcare is delivered, provided everybody has access to good care when they need it. I think my attitude is not untypical of the population at large. Until the whole of the political establishment accepts that and acts in OUR interests, we're going to carry on with healthcare provision which is sometimes grossly sub-standard. Silly political side-shows aimed at suppressing the facts about what the NHS is delivering don't, in the end, help either you or me.
Similarly, sweeping statements that Lynton Crosby (or Len McCluskey, or Mark Serwotka, or Uncle Tom Cobbley) 'have no interest in democratic politics for the public good' just obscure the search for actual facts, and a measured debate about those facts. It's the kind of political discourse that's utterly beneath you, but sadly prevalent among some discussing politics.
Jacob, do you think that the scandals I outlined above (Mid Staffs, Redditch, 13,000 unnecessary deaths etc etc) should be debated properly, or ignored? Are they acceptable in a publicly provided service?
Come on, we all know the the Gruaniad is always right. The only papers that publish lies are the Mail and the Telegraph.
