5 years hard labour ?

[dannyboy413]

Hopefully, Mr and Mrs Starmer are too busy trying on new clothes to read this forum. 😄

[Bper]

2 hours ago, Cyker said:

Reform is basically UKIP under a different name, and given how quickly they disappeared after all the benefits they promised if we voted to leave the EU failed to materialise, I would expect no different from them in their new guise.

They are also a populist party, which means they will say whatever they think you want to hear to vote them in and prey on peoples' fears and insecurities with honeyed words and big smiles. I trust them even less to honour their word than I do Labour or Conservatives, and that's saying something - Most of the people in their party are practically the scum of the earth.

I understand where you're coming from, especially after seeing how UKIP faded away post-Brexit. But I think it's worth considering why some people are drawn to Reform. A lot of voters are fed up with the current parties and feel like their concerns aren't being addressed.

Sure, we should be skeptical and question their promises every party deserves scrutiny. But dismissing them outright might overlook the reasons they have support in the first place. It’s better to engage with their ideas and challenge them on specific policies instead of assuming the worst right away.😃

[Cyker]

TBH I'm done with parties - That's why I think the next best thing to firing them all into the sun would be if they were all dissolved and people had to stand for election alone on their own merits, and then they'd be free to vote for what they believe is right without being forced to by The Party.

It would be a refreshing change if the Primeminister was actually picked by a load of independent votes instead of just automatically getting in depending on which Party won.

This would also make them more individually accountable instead of behind able to hide behind The Party.

The problem is this would require a major change in how politics works in this country, away from the choose-your-own-dictator system we currently have.

Another alternative is if we could somehow be more involved in decisions for the country, instead of a bunch of people who have a minority vote mandate making these decisions unilaterally...

[Eddie G]

3 hours ago, dannyboy413 said:

Hopefully, Mr and Mrs Starmer are too busy trying on new clothes to read this forum. 😄

Over £100,000 in free gifts since Dec 2019 according to the latest reports, there will be a change of clothes more often then Mr Ben did on TV years back 😆

Edited September 18 by Eddie G
spelling

[Eddie G]

2 hours ago, Bper said:

I understand where you're coming from, especially after seeing how UKIP faded away post-Brexit. But I think it's worth considering why some people are drawn to Reform. A lot of voters are fed up with the current parties and feel like their concerns aren't being addressed.

Sure, we should be skeptical and question their promises every party deserves scrutiny. But dismissing them outright might overlook the reasons they have support in the first place. It’s better to engage with their ideas and challenge them on specific policies instead of assuming the worst right away.😃

My gut tells me to stay well clear of Reform UK mind it told me the same with Labour but they were the only option to get the Tories out and after the way they acted during Covid with deals for unfit for use PPE, endless parties during lockdown at number 10 and the rest!  they needed to be out of power and it pushed me into that Labour vote if pushed is the right word 🤷

Edited September 18 by Eddie G
Added information

[Eddie G]

1 hour ago, Cyker said:

TBH I'm done with parties - That's why I think the next best thing to firing them all into the sun would be if they were all dissolved and people had to stand for election alone on their own merits, and then they'd be free to vote for what they believe is right without being forced to by The Party.

It would be a refreshing change if the Primeminister was actually picked by a load of independent votes instead of just automatically getting in depending on which Party won.

This would also make them more individually accountable instead of behind able to hide behind The Party.

The problem is this would require a major change in how politics works in this country, away from the choose-your-own-dictator system we currently have.

Another alternative is if we could somehow be more involved in decisions for the country, instead of a bunch of people who have a minority vote mandate making these decisions unilaterally...

The Sun would probably spit them all back out 😆 but watching the trip over would be fun 😂👍

[Bper]

10 hours ago, Cyker said:

TBH I'm done with parties - That's why I think the next best thing to firing them all into the sun would be if they were all dissolved and people had to stand for election alone on their own merits, and then they'd be free to vote for what they believe is right without being forced to by The Party.

It would be a refreshing change if the Primeminister was actually picked by a load of independent votes instead of just automatically getting in depending on which Party won.

This would also make them more individually accountable instead of behind able to hide behind The Party.

The problem is this would require a major change in how politics works in this country, away from the choose-your-own-dictator system we currently have.

Another alternative is if we could somehow be more involved in decisions for the country, instead of a bunch of people who have a minority vote mandate making these decisions unilaterally...

I understand the frustration with party politics. The idea of electing people based on their own merits rather than just party affiliation could definitely lead to more independent thinking. It might even make politicians more accountable since they can't just hide behind 'the party line. But like you said, changing the whole system would be a huge challenge. Some people argue that parties help provide structure and direction, but it's very far from perfect.

As for involving people more directly, that’s an idea. Things like citizens assemblies or more referendums could be a way to give us more say in big decisions. It makes you wonder what politics could look like if we had more direct involvement. Everything would work and run on time. On second thoughts we can't have that can we.😃

[Bper]

Nearly 1.8 million penalty charge notices were issued between Aug 29 last year and the end of June the value of these at the point of issue was £322.8 million. Not bad for a Mayor who only received 18%of the vote. 🤬

[Eddie G]

16 minutes ago, Bper said:

I understand the frustration with party politics. The idea of electing people based on their own merits rather than just party affiliation could definitely lead to more independent thinking. It might even make politicians more accountable since they can't just hide behind 'the party line. But like you said, changing the whole system would be a huge challenge. Some people argue that parties help provide structure and direction, but it's very far from perfect.

As for involving people more directly, that’s an idea. Things like citizens assemblies or more referendums could be a way to give us more say in big decisions. It makes you wonder what politics could look like if we had more direct involvement. Everything would work and run on time. On second thoughts we can't have that can we.😃

Proportional Reputation could help? but first past the post seems to be here to stay.

[Haliotis]

What a sad day for UK politics.  The consensus of opinion seems to be that most of us feel that there is no single party that can be trusted, or deserves to be voted into office.  The understandable belief that it is a waste of time bothering to vote produces a very dangerous situation.  The system requires that “a” party must be elected to govern.  There are, and always will be, fanatical groups who will steadfastly vote for the party they fiercely support.  Abstention by an increasing majority would only serve to risk the election of a party which would bring in frightening legislation at a level that is only seen (at present) in governments in the east.   For the moment, fanatical support in the UK is only liable (as has happened) in electing a Labour government.  But this could change dramatically in the future.  My personal belief is that UK politics can only be saved from disaster by all British citizens showing a responsible interest and making a considered and practical decision on how they vote.  Abstaining is not an answer - this would simply be a “head in the sand” hope for being possibly better off whilst praying it wouldn’t be worse.

Let’s face it - recent Tory behaviour and the post-election doubts that some are saying about Labour, should be a clear enough warning of how easily we could be saddled with a brutally uncaring government.

[Benzowner]

1 hour ago, Haliotis said:

What a sad day for UK politics.  The consensus of opinion seems to be that most of us feel that there is no single party that can be trusted, or deserves to be voted into office.  The understandable belief that it is a waste of time bothering to vote produces a very dangerous situation.  The system requires that “a” party must be elected to govern.  There are, and always will be, fanatical groups who will steadfastly vote for the party they fiercely support.  Abstention by an increasing majority would only serve to risk the election of a party which would bring in frightening legislation at a level that is only seen (at present) in governments in the east.   For the moment, fanatical support in the UK is only liable (as has happened) in electing a Labour government.  But this could change dramatically in the future.  My personal belief is that UK politics can only be saved from disaster by all British citizens showing a responsible interest and making a considered and practical decision on how they vote.  Abstaining is not an answer - this would simply be a “head in the sand” hope for being possibly better off whilst praying it wouldn’t be worse.

Let’s face it - recent Tory behaviour and the post-election doubts that some are saying about Labour, should be a clear enough warning of how easily we could be saddled with a brutally uncaring government.

As I have stated previously, this current government was voted in on 25% of the voters and only 20% os the electorate because 40% of the electorate decided not to vote. As you say many consider it a waste of time voting under the current system of first past the post. WE do need to reform our voting system, one way could be to introduce compulsory voting, as a few countries do already, with a suitable box at the bottom with abstain, non of the above or other such suitable choices.

Just as a side not, I see this lot have agreed a pay deal with Junior Doctors of 4%, 9% and 9% and the madia have said oh, thats 22% pay rise. I doubt very much the unions agreed to a pay rise of 3 amounts base on the initial pay so 4%, 9% and 9% is actually 23.56% compounded up.

[Haliotis]

And the greedy sods still won’t be satisfied.  When I have seen them picketing on TV, and seen their apparent joyful behaviour as they hold the government to ransom, it makes me wonder if there is a new regime in the medical profession - where dedication gives way to as much as possible for as little effort as possible.  I cannot see patients receiving the best medical treatment in such a situation.

[Cyker]

IMHO they deserve it and more - During covid everyone was saying how they'd support the NHS but as soon as it looked like covid was no longer an existential threat that evaporated faster than rain in a nuclear blast. The fact that they had to strike to get anything just shows what a bunch of ungrateful  this country is - 

The NHS needs more funding, not just wages but equipment, even beds - The Tories have been slowly killing it for years in order to justify privatising it and it's in terrible shape. One of the reasons we had more money under the Tories is they keep selling off national assets, but what is there left to sell off now??

 

 

[Bper]

54 minutes ago, Cyker said:

IMHO they deserve it and more - During covid everyone was saying how they'd support the NHS but as soon as it looked like covid was no longer an existential threat that evaporated faster than rain in a nuclear blast. The fact that they had to strike to get anything just shows what a bunch of ungrateful  this country is - 

The NHS needs more funding, not just wages but equipment, even beds - The Tories have been slowly killing it for years in order to justify privatising it and it's in terrible shape. One of the reasons we had more money under the Tories is they keep selling off national assets, but what is there left to sell off now??

 

 

Is it possible to ever bring the NHS back to how it used to be? A lot of people say the NHS is underfunded, while others argue it's already running on a huge budget around £180 billion. But with waiting lists growing longer and the population aging year after year, it really feels like an impossible task to fix.

Maybe what we need is a proper long-term plan like, 25 years or more agreed by all political parties and actually protected by law. That way, we avoid the constant back-and-forth changes and give the NHS a solid foundation to deal with future challenges.

One idea could be to build or refurbish smaller community healthcare centres. These could handle things like blood tests, X-rays, and minor surgeries, which would help take the pressure off hospitals and keep them focused on more serious treatments.

With a clear plan and more local services, it might just be possible to turn things around for the NHS. Whatever the case something has to change.🙄

[Cyker]

It won't be easy - 180 billion may sound like a lot but it really isn't when you look at how much stuff costs. One big problem is the NHS has spun off so much stuff it used to do in-house, so they have to go to private companies who gleefully screw them for every penny they can because they can get away with it.

The other problem is wages - People cost a lot of money to employ, especially if you want good people. Us leaving the EU cut off a pool of cheap skilled labour, and people from this country here won't work for the NHS because they can get much better pay from the private sector without having to go on strike. That needs to be remedied.

Before, people would take public sector jobs for less pay because there was more job security, but that is no longer the case, so people in those jobs are often less skilled, don't care, or are agency staff.

People want the service but don't want to pay for it.

Of your comments re. the NHS, this especially:

35 minutes ago, Bper said:

Maybe what we need is a proper long-term plan like, 25 years or more agreed by all political parties and actually protected by law. That way, we avoid the constant back-and-forth changes and give the NHS a solid foundation to deal with future challenges.

... would go a long way to getting it back on track.

The problem we currently have is Labour waste loads of time and money getting education and medical back on track, run out of time and/or money, and then when the conservatives inevitably get back in they undo it all again in the blink of an eye and throw all that money down the drain, selling things off for pennies on the pound - This has been the wasteful cycle and is why the country's finances are in such a terrible state.

If a binding long term plan as you say could be agreed it might stop that happening... maybe.

[Eddie G]

4 hours ago, Bper said:

Is it possible to ever bring the NHS back to how it used to be? A lot of people say the NHS is underfunded, while others argue it's already running on a huge budget around £180 billion. But with waiting lists growing longer and the population aging year after year, it really feels like an impossible task to fix.

Maybe what we need is a proper long-term plan like, 25 years or more agreed by all political parties and actually protected by law. That way, we avoid the constant back-and-forth changes and give the NHS a solid foundation to deal with future challenges.

One idea could be to build or refurbish smaller community healthcare centres. These could handle things like blood tests, X-rays, and minor surgeries, which would help take the pressure off hospitals and keep them focused on more serious treatments.

With a clear plan and more local services, it might just be possible to turn things around for the NHS. Whatever the case something has to change.🙄

Totally agree a long term plan of around 25 years is definitely needed for the NHS 👍

[Eddie G]

3 hours ago, Cyker said:

It won't be easy - 180 billion may sound like a lot but it really isn't when you look at how much stuff costs. One big problem is the NHS has spun off so much stuff it used to do in-house, so they have to go to private companies who gleefully screw them for every penny they can because they can get away with it.

The other problem is wages - People cost a lot of money to employ, especially if you want good people. Us leaving the EU cut off a pool of cheap skilled labour, and people from this country here won't work for the NHS because they can get much better pay from the private sector without having to go on strike. That needs to be remedied.

Before, people would take public sector jobs for less pay because there was more job security, but that is no longer the case, so people in those jobs are often less skilled, don't care, or are agency staff.

People want the service but don't want to pay for it.

Of your comments re. the NHS, this especially:

... would go a long way to getting it back on track.

The problem we currently have is Labour waste loads of time and money getting education and medical back on track, run out of time and/or money, and then when the conservatives inevitably get back in they undo it all again in the blink of an eye and throw all that money down the drain, selling things off for pennies on the pound - This has been the wasteful cycle and is why the country's finances are in such a terrible state.

If a binding long term plan as you say could be agreed it might stop that happening... maybe.

The endless cycle of Labour and Tory but this time going from the nasty party into another one! i used to be glad when Labour got into power but they get worse each time! 

[Haliotis]

15 hours ago, Cyker said:

IMHO they deserve it and more - During covid everyone was saying how they'd support the NHS but as soon as it looked like covid was no longer an existential threat that evaporated faster than rain in a nuclear blast. The fact that they had to strike to get anything just shows what a bunch of ungrateful  this country is - 

The NHS needs more funding, not just wages but equipment, even beds - The Tories have been slowly killing it for years in order to justify privatising it and it's in terrible shape. One of the reasons we had more money under the Tories is they keep selling off national assets, but what is there left to sell off now??

 

 

Initially, the NHS does not need more funding.  This has happened in the past, with upper management wasting the Mooney on projects which have nothing to do with patient care.   The first priority is to get rid of highly paid executives in non-medical positions, and also the generally reduce the top heavy structure of “too many chiefs and too little Indians”.  All of the NHS staff, from top man down, should have a medical background, and the uppermost priority should be first class patient care.

When all the necessary corrective procedures to obtain an efficient, financially-critical NHS has been achieved, only then should thoughts turn to assessing what, if any, additional funding is absolutely necessary.  Pouring good money after bad will never solve the problem.

[Bper]

 

I've been looking into how different healthcare systems operate, and it’s interesting to compare for example Spain’s system with the NHS. 

Spain’s healthcare is funded by regional governments, which allows for more local control and flexibility. In contrast, the NHS relies heavily on general taxation, which can sometimes lead to budget constraints. Generally, people in Spain have good access to healthcare, often with shorter waiting times for services. The NHS, while also providing access,is struggling with longer wait times for many treatments and elective procedures.

Spain emphasises preventive measures and early intervention, which helps reduce the overall burden on the system. The NHS has a focus on prevention too, but there are gaps due to funding and resources.Many Spaniards report high levels of satisfaction with their healthcare, appreciating the local services. In the UK, while many patients who once treatment starts are happy, waiting times does impact overall satisfaction.

Both systems boast strong health outcomes, but Spain tends to have lower infant mortality rates and higher life expectancy. Spain has a more integrated approach between health and social care, which often leads to better continuity of care. The NHS is working on this, but it it has a long way to go.Overall, both Spain and the NHS have their strengths and weaknesses, shaped by their funding models and cultural factors. It’s fascinating to see how different approaches can lead to varied outcomes in healthcare.

Spain has a population of appox 47 million but the UK approx 67 million. All the below countries have better health care then ourselves.

Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland, Germany, Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, Singapore, Japan, South Korea  Oceania: Australia, New Zealand  

It's also interesting that France has an excellent health care system with low waiting lists and a population of appox 65 million. Surely we must be able to fix our NHS.🫤

 

[Primus1]

I wonder if the longer life expectancy in Spain has some kind of factor ☀️☀️☀️☀️, the nhs is broken because of 14 years of underfunding, 

[Bper]

16 minutes ago, Primus1 said:

I wonder if the longer life expectancy in Spain has some kind of factor ☀️☀️☀️☀️, the nhs is broken because of 14 years of underfunding, 

That's a fair point about Spain's longer life expectancy. They spend around 9-10% of their GDP on healthcare, which is slightly less than the UK, but they seem to use their funding more efficiently. Their focus on preventive care and lower administrative costs probably help. Plus, the Mediterranean lifestyle likely contributes to better health outcomes. Some warmer regions, like parts of the Mediterranean, have high life expectancies, often attributed to lifestyle factors rather than climate alone. We are going to Spain in October so if all our minor ailments clear up we might not come back.😂

[Haliotis]

You’ve said it, Bob - “……they seem to use their funding more efficiently….”   This is not the case in the UK, where an excess of overpaid ‘administrators’ who make no actual contribution to patient care, plus spending on irrelevant “projects” means that the spending which reaches the ‘coalface’ has already been seriously depleted.

[Cyker]

That and the contracts they have with private firms, no doubt friends of certain MPs, are probably making them pay well over the odds for substandard equipment. I wonder how many of the staff are agency too - I've noticed a lot of public sector institutions have been cutting permanent staff posts and employing long-term agency staff instead, which I'm sure must cost significantly more...!

 

[Primus1]

The care sector is even worse..

[Bper]

4 hours ago, Primus1 said:

The care sector is even worse..

The care sector has been seriously neglected due to a mixture of political inaction, chronic underfunding, a growing and aging population, and the undervaluation of its workforce. Fixing these problems will take serious political commitment, sustained investment, and tough decisions about how care is funded and provided. The challenges are deep rooted, and without meaningful reform, the crisis will get worse as demand continues to rise.

With an aging population, any further delays will make the situation even more difficult. The care sector, alongside the NHS, is crucial for the health and well-being of this country. Solving the care crisis isn't just about improving life for those who need it it's also about relieving pressure on the NHS.