Monday, 6 June 2011

People, Patients, Privatisation, Profits and the NHS

This is going to be a lazy posts folks and you will have to do most of the work yourselves by reading the links provided.

During my break at work last night I was reading The Sunday Telegraph and The Observer - I like a balanced view, but am always suprised at the totally different entries in these two papers - it is as if they were written in two entirely different countries.

I read in The Telegraph that Dave is to commit to "five guarantees" on the future of the NHS in a speech on Tuesday, these are that he will promise to keep waiting lists low, keep care integrated, maintain spending, keep the health service "national" and not to privatise the NHS.

I also read of the plight of Southern Cross and more importantly the possible plight of the residents that dwell therein.  Southern Cross is a perfect example of greedy business - where profit is more important than people. 

I read in The Observer of doubts re the financal strength of Circle Health this being a troubled company that already has its finger in the NHS pie.

Not read in these papers - despite the PFI controversy, NHS trusts are still setting up deals.  The NHS will eventually pay more than £50bn for buildings worth just £11bn, plus there will be maintence charges on top.  You will be paying this through your taxes general public - but more so your children.  You will be paying this to private companies.

Must go to bed now folks so read and figure it out for yourselves.

Anna :o]

Link: It Could Be Fatal at Bad Medicine

4 comments:

blackdog said...

If we have private provision in healthcare then it is essential that we have governance that is independent and effective. We do not have that in the CQC or Monitor. The Neo-Liberal paradigm is fatally flawed if it continues down the road of the state being the facilities manager with all of it's provision being subcontracted.

There is little to no profit, in many areas of healthcare, especially care of the elderly, trauma, chronic disease, and emergency medicine. There was once, but that was way back in the 1990's for elderly care only, but the model became flawed, not by profit per se but greed. We are at a crossroads, with no debate that isn't tinged with rhetoric or tearfull references to 'saving the NHS'. I really don't think that many realise the extent of privatisation that has already taken place in all aspects of our lives. Some of it wholly inappropriate I, feel such as foster care provision and vetting, and of course the Railways to name just two. If it made things cheaper or better then it would be possibly a trade off that could be accepted, but largly it has been more expensive and less safe.

If the model is taken to it's ultimate conclusion as in the US, we will end up with less care, more cost and the state funding the profits of a myriad of providers whose only loyalty is to the shareholders.

That is the capitalist paradigm, 'buy cheap sell dear'. But it is not true capitalism, because it is not creating a market, simply taking advantage of one created for it. So we have neither state provision nor market driven forces at play. The worst of all worlds, and for sure Southern Cross, will fail. It is a surrogate of the banks without the state to bail it out.

The witless politicians in power at present and indeed since the 80's haven't got a clue really. They are just coming up with same answers as always, just dressed up in a shiny new folder, in the blind hope that another top down polemic will baffle the proles long enough to keep them in power. We really are moving the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Am Ang Zhang said...

Looks bad now. The PM is not really turning.

The likes of City experts are moving in.

The Cockroach Catcher

ned ludd carer said...

Health Service seems to be carrying out these reforms anyway, regardless of 'pause for listening' and no bill having been passed. Our own PCT 'dissolved itself' last week and passed on its functions to a range of Foundation Trusts etc..

We're unclear who to talk to now about my sons care package, that's got a large gap due to CQC registration rule changes. His care needs haven't changed - only the organizations administering the care package. But the result is a non provision and no one to hold accountable.

HyperCRYPTICal said...

Thanks for you kind comments folks.

blackdog: Much wisdom in your words my friend. Despite the 'five pledges' nothing has changed at all and the clueless politicians will plod on regardless.

With regards to wholly inappropriate privatisation - some time ago I noticed a private company offering foster care as its 'product' (emblazoned on the front of the building) and at first I couldn't understand it, couldn't fathom it out. I did not know until researching that foster care had become a private concern. You are correct - it is just not right.

Am Ang: Does look bad my friend. The PM spoke fine, but clever words. He is not for turning and as expected, the listening exercise was a sham. That said, I find it hard to believe that some/many are now appeased - but they are!

Ned: You are correct. Nothing paused in the 'pause for listening' and nor will it now. The goalposts haven't changed - merely the time in which the ball is expected to be kicked in. But has it really?

I am saddened to hear that difficulties re your sons care package continue. Lack of accountability shows the confusion, the mess of 'change.' Nothing truly thought out and people suffer because of it.

As Lansly himself is no longer accountable for the provision of our Health Service - not National anymore - those at the top, for the top layer of management (in whatever guise) will continue, it seems we are doomed.

Anna :o]